What would that reason be?
Posted on 09/10/2009 9:42:35 PM PDT by moonpie57
I just talked to Orly:
She has 2 good news items that she is very busy with right now:
1. Judge Carter is ‘giving her expedited discovery - immediately’.
2. Judge Land will allow her to present before the court in GA. She is leaving now to fly to GA to appear before Judge Land at the Federal Building in Columbus, GA at 2:00 pm tomorrow (Friday, 9/11/09).
She would like as many military supporters to be there as possible. I called Carl Swensson (RiseUpForAmerica.com), and he will see what he can do. If you have any contacts there, please advise them.
(Excerpt) Read more at resistnet.com ...
What would that reason be?
It will be interesting to see what happens in removing the Kenyan from the Oval Office if it turns out that he is a fraud. Maybe this is why he is on the commie's side in Honduras. Obama’s position, “no big deal if a commie violates the constitution. Leave him in office.”
In in your case it would be non-sense?
Yep. And that CAN'T be an oversight on their part. It shows you that even they know that the internet CoLB has problems...
your gut apparently doesn’t have huevos to go with it.
OK, so how will Judge Carter determine Obama is a fraud without the valiant efforts of Orly Taitz?
It will be interesting to see what happens in removing the Kenyan from the Oval Office if it turns out that he is a fraud.
Let's prove the fraud part first and then we'll worry about the repercussions.
Don’t know that either, do you?
You don't understand federal court practice. A motion to dismiss cannot rely on any evidence proffered by the defendant. The only basis for a motion to dismiss is to say that, even if all of the facts claimed by the plaintiff are true, the case must still be dismissed. Therefore, the only possible grounds for a motion to dismiss are the procedural issues raised by the DOJ.
Perhaps, but none of it is relevant to his eligibility, and that's the subject of this lawsuit.
A judge can't order discovery for something just because it would be good to know. It has to have some direct relevance to the lawsuit in question, and that lawsuit is about eligibility.
Also, I've found the birther claim that he was on a foreign scholarship to be rather bizarre. The vast majority of scholarships and other college financial aid packages are available only to US citizens and permanent residents.
Now maybe there was a scholarship avaialble only to Indonesian citizens when he was in college, but I doubt it. I have yet to see a birther produce any evidence that there was one.
From an the official website of The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, which gives the best and most complete guidance on the subject, as a claim of indigenous HI birth is most important to them in particular says the following...
"Primary DocumentsBirth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.
The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."
In the state of HI a "Certificate of Live Birth" and a "Birth Certificate" are the exact same things.
You are confusing a "Certfication of Live Birth" with a "Certificate of Live Birth", which are two entirely different things. I'm sure your apology to our fellow Freeper will be forthcoming.
Because you don’t argue facts on procedural motions?
You, What would that reason be?
How about you tell us?
|
Don’t know that either, do you? At the 50 cents per post I'm sure you're earning, no wonder your postings excel in brevity and stupidity, yet lack in substance and originality. Don't you have an ACORN office to go give legal advice at? |
I don’t have a clue what the “that” in your first sentence refers to.
And to think, the think the future of the republic lies on the letters “ion.” I guess there really is a difference between lightning and a lightning bug.
No it's not. Civil cases don't morph into criminal cases when evidence of a crime comes out. A prosecutor has to bring seperate charges in another case.
You don’t get it. On October 5, Orly is going to convince the judge to hear the testimony of Lucas Smith. The judge will then be so convinced that Obama is not eligible he will issue a bench warrant and sent marshalls to arrest the president. Later that same day, he will personally try Obama for treason.
(I think this is actually what Orly believes by the way).
You said, “The press isn’t covering this because they’ve been threatened. Obama has nothing against using the FCC as a weapon.”
He can’t get away, politically with pulling Fox News or CNN off the air if they ask questions about his background and NBC. Everyone in the country except the socialists and their lawyers (same difference), would be demanding his birth certificate and/or his head on a platter. The best he can do is what he has done to Beck in isolating and demonizing him, and that only increased Beck’s audience.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.