Posted on 09/16/2009 9:48:30 AM PDT by vikk
Wrong. John McCain was challenged and produced his documentation, including his birth certificate.
Yeah. Ever since Saturday my sense of urgency to emigrate has diminished greatly.
Sorry, when I said that Judge Land “took” the case I didn’t mean that this was rigged. And I see that he was a Republican politician. But his record on the cases I have seen, including the earlier military case, does not suggest that he is particularly “conservative.”
More likely he is an opportunist, from what little I know of him, mostly from reading his various comments and opinions on these two cases.
These two cases raised a legitimat issue. And evidently someone thought so, or the earlier deployment would not have been cancelled, rendering the issue moot. And this officer’s commander would not have forbidden her to leave her post to attend the court. And the Defense Department would not have threatened to cancel its contracts if the employer of the first guy refused to fire him.
Although the judge yesterday accused Orly Taitz of making PR speeches, all she said was that it was only reasonable to ask the Obama prove his legitimacy by producing the necessary proofs that he is constitutionally qualified to be president. That is certainly reasonable. Nor did the judge have any reason to believe that her Kenyan BC was a fake.
The difference between a legitimate soldier and a pirate or bandit, according to recognized international law for at least 2000 years, is that the soldier is legitimated by legitimate authorities. So, if Obama is not legitimate, our troops have no legitimate excuse to be fighting wars, and would be vulnerable to international courts. Therefore they have a right to ask that Obama prove he is legitimate, since there are very reasonable doubts that he is.
“The difference between a legitimate soldier and a pirate or bandit, according to recognized international law for at least 2000 years, is that the soldier is legitimated by legitimate authorities. So, if Obama is not legitimate, our troops have no legitimate excuse to be fighting wars, and would be vulnerable to international courts. Therefore they have a right to ask that Obama prove he is legitimate, since there are very reasonable doubts that he is.”
BINGO!
sar.casm- a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
Kreep the other lawyer wrote the response:
No, Kreep responded to the motion to stay discovery. No one has responded to the motion to dismiss yet. (They still have time, though.)
I thought it was joke until someone pointed out that there are no credible report of SAD actually being pregnant. Then she showed up in Washington Sate with a new baby that she did not seem to know how to take care of. “Reports†are that it was an Aunt who actually had the kid. Hey, good a guess as anything else. One branch of the story goes that SAD actually did have 0, but in Canada since it was so close to Seattle. Who knows but they will keep making it up as long as the truth is not revealed. Oh and I did get sarcasm just thought the bastard angle was good!
I have now read Kreep’s response to the discovery stay motion and I see that he also addresses the issues raised by the U.S. Attorney in the motion to dismiss. He and/or Orly will still need to file a separate document formally responding to the motion to dismiss, but at least Kreep has done the work needed to state an argument.
I don't think so. I have an original copy of my long form and it does not.
My crazy theory (everyone has one) is that the father isn't listed (thus the word 'bastard' could be thrown around.)
That's my theory (more-or-less) as well.
I don't know that it would actually say bast*rd, but it might say "unwed" or some such.
I also think this: if you and I are correct, it benefits him to keep it quiet for as long as possible. If he's ever forced, by a court or by circumstance (an act of Congress, let's say - though that will never happen), he'll tearfully produce it and say he was trying to protect the memory of his mother.
Ta-da! He wins and everyone who doubted him looks terrible in the minds of the public - who largely have not been following this.
Exactly like every other useful idiot has thought at every other "this time" in history.
The Chicagoland thugs have just as much on Hillary as she has on Obama.
Think of it as a nuclear blackmail stand off with mutual assured destruction.
How many other people have been vetted for positions of prominence and found not qualified?
Ed Jui, of San Francisco, was found ineligible and jailed.
We have had presidents of Universities found to have embellished their resumes. VETTED!
We have had presidents of companies found to have embelished their resumes, fired, sued etc. VETTED!
We have had executives of corporations commit fraud for years, going undetected, until the peoblems were suddenly too enormous to ignore.
Adelphia, Qwest, MCI/Worlcom, Enron, etc! The list is numerous!
There have been police chiefs, presumably applying to some of the most competent organizations who sucessfully complete investigations. VeTTED !!!
Tell me who vettED this chump?
on what basis was he vetted and what was the information they relied on as proof?
There are no, nada, zip documents that were used.
Anyone who tells there is is lying and should be able to provide resources were we can see the wonders of Barry’s proof.
There is none and absent proof a vacuum of legitamacy exists!
You should familiarize yourself with Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 901. Requirement of Authentication or Identification, as well as Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 44(2) Proving an Official Record.
Orly didn't even come close to meeting ANY of the requirements spelled out in those two rules - not even close. Foreign records, unlike domestic birth records, are not prima facie evidence of anything. Foundation and authentication must be established by the Movant, not the opposing party or the bench. The Movant must provide compelling and specific authentication before the bench may presume that the evidence (a foreign record in this case) isn't a fake.
So, when you say "Nor did the judge have any reason to believe that her Kenyan BC was a fake.", it says to me that you don't have a clue how things work in the US Court system, let alone do you demonstrate any credible foundation upon which to base an allegation of incompetency with respect to this, or any federal judge. Just saying.
Incidentally, the mistakes that Orly made in this case are mistakes that would get a first year law school student laughed out of any moot court in the country. Which probably shouldn't come a surprise to anyone considering she obtained her law degree from a online law school.
Count yourself among Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Payne. The count yourself as lucky that your mother loved you enough to suffer people who shamed or shunned her - just to have you.
Those kinds of accusations may be what Obama is counting on - that there would be loud public outrage of him somehow being forced to out his mother as an unwed mother.
Very few people hold that sort of thing against the child - those who do have a screw loose. Having to "out" his mother could transform him into a very sympathetic figure.
Most people recognize that there is no shame in bringing a child into the world if the mother finds herself pregnant. That is the only correct thing to do.
And no, I don't approve of sex outside of marriage, but abortion towers over it as a sin.
But, Kreep specifically addresses and mentions the Governments 'Motion to Dismiss' issues of "Standing" and counters them in the Application. The Governments Motion to Dismiss is all about Standing or Jurisdiction. This is a response no matter what the title says. And you wouldn't oppose the Government's opposition to Standing unless you thought the case would go forward.
Well that sucks but the arguments that he put forth counters the Government arguments in the same case will same amount weight to the judge as it would to Orly's plaintiffs. Her plaintiffs still benefit.
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.