Posted on 10/02/2010 4:36:35 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
Prima facie? The Obama Hawaiian COLB has not been entered as evidence in any court. That’s the fact.
More nonsense. Obama could have entered that faux Hawaiian COLB of his as evidence when his lawyers submitted their briefs to the courts. The thing must not be real as Obama has not done so.
true. If the COLB is entered as evidence , it opens the door to demand supporting doc’s. The proof would be a certified copy of obama’s LONG FORM certificate(if one exist?). obama can never allow this to happen as it proves he is not a Natural Born citizen. I have no doubt that obama knows that he is not a natural born citizen, and can remain “president” only as long as he can keep his birth records out of the court system.
More nonsense. Obama could have entered that faux Hawaiian COLB of his as evidence when his lawyers submitted their briefs to the courts. The thing must not be real as Obama has not done so.
Let me repeat just one more time and very, very slowly, for the really, really stupid: defendants don’t substantiate their innocence in the American judicial system. Plaintiffs have to substantiate the defendant’s liability.
Since the Governor of Hawai’i, the Attorney General of Hawai’i, the Director of Health of Hawai’i and the Registrar of Vital Statistics of Hawai’i have all vouched for the authenticity of Obama’s Hawai’i birth records, that most likely will be enough for any Court should the “Obama in ineligible” folks ever find a plaintiff who might be granted legal standing to file suit.
Additionally, if anybody really, truly, honestly wants to see Obama’s original birth records, all they need do is go to a friendly judge and get a legal document known as “a subpoena.” That way the state of Hawai’i will print out a fresh copy of whatever birth records they have for Barack Hussein Obama II! What a concept!
Futhermore, any congressional committee could have subpoenaed Obama’s birth records years ago. Obama announced his candidacy for the presidency in February of 2007.
If Congress subpoenaed Nixon’s White House tapes, they can certainly subpoena Obama’s birth certificate.
Have you heard ANY single member of Congress call for congressional hearings on Obama’s eligibility to be president or has any member of Congress called for a congressional subpoena of Obama’s birth records?
A Hawai’i birth record can be released without the permission of the person named on the record to: “a person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by a court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.”—Hawai’i Revised Statutes 338-18(b)
true. If the COLB is entered as evidence , it opens the door to demand supporting doc’s. The proof would be a certified copy of obama’s LONG FORM certificate(if one exist?). obama can never allow this to happen as it proves he is not a Natural Born citizen. I have no doubt that obama knows that he is not a natural born citizen, and can remain “president” only as long as he can keep his birth records out of the court system.
Obama’s birth records can be released at any time without his permisson by subpoena.
I'm sure there's a different standard that can be applied to people we don't like.
The Supreme Court said so in some document that I can't recall.
It's probably in the Constitution somewhere too.
I'll have to go see if I can find some out of context quotes by some Flemish writer from back in the 1500’s or so that support my opinion.
Still playing games I see you, have been advised over and over what the long form has that the short form doesn’t and that is the ability to verify it.
Nice to see you post Obama’s long form, blank just as many thought. ZERO information just like Obama another big ZERO.
Well clown it is called exculpatory evidence. To clear his name to at least show he was born in in Hawaii. He says he is but will not prove it. That is called hearsay BS, especially from a proven liar.
Let me repeat just one more time and very, very slowly, for the really, really stupid: defendants don’t substantiate their innocence in the American judicial system. Plaintiffs have to substantiate the defendant’s liability.
No, let me repeat to you clown for the very slowly...you're slow and even slower than an idiot.
Obama could have submitted a birth certificate to each of the seventy-some trials to date, and no Court would have even attempted to validate it. The dismissals would have been issued on the exact same procedural grounds; they don't just jump over that to answer questions they aren't even legally asked yet.
I'm sorry my points are right on CON. We see a silly "president" who can't even prove he was born in Hawaii. Nope, we have a proven liar-in-chief who can't show a mere birth certificate in court. He has the exculpatory evidence at the tip of his finger but won't produce it for the court. It's certainly not evidence that will hurt him in court as it should clear his name to where he was born. You don't keep exculpatory evidence out of numerous courts for over 2 years if it clears your name.
You may recall that this same conceptual issue was played for humorous effect in "My Cousin Vinny."
Vinny Gambini: No. I'm just trying to explain...
Judge Chamberlain Haller: [cutting him off] I don't want to hear explanations. I don't know how you practice law in New York, but the state of Alabama has a procedure. And that procedure is to have an arraignment. Are we clear on this?
Vinny Gambini: Yes, but there seems to be a great deal of confusion here. You see, my clients...
Judge Chamberlain Haller: Uh, Mr. Gambini?
[Motions for him to approach the bench]
Judge Chamberlain Haller: All I ask from you is a very simple answer to a very simple question. There are only two ways to answer it: guilty or not guilty.
Vinny Gambini: But your honor, my clients didn't do anything.
Judge Chamberlain Haller: Once again, the communication process has broken down between us. It appears to me that you want to skip the arraignment process, go directly to trial, skip that, and get a dismissal. Well, I'm not about to revamp the entire judicial process just because you find yourself in the unique position of defending clients who say they didn't do it.
Now that's just Hollywood humor, but the point is correct. Courts don't accept evidence for evaluation before they have made a determination that a case, as presented, can progress to that stage. It wouldn't be exculpatory for Obama in a pre-trial submittal because the Court wouldn't evaluate it. Therefore, no competent attorney would bother to submit it. They would likely be embarrassed by the Court if they did.
Now if you can work Marisa Tomei into this, we’re in business!
No, I'm right on troll. You can make all the excuses you want; apparently, Obama does not have the evidence that clears him.
It seems to be all right with you Obots for Obama to act like a criminal. Most of us have a much higher standard that we expect from someone who occupies the presidential office. Obot lawyer Robert Bauer can point to a jpg. image in a silly footnote for a federal judge to look at online, but will not produce Obama's birth certificate in court? So it's ok that Obama's eligibility has been twittered, blogged, and massaged? That's total nonsense by a federal judge. You after-Birther's are all unbelievable to say the least.
It wouldn't be exculpatory for Obama in a pre-trial submittal because the Court wouldn't evaluate it. Therefore, no competent attorney would bother to submit it. They would likely be embarrassed by the Court if they did.
Oh, it would be an "Embarrassment" that you guys like to latch onto? What 'embarrassment' would that be CON? Do tell. Obama not born in Hawaii is about as big as an 'embarrassment' that can happen. So again, what 'embarrassment' is Obama keeping from the public other than that he is a pathological liar?
No, irrespective of whether Obama was born in Hawaii or not, you simply don't know what you're talking about. You apparently have no comprehension of actual court procedure; that is the issue about which you're trying (unsuccessfully) to state meaningful conclusions.
It seems to be all right with you Obots for Obama to act like a criminal.
Failure to provide exculpatory behavior in the initial pre-trial briefs is not the behavior of a criminal. It is the normal behavior expected by the Court. As, I've noted, they wouldn't evaluate the birth certificate if he provided it. And outraged hyperbole does not, in fact, constitute an argument, either in court or out.
Oh, it would be an "Embarrassment" that you guys like to latch onto? What 'embarrassment' would that be CON? Do tell. Obama not born in Hawaii is about as big as an 'embarrassment' that can happen. So again, what 'embarrassment' is Obama keeping from the public other than that he is a pathological liar?
You fail to comprehend what I wrote. It does not presume there is anything embarrassing in the birth documentation itself. The embarrassment I was speaking of would be felt by the attorney who submitted such a thing at that stage. They would likely be asked "What am I (the Court) supposed to do with this? You do recognize that I have not asked for or directed delivery of this, and that it has no relevance at this stage of the procedure?" You are basically taking attorneys to task for following court procedure and thus not subjecting themselves to needless rebuke. That's a pretty unreasonable perspective.
I tried to get Marisa Tomei, but when she found out the script was pages and pages of Red Steel yelling at her that she was a traitorous Obot, she told her agent to pass. (smile)
I understand completely.
It does not presume there is anything embarrassing in the birth documentation itself. The embarrassment I was speaking of would be felt by the attorney who submitted such a thing at that stage.
Oh come on now troll, then there is no good reason for Obama not to release the birth certificate if it is not an embarrassment. At that stage? LOL! That's about as silly of an excuse that I've seen in awhile. "At that stage" is BS. Moreover, after about 70+ cases and over 2 years of litigation "that stage" has come. Ask your fellow Obot LiL' Jamie for an accurate count.
They would likely be asked "What am I (the Court) supposed to do with this? You do recognize that I have not asked for or directed delivery of this, and that it has no relevance at this stage of the procedure?"
You understand an honest man would release his birth certificate without question. I expect no less from a "president," and not make up BS excuses .
You are basically taking attorneys to task for following court procedure and thus not subjecting themselves to needless rebuke. That's a pretty unreasonable perspective.
Exculpatory evidence that show Obama was at least born in Hawaii is not an unreasonable perspective or is it unreasonable for him to release exculpatory evidence to the courts. Everyone would present exculpatory evidence, to clear themselves "except Obama" in this world. It seems to be OK with you Obots to send a man to jail to protect Obama because of some imaginary 'embarrassment' cooked up from the imaginations of dishonest lawyers.
Well clown it is called exculpatory evidence. To clear his name to at least show he was born in in Hawaii. He says he is but will not prove it. That is called hearsay BS, especially from a proven liar.
No, let me repeat to you clown for the very slowly...you’re slow and even slower than an idiot.
For example:
“A spurious claim questioning the President’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.“ US Federal District Court Judge for the Middle District of Georgia Clay D. Land in dismissing “Rhodes v MacDonald” September 16, 2009
or:
“This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Constitution. See U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”—Chief US District Court Judge for the District of Columbia Royce C. Lamberth in dismissing “Taitz v. Obama”—April 14, 2010
Ah, dang....
Oh, Really? Why don't you also trot out that Obama wants the NBC issue to save Congress for the Dems in this election season? So Jamie, you should start a national Dem campaign that Obama is a natural born citizen and is eligible for presidential office. It would be such a winner for you guys since the Dems have nothing else to run on this year. Get all the Dems to spout everyday in unison that Obama is an natural born citizen. Heehee... And Obama is an empty suit who spouts a bankrupt life and governing philosophy and having a Harvard degree did not save him from his stupidity.
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.
