"That explains a great deal about you. "
Dude.
Posted on 01/26/2012 5:55:04 AM PST by RaceBannon
Article II SUPERPAC streaming live video and audio at this link
How about recipes?
Oh, now that has pucker factor written ALL OVER IT. Thanks for the ping!!!!!!!!!
OH! OHohoh!
Wait a minute... does that mean that the petitioners entrance of it into evidence can DO THE SAME THING??????????? Its been entered into evidence, does it matter which side did it?????
WOW..... that would be one damn powerful tool at this point on several levels!!!
"That explains a great deal about you. "
Dude.
“Those two non-Orly cases could result in SCOTUS defining NBC from now forward if an appeal challenges those facts. Part of Obama’s strategy might be to appeal the GA SOS case on jurisdictional or other technicalities, such as those Jablonski tried to put over on the GA SOS.”
The appeal, if any, will be de novo (from the beginning, a fresh start). Plaintiffs or Defendant would be appealing a decision of the GA SoS and not Judge Malihi. Consequently, a civil suit would be filed against GA SoS Kemp, in his capacity as GA SoS, because they disagreed with his decision and want court review.
“Auntie” thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?page=1
And another of my favorites, Fred Nerks’ brilliant “African Colonial” thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2278969/posts?page=1
(Fred didn’t start the thread (neverdem did), but she has packed it with excellent research and history. Kudos to both of you.)
Thanks very much for all of the great sources for info. I came late to this game, and have been working daily for the past nine months to catch up. The folks that have done so MUCH research on this issue are absolute heroes, in my utterly honest opinion.
Thanks for the Freepmail. I might have ignored your insult if I hadn’t been Freepmailed.
Lost in this discussion is the simple fact the non-Orly Plaintiffs could have rested their case after the Defendant failed to appear and won their case. But no. They insisted on entering evidence into the record. They entered printouts of Obama’s COLB and his long form BC as factual evidence. The Judge admitted the documents as undisputed fact.
The sad part is the non-Orly Plaintiffs could have established Obama’s father was a non-citizen without entering the COLB or long form BC. The birth records only indicate where Senior was born. Obama’s books establish Senior as a student in America with a temporary visa.
SatinDoll,
Have you seen this?
It’s a partial quote from rolling_stone and it indicates Orly may have the opportunity to authenticate the copies of Obama’s COLB and Long form BC entered into the record by non-Orly Plaintiffs. Orly should demand to inspect the Original in Hawai’i to verify the copies.
Georgia Administrative law rules 8-1-2.18
(e) documentary evidence in the form of copies if the original is not readily available, if its use would unduly disrupt the records of the possessor of the original, or by agreement of the parties. Upon request, parties shall have an opportunity to compare the copy with the original. Documentary evidence may also be received in the form of excerpts, charts, or summaries when, in the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, the use of the entire document would unnecessarily add to the record’s length. The entire document shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place.
http://www.osah.ga.gov/documents/procedures/administrative-rules-osah.pdf
This is not a rumor. See comment 881. It has been reported since 11:30 in the morning. This information comes from more than one source that was there.
:)
I don't know how valid the argument it, but is sure sounds like it could be an issue.
Eye of the Obama (Arizona):
The real issue in this is a President is not elected to these 49 United States, but Constitutionally must be elected by all 50 states, unless they have seceded from the Union as the Confederates did. Unless an event as that has taken place, the Constitution is not about Electoral Colleges or being ratified by Congress, but it is about the Union electing a President of all 50 states. Understand that any President can loose the popular vote as President Bush had, and win the electoral votes, along with numerous states, but no President can be President of these United States if he is not on the ballot or certified in all 50 states.Scholars have missed this ultimate check and balance in the "silence of the Constitution". No state can keep any legal candidate off the ballot, but a state can keep anyone off the ballot who does not provide legal documentation they are qualified to be President.
That is the Constitution at it's core in the Articles concerning the Presidency. 49 states can state a fraud can be President in their super majority, but if one state demands proof and the candidate does not provide that legal proof, the one state in checks and balances can negate a national Presidential Election. There is no court nor Supreme Court which can undo this. Thee only way this could be reversed is by Congress in majority or the states in majority undoing by Amendment the Arizona check and balance, but in that is the Catch 22 in no Amendment can undo the Articles in making a non natural born person a President of these United States. The majority could undo the Arizona check, but the majority can not negate the prime directive of the Constitution concerning Citizenship
I don’t measure anything out when I make cream pies. I just make a basic vanilla pudding from milk, cornstarch, sugar, vanilla, and the egg yolks that I separate for the meringue. And then I add pineapple, coconut, or bananas to the pudding in the baked crust, and top it with meringue.
I should measure it out sometime so I get the right amount. One time I intended to make 2 pies and ended up with 5 because that’s how much filling I had after being a little too generous with the milk. lol
So did he, but he was just an Honorary "black" President.
That may be how WE feel, but that is not necessarily how the SCOTUS feels. Like I said, their last ruling on Roe v Wade was "Stare Decisis." Being moral or legitimate is not that high on their priority list. I believe that the court will pass on the two parent requirement, but I believe they wouldn't be able to ignore the issue if it can be shown that he was born in Canada. *THAT* would create more anger and heat than would black riots throughout the country. There is NO interpretation that would allow them to spin that!
The alleged HI LFBC appears to be forged to me and I don't care what race the person is if they use forgery to dupe the American people into believing they are eligible to be POTUS.
I believe it is forged as well, but I also believe it is a legal forgery produced as a "replacement birth certificate" by the Department of Health in Hawaii.
I would hope to God that a court is knowledgeable and intelligent enough to at least look at this idea before ruling that the document is legitimate, But in my experience, courts get things wrong far too often.
I will put this idea in the corner as a surprise "gift" should it actually happen this way.
Posting this here because it seems to [still!] be the most active thread, and because you mentioned heroes -
butterdezillion made this comment [#59] on the ‘Obama’s Attorney Jablonski Slapped Down By Georgia’s SOS...”. When reading it, keep in mind that Jablonski wasn’t flying off at the handle - those very carefully crafted statements were Jablonski SPEAKING FOR/AS HIS CLIENT, OBAMA.
butterdezillion: “...if Obama’s lawyers let Savannah Guthrie feel the seal on a genuine birth certificate, then why won’t they just submit the stupid thing to Malihi? Anybody with half a brain has to be asking that question.”
That is absolutely the most simple yet profound question...observation...statement yet posited relative to this ongoing Obiefarce. butter’s question exquisitely zeroes-in [pun intended] to what has to be the obvious conclusion, i.e., that the “stupid thing” is a fake.
butter’s question should be called in to every talk show in the nation, and should be published - in bold print caps - in every newspaper and every news website/blog from coast to coast!
KUDOS to you, butterdezillion!
Must suck to be such a low life that your 'duty' is to undermine our Constitution on a daily basis by fighting the efforts of honest Americans to restore our Republic.
The world knows we can't be beat us militarily, at least not now, but they might be able to do it by dividing us and undermining our Constitutional foundation, our culture and our finances.
That's the nature of the very real war we are fighting now and the "Svens" are either on the other side or are their useful idiots.
Yum!
That same filling would make a sumptious Boston creme pie.
Why is it called ‘pie’ when it’s really a cake?
Nonappearance by the defense is based, of course, on the assertion that because the SOS lacks statutory authority to determine the candidate’s eligibility, the hearing officer lacked subject matter jurisdiction - suggesting the defense thought the hearing was a kangaroo court.
Au contraire. Nonappearance by the candidate and his counsel is based, of course, on the fact that they have no legal documents from Hawaii indicating that a Barack Hussein Obama II was born on August 4, 1961. Further, none of these participants wanted to enter false testimony into the hearing as evidence...so easy even a caveman could understand it.
Other states sure to follow...bye bye Bari.
Were you also a Klingon during Halloween?
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.