Posted on 06/27/2015 8:12:51 AM PDT by Uncle Sham
Two of the five votes concerning same sex marriage are totally illegitimate. They were cast by Elenor Kagan and Sonia Sotomayer acting as though they are legal members of the United States Supreme Court. Any challenge to this ruling should include a challenge to their legitimacy as they were appointed by a Usurper, not a legal President.
It's time to take the gloves off and get the courage to confront the evil that is before us. I can prove that Obama is illegal just using the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three and have made this case many times on this forum. The charade has gone on long enough. We the people have the "reset" button in our hands with the Obama eligibility issue and we need to use it.
That the current federal government has declared war on on every one of us cannot be disputed. Obama's weak spot is his legitimacy as a legal President. Attacking it is our nuclear option. Someone please, hit the button.
You mistake logic for scorn. Not surprising, given your fundamental misconception. You imagine yourself imbued with the power to pontificate when a court consensus is authoritative and when it isn’t
This is a delusion.
You do not possess that superpower. Either the courts’ consensus carries authority, in which case you are promoting homosexual marriage, or it doesn’t, in which case the courts’ consensus in favor of Obama is merely evidence of the leftist corruption of the legal system.
A or B, NG; A or B.
Copies of the Obama long form birth certificate were submitted to:
(1) Georgia Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili and Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp
(2) U. S. District Court Judge Henry T. Wingate of the Southern District Of Mississippi
(3) The Justices of the Alabama Supreme Court.
(4) Every member of the Washington Press Corps at the press event called to announce receipt of the long form from Hawaii. That included Lester Kinsolving of the pro-birther worldnetdaily.com
Both Judge Wingate and the Alabama Supreme Court Justices also received copies of a Certified Letter of Verification from the Hawaii Registrar.
You mean the dysfunctional system which has ordered people to lose their businesses for failing to bake gay wedding cakes, ordered Nazi-Care to be our health provider and legalized homosexual marriage says he's legit?
Well alrighty then.
I guess you haven't seen it then. It has stamped right on it a notification that it might not be genuine. A notification with an official state stamp to indicate you should take the statement (that it might not be genuine) seriously.
I do take that statement seriously. You apparently don't.
Its the only system currently in existence and it still includes hundreds if not thousands of constitutionalist magistrates, judges and justices in the mold of Justices Roy Moore and Tom Parker in Alabama plus Alito, Scalia and Thomas.
Well that's not true. An image pulled off the internet was submitted, but to the best of my knowledge, no one has offered an actual certified copy from Hawaii.
Presuming an actual certified copy looks like the images on the internet, they aren't actually certified. They are certified to not necessarily be genuine, which makes them pretty useless, doesn't it?
I can just see a trial in which a witness answered a question. "Well maybe he did and maybe he didn't."
*THAT* would be the equivalent of what those "birth certificates" say.
I've got news for you friend. It doesn't really exist any more. In my mind it's gone way over into illegitimacy.
You're argument that there are still good judges is like arguing during the Nazi rise to power that there are still good Germans.
That may be so, but does not address the fact that the bulk of it has turned evil.
Interesting analogy. I am currently reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. As you may know, immediately prior to Hitler’s seizure of power, the German court system resembled ours. I.e. one side, the Nationalists, could get away with anything, including murder, and receive no more than a wrist slap. The other side got nailed to the wall for the most trifling of minor offenses.
Iow, the courts were completely political with no thought for justice. When a legal system becomes such that one side of the political spectrum is a foregone winner and the other is a foregone loser, the country is on the skids.
Any of the 11 judges/justices who received copies could reject the copy as insufficient evidence.
None of us has seen the hard copies that the judges or justices received in exhibits. All we’ve seen is scanned images that were then jdownloaded to web sites.
Federal Rule of Evidence 1005:
The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record — or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law — if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_1005
The copies of the long form birth certificates that were entered into evidence by U.S. District Court Judge Wingate in Mississippi and by the Alabama Supreme Court included Certified Letters of Verification from the Hawaii Registrar of Vital Statistics.
Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney in Georgia sent hard copies to Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili and to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp.
From Bob Unrah of worldnetdaily.com:
“They also sent a copy to the court of Judge Michael Malihi, the hearing officer, whose ruling is expected to be made available iyn the next few days.
That act, Taitz explained, effectively gave the court a copy of the White House documentation, and under ordinary rules of evidence the opposing side is supposed to have access to the original to verify the authenticity of the purported copy.”
“They submitted a copy and said this is a copy of the original birth certificate. Now the other party has a right to examine the original,” she said.
Her next step was to ask Malihi for a letter to the courts in Hawaii seeking a subpoena for the records. When the judge responded that the issue probably was outside his jurisdiction as an administrative law judge, she received permission to take her request to the Fulton County Superior Court.”
On its web site, the Hawaii Department of Health refers readers to the whitehouse.gov image of Obama’s long form birth certificate and they provide a link.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT VITAL RECORDS OF PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II
On April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth.
For information go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate
There are three different Certification statements on different types of copies of birth vital records certified by the Hawaii Registrar of Vital Statistics, Alvin T. Onaka, Ph.D.
(1) Certification Statement on Long Form Certificates of Live Birth:
“I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii Department of Health.”
(2) Certfication statement on a “Certified Letter of Verification In Lieu of Certified Copy:”
“I certify that the information contained in the vital record on file with the Department of Health was used to verify the facts of the vital event.”
(3) Certification Statement on the Computer print out abstract/short form Certification Of Live Birth:
“This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]”
There was an article posted on Free Republic the other day that points out the Courts are just a political tool now. They merely reflect the position of whatever party to which they hold allegiance. I'm sure this is true in the case of Democrat Judges, but I think Republican judges are more intent on originalism.
Iow, the courts were completely political with no thought for justice. When a legal system becomes such that one side of the political spectrum is a foregone winner and the other is a foregone loser, the country is on the skids.
As that article pointed out, not one word of debate was wasted trying to figure out what the positions of Sotomayor, Kagan, Ginsberg or Breyer would be. No one on any side contemplated any other possibility than that they would vote for the Democrat position.
The only Justice about which anyone was speculating was Justice Kennedy, and most people thought he would go over to the Liberal side.
Funny, 7 years ago when Prop 8 was challenged in court, one clever fellow over at Instapundit remarked:
"Why don't we just save a lot of time and ask Justice Kennedy what he thinks?"
It was apparent even back then that this was going to be entirely a political matter that has nothing to do with actual law, and everything to do with personal preferences of specific judges.
Ted Cruz has the right Idea. We need to improve our ability to kick Supreme Court (and in my opinion all Federal Judges) justices off of their thrones.
Why would they want to do that? That fake document supported the positions they wanted to have. They would only have challenged it if it went against their personal preferences.
Objectivity is not a factor in these proceedings. Arriving at their preferred destination is the only thing they wanted to happen. See previous post to Fantasy Writer.
Indeterminate. Useless.
record on file
Non specific. Useless.
of the fact of birth
Yes, your document proves he was born. It doesn't prove where.
Unlike credible states, Hawaii will issue these documents to children NOT BORN in Hawaii. Again, indeterminate of any useful information.
Yes, I agree that we have a few Republican judges who try to do their jobs, but very few. Cruz’ idea to hold judges accountable is the best hope we have, but it doesn’t strike at the heart of the problem. I.e.: the Democrat tactic of becoming en masse hysterical whenever a conservative jurist is nominated. After engaging in over the top public scream fests, they block anything approaching an actual conservative, and will end up confirming only wishy washy squishes that can subsequently be intimated into voting with the liberals. The Dems meanwhile nominate radical extremist-leftists, and they are confirmed without a whimper.
Until this basic dynamic is altered-if it can be-nothing else is going to help much, if at all.
Good reply. Here is an additional thought. HI is and has been a one-party Dem state for a long time. I lived in a similar state, MA, for two-plus decades. The word ‘corruption’ doesn’t begin to describe it. Both parties in such a state, along with everyone else on the public payroll, is either a lying hack or else has a very, very short career. Integrity is nonexistent, literally. You have to live in that type of cesspool to truly grasp how bad it is; nothing less can give you the full gist of it.
Anyway, the idea that these HI officials told the truth is simply not credible to anyone who knows how these situations work. I.e.: as in MA, the fact that a public official said it is almost inevitably the first indication that it is a lie.
People who post the words of these hacks et al as if they resolve anything are either inexcusably naive or aggressively dishonest. We are not in the mess we’re in due to the integrity of the taxpayer-parasite class. We got here via the lies and political expediency that have become the norm. Period.
This tactic only works as a function of their media propaganda weapon. If we take that out, this tactic will no longer work.
The Dems meanwhile nominate radical extremist-leftists, and they are confirmed without a whimper.
Again, due to the fact that they won't transmit to the public negative information about their side. We live in a one sided "freedom of speech" country. The Liberal/Left has an infinite quantity of speech, while our side gets occasional sound bites, but with the bulk of our ideas and commentary censored.
Until this basic dynamic is altered-if it can be-nothing else is going to help much, if at all.
Exactly right.
And that is also a good reply.
“Useless” to you. But every person in an official capacity who utilized copies of the birth vital record to make determinations on eligibility found the certification statements to be useful.
People who are familiar with government vital records understand that an “abstract” is a short form birth certificate and a “copy” is a long form birth certificate.
Those certification statements have appeared on Hawaii vital records for many years and they are the same on thousands of birth vital records.
Triers of Fact and Chief Election Officers also understand that a “record on file” is an original edition birth vital record.
There is zero proof that the state of Hawaii will issue birth certificates for children not born in Hawaii THAT SAY THE CHILD WAS BORN IN HAWAII.
Hawaii has said that like many other states, a person born in a foreign country can get a Hawaii birth certifcate that says they were born in that foreign land.
No one has ever produced an example of a birth record that says someone was born in the state of Hawaii when they were actually born someplace else.
Where is the statement that you think means that Hawaii doesn’t stand by its birth vital records?
If anyone in an official capacity had ever rejected the Obama birth record as proof of birth, you’d have a valid point but over the last seven years...nope.
If members of Congress would like to inspect the original, vault edition hard copy, they can issue a Congressional Subpoena for it and if Hawaii refused to release it for inspection, Congress Committee Chairs can go to a court and get a court order. If that is violated, a contempt of court citation allows a judge to lock the offender up in federal prison for up to 18 months or until they comply.
Its unfortunate that no member of Congress has shown any interest in pursuing this. If for no other reason than to end the birth certificate part of the debate, once and for all.
Remember Bill and Hillary Clinton’s accomplice Susan McDougall? She did 18 months in various federal prisons when U.S. District Court Judge Susan Weber Wright held her in civil contempt in the Whitewater Trial.
In the same manner that the Authorities found Marinus van der Lubbe, Useful.
I cannot help the fact that people of normal intelligence are smarter than what passes for judges these days, but most people of normal intelligence would not be fooled by a non-determinative certification.
Of course we can suspect these judges aren't really that stupid, but merely pretending to be so.
You are right to point out that the Dem tactic of screaming down decent, well qualified conservative candidates only works in conjunction with the leftist lapdog press. No wonder Obama whines about Fox so much. Fortunately in this cycle we have several candidates that are just stellar in dealing with the obnoxious and criminally biased but not overly bright MSM. If there is anything left to salvage by ‘16, God willing we may see things turn around yet.
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.