Kagan, Sotomayer Not Legitimate Members of Supreme Court

June 27, 2015 | Uncle Sham

[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.

[Nero Germanicus]

Well if the judiciary is too stupid and Congress is cowed, why are we wasting time discussing this? It should be obvious after six and a half years of total abject failure that this issue is a political loser, which has been my basic point from day one.
Loser issues HELP Obama, they don’t hurt him.

[wintertime]

Obama has failed to qualify.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Amazing how few of the posters seem to understand that.

[wintertime]

Did Congress ask Ronald Reagan to prove his eligibility?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

No. Why? Because it was self-evident.

Obama, **himself** listed himself as a”born in Kenya” on the jacket of his **own** autobiography. He fails e-verify. He posted clumsy forgeries of birth documents. None of the classmates in his so-called major remembers him attending Columbia.

How many red flags do you need?

[Fantasywriter]

Those are some good points. Here are a few more. Prior to its production—which occurred only after Trump started beating Obama over the head with the issue—various people stated the lfbc did not exist. The cut and pasted-up Frankenstein creation that was eventually revealed does not match the description of the birth records as previously provided by those who had seen them. The ‘home’ address listed on the lfbc is a residence at which neither Stanley Ann nor Little Barry ever lived, even briefly. There is no evidence that Stanley Ann lived anywhere in HI during or immediately following the pregnancy and birth. None.

And that is just a very short and partial list.

[DoodleDawg]

Let’s find a member of Congress who is willing to open an Obama natural horn citzen-eligibility investigation and subpoena Hawaii government officials past and present and also subpoena the original birth certificate for congressional committee inspection.

You've been looking for one for over six years now.

[DiogenesLamp]

Well if the judiciary is too stupid and Congress is cowed, why are we wasting time discussing this? It should be obvious after six and a half years of total abject failure that this issue is a political loser, which has been my basic point from day one.

Yes, it has been a loser for a long time, but much of the reason is the willingness of the Republican side to give Obama a pass in the first place.

There for a brief period, the Republican side took the issue seriously, but then Allahpundit and the Pilsbury Dough Boy (Ed Morrissey) et al, Declared the issue "over" on the basis of Newspaper announcements, and the rest of the rank and file followed suit.

This completely ignored the larger point of his foreign father and the accurate meaning of the "Natural Born Citizen" requirement, and the fact that Newspaper announcements existed were certainly strong evidence of 14th amendment citizenship, but not conclusive.

The Republican side threw in the towel with barely a ripple of effort and all the "geniuses" like Karl Rove, said this issue was a distraction, and so we should concentrate on losing the election.

As things turned out, it wouldn't have made much difference had they hammered the issue and failed. They failed anyway. (Thanks Liberal Propaganda networks.)

The biggest stumbling block in trying to make it a "winning" political issue was John McCain. When I voted for John McCain in the primary (everyone else sucked worse) I was not aware that he wasn't born in the United States, but on a US Military base in Panama.

What this meant is that the issue of "natural born citizen" would hurt him worse than it would Obama, so he dared not bring it up. Had anyone else been running, it would not have been a problem, but because of some strange twist of fate, the Republicans managed to nominate the only guy who COULD NOT raise the issue successfully against Obama.

This does not make the issue irrelevant, there's still some principles involved. It just became an issue that the Mainstream could not embrace because it was impossible to do anything useful with it considering the Candidate running against Obama.

They all rolled over, because there was no useful benefit to the campaign to deal with the issue.

So why are we wasting time discussing this? Because there are still principles involved, and the fact that more powerful forces have "decided" the issue, does not make them right, especially when you consider all the negative consequences which accrue as a result of dismissing the issue.

Why are we wasting time discussing roe v wade or "gay" marriage? Because some people believe it isn't finished despite what our "rulers" say.

[DiogenesLamp]

Yes.

Well then you haven't been watching enough of it because you are seemingly unaware of the Rubber Stamp Republicans currently doing whatever Obama and the Democrats want in both the House and Senate.

I doubt much would be different if the Democrats still held the majority.

[DiogenesLamp]

Amazing how few of the posters seem to understand that.

Exactly. The burden of proof is supposed to be on the candidate, not on his opposition.

[Nero Germanicus]

Obama qualified for the ballot in all fifty states plus the District of Columbia. Over two election cycles, that’s 102 qualifications. His Electoral votes were unanimously confirmed by both Houses of Congress, without objection.

There have been 226 original jurisdiction legal challenges to his qualifications, 97 state and federal appellate rulings and 26 appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States. There has been no ruling of ineligibility.

Obama placed a copy of his official state of Hawaii birth certificate on the Internet for the whole wide world to see on June 12, 2008. He followed that up with placing on the Internet a copy of his original, long form birth certificate on April 27, 2011.
The state of Hawaii said: “The Hawai’i State Health Department recently complied with a request by President Barack Obama for certified copies of his original Certificate of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “long form” birth certificate.
‘We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai’i,”

There have been 21 judicial rulings finding Obama qualifies as a natural born citizen and no ruling has ever found that he does not qualify as such.

For example: Taitz v. Obama (Quo Warranto) “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 is required by the Constitution. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”— Chief U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, April 14, 2010
A Writ of Quo Warranto requires an elected or appointed official to prove by what authority they hold the position that they have. Quo warranto shifts the burden of proof to the elected or appointed official.

If anyone still has questions about his eligibility, his birth certificate can be inspected under an order from a judge of a court of competent jurisdiction or by a congressional subpoena. Furthermore officials of the state of Hawaii can be deposed under oath and subpoenaed to testify before courts or Congress, under oath, at any time.

[DiogenesLamp]

And your response is another good example of the "ad nauseum" fallacy.

[Nero Germanicus]

Its seems logical to me that posting facts instead of fallacies might induce nausea, but thanks for reminding me: I forgot to add that Obama’s attorneys submitted copies of his birth certificate to judges/justices in the Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama eligibility challenges.

Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili (and Secretary of State Brian Kemp) received copies of the birth certificate in Georgia; U.S. District Court Judge Henry T. Wingate received a copy of the birth certificate in Mississippi and all nine Justices of the Alabama Supreme Court received copies in that state. The Mississippi and Alabama birth certficate exhibits came with Certified Letters of Verification from the Hawaii state Registrar.

[Fantasywriter]

Look at the bright side. At least he’s no longer pretending to be a conservative. He’s out of the closet loud and proud as a straight ahead super Obot. He was once on the verge of being banned, and hastily claimed to be a Palin fan. That didn’t fly, though, because he supports everything Palin opposes. So now he’s back to being Obama’s biggest onsite apologist. Honesty is always an improvement.

[DiogenesLamp]

Its seems logical to me that posting facts instead of fallacies might induce nausea, but thanks for reminding me:

Irrelevant facts, when you even bother with them.

I forgot to add that Obama’s attorneys submitted copies of his birth certificate to judges/justices in the Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama eligibility challenges.

Like that one. What is wrong with this fact and why is it irrelevant? Because the document says right on it that it may not be accurate.

You keep trying to use this "bait and switch" tactic to get around the fact that nothing which proves anything has been submitted. You keep ignoring that "Or an Abstract thereof" statement which renders the document invalid in the eyes of any sane and intelligent individual who comprehends what those words mean.

And then you keep pounding the same irrelevant facts as if you think they prove something. You NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER address the valid point in rebuttal to your ad nauseum recitation of irrelevant facts.

Hawaii is an extreme Liberal state with very loose rules to their birth documents, they give birth certificates to people not actually born there, and they won't certify anything with finality. It always has some sort of "Might not be true" or "So say our records over which we have total subjective control", comment slapped on it somewhere.

[DiogenesLamp]

Look at the bright side. At least he’s no longer pretending to be a conservative. He’s out of the closet loud and proud as a straight ahead super Obot. He was once on the verge of being banned, and hastily claimed to be a Palin fan. That didn’t fly, though, because he supports everything Palin opposes. So now he’s back to being Obama’s biggest onsite apologist. Honesty is always an improvement.

One can only conclude that his donation history is acceptable.

[Fantasywriter]

I don’t know about that end of it. I can tell you this much, however. His initial claim to be a big Palin fan was accepted, and it saved his bacon. Subsequently he was hammered over the fact that he slavishly supports everything Palin ferociously opposes. In time his incongruous pro-Palin tagline disappeared. Perhaps he simply realized the futility of pretending to be a conservative. No-one who has followed his posting history even loosely is buying that whopper.

[Nero Germanicus]

I have no idea why you feel the need to persist with that blatant lie. Are you really that desperate to win a minor debating point? You have deteriorated to pathetic.

[DiogenesLamp]

I have no idea why you feel the need to persist with that blatant lie. Are you really that desperate to win a minor debating point? You have deteriorated to pathetic.

You aren't clear on which point you consider to be a "Blatant Lie" so I'm going to have to assume it's my reference to the Official certification which says:

I certify this is a true copy or Abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii state department of health.

That bolded section is a legal loophole through which you could drive a Mac truck. It removes any credibility which the document might have possessed. It basically says this document could be an abstract of a record which has been manipulated by the Department of Health in Hawaii. Other evidence supports this conclusion as well.

It makes the document uncertain as to whether or not it is an original record or a subsequently manipulated one with the original being occluded.

As only something which demonstrates conclusively that Obama was physically born in Hawaii can grant the 14th amendment citizenship which is his only claim to citizenship at all, this document is useless and non dispositive.

Again I remind you that I have been adopted and have two birth certificates, the second one filled with non-true information.
Again I remind you that there is quite a lot of evidence to indicate Obama was also adopted, and so his original document has very likely been replaced with a certificate altered by judicial process.

You just choose to absolutely dismiss these valid claims demonstrating that what has been submitted isn't good enough to establish the facts which due diligence requires to be in compliance with Article II.

No, my point isn't a "blatant lie." It is a valid point which you absolutely refuse to address or deal with, preferring instead to constantly cite the quantities of people who are such shallow thinkers that the very probable possibility I mention above hasn't intruded on their consciousness.

In other words, you continue to cite ignorant, arrogant, simpleminded stupid people who think following a ritual is more important than truth.

[Nero Germanicus]

An abstract is a short form. A copy is a long form. The certification stamp covers both documents. It says NOTHING whatsoever about not standing by the information contained on the document. Not one word.
Every birth certificate has the same wording.
The proof is in the pudding, everyone in an ifficial capacity who received a copy of the long form containing that certification wording ACCEPTED IT.
That’s 11 judges/justices and two Secretaries of State.

[DiogenesLamp]

It says NOTHING whatsoever about not standing by the information contained on the document. Not one word.

It stands by the fact that some sort of record exists in their files. It is not clear on whether this was an original record, or a replacement record.

That record in their files can be made to say anything, and need not reflect the actual truth.

Every birth certificate has the same wording.

Well that's absolutely not true. Take this one for example.

It has a clear and wiggle free certification:

This certifies that the above is a true and correct copy of the original record on file in the research and statistics office Hawaii State Department of Health.

.

The proof is in the pudding, everyone in an ifficial capacity who received a copy of the long form containing that certification wording ACCEPTED IT. That’s 11 judges/justices and two Secretaries of State.

And now you are back to your fallacy of authority argumentum ad nauseum. I just demonstrated to you how these people could be wrong and not cognitive of the fact. Are you so stupid that you can't comprehend the point either?

The certification on Obama's document is not solid. The Certification on the birth certificate posted above is solid. Every effort to get a state official to certify it as an "ORIGINAL RECORD" is met with insistence on resorting to the "record on file" dodge.

They simply WILL NOT say those magic words "Original Record."

[Nero Germanicus]

If anyone in an official capacity has any further questions, the Hawaii Registrar of Vital Statistics can be deposed or subpoenaed and called to testify in a court of law or before a committee of Congress.

The original, vault edition birth certificate can be inspected under a court order or via a congressional subpoena.

If the wording on the Obama Certficate of Live Birth’s Certification statement that was issued by the current state Registrar was different from that on any other Certificate of Live Birth that he has issued then you’d have a point. But it isn’t different and you don’t have a valid point.

Statement issued by the Secretary of State of Arizona:
“Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett satisfied Obama was born in United States”
“Late yesterday, our office received the ‘verification in-lieu of certified copy’ from officials within the Hawaii Department of Health that we requested in March,” Bennett said in a statement released Wednesday afternoon. “They have officially confirmed that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for the President matches the original record in their files.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/arizona-secretary-of-state-ken-bennett-satisfied-obama-was-born-in-united-states/2012/05/23/gJQAN1czkU_blog.html

Statement by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach
“I have no doubts now,’ Kobach says of Obama’s birthplace”
He [Secretary of State Kobach] said Kansas now has information from the Hawaii Department of Health certifying that Obama’s birth certificate posted on the White House website is the same as what’s logged in Hawaii.

“That, for me, settles the issue,” he said.

He downplayed the idea that Kansas’ reputation took a hit because of the board’s delay, saying the board is quasi-judicial and needed to get records, no matter how strong or weak the objection was.

Kobach said the board needed more information, despite documents posted to the White House site and cases in other states.

“I have no doubts now,” he said.

http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article1099175.html#storylink=cpy