Obama's Eligibility Still In Question

Damocles

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89941

2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility
Says issue could decide if 'we are a Constitutional Republic'


By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Another U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq is joining a challenge to President Obama's eligibility to be commander-in-chief, citing WND's report on 1st Lt. Scott Easterling, who has agreed to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit over the issue, as his inspiration.

"I was inspired by 1LT Easterling's story and am writing you to inform you that I would like to be added as a plaintiff against Obama as well if you feel it would help your case," said the soldier, identified for this report only as a reservist now on active duty in Iraq.

His letter was directed to California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her DefendOurFreedom.us Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

More at link...
 
Oh, yay...

As a Guardsman, I can tell you that if I were on federal orders, Obama would be my CINC. Period. And before the last election, when I had a governor who got elected fraudulently (she managed to get elected for good, this time around), I still considered her my state CINC. Period.

This whole thing is retarded.
 
Last edited:
Threedee said:
Oh, yay...

As a Guardsman, I can tell you that if I were on federal orders, Obama would be my CINC. Period. And before the last election, when I had a governor who got elected fraudulently (she managed to get elected for good, this time around), I still considered her my state CINC. Period.

This whole thing is retarded.
Click to expand...
They are just seeking people with "standing" after that idiot judge ruled that a citizen has no standing on a constitutional question.

IMO, the truth will out, and it will likely disappoint everybody. He is working hard to hide what will eventually become public knowledge.
 
Damocles said:
They are just seeking people with "standing" after that idiot judge ruled that a citizen has no standing on a constitutional question.

IMO, the truth will out, and it will likely disappoint everybody. He is working hard to hide what will eventually become public knowledge.
Click to expand...


There is no question. You're being a dumbass. "That idiot judge" (whichever one that is) is simply applying well established law.

This stuff is pretty funny though. Bunch of true jackasses getting their panties in a bunch and getting their frivolous lawsuits continuously tossed out of court.
 
Dungheap said:
There is no question. You're being a dumbass. "That idiot judge" (whichever one that is) is simply applying well established law.

This stuff is pretty funny though. Bunch of true jackasses getting their panties in a bunch and getting their frivolous lawsuits continuously tossed out of court.
Click to expand...
Well established law that the citizens have no standing on constitutional issues? I think he is an idiot. If the voter doesn't have standing on who they can vote for (in that case it was a member of the D party) then in reality there can be no standing that will ever count.

And I agree with the second part, as I said. IMO, it will all come out eventually and disappoint all these people.

He is spending a ton of cash to hide stuff that we know about every other person that has been President. It will eventually come out one way or another and then we'll all know what it was all about.
 
Threedee said:
Oh, yay...

As a Guardsman, I can tell you that if I were on federal orders, Obama would be my CINC. Period. And before the last election, when I had a governor who got elected fraudulently (she managed to get elected for good, this time around), I still considered her my state CINC. Period.

This whole thing is retarded.
Click to expand...

No. You're a mindless drone who puts mindlessness on a pedestal, congratulations on your idiocy.
 
Damocles said:
Well established law that the citizens have no standing on constitutional issues? I think he is an idiot. If the voter doesn't have standing on who they can vote for (in that case it was a member of the D party) then in reality there can be no standing that will ever count.

And I agree with the second part, as I said. IMO, it will all come out eventually and disappoint all these people.

He is spending a ton of cash to hide stuff that we know about every other person that has been President. It will eventually come out one way or another and then we'll all know what it was all about.
Click to expand...

1) It is solidly established law. You can look it up if you like. In fact, standing requirements are often most favored by so-called conservative justices in that it is a procedural mechanism for closing the courthouse doors on litigants. The reason that the cases (all of them decided by any judge anywhere, including the cases challenging McCain's eligibility since he was born in Panama) were disposed of so swiftly is that the law on this is so firmly established. That's also why subsequent appeals were dismissed without a second thought.

3) He (I presume you are talking about Obama) isn't really spending any cash at all since is most of these cases he isn't even a party to the proceedings. "It" has already come out. He was born in Hawaii. Get over it.

By the way, have you seen copies of every other president's birth certificates? Strange.
 
Dungheap said:
1) It is solidly established law. You can look it up if you like. In fact, standing requirements are often most favored by so-called conservative justices in that it is a procedural mechanism for closing the courthouse doors on litigants. The reason that the cases (all of them decided by any judge anywhere, including the cases challenging McCain's eligibility since he was born in Panama) were disposed of so swiftly is that the law on this is so firmly established. That's also why subsequent appeals were dismissed without a second thought.

3) He (I presume you are talking about Obama) isn't really spending any cash at all since is most of these cases he isn't even a party to the proceedings. "It" has already come out. He was born in Hawaii. Get over it.

By the way, have you seen copies of every other president's birth certificates? Strange.
Click to expand...
No, most of the cases have not already run. You are misinformed. Not all of the suits are about his birth certificate and they are being fought by attorneys hired by Obama.

Obama has hired a power firm in California to fight a subpoena of records from his college, for instance. He is spending a ton of cash to hide things that we know about every other person who ever held that office. Shoot, we all knew the grades of Kerry Bush and discussed them at length. Papers they write can be read... on and on...

There is a reason he is trying to hide these things. I don't believe it is because he is ineligible. I think everybody is going to be disappointed with the result when they do come out. And they will.

Most of the reporting on this is on WND and I mostly know because the morning guy on the radio is a conspiracy nut and loves to report on things like this so he brings Bob Unrue on to talk about the myriad lawsuits in several different states and from many different sources to get some information. It is also why I put it here in the Conspiracy Theory area. At this point it is only that.

I am fascinated by how this is keeps going. And there are far more than just ones to see his Birth Certificate.

Also, I believe that the Judge misapplied the standings rule. As a member of the Party he has "standing", IMO (and that of some other judges). But that is neither here nor there. I think the judge did it for Party, as judges are sometimes wont to do.
 
Damocles said:
No, most of the cases have not already run. You are misinformed. Not all of the suits are about his birth certificate and they are being fought by attorneys hired by Obama.

Obama has hired a power firm in California to fight a subpoena of records from his college, for instance. He is spending a ton of cash to hide things that we know about every other person who ever held that office. Shoot, we all knew the grades of Kerry Bush and discussed them at length. Papers they write can be read... on and on...

There is a reason he is trying to hide these things. I don't believe it is because he is ineligible. I think everybody is going to be disappointed with the result when they do come out. And they will.

Most of the reporting on this is on WND and I mostly know because the morning guy on the radio is a conspiracy nut and loves to report on things like this so he brings Bob Unrue on to talk about the myriad lawsuits in several different states and from many different sources to get some information. It is also why I put it here in the Conspiracy Theory area. At this point it is only that.

I am fascinated by how this is keeps going.
Click to expand...


You don't know very much about judicial processes and are grossly misinformed. As a preliminary matter, as I said previously, Obama is not a party to any of the litigation. Also, Obama is not paying any attorneys at all. You're being lied to and beg for more more more. It's Alan Fucking Keyes for crying out loud.

Why is it fascinating? It's what these lunatic fringe fuckers do.
 
Dungheap said:
You don't know very much about judicial processes and are grossly misinformed. As a preliminary matter, as I said previously, Obama is not a party to any of the litigation. Also, Obama is not paying any attorneys at all. You're being lied to and beg for more more more. It's Alan Fucking Keyes for crying out loud.

Why is it fascinating? It's what these lunatic fringe fuckers do.
Click to expand...
Because the lunatic fringe is fascinating.

Do you believe he will be successful at hiding such things as his college records forever? Because I don't. This will see a resolution. And I can't wait to see if my predictions are correct. (Well I can, but it is an idiomatic expression.)
 
I think they asked Keyes to participate because he couldn't be said to have no standing, and he agreed because he likes to be noticed.
 
Damocles said:
Because the lunatic fringe is fascinating.

Do you believe he will be successful at hiding such things as his college records forever? Because I don't. This will see a resolution. And I can't wait to see if my predictions are correct. (Well I can, but it is an idiomatic expression.)
Click to expand...


Yes, let's wait and see.

My only question is at what point do we stop waiting and seeing and start collectively laughing our asses off at these fucking nutters? At what point do we treat them like 9/11 truthers? That time seems to have long since passed but here we are.
 
Dungheap said:
Yes, let's wait and see.

My only question is at what point do we stop waiting and seeing and start collectively laughing our asses off at these fucking nutters? At what point do we treat them like 9/11 truthers? That time seems to have long since passed but here we are.
Click to expand...
I haven't told you not to laugh, in fact I have yet to see anybody here telling you that.

It seems that you think a fascination for something equates to belief. I'm fascinated by UFO reports too, and ghosts, but I am extremely skeptical about either of them. Bigfoot is also fascinating, still also skeptical.

And you have yet to answer the question. Do you think Obama will be successful at hiding his college records forever?

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the signed vault copy of his birth certificate because Hawaii has logical laws that allow him to refuse that to them. But I do believe we'll eventually get most of the documents these people seek, and that everybody will be a bit disappointed in the result.
 
Damocles said:
I haven't told you not to laugh, in fact I have yet to see anybody here telling you that.

It seems that you think a fascination for something equates to belief. I'm fascinated by UFO reports too, and ghosts, but I am extremely skeptical about either of them. Bigfoot is also fascinating, still also skeptical.

And you have yet to answer the question. Do you think Obama will be successful at hiding his college records forever?
Click to expand...

It's one thing to be fascinated. It's yet another to repeat the lies you are being told as if they are fact, particularly when the source is these guys.
 
Damocles said:
I haven't told you not to laugh, in fact I have yet to see anybody here telling you that.

It seems that you think a fascination for something equates to belief. I'm fascinated by UFO reports too, and ghosts, but I am extremely skeptical about either of them. Bigfoot is also fascinating, still also skeptical.

And you have yet to answer the question. Do you think Obama will be successful at hiding his college records forever?

Personally, I don't think we'll ever see the signed vault copy of his birth certificate because Hawaii has logical laws that allow him to refuse that to them. But I do believe we'll eventually get most of the documents these people seek, and that everybody will be a bit disappointed in the result.
Click to expand...


What do you mean by everybody will be disappointed in the result? Who and why?
 
Dungheap said:
What do you mean by everybody will be disappointed in the result? Who and why?
Click to expand...
I think both sides will be. And it will be because both of them will get something they didn't expect.

The conspiracy dudes will find nothing to "prove" his ineligibility, and the worshipers will have some feet of clay moment. Mostly because of the amount of energy expended to hide it I feel that there is something they actually want to hide.
 
* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

* Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

* In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top