Thread: OBAMA ELIGIBILITY ISSSUE MUST BE RESOLVED SOON

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY ISSSUE MUST BE RESOLVED SOON

By: Devvy
March 14, 2009
© 2008 - NewsWithViews.com

Before I get into the how can we get this done, I would first like to make a statement to hopefully deflect an email box full of hate mail.

Please don't misconstrue what I'm about to say as disparaging to any of the lawyers involved in these lawsuits. I have supported all of them and their efforts. I am not an attorney. I have no training in the law, but I can read and read I have. A million words in these lawsuits; the briefs as well as supporting documentation. That's how I learn and hopefully make an informed decision. Not based on personalities, but what the law says.

Millions (not a thousand or a hundred thousand), but millions of Americans either know a lot about the Obama citizenship/birth certificate controversy or they know enough that it has raised serious questions in their mind.

Readers of this column and listeners to my radio show know that I have covered this extensively. They also know that I do not play favorites and would be fighting the same fight if McCain had allegedly been elected because McCain is also, in my opinion, constitutionally ineligible.

While some cases have received more attention than others, those receiving the most exposure have been cases filed by Phillip Berg, Dr. Orly Taitz, Leo Donofrio, Cort Wrotnoski, Stephen Pidgeon, Mario Apuzzo and the United States Justice Foundation. Dozens have been filed at the state level; too many to list here. Many of the cases have been brought by citizens and the rest by attorneys on behalf of their clients.

We are all aware of the outcome of those docketed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Denied with no comment on merit) and those that had at least a hearing of some sort in front of a judge. The issue of whether or not Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka and so forth, is badly dividing this country. The frustration and rage is escalating. Every piece of legislation he signs into law brings the potential of lawsuits that would be never ending - possibly thousands of them. Not to mention the destructive policies Obama is shoving down our throats. However, the issue at hand is not political or racial, but a matter of constitutional law.

Thousands of citizens have been doing everything humanly possible to get the courts to hear these cases on their merits. Of course, this is more than just a political hot potato, it is a volcano that could erupt in a nasty way. That's why the courts won't touch it - what judge wants to be responsible for removing an usurper president? Do they even have the legal authority to do so? An important question.

The situation can't continue with another lawsuit filed on Monday, four on Wednesday, maybe three the following week. Then comes the endless wait while the defendants respond and the legal wrangling begins. When those fail in seven or eight weeks, a new round of lawsuits gets filed and again, months go by while the defendants answer the lawsuit and file motions that could go on for years. Leo speaks highly of Mario Apuzzo's case, Kerchner v Obama and we hope it has a successful outcome. Mr. Apuzzo's web site is here.

Obama has controlled the birth certificate issue from day one. He continues to do so. This keeps all of us wondering, filing Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits. I think even to the most staunch Obama supporter, it's obvious by now that Obama refuses to release his vault birth certificate because he has something to hide. Or, maybe not. Maybe Obama's refusal is simply to keep everyone running around chasing lawsuits. Remember, he can pull it out for release to the media anytime he wants. Timing in life is everything as they say - especially in politics.

There is also the issue of possible criminal activity by Obama and this is addressed on Orly's web site where she is petitioning Attorney General Eric Holder for a special prosecutor; click here.

What do we do to bring this to an end as quickly as possible? I believe Orly was the first to bring up the issue of Quo Warranto, but I'm not 100% certain. There is so much activity and web sites to comb through besides reading all these legal filings. In any event, there are outstanding lawsuits waiting to be processed through the system. Many state representatives, active military and veterans have signed up to become plaintiffs for a possible lawsuit being initiated by Orly. They are all listed on her web site. Orly has also sent a letter of request to AG Eric Holder to undertake a Quo Warranto, as well as a new filing with the U.S. Supreme Court; click here.

Both Orly and Leo Donofrio were guests on my radio show last week to help us understand these legal issues. In a recent column, I provided a link to Leo's three part hypothetical brief on Quo Warranto; click here. I concur that a Quo Warranto in the District Court in Washington, DC, FIRST is the best path to take, not the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you read the statute (see Leo's brief), even if AG Holder and U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor decline to proceed, there is still the opportunity to go forward. In Part 3 of Leo's legal analysis, you will see where he gives the statute and who can have standing. This has been done successfully in the past when the AG and US Attorney have failed to act. We also have to remember that this will be a jury trial. My biggest concern is that an action taken straight to the U.S. Supreme Court - especially in light of the fact that the Chief Justice, John G. Roberts, met behind closed doors with Obama - would likely be shot down and we lose. Personally, I believe on the Quo Warranto issue, the U.S. Supreme Court should be last in line.

I know the knee jerk reaction to a jury trial in the District Court in Washington, DC, because I've already had email: "You're dreaming, Devvy, if you think jurors in Washington, DC, who worship the Messiah are going to do the right thing." My response is to let the system work and do not underestimate the integrity of the American people when presented with solid facts. That statute is perfect for this issue. It is up to the AG and the U.S. Attorney to bring an action on behalf of the United States. No plaintiffs. Should they refuse, then the "third persons" or "interested persons" part kicks in and we proceed from there.

Many, many Americans have been forwarding their letters of request to Holder the past couple of weeks; Orly has been posting them to her web site. Thank you to all the people who wrote letters to Richard Durbin. Every one counts. We know that hundreds of thousands have signed petitions to the courts. If hundreds of thousands of Americans from all walks of life sent their polite requests to Holder and Taylor (including all those state legislators), something has to give. A small flame can turn into a huge fire if fanned properly.

This pdf file is my certified letter to U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor. I provided a copy to Richard Durbin at the U.S. Attorney's office in Austin, Texas and U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. That pdf file also contains Leo Donofrio's letter of March 13, 2009, to U.S. Attorney Taylor. I put Leo's letter in this pdf file to help people like me. I wear glasses and sometimes reading text off a web site with color back grounds makes it difficult on my old eyes.

I hope you will join me in sending U.S. Attorney Taylor a polite request to bring a Quo Warranto action. It is completely within either Holder or Taylor's discretion. It can be one or the other or both of them. Time is of the essence and we simply must move this along to a resolution. The longer this lingers, the worst the situation will get for all of us and our republic.

Devvy on live radio: Solutions Not Politics
Monday-Friday
6:00 pm PST, 8:00 pm CST and 9:00 pm EST
Listen live:

Addresses:

United States Attorney Jeffrey Taylor
United States Attorney's Office
555 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Web sites on lawsuits:

Listing of cases and actions
Dr. Orly Taitz
Leo Donofrio
Phillip Berg
Mario Apuzzo
United States Justice Foundation
Stephen Pidgeon

Free audio:

Leo Donofrio legal filings and the Wong Kim Ark case

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd436.htm

Many Links on this page; please go to the link above to view them

Supreme Court justices will discuss challenge to Obama's citizenship Friday

Though it writes that the legal action has "little chance of succeeding," the Chicago Tribune notes that Supreme Court justices will sit down tomorrow to "take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama's U.S. citizenship."

At issue is the contention of some Obama opponents that he either wasn't born a U.S. citizen or that at one point as a child he gave up his citizenship. The arguments have been dismissed by lower courts and well as by Obama and his aides.

The nonpartisan FactCheck.org reported earlier this year that its researchers "have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship."

Another nonpartisan fact-checking outfit, PolitiFact.com, reached the same conclusion.

Justice Clarence Thomas submitted the case, Donofrio v. Wells, for the court's consideration.

Posted by Mark Memmott at 01:58 PM/ET, December 04, 2008 in Election law

USA TODAY Online

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/
----------------------------------------------------


Supreme Court Not Considering Obama's Birth Certificate Case

By Michael Kraskin
Dec 5th 2008 8:48AM
Filed Under:eBarack Obama, Breaking News, Supreme Court

Today is the day that all the Barack Obama birth certificate conspiracy theorists--or "birthers," as they're known in some circles*--have been waiting for. Yes, at long last, it's Birth Certificate Day at the Supreme Court! Time for the highest court in the land to settle this dispute once and all.

Or so the "birthers" would like to believe.

They're a tad mistaken, though. That's because the authenticity question over of Obama's birthplace document has all ready been put to rest innumerable times.

No, the question before the court today is not whether Obama was born in the U.S., it's whether that birth makes him a natural born citizen. The argument brought by Leo Donofrio goes like this:

"Don't be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesia issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama's ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama's father was a Citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama's birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen 'at birth', just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn't be eligible to be President.

The Framers of the Constitution, at the time of their birth, were also British Citizens and that's why the Framers declared that, while they were Citizens of the United States, they themselves were not "natural born Citizens".

Got it? The argument is that even if he was born in the U.S., his daddy was an immigrant, so he can't be president. Donofrio in fact "concedes Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii."

Also, the Supreme Court isn't hearing the case, they are deciding whether to hear the case.

So, sorry birthers, no closure for you today. But hey, just for fun, here's a poll.

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2 ... cate-case/
--------------------------------------


December 5, 2008

Supreme Court Silent on Obama Birth Certificate Lawsuit

The Supreme Court made no announcement today whether or not it will hear Donofrio v. Wells, the lawsuit challenging the election based on Barack Obama's release - or alleged lack thereof - of his official birth certificate and his citizenship status. (The court did decide to hear two cases, one of which is the case of Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, an Al Qaeda combatant seized on American soil.) Of course, there's no guarantee the Court will ever actually issue any statement on the Obama case since it was simply petitioned to the court and, along with hundreds of other cases, could be dismissed without any comment at all. But as Frank James, over at The Swamp, says, "the lack of an announcement doesn't mean the court definitely won't hear Donofrio." So either we will or we won't. Hmm.

Meanwhile, our comrades at our sister site DCist scoped out a protest held by supporters of the Donofrio cause at the Supreme Court this morning led by Roger Bredow, who claims Obama has duel citizenship.

The Supreme Court will announce whether it will actually consider the Obama lawsuit as early as today and as late as Monday. If (as expected) the Court tosses the suit, Bredow will start challenging Obama's legitimacy based on "foreign money that went into his campaign." Other protestors said they'd start contacting members of the Electoral College. Steve Brindle, who drove down from Pennsylvania, said he'd called his senators yesterday.

"There aren't a lot of people out here today," said Brindle. "There are a lot of people talking about this back home. Really, everyone's asking questions."

Of course, only 15 to 20 people showed so...yeah.

Either way, nothing will ever outweigh the rage we felt this morning when we read that Obama has allegedly chosen a Zune over an iPod. We're whipping up a petition as we speak and expect a protest very, very soon.

http://chicagoist.com/2008/12/05/no_wor ... _obama.php

My biggest concern is when are the girls going to get the First Puppy.

Originally Posted by vortex

My biggest concern is when are the girls going to get the First Puppy. :wink:

L O L

Thanks for the article AB......Devvy is always a good read no matter the subject.

Originally Posted by vortex

My biggest concern is when are the girls going to get the First Puppy.

I would imagine they will get it as soon as they find just the right illegal alien to go around cleaning up after it, and who can also double as obama's poster child for job creation.