Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

The newest case out of NJ in Kerchner had an amended complaint filed earlier this week.

The blog doesn't announce plans in advance.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/02/secon ... t-for.html

The case is developing around a theme of the Legislative branch having been called upon to "investigate" McCain but failing to act when asked to investigate Obama.

Originally Posted by FreedomFirst

The newest case out of NJ in Kerchner had an amended complaint filed earlier this week.

The blog doesn't announce plans in advance.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/02/secon ... t-for.html

The case is developing around a theme of the Legislative branch having been called upon to "investigate" McCain but failing to act when asked to investigate Obama.

Do you honestly think this one has a chance?

Originally Posted by cayla99

Do you honestly think this one has a chance?

Three points to answer your question Cayla.

First, I know that 3 of the conservative/constitutionalist justices on the SCOTUS have been polled by Berg, Donofrio and Tatiz. In other words, the initial request to have the emergency cases heard must go to a specific justice. If that justice denies the request then the petioner has the right to re-petition to the justice of their choice. I know that they have petitioned three different justices and they all granted the opportunity to go to conference. At conference there is only a requirement for 4 justices to vote to hear the case. So far, they have petitioned Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts. Has Alito been petitioned yet? If he has been and he has elected to allow this to go to conference and we still can't get those 4 to vote it out of conference then I don't think there is a chance.

2. Most of the cases that went to the SCOTUS were emergency petitions of one way, shape or form (as I understand it). The emergency stays or requests for information were denied but not the case at the root of the emergency request. Soooooo, I believe at least in some of those cases the original case still needs to work its way through the slow judicial process. If that is the case then there is still hope.

3. I saved the best for last. My pastor said 2 years ago not to be concerned with Hillary winning the presidency because God said, "And when HE gets into office I will change his heart" Now two years ago it was a forgone conclusion that Hillary would be the next President of the US. Pastor was the only one that stated otherwise. God didn't say when HE becomes president, he said when HE GETS INTO OFFICE. Now I am torn. I have an obligation to pray for our leaders, however the Bible teaches that if you don't run the race according to the rules that you forfeit the race (2 Tim 2:5 Texas Standard Version). So we have an obligation to pray, but we have an individual who didn't run the race according to the rules. So what do we do?
We can pray Matthew 10:26 (New International Version)

"So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.

We are to the point that our legal arm has proven too short and too weak for the task. However God has said that His arm is not too short nor too weak. It is high time that we turn to Him and ask Him to intervene on our behalf. God can soften the hearts of the SCOTUS members and also of Obama. We must intercede on behalf of them that they will do what is lawful and right.

Originally Posted by armbruster512

We can pray Matthew 10:26 (New International Version)

"So do not be afraid of them. There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.

We are to the point that our legal arm has proven too short and too weak for the task. However God has said that His arm is not too short nor too weak. It is high time that we turn to Him and ask Him to intervene on our behalf. God can soften the hearts of the SCOTUS members and also of Obama. We must intercede on behalf of them that they will do what is lawful and right.

Pray for peace and justice, and then work as the Lord leads.

God Bless Dr. Orly Taitz. She is at it again. If you keep firing at the impregnable wall, eventually something will get through.

State lawmakers: Prove you're president, Mr. Obama
Case being assembled to demand eligibility documentation
Posted: February 11, 2009
11:55 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new lawsuit is being prepared by a California attorney who already has four cases pending over the issue of President Obama's eligibility to occupy to Oval Office, and this one will include a demand from state lawmakers who forward state funds to Washington for documentation of his qualifications.

Orly Taitz told WND today she's preparing the complaint but is holding onto it and will file it shortly to give state legislators a chance to join the action as plaintiffs.

Four already have signed up, including state Rep. Eric Swafford of Tennessee, who agreed to be a plaintiff "for a Writ of Mandamus to obtain original birth certificate, immigration records, passports and other vital records for Barry Soetero aka Barack Hussein Obama."

Taitz told WND the case also probably will include members of the military as plaintiffs, since both state lawmakers and military officers are obliged to follow orders from the president, and both have a need to know the orders are legitimate.

"In the military, those would be unlawful orders, and [following them] would subject the officers to courts-martial," she said. "In the legislatures, they cannot follow any of his bills or orders … they don't know who he is.

"As far as we know he is a foreign national … Why should state legislators send any funds from the state to a foreign national?" she said.

"While we are working on the complaint, I'm gathering support from different states," said Taitz.

Her other cases now include one pending at the U.S. Supreme Court, another in Superior Court in California, a third in U.S. District Court in California and a fourth in Texas for which she's awaiting a court response.

It certainly appears that Obama and his lawyers are getting tired of fighting off these court cases. Now comes sanctions I guess they will eventually get to the IRS and audits.


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=88746

'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case
Motion demands records be withheld from public
Posted: February 13, 2009
12:15 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be "monetary sanctions" against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn't qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" citizen in that post.

The suggestion came in an exchange of e-mails and documents in a case brought by former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others in California. The case originally sought to have the state's electors ordered to withhold their votes for Obama until his eligibility was established. Since his inauguration, it has been amended to seek a future requirement for a vetting process, in addition to the still-sought unveiling of Obama's records.

In the case, being handled largely by Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation, he recently subpoenaed the records documenting the attendance by Obama, or possibly the student when he was known as Barry Soetero, from Occidental College.

The lawyer for the college, Stuart W. Rudnick of Musick, Peeler & Garrett, urgently contacted Fredric D. Woocher of Strumwasser & Woocher.

"This firm is counsel to Occidental College. The College is in receipt of the enclosed subpoena that seeks certain information concerning President-Elect Barack Obama," he wrote via fax. "Inasmuch as the subpoena appears to be valid on its face, the College will have no alternative but to comply with the subpoena absent a court order instructing otherwise."

Within hours, Woocher contacted Kreep regarding the issue, telling him, "It will likely not surprise you to hear that President-elect Obama opposes the production of the requested records.

"In order to avoid the needless expense of our bringing and litigating a Motion to Quash the subpoena, I am writing to ask whether you would be willing to agree voluntarily to cancel or withdraw the subpoena…"

Woocher warned, "Please be advised, in particular, that in the event we are forced to file a motion to quash and we prevail in that motion, we will seek the full measure of monetary sanctions provided for in the Code of Civil Procedures."

With Kreep out of town for a business trip, he did not respond immediately and the motion eventually was filed. It states that the records, which could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students, "are of no relevance to this moot litigation."

It also claims the petitioners failed to serve the subpoena properly.

"The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place," the firm working on Obama's behalf stated.

"The central issue in this lawsuit … is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from Democratic Party's nominee," the motion said. "None of the documents sought by petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question."

The motion then cited a precedent from a case involving a "former law firm client who brought malpractice action against firm claiming unconscionable rates was not entitled to discovery regarding amount paid by law firm to contract staff attorney because such information is irrelevant to unconscionability claim."

The case, with Keyes, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson as plaintiffs, names California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden and the state's electors as defendants.

"OBAMA has been inaugurated as the president of the United States. However, to properly assume such office, OBAMA must meet the qualifications specified in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution for the Office of the President of the United States, which includes that he must be a 'natural born' citizen," the amended complaint states.

"OBAMA has failed to demonstrate that he is a 'natural born' citizen. There have been a number of legal challenges before various state and federal courts regarding aspects of non-, lost, or dual citizenship concerning OBAMA. Those challenges, in and of themselves, demonstrate Petitioners' argument that reasonable doubt exists as to his eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

"To avert a constitutional crisis which would certainly accrue after such an election through laborious legal challenges, this writ seeks to require SOS (Secretary of State) to verify the eligibility of a Presidential candidate prior to the candidate appearing on the California ballot. It is incumbent on the candidates to present the necessary documentation confirming his or her eligibility, but, to date, for this past election, OBAMA has failed to do so," the complaint continues.

"An unprecedented and looming constitutional crisis awaits if a President elected by the popular vote and the electoral vote does not constitutionally qualify to serve in that capacity," the case said. "In addition, if OBAMA is not a 'natural born' citizen and not eligible for presidency, OBAMA will be subject to the criminal provisions of the California Elections Code, stating, 'Any person who files or submits for filing a nomination paper or declaration of candidacy knowing that it, or any part of it, has been made falsely, is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by both the fine and imprisonment,'"

It appears, with the passage of the stimulus bill by Congress, that the only recourse the American people have is to sue the government for every single provision that is shown to have been enacted outside the constraints of the U.S. Constitution.

Because Congress passes a bill or a statute, does not mean that the bill or statute is legal according to the Constitution.

I suspect that many of the provisions will be challenged in the courts.

I certainly hope so.

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

It appears, with the passage of the stimulus bill by Congress, that the only recourse the American people have is to sue the government for every single provision that is shown to have been enacted outside the constraints of the U.S. Constitution.

Because Congress passes a bill or a statute, does not mean that the bill or statute is legal according to the Constitution.

I suspect that many of the provisions will be challenged in the courts.

I certainly hope so.

Me TOO!!!

From Orly Taitz site http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles ... orly-taitz

we have this comment:

"If Obama's unsealed records show, what we actually know, that his father was a foreign National and he was a Britiish National at birth (Kenya was a British colony) and he is an Indonesian citizen now and in the past, he cannot be a US president and needs to be removed from the White House ASAP. No bill, including hotly debated economic package is valid, if he is not legitimate."

Agreed.

Originally Posted by HighlanderJuan

From Orly Taitz site http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/profiles ... orly-taitz

we have this comment:

"If Obama's unsealed records show, what we actually know, that his father was a foreign National and he was a Britiish National at birth (Kenya was a British colony) and he is an Indonesian citizen now and in the past, he cannot be a US president and needs to be removed from the White House ASAP. No bill, including hotly debated economic package is valid, if he is not legitimate."

Agreed.

Unfortunately, WE THE PEOPLE would still be out the money as it has already been spent.