Thursday, December 04, 2008

[obama] already defaulting, fate decided tomorrow

All right, well now that that's over, we can concentrate on the next big issue:


WHY IS THIS NOT BEING DISCUSSED ON EVERY NEWS CHANNEL, IN EVERY PAPER AND ON EVERY BLOG?

December 1, writes attorney Thomas J. Latino, was “the deadline for the Obama legal team to file their response to the Berg Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.

There was nothing.

Mr. Obama has done what hasn't been done before…he has blatantly ignored a request from the Supreme Court of the United States – our highest and most revered legal institution. Mr. Obama, quite frankly, has thumbed his nose at the highest court in our land.”


On December 5, Leo Donofrio, a plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, is scheduled to have his case heard by the nine Justices of the Supreme Court, who have agreed to hold a “Rule of Four” Conference.

This means If four of the nine Justices agree that Donofrio’s case has merit, there is the potential for the Justices to issue a “stay” of the Electoral College vote on December 15, which would prevent the Electoral College members from casting their votes until this explosive issue has been resolved.

The greatest problem is that it is only the conservative and foreign press and blogosphere reporting this, so it's difficult to get a line on the actual truth here. I've read all I can and this is how I think it works - correct me if I'm wrong:

A Philadelphia lawyer filed a suit against Obama and McCain, alleging not "natural born citizens". His suits were overturned but Leo Donofrio then filed a stay of the election result, pending establishment of this citizenship matter. There seem two stories connected to this:

1. Obama was asked to produce his birth certificate by the USSC by December 1st gone and did not. This raises all sorts of questions about whether he was actually born in Hawaii and whether he was a dual citizen anyway.

2. There is an opinion that:

As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama's father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama's father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963.

He lost it when he reached age 21 because:

[T]he Kenyan Constitution prohibits dual citizenship for adults. Kenya recognizes dual citizenship for children, but Kenya's Constitution specifies that at age 21, Kenyan citizens who possesses citizenship in more than one country automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship unless they formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya.

Needless to say, this raises mindboggling issues because if doubt is expressed by four judges, then the Electoral College vote on December 15th must be stayed but this raises the question of the countdown to Inauguration Day. The delay would be unprecedented on this issue.

If the resolution of the matter is an eventual referral to the House of Reps, which is Democrat, then if Obama has been declared ineligible and struck off, whom would they select? Also, the question of fraud comes into it on a mammoth scale, let alone treason to the United States.

Tomorrow, it will be decided if Obama has a case to answer or not. Can you imagine the weight of the global community, the power within the U.S. and the entrenched positions having a word or two to the justices this evening?




11 comments:

  1. How to get the Vault Birth Certificate of the President Elect?

    Over a dozen lawsuits have been filed most of which are hinged on forcing the President Elect to show his “Vault Birth Certificate”. So far, the lower courts ruled that none of the plaintiffs, as US citizens, have “standing” to enforce the Constitution, as they can not prove harm. State officials take the stance that checking eligibility for presidency is not their duty. One Elector made a public statement to the effect that the current administration had ample opportunity, so he is counting on them to check the eligibility of the President Elect. In the meantime, the White House would not touch the issue with a ten-foot pole. The mainstream media largely avoids the topic or dismissing it as fanciful conspiracy theory, instead of questioning why the President Elect spent hundreds of thousands on legal fees to keep it secret. Even most conservative talk show hosts, with few exceptions, avoid the issue or touch it on surface only. There is silence from the GOP as well.

    In many states one must show a valid birth certificate for fishing or driver’s license, or for receiving social security benefits, but a simple statement of eligibility by the candidate is sufficient to be president, similarly to a “no-doc real estate loan”.

    Suggestion: As US citizens have no “standing” because they can not prove harm, let’s ask one of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners to file a lawsuit. The courts have been enthusiastically granting these foreign dudes “standing” at US courts. A good attorney could claim that the President Elect appears to be less determined to dismantle GITMO than promised in his campaign, thereby causing irreparable harm to the terrorist. No doubt the court will order the “Vault Birth Certificate” promptly.

    Some links:
    http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/misc2008/ChicagoTribune-ObamaLtr-Nov-2008.pdf
    http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/26/game-boys-at-gitmo/
    http://usatodayadforobamarecords.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-is-media-silent-on-obama-birth.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. James this is rubbish from cranks that you are repeating. Obama is an American citizen, his certificate is in Hawaii and the Hawaian government says that it is.

    As to whether it will succeed- historically as this article makes clear- very few of these mattters referred to the Supreme Court are even discussed (out of the 782 stays over the last eight years, only 60 were discussed), I'd be stunned if this got any further than a brief note that it had been noticed.

    The real point about this is that it is a pretty ridiculous attempt to invalidate a democratic election. The people have spoken- and they elected Obama, if some people don't like it then they should wait four years and put their own candidate up for election and win. Otherwise they should shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Astounding.I also questions why he has been known under so many aliases.
    I would want a criminal record check under all those names, too.

    Has there been an actual 'order' made by a court compelling him to file his birth certificate or only requests from plaintiffs to do so?

    If the latter, he has NOT thumbed his nose at any court.
    You would think though that he would want to lay the matter to rest, if he can do so without harm to himself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. From what you say, Obama is in danger of being hoist with his own petard, seeing how he has used legal technicalities to disqualify rivals in an election.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've just read the Chicago Tribune article and it is deeply flawed. It is not of consequence who filed it and why, as long as he is a U.S. cit.

    The facts are that Obama ignored a USSC court order, the media are not touching the story and due process is not being observed. The Hawaii statement is based on an extract, not on the vault copy.

    Obama does not have to produce that for the media but he does have to produce it for the USSC.

    Why is he not doing that? This thing smells.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I would be interested to see what sanctions a court places on him if he is in non compliance of a court order.
    It is my belief that they can be imprisoned until they do comply.

    When you add this fiasco -including media black out and seemingly Obama friendly judges-to his unlimited campaign funds,slick marketing and Hollywood win, it calls into question who is REALLY behind Obama? And why?

    ReplyDelete
  7. WHY IS THIS NOT BEING DISCUSSED ON EVERY NEWS CHANNEL, IN EVERY PAPER AND ON EVERY BLOG?"

    Why not? Probably beccause it's the last desperate attempt by the lunatic right to derail Obama's election.

    If there was something to this do you not think that the likes of Limbaugh et al would not be screaming this from the highest roof...

    ReplyDelete
  8. 110 000 signatures on the WND site says a lot and 60 000 signatures to the Supreme Court.

    Not a lunatic fringe, methinks. As for the MSM, there are distinct reasons why no one will touch it. Look at the consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "the last desperate attempt by the lunatic right..": bollocks; the chap who has pursued this most assiduously is a Democrat.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's a simple matter. Very powerful people wanted to catapult Obama into the White House , and very powerful people want to catapult him out.

    One ask to ask 'why?' to both.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.