Is the Supreme Court circling Obama

MonsterMark

MonsterMark

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
9,225
Reaction score
3
Location
United States
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm

Interesting turn of events.

A third Conference before the SCOTUS has now been scheduled for January 23rd, 3 days after the inauguration. This one argues that Hawaii virtually lets anyone get a Certificate of Live Birth, even Sun Yat-Sen, the father of modern China, who just happens to have been born in China. :bowrofl: This whole Obama thing is so sad it is funny.

There is also one scheduled for January 9th, the day after the Electoral Votes are counted, that asks for a Writ, and then another set for January 16th that will deal with an injunction to keep Obama from taking office.

So circle the following dates on your calendar.
January 9th
January 16th
January 23rd

I don't believe the Supreme Court can act until after he is sworn in so I guess we'll just have to wait and see where this all goes.
 
I don't think it's fallen into the category of constitutional crisis, but more into the constitutional vaguery realm.

Most everyone is confident that he was born of one American parent on American soil. The arguments regarding "natural born" and then the constitutional distinctions that were presented by the founding fathers in the constitution go over most people's head.

Couple that with the distinct sense of fear people are experiencing with the economy.. they just don't care.. they just want things "fixed." The last thing they want is a genuine constitutional crisis that would result if the Supreme Court decided that the President-elect was ineligible to serve.
 
Michael Reagan has a different view I guess.

1. Obama admits on his website, and parents divorce papers confirm, that he was a British citizen at birth.

2. Anne Dunham had not sufficient residency in the U.S. and wasn't of sufficient age to confer U.S. citizenship on Barack at his birth in 1961.

3. If he was, in fact, born in Hawaii in 1961, he was a British citizen only, and only under British jurisdiction as a visitor to Hawaii.

4. In 1961 the U.S. did not permit dual citizenship. So even had his mother been of sufficient age and U.S. residency, he could not have gained U.S. citizenship by a Hawaiian birth through her. His Certification of Live Birth could not grant citizenship to a British national.

5. As with any parents who are foreign nationals giving birth in the U.S., and "not under the jurisdiction thereof," Obama would have to return to the U.S. and undergo the naturalization process, and sign a written citizenship oath to gain U.S. citizenship for the first time. This is exactly what happens to the children of foreign tourists whose children claim citizenship under the 14th Amendment birthright. Citizenship under these circumstances does not constitute being "natural born".

Therefore, Obama was never a U.S. citizen as a minor, could only become one by naturalization, and if he has not done so, he is an illegal alien like his half-aunt from Kenya.
 
MonsterMark said:
Therefore, Obama was never a U.S. citizen as a minor, could only become one by naturalization, and if he has not done so, he is an illegal alien like his half-aunt from Kenya.
Click to expand...

And that's the problem... that flies into the face of the average person with common sense. He was born in the U.S. His mother was a citizen of the U.S. He was raised in Hawaii. He went to school in New York. He worked in Chicago. He served in the state senate of Illinois and then represented the state in the U.S. Senate. And finally, he won the election for the Presidency, absolving all from any residual, legacy guilt for any race problems within this country's history.

Now someone is going to argue that he's an illegal alien, no different than someone who snuck across the border at midnight?

This is the realm of the legalese. Technical distinctions without a perceivable real world difference. In the meantime, they are looking to increase spending by several trillion dollars, and it doesn't matter if it's Obama or Biden at the helm. (Biden is just less charismatic and endearing, so easier to challenge). Which, at this point, is a much bigger issue than the arguable and technical eligibility of Obama.

There's only so much energy, so many resources to pour into these fights, and as a conservative and patriot, it's a defensive position now. The constitutional eligibility fight has been lost, now the policy issues and long term vision are most important.
 
I deleted a bunch of posts, most of them mine. I want this thread to stay on track.

Isn't it curious that Harry Reid goes on the record in the Senate saying it is the Senate's responsiblity to make sure Burris is eligible to serve, yet not a peep out of Reid's mouth about his responsibility towards the Usurper-Elect?

Simply amazing, the double standard employed by the Dems daily.
 
Chew on this...

Urgent- Obama's mother used someone else's social security number

As you remember I reported that the social security number xxx-xx-8522 that Obama's mother Stanley Ann Dunham used most of her life showed active many years after she supposedly passed away.

Two days ago I reported that there is a woman in Bothell WA, Phyllis Albriktsen that has been using this social security number all her life. By all accounts she is the real owner of this social security number. She was born in Washington state on 12.28.42. She has roots in the community and lived all her life in that community. Last phone number xxx-xxx-8815.

Please, our patriots from Wa. Visit this woman and her family. See names of all the relatives below. I need to know how did this Stanley Ann Dunham (or who ever in god's name she is)got this woman's info. How did their lives cross? Phyllis is the same age as Stanley Ann, they are only one month apart. (Stanley Ann was born in November 1942, if this is even her real birth date)

(snip) We have no clue who these people are. Their social security numbers are wrong, their birth certificates are sealed and hidden from the citizens of this country. No marriage license for Ann Dunham and BO sr, no burial place, no medical records, no birthing records from any hospital, no coroners reports for the deceased. (snip)
 
Cheney, yesterday, during the counting of the Ballots, failed to openly call if there were any objections, according to:

US Code, Title 15, section 1 Part 15: it states...


Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections.

He didn't do it. You can listen to it here (36mb download) or you can take my word for it.

http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/p...p?id=309&sid=8ea07e7f4eca9d3fd4aab0652e1ee8bc

Keep your heads buried sheeple. You are about to be sheared.
 
MonsterMark said:
... no coroners reports for the deceased
Click to expand...

Now we are hearing from the mortuary conflicting reports that Madelyn Dunham had actually died prior to Obama going to see her, and not from cancer. They won't release her time of date/death and no autopsy report is available. Nor is there a death certificate.
 
MonsterMark said:
Cheney, yesterday, during the counting of the Ballots, failed to openly call if there were any objections, according to:

US Code, Title 15, section 1 Part 15: it states...


Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections.

He didn't do it. You can listen to it here (36mb download) or you can take my word for it.

http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/p...p?id=309&sid=8ea07e7f4eca9d3fd4aab0652e1ee8bc

Keep your heads buried sheeple. You are about to be sheared.
Click to expand...

UPDATE 12:35: Now someone is claiming he stated there were no objections off the record before the proceedings began. Good grief.
 
You are going after this dude with all theveroscity of a pitbull.
You make Shawn Hannity look like Mary Poppins.
Give it a rest dude.
Bob.
 
..so all the powers are aligning and that they've been planning to have Obama run for President since the 1960s? And his mother isn't his mother, or it is, but she's been using a fake social security number because her son might run for President?

I'm genuinely not following the trail of breadcrumbs you're laying out.

Is the ultimately the "no difference between Republicans/Democrats, the powers that be control both parties, and they are globalists. And Obama is their hand picked, hand groomed vessel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 121 (members: 0, guests: 121)
Back
Top