UPDATE: Obama supporters must be stunned that SCOTUS is reviewing eligibility again!!!!!
Submitted by nmlifestyles on Tue, 01/06/2009 - 22:34
01/12/2009: PRESS RELEASE - U.S. Supreme Court denies Berg vs. Obama Berg states he is disappointed for the 300+ million U.S. citizens, for our “Forefathers” and for the tens of thousands that have died defending “our” Constitution and we will fight on as Obama is “not qualified” to be President
»
Done deal & was all along
not worth spit to pursue - the skids are greased & twisted
"If you don't stand behind our troops, PLEASE feel free to stand in front of them!"
Their way around this
is to change the constitution during some late night session while the public is being distracted by some global event. All in the plans. Watch for it. Do not Colin Powell and Mr. Biden predict this event?
Not trying to be rude
But, they won't change anything! there is nothing to change! We have not used the constitution in our lifetimes. They only pretend it exists to keep us subdued. They make you think you have rights, you don't. You most certainly don't have them in the UCC courts. You de-facto puppet regime ignores it. It's all a big illusion, a big fat lie that keeps us in chains. Do you really believe you get your rights form a piece of paper?
I assume that by "they" you
I assume that by "they" you are referring to Congress. Congress is not able to change the Constitution. The only thing that Congress can do is suggest amendments to the Constitution. In order for any proposed amendments to be passed they must be ratified by at least 38 state legislatures.
That would require a LOT of corrupt people!
...
we're only 2 states away from having constitutional convention
we have plenty of corrupt people. It's a long-term plan that is coming to a new chapter.
Explore Orthodox Christianity
The country has just
been taken over and we might as well get used to it. The swearing in was a sham and Roberts knew it. No one has the ba$$s to stand up to the Elitists. They are too far entrenched into their NWO.
Some fake legislation or not, everything they've done has been illegal, why oh why would this be any different?
As John Mcain would say "My
As John Mcain would say "My friend" ,the fix is in and has been in for some time now. Even if the Supremes find that Obama is ineligible they will just say to Congress "Hey, Congress this guy is ineligible to be Prez what you gonna do about it. And Congress will say "Well, we dont have enough votes to remove him so, I guess he will stay in office and be our Prez. I'm not sure if that is how it works or not but you get my drift. Natural Born?...It wont matter.
www.givemeliberty.org
-MY OPS ARE BLACKER THAN YOUR OPS-
-MY OPS ARE BLACKER THAN YOUR OPS-
Sad to have
to agree with that analysis.
This is why Roberts flubbed the oath
He hedged his bets that Obama is ineligible so he flubbed the oath to protect his butt. Technically, the oath was not completely read or repeated by Roberts or Obama so it is like not taking it at all.
_________________
Want Ron Paul? Register Republican Now
I wouldn't doubt it
He purposefully flubbed it to give the SCOTUS more time.
Obama, oaths and the end of constitutional government
Obama, oaths and the end of constitutional government
Posted: January 20, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
By Alan Keyes and John Haskins
© 2009
Now steps onto the stage of world history a man apparently quite conscious that the Supreme Law of the United States prevents him from being president of the United States.
For why else would anyone hire lawyers and expend millions of dollars to avoid producing a $12.50 birth certificate to show eligibility under the Constitution? 'Midst the rhythmic chants of a delirious, sycophantic media, inaugural splendor will substitute for simple proof that the United States of America will have a constitutionally legitimate president.
If Obama is not eligible, legally, the United States of America will have no president. A usurper will wield such power as few men have ever held, having no constitutional warrant. However beloved of the media or adored by racialist groupies, and irrespective of public support, Obama will be a tyrant, in the original sense of the word (from the Greek tyrannos meaning one who wields power to which he has no lawful claim). As he sends young soldiers to die, even the appearance of his usurpation of presidential powers will insult their sacrifice and thwart the Constitution they give their all to preserve. Even as he utters the oath – hand on Lincoln's Bible – he will betray it, not upholding, protecting and defending the Constitution, but subverting it.
The elites insist that we should pretend to be convinced by an exhibition of a "certificate of live birth" via the Internet, lacking the very information the Constitution requires. On the strength of this we are to exercise blind faith and risk the consequences of an unconstitutional usurpation of the presidency?
"Put not your faith in men, but bind them down with the chains of the constitution," Jefferson warned us. Caesar rose to power on the passions of men, and killed a republic. Napoleon did the same. So did Hitler, with strong support from the secularized, university-educated elite. But the elites approve as Obama whistles past the Constitution, just as they did when Mitt Romney flushed away the Constitution he'd sworn to uphold. They regard the Supreme Law of the United States as a dead letter, "living and breathing" of course, which is their code for dead and buried.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=86611
President-elect is not a citizen of this country
There is now very good news, via Dr. Orly Taitz for those of us in America who have been trying to expose Barack Obama's lack of constitutional eligibility to become president based on his lack of a verifiable, certified birth certificate.
http://www.mansfieldnewsjournal.com/article/20090119/OPINION...
I Love how that I-can't-say-it-in-polite-company
Hilary Clinton co-sponsored the Senate bill for McCain and now she's the fundraiser's Secretary of State. How nice. It's all so...rich...isn't it?
Important - Zapem: ‘Obama Knew He Wasn’t Eligible for POTUS’
Important - Zapem: ‘Obama Knew He Wasn’t Eligible for POTUS’
Posted on January 18th, 2009 by David Crockett
Investigating Obama republished:
In this article, originally posted in the blog of the same name, “Zapem” breaks a report of the history of sidestepping, skirting, and attempted Constitutional tinkering on behalf of unnatural born Citizen, John McCain — thereby, an attempt to pave the way for Barack Obama.
If one were to look at the activity on Capital Hill during the campaign, there would be no question in their minds that both McCain and Obama were sweating the “natural born citizen” issue.
How do we arrive at that conclusion? We take McCain’s ingrained, glib advice and “Look at the record, my friends“.
Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).
Bill S. 2678 attempted to change article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States with reference to the requirements of being a “natural born citizen” and hence; the entitlement to run for President of the United States. This bill met the same fate that similar attempts to change the Constitution have in the past. Attempts such as The Natural Born Citizen Act were known to have failed and the text scrubbed from the internet, with only a shadow-cached copy left, that only the most curious public can find.
Sen. McCaskill, her co-sponsors, fellow colleagues and legal counsel, contend that the Constitution is ambiguous in article II, section 1 and requires clarification. But does it? According to the framers and such drafters as John Bingham, we find the definition to be quite clear:
I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen… . - John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866
From the days of James Madison to the present, the courts have held that the amendment process be justiciable in accordance with its constitutionality and not self-serving or political. But is that what happened here? Again, we must go to the record.
Within only five short weeks after Senate Bill 2678 faded from the floor, we find Sen. Claire McCaskill back again, making another attempt with Senate Resolution 511. On April 10, 2008, she introduced a secondary proposal in the form of a non-binding resolution, recognizing John McCain as a “natural born citizen” in defiance of the Constitution. Curiously, it contained the same identical co-sponsors, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
ABCNews.com reported:
“With questions - however serious - about whether Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is eligible to run for president since he was born outside U.S. borders on an American Naval base, Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. today introduced a non-binding resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that McCain qualifies as a “natural born Citizen,” as specified in the Constitution and eligible for the highest office in the land.
Co-sponsors include Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois; Leahy said he anticipates it will pass unanimously.”
One has to wonder — what dire urgency could there possibly have been in persisting with trying to legislate a candidate into being a “natural born citizen”? Certainly providing a birth certificate and reading the Constitution would be more than sufficient. Why did these candidates and their wishful nominees go to such lengths in the Senate when obviously, they had more pressing matters to attend to? And why were there two Senators co-sponsoring such an issue, twice, who were in direct competition with John McCain in the 2008 election?
continue:
http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=791
Thanks mnlifestyles- Obama
Nice find. Very interesting and timely-twice.
'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.
'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.
You can now see on the docket Suggestion for Recusal
You can now see on the docket Suggestion for Recusal of the Justices of the Supreme Court to swear Barack Obama as president(conflict of interest)
http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=779
If Obama is British
...then U.K. visitors to the Ol' USA should get a club discount.
'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.
'I always thank of all you canvassors and precinct leaders and delegates who were at the front line and caucuses.
Good luck out there &Thank you. You're a gift.
DIGG - Eligibility battle rages on 3 fronts
wnd.com — This is an un-ending battlefront that will not be ignored. It is patriotic, extremely important and if ignored can create a crisis unlike any in our entire history as a nation.
http://digg.com/politics/Eligibility_battle_rages_on_3_fronts_2
PRINT OUT OBAMA CITATIONS HAND OUTS!
http://www.scribd.com/people/view/4975153-fireant
Washington Post - LETTER TO EDITOR: Supreme Court accountablity
I stand amazed at what I am witnessing in our constitutional republic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Constitution the rule of law in this nation? Don't Supreme Court judges take oaths promising to protect and uphold that Constitution from foreign and domestic enemies? If our laws are derived from this text, then what is it called when those laws are ignored? It is called, "breaking the law."
Our Constitution lays down the eligibility requirements for presidents. One requirement states that the president of the United States must be a natural-born citizen. Now, any reasonable thinking person knows citizenship is proven by one's birth certificate.
President-elect Barack Obama's presentation of a Certification of Live Birth certified that he was born alive but not that he was born in Hawaii. So we have rumors of a Kenyan birth. How do you get to the bottom of rumors? You inquire and investigate.
Our Supreme Court judges are required to uphold our law and get to the bottom of this unnecessary upheaval that Mr. Obama has hurled America into. What's so hard about producing a real birth certificate? He is challenging our rule of law by refusing to prove his natural-born citizenship and is, therefore, undermining the foundation of our nation.
If our Supreme Court justices continue to deny "hearing" the many lawsuits that they are being presented with concerning Mr. Obama's citizenship, then they are failing to do their jobs. The law states eligibility through natural-born citizenship is required. It is the court's duty to get to the bottom of this and hold Mr. Obama accountable to the law.
LONNIE LECZO
Louisville, Ky.
COMMENTS PLEASE:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/17/supreme-court-ac...
The difference between a Washington Post Letter and a Times
letter is night and day. You said it was the Post and it was the Times. This is not an agenda factory, please man we need the smart ones to stay on top of their games.
Explore Orthodox Christianity
Thanx Mike --- It won't let me edit for some reason
Thanx Mike --- It won't let me edit for some reason
Please check eligibility, thousands ask Supremes
WND Exclusive OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Please check eligibility, thousands ask Supremes
Another round of urgent requests delivered to high court
Posted: January 16, 2009
12:10 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Thousands of urgent appeals for the U.S. Supreme Court to consider the question of Barack Obama's eligibility to be president of the United States are being delivered to the justices as part of WND's campaign to seek the truth.
The high court has conferences scheduled on cases addressing Obama's eligibility tomorrow and again on Jan. 23. They cite Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, which stipulates the office of president can only be filled by "a natural born citizen."
Because the Supreme Court justices do not accept faxes, e-mails or telephone calls, WND assembled an option for a delivery of letters through FedEx, and 1,344 people signed up to send a message to the justices, resulting in 12,096 messages.
The campaign was a followup to one in December that generated more than 60,000 letters sent by overnight courier to the nine Supreme Court justices. That campaign resulted in 60,138 letters in 6,682 FedEx packages of nine letters each.
(Story continues below)
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=86252
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS MEETS OBAMA IN PRIVATE
"Is there anything more shameful than the man who lacks the courage to be a coward?" Peter Blaunder
CBS News reported that Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John G. Roberts, Jr., would meet in private with impostor president elect, Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro and so forth, on January 14, 2009:
"At the invitation of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Mr. Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden will pay a protocol visit to the Supreme Court of the United States Wednesday afternoon, the office says....The visit is private; reporters and photographers will not be present."
I called the media number at the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. The giddy operator confirmed they expected Obama at any minute!
To say I was floored when I read the news item is an understatement. A 'ceremonial' meeting between a president elect and justices of the Supreme Court is somewhat traditional. HOWEVER, in this instance, it's flat out wrong. Chief Justice Roberts has cases on the docket where Obama is the defendant or is the subject of the litigation. Roberts and the other eight justices have already held two 'Distribution for Conferences' on the Donofrio and Wrotnoski cases on Obama's citizenship ineligibility. They just turned away one of Phil Berg's cases a few days ago; that one is still in the Third Circuit. Tomorrow is the fourth case; another from Phil Berg.
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?EdNo=001&At=...
MILITARY SPEAKS OUT - (Letter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Dat
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/281/messages/boards/thread/6098504
Supreme Court denies petition in Berg v. Obama
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/281/messages/boards/thread/6106152
Berg v. Obama et al.: Third Circuit blows it BADLY
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/281/messages/boards/thread/6105954
***URGENT - URGENT - URGENT **** SCOTUS EXPERIENCE REQ.
Berg's case was dismissed, but my case is still alive and I am filing a request for Justices to recuse themselves from swearing Obama on the 20th
Unfortunately there were setbacks and Berg's and Pidgeon's cases were dismissed, however my case is still very alive and scheduled for conference on the 23rd. I am not a chess player, but if I was one, I would state that now my best move is to request that the Justices nd particularly chief justice Roberts recuse themselves from swearing Obama on the 20th, due to the fact that the chief Justice Roberts on January 7th issued a decision not to dismiss my case, but rather to distribute it to be heard in the full conference of all 9 justices on the 23 rd. Since my case clearly states that Obama is not a Natural Born citizen and hasn't even proven that he is a citizen, there will be a clear conflict of interest if Justice Roberts or any other Justice swears him in on the 20th.
I called at 10:05 the clerk, responsible for stays, Mr. Danny Bickle and asked him about the procedure of filing this request for justices to recluse themselves from the swearing ceremony. Mr. Bickle has told me that I should think very hard about a legal ground for such request, since if it is not there, he will send it right back pursuant to rule 23.3. I need help from attorneys, particularly ones that have experience with the Supreme Court, to craft such request. Please, if you have specific ideas and want to help, call me 949-683-5411 or e-mail dr_taitz@yahoo.com. (please, no crazy calls and no marriage proposals)
Orly
http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/bergs-case-was-dismissed-...
A class action
Can we start a class action lawsuit ? i don't know how to start one but i do know that when there is one it has to be posted for example: if virgin mobile has a pending class action it would be stated on there web site or some store it would be posted at the store. I don't know where it would be posted if there was one pending against obama. I just thought of pin the tail on the donkey though, sorry if it's not funny.
Puzzlin' Evidence: True Stories, A Completely Cool, Multi-Purpose Movie. www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2TyF1CbsDs
Yes But You Can Also File Your Own Lawsuit And Here Are The
printable forms.... I'm going to start this as a thread later.
Obama Qualification Redress Petition -PDF
http://www.axtk.com/4w/BHOrp/Obama.Qualification.Redress.Pet...
http://www.axtk.com/ Scroll down for all the different ways to print this document.
Revolt For Freedom !!!
Revolt For Freedom !!!
.
.