In today's dispatches, The Pest and eFail has washed up at the conspiracy site "Gulag Bound", where they give their uniquely dishonest spin to the Georgia Birther Ballot Jihad hearing.
By this point the majority of birtherstan is firmly convinced that the judge in the Georgia Birther Ballot Jihad hearing gave them everything they wanted (and a pony) before the hearing, but the birtherstani attorneys just decided to go ahead with the hearing and their nonexistent "merits". However, we already have one ruling from the Judge that tells Dr. Orly she doesn't get one thing she wanted or a pony.
Some news video, along with a few YouTube hostings of the hearing footage, courtesy of Joseph Farah's buddy and comrade in arms Floyd Brown. Which meshes with the articles World Nut Daily managed to excrete without actually having had a reporter at the hearing.
Dr. Orly is in Media Whore Heaven. Sharon Meroni realizes she doesn't have what she needs to challenge Obama in Illinois after all. And the police officer in Arizona who thought it would be fun to post a picture of teens with rifles and a shot up Obama shirt tells the Secret Service "was that wrong? should I not have done that??"
26 January - Someone tripped over the cord at the Pest and eFail today. As a result while they mop the beer out of the cabinet, things are being hosted at the conspiracy blog "Gulag Bound".
Like this one about the birther ballot jihad hearing in Georgia.
"In closing, this case is about the Constitution,” Irion said. We’ve shown that Barack Obama’s father was never a citizen…and that means he is not constitutionally qualified…Finally, the defendant was ordered to be here, and I wish to state on the record that that shows not just a contempt for this court…”
Then Irion was interrupted and stopped speaking."
She doesn't mention it was the judge who told Van Irion to zip it.
"Taitz utilized a projector on the wall to the right of the judge as an aid in her presentation. She then stated that evidence existed that Obama possessed Indonesian citizenship, to which the judge was heard by this writer to say, “That’s not relevant.” Taitz then discussed the court’s decision in Minor v. Happersett and was interrupted by the judge, who said, “Counselor, can you save your argument for the closing?” She then stopped speaking."
Sounds like someone didn't realize the level of circus he was in for.
"Regarding the number of Obama’s purported birth record, Vogt stated that “federal regs” require that “all birth certificate numbers have to be sequential, starting on January 1.”
Funny, I have yet to find any such regs, and I've been looking.
Here's something amusing, federal regs don't even require that birth certificates be issued! They simply mandate what should on such a birth certificate. Florida was the last state to mandate all births be accompanied by a birth certificate, and this was in 1963.
“We have another boy who from 1968-69 was in Hawaii,” she said. The judge then said, “Are you testifying? Do you know how?” which brought laughter from the assembly."
I guess they can't tell sarcasm when they hear it.
"Taitz asked Judge Malihi to order the release of Obama’s records in Hawaii and to hold Obama in “contempt of court” for failing to appear at the hearing.
The judge said, “Thank you” and adjourned the court at 11:12 a.m."
In other words, "No", and "FREE AT LAST!"
26 January - Video (complete with the crappy audio) from the Birther Ballot Jihad hearing is posted on YouTube by "floydb310", aka GOP dirty trickster and Joseph Farah cohort Floyd Brown
Part One
Part Two
26 January - Speaking of Floyd Brown, the "Western Center for Journalism", which he runs with Joseph Farah, has their take on the Birther Ballot Jihad hearing.
"Court was in session at 9 am sharp; proceedings began with the judge meeting privately with all attorneys associated with the case (you know, at least those who showed up) for more than twenty minutes. According to various sources, he told them that since Obama was not present that he would be issuing a default judgment in their favor; he also initially wanted to end the case right then and there. However, the attorneys insisted on holding speedy hearings in which witnesses could testify and evidence would be entered into the court’s records. The judge honored their request."
How do they know this? They cited Carl Swensson's claim!
"What everyone is awaiting now from the judge is an official publishing of today’s ruling, again a default judgment for the plaintiffs. Swenson says “we won” and that it is now “time for the rest of the States to take my lead and duplicate this effort.”
And so a birther meme is born.
"In short, the “birthers,” who have been ridiculed if not ignored by the media and much of the American public for the past three years, have officially been vindicated today."
Actually they got shown to be a batch of conspiracy minded dolts. With egg on their faces if this so-called "default judgement" turns out to be Yet Another Birther Lie/
26 January - MEE!! MEE!!! IT'S ALL ABOUT MEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!! (malware and redirect warning)
"I JUST SAW A CLIP OF MY INTERVIEW TO ABC ATLANTA
Posted on | January 26, 2012 "
And that's all she posted.
26 January - Atlanta NBC 11's video on the Birther Ballot Jihad hearing.
wnload/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash">
Bonus, they talked to the birther debunkers as well.
26 January - NBC Atlanta also posts their news story about the Birther Ballot Jihad hearing.
And one of the better debunking websites out there got a hat tip:
"One group proudly called themselves the "anti-birthers."
"This whole birther movement is a pack of lies from beginning to end," said Bill Bryan of North Carolina.
"I think today's hearing was an embarrassment to the state of Georgia that they would even have a hearing like this. It's all based on claims to delegitimize the president."
Bryan runs a website dedicated to debunking the "birther" theories."
26 January - At "All Voices". Harold Michael Harvey points out a logical conclusion of Van Irion's argument.
"Welden's attorney, Van R. Irion, argued that under the constitution before the 14th amendment both parents had to be citizens for an offspring to meet the requirement of natural born citizen. Additionally, Irion told the court that the enactment of the 14th amendment did nothing to eliminate the requirement of both parents being citizens for a child to become a natural born citizen. He went on to add that if a person was ineligible to run for president before the enactment of the 14th amendment, he would still be ineligible to run for president after it.At this point Irion's voice trailed off. He did not have to state the obvious; if his reasoning is correct, the office of the President is reserved to descendants of free born parents before Lincoln freed the Africans enslaved on these shores."
Van Irion is on the board of directors for a Neo-Confederate group and has fought (and lost) some so-called "Southern Heritage" lawsuits. It's quite possible - if not likely - he has the same contempt for the so-called "Reconstruction Amendments" (which include the 14th) that many of his fellow Neo-Confederates have.
And it's a matter of belief among some of the more racially-motivated Neo-Confederates that any non-white citizen is a "14th amendment citizen" and not a "natural born" citizen. We've seen this belief crop up from time to time in birtherstan as well.
"Mr. Irion asked the court to sanction President Obama for his failure to produce documents and to present himself for questioning in this matter."
"That uppity BOY didn't show us his papers. You gotta punish his darkie ass for that!"
"At one point the hearing took on an atmosphere of a Saturday Night Live skit when Judge Malihi interrupted Orly Taitz, the Euro Asian, who grew up in the Soviet Union and is representing the lead plaintiffs in this case and asked her if she wanted to testify. She jumped to the opportunity and raced to the witness stand before Judge Malihi could object. She took a seat in the witness box, took the oath to tell the truth and proceeded to rant on and on about fraud and deceit in high places in the government."
Crass, brazen, unprofessional, and totally without any class. Yep, that's Dr. Orly.
"The name Obama was mentioned over two dozen times, but never President Obama. Ms. Taitz did refer to the president as Mr. Obama three times. All of the white males who testified referred to the president as either he or him or Obama."
Not at all surprising. They can't stand to acknowledge him as President. Hell, they can hardly stand to acknowledge him as a human being.
27 January - At the Pest and eFail's temporary home at Gulag Bound, we have an interesting idea (by which I mean, really stupid). The idea of having "Sovereign Voters" go to the Electoral college, rather than, oh, the people that the voters in a state actually CHOSE to go for them.
"Let’s get this straight. If you are a registered voter, you are an elector. Your vote is in no way inferior to those cast by the Party-appointed members to the Electoral College.
Per the 12th Amendment, “the electors, all of them individual and appointed, shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President…. “
You are a Presidential elector if you hold a voter’s franchise granted to you by your State. That the election has two parts and is considered indirect as opposed to the direct elections of State Officials is irrelevant. It is considered an indirect election because the Nation is voting for Federal Officers and the voting results are a compilation of State vote results. There is no National voter franchise per Bush v Gore (2000). Thus, the Electoral College is the Federal component of the election for a President, while the popular vote remains the State component."
Right. You just show up at the Electoral College in December of 2012, and see how seriously they take you.
27 January - Jay Bookman at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution throws some cold water on the birthers victory lap.
"According to the birther movement, Malihi told their lawyers during pre-hearing conference that he would enter a “default judgment” against Obama for refusing to appear and for refusing to even send lawyers to participate in the hearing, and that he would in fact recommend Obama’s removal.
I think that’s highly dubious. I know you will be shocked to hear this, but Orly Taitz and others have a record of claiming important legal victories that turn out to be inglorious defeats. Among other things, it keeps the contributions flowing in. Nothing presented in the absurdist comedy of that courtroom yesterday would justify barring a sitting president of the United States from the Georgia ballot. It was a farce. The birthers’ only chance is a recommendation from Malihi based not on their “evidence,” but on the refusal of the Obama camp to put up a defense against it."
And if the judge does decide to play nice with the birthers??
"Regardless of what Malihi recommends, Kemp does not want to become the Republican secretary of state who ruled Barack Obama off the ballot in Georgia. Becoming a birther hero would not begin to compensate for the lasting infamy such a step would bring him, especially because such a ruling would be challenged in state or federal court and almost immediately overturned on any number of reasons. Kemp would then look like a fool and put an end to any further political ambitions he might have. I doubt that’s the course he will choose to take."
27 January - Sharon Meroni tries to explain away the withdrawal of their signature challenge.
Now on 17 January, on her internet radio show (MP3), she played a claim by Chris Cleveland that 3000 of the 5000 signature on Obama's petition are from people who are not registered to vote, which would then knock Obama off the primary ballot.
(Note, Meroni was part the lawsuit filed with Chris Cleveland and Steve Boulton to challenge those signatures)
Needless to say, Sharon Meroni was ALL over this one. Except, as it turned out, they were wrong.
"During the records review of the petition signatures, held at Illinois State Board of Election offices in downtown Chicago, ISBE clerks called “Checkers”, rule on each challenged voter signature on a line by line basis though comparison with ISBE records on computer screens. In this case, over 3,000 individual reviews had to occur. On respective sides of the Checker are single representatives of each party, who notes each ruling, and asserts the party’s position.
After six hours of checking at eight computer terminals, a substantial ongoing effort by 40 Board employees and volunteers, we determined in the final stages of the records check that Mr. Obama had reclaimed sufficient signatures to cross the 3000 mark required for ballot placement. Through close review and extensive use of pocket calculators, we had to face the mathematical reality that the President was certain to prevail on the challenge, and consequently instructed our counsel to file papers to withdraw the Objection to avoid using additional hours of effort and time. No further action will follow."
So in other words, they made a mistake and were wrong in their claim. However, Sharon Meroni can't admit she made a mistake, so she weasel-worded her entry to make it sound like Obama did something underhanded to make up those supposed missing signatures.
She's just as dishonest and hypocritical as ever.
27 January - Looks like Van Irion has a mad that that uppity darkie didn't appear at their birther ballot jihad hearing.
"One of the attorneys who argued before a Georgia judge today that Barack Obama is ineligible to have his name on the state’s 2012 presidential ballot says the president’s decision to snub the court system and ignore the hearing is a dangerous precedent that threatens the foundation of the United States.
“We have a president who has openly refused to comply with a legal order of the judicial branch,” Van Irion told WND after today’s hearing before Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi concluded in Atlanta."
First off, it wasn't a "legal order of the judicial branch". It was a subpoena issued by another attorney in the case that was only valid in the state of Georgia.
Second off, the attorney who issued it was the SAME ONE you and the other attorney tried to separate from and distance yourself from. And now you want to suck up to Dr. Orly's subpoena storm??
Right…….
“If this doesn’t lead to impeachment proceedings, everyone in Congress is as responsible,” he said."
"Wahhhh! That uppity darkie is STILL PRESIDENT!!!"
27 January - Oh look. World Nut Daily talks to Leo Donofrio.
"One of the attorneys who challenged Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court says he fears that even if the justices declared Obama constitutionally unqualified, he’d simply ignore the ruling and continue issuing orders.
But those who observed a court hearing today in Atlanta say it could be the beginning of the end for the Obama campaign, because of the doubt that could surge like a tidal wave across the nation.
The comments came today from Leo Donofrio, who led the pack in filing lawsuits over Obama’s 2008 election and his subsequent occupancy of the White House."
Yeah, but it's the same attorney who believes he's an avatar of God, and that Black Helicopters dog his every move.
“If the judge’s recommendation – and I’ve been told that it’s going to be to disqualify Mr. Obama as a candidate – is followed by the secretary of state, Mr. Obama has got a real problem,” said Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation."
There's that rumor again. And it's not like Gary Kreep has been wrong about such cases before.
Oh, right. He has.
"Mario Apuzzo, who also shepherded a case to the Supreme Court, said Obama, by not showing, “actually failed to meet his burden of proof, to show that he is eligible and should be placed on the ballot.”
“For him to just ignore due process here is really telling a lot,” he said, noting, “This decision will have a ripple effect.”
*Rolls eyes* The amazing thing is that these so-called "attorneys" really seem to think that the President was commanded to appear, show his happens, and dance a jig for the gather birtherstani.
He wasn't. The only "command" came from a subpoena that wasn't valid outside of that state.
"Charles Kerchner, on whose behalf one of the cases went to the Supreme Court, said, “Obama thinks he is a king and thus not subject to the election laws of Georgia and the United States Constitution. He will soon learn otherwise.”
He continued, “As the Georgia secretary of state said in warning Obama and his attorney if they did not show.up for the court hearing today … if they do that, they will do so at their own peril.”
Kreep said a ruling that would remove Obama’s name from the Georgia ballot would be a “tremendous victory for … America.”
Yes, I'm sure the appearance of a Southern, GOP-dominated state removing the first African-American president from the ballot because he didn't "show his papers" is going to be a great victory……
……for the Democrats
Oh, and it's funny, but no interview with Dr. Orly…..
27 January - Crooks and Liars does an piece on the Birther Ballot Jihad hearing in Georgia.
"It's almost unbelievable to me that we've got a court in Georgia actually willing to give credence to Taitz and her ilk, but sadly this is one of the places we're at in American politics today with a Republican Party that's desperate to hold onto power no matter what it takes and that have little use for democracy or winning elections by means other than cheating and rigging the system and with buffoons like Taitz willing to help them along . It's just shameful and that's the nicest thing I can think of to say about Taitz's case, the idiotic judge, or the state of Georgia for allowing some wing nut like this judge to ever be allowed to hold public office.It's bad enough we've got to worry about electronic voting machines and whether votes will be counted or not in the upcoming election, but we get to add this sort of nonsense to the mix as well. It's nothing short of disgusting and shameless and destructive to what's left of our democracy. A fraud like Taitz should not be allowed to affect whether Americans can vote to reelect the legitimately previously elected President of the United States."
27 January - It seems the word from the Judge in the Georgia Birther Ballot Jihad is:
(Scribd link here)
"Order: The parties may file any post hearing pleadings by Wednesday, February 1, 2012. The Court will issue a recommendation to the Secretary of State shortly thereafter. The Court has reviewed the motion by Plaintiffs, Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren, and Roth, to direct and/or request the Court in Hawaii to order the release of certain Hawaii documents to the Plaintiffs. This Court lacks jurisdiction or authority to direct or request documents from Hawaii. Plaintiffs' motion is denied.
SO ORDERED, this the 27th day of January, 2012. "
So, no decision, oh, and Dr. Orly, no, you can't have letters rogatory, not yours.
And how interesting. It's addressed to all the parties, not just the plaintiffs or parties-plaintiff.......
27 January - As well they should.
"The US Secret Service is investigating an Arizona cop after he posted a photo online showing several teenagers with guns posing next to a bullet-ridden Barack Obama T-shirt.
Sgt. Pat Shearer also is being probed by Peoria Police Department after posting the photo of seven young men, four with guns, holding up a gunshot-marked T-shirt featuring an image of the US president above the word "hope," on Facebook.
The picture was posted Jan. 20, the week before the president's visit to Arizona, The Arizona Republic reported.
The Secret Service confirmed it was looking into the photo Thursday, with a spokesman telling KNXV-TV that although the individuals involved have a right to free speech, the agency also has a right to question them."
The police officer doesn't understand what all the fuss is about.
"I don't think that the shooting of that T-shirt is that big of a deal," he told the station. "It was more of a political statement … It's not like they were going to go out and shoot the president."He admitted he was embarrassed by the photo and added he would risk his own life for the president's."
27 January - Over at Dr. Orly's (malware and redirect warning)
"Judge Malihi shortened the time to file any post trial trial pleadings. He moved the date from February 5th to February 1. He will issue his ruling shortly thereafter. I believe, he will issue his ruling by the end of the day on February 1 or on February 2 at the latest. I believe Brian Kemp, the Secretary of State of GA, will announce on February 2 or 3rd whether Barack Hussein Obama’s name will be allowed on the ballot in the state of GA as an eligible Presidential candidate."
Well, since 5 February is a sunday, it's not surprising they would shift the date a bit.
And, amazingly enough, no comment on the "No, you can't have letters rogatory, not yours" part.
27 January - The Columbus, Georgia Ledger-Enquirer comments on the Georgia Birther Ballot Jihad.
"You almost have to laugh at this latest chapter in the seemingly endless “birther” saga, because about the only alternatives at this point are tears and/or nausea.
It was embarrassing enough when members of the Georgia legislature -- including, to Columbus’ acute humiliation, two members of the local delegation -- drafted a “Presidential Eligibility Assurance Act” in the last legislative session.
Now Georgians get to enjoy the added spectacle of their secretary of state, Brian Kemp, warning the president (let that sink in -- warning the president) through a White House attorney that failure to appear in a Georgia court would be “at your own peril.” Really, Mr. Secretary? Is that a threat?"
And ends with
"Georgia, no thanks to some judgment-impaired officials and certainly without the consent of the governed, has been slumming in the Orly Taitz nuttery neighborhood way too long. Please, for the sake of the state’s already battered image, let’s just quietly tiptoe out of this putrid political ghetto and back to the daylight side of town before we attract any more ridicule.
Move along, folks. Nothing to see here."
27 January - At he currently Gulag Bound Pest and eFail, professional seditionist Sharon Rondeau gives Dr. Orly's spin on things.
"This evening Taitz told The Post & Email that she and the other two attorneys conferred with Judge Malihi in his chambers prior to the hearing, during which Malihi said that since Obama’s attorney was not in attendance, he could issue a default judgment. Alternatively, the attorneys would be allowed to argue their cases if they wished. All three chose to “present their case on the merits.”"
I'm still fairly certain he didn't mean "default judgement" in the way the birthers seem to have heard, but this seems to imply they were offered the chance….and turned it down.
And since, as we know, none of their claims HAVE any merits…..
"Another attorney accompanied Taitz from California to review the testimony and act as an observer during the hearing. He reviewed the testimony of four of the six witnesses on the evening of January 25, 2012."
Oh gee. Wonder who she got to come along with. Her friend (and fellow Taft Skool o' Law and Stuff grad) Jonathan Levy??
"Altogether, Taitz stated that the Georgia trip cost her $11,000, and she has spent over $6,000 traveling back and forth to Hawaii five times for hearings to procure the release of the original birth certificate allegedly held by the Hawaii Department of Health."
Time to raid the cushions of the Tesla for pocket change again.
"At the end of the hearing, Taitz had asked Judge Malihi to hold Obama in contempt of court for failing to appear. We asked Taitz the judge’s response, and she said, “He took it under consideration.”
No, he didn't. He said "thank you", and gaveled the hearing closed. As the Pest and eFail reported the day beforehand.
Wow. Sharon Rondeau can't keep her lies straight. Or maybe she fears crossing The Orly.
"Taitz said that a video clip of a Fox television station depicts her saying, “Anybody with half a brain” could recognize Obama’s “forged birth certificate.” She said she was the “only person” interviewed afterward by the major media. According to Taitz, news reports were made by Fox, ABC, NBC and CBS."
Well of course. They ALL recognized the media and attention whore.
"Taitz said she is in need of more donations to continue the cases against Obama."
"IT'S ALL ABOUT MEEEE!!!! SEND YOUR MONEY TO MEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!"
27 January - At Birther Report, someone is a bit upset at Carl Swensson calling Dr. Orly an "embarrassment"
"Commykiller said…[Reply] -Both Van Irion and My lawyer, Mark Hatfield made certain that our cases and evidence in those two cases would be closed so as not to be affiliated, in any way, with “Birther” Orly Taitz. As expected, she was an embarrassment.“Birther” Orly Taitz. With all due respect to Mr. Carl, Just what the F$%CK does that mean..?
Orly is the reason that S.O.B. is in DEFAULT. It was HER supposedly FAKE subpoena that STUCK. Additionaly she presented no less than SIX powerful witnesses, who at their own PERSONAL risk, each gave CRUSHING EXPERT TESTIMONY, that at the very least TEARS A NEW ASSHOLE in Bozos FACE. And she did it all with (according to some here) an ONLINE DEGREE. Meanwhile the other 2 more professional assholes who DON'T WHANT TO BE ASSOSIATED, wrapped their cases up in what, 10-15 min. a piece. And yet it's Orly we're EMBARRASSED about..!
Well Mr. Carl and all who simpathise, YOU may be embarrassed by Orly and that's OK. But I have never been PROUDER of a fellow patriot IN MY LIFE..! I "LOVED IT" WHEN SHE TOOK THE STAND..! YOU GO GIRL..! And with all due respect and in all honesty, it is your NEEDLESS and POINTLESS attack on Orly that embarrasses ME.
LONG LIVE THE QUEEN..!
January 27, 2012 9:05 AM"
Someone wants his ride in the Dental Chair o' Luv.
“We have a president who has openly refused to comply with a legal order of the judicial branch,” Van Irion told WND after today’s hearing before Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi concluded in Atlanta."
It is a Hearing that is under the jurisdiction of the EXECUTIVE Branch...
Another "Box Top Lawyer"??
Posted by: SueDB | January 27, 2012 at 05:46 PM
I wonder if moving the Feb 5th date to Feb 1st is because the judge now realizes just what kind of crazy he allowed to be dumped into his lap and just wants to get this whole stinking mess over and done with and off his plate as soon as possible...
Posted by: G | January 27, 2012 at 09:31 PM
@G
It wouldn't surprise me. He probably realises that no matter what the SoS does, it will result in a lawsuit, so it doesn't matter too much what his recommendation is. He just needs to make sure that his conduct can survive a close scrutiny, and then he can toss the buck onwards.
Posted by: KDLarsen | January 28, 2012 at 01:16 AM
OPOVV here. Your observations and conclusions of the court proceedings in Georgia are why policemen don’t put too much credence in eyewitness accounts: they’re unreliable. I suggest that you go over the transcript to determine what really took place in that courtroom on the 26th.
Besides Obama’s record of having used multiple Social Security numbers, the one that he is currently using was issued to a person that was born in 1890, and, according to the Social Security Administration, was not issued to Obama.
Obama provided a false Social Security number on his Selective Service form.
The first Birth Certificate was proven to be a fake, as was the second Birth Certificate (by the way, ever wonder why anyone would provide TWO separate Birth Certificates? Maybe the first was a fake, ever think of that? Just turns out the second one is a fake, too).
Obama has used multiple names, addresses, Social Security numbers in the past. Conclusion: identity theft.
Obama’s book was introduced as evidence, and it was noted that Obama claimed that his father was a Kenyan citizen, and therefore a British subject. The Constitution clearly states that both parents of an eligible president must be U.S. citizens, hence the definition of NATIVE BORN, as, for instance, I am: both my parents were citizens, and, matter of fact, both my grandparents were U.S. citizens.
I could go on, but the end result was that Obama was never vetted properly. One interesting point: at the time of Obama’s birth, there was a Barry Soetoro living in Hawaii.
The witnesses presented by the plaintiffs’ lawyers, and I was one of the plaintiffs, Thank you very much, were all experts and came across as just what they were: reporters of facts.
One would think that all Americans would champion any cause that would defend and support the Constitution, and it is rather disturbing why some of our citizens, such as yourself, run and hide from the facts. If Obama is ineligible, and to all prudent people it would certainly appear that he is, he should be removed from government employment. If I caught one of my employees having lied on their application, I’d fire that employee and replace with one that was qualified. It’s called following the rules. It isn’t difficult to do, nor to reason why.
Posted by: D | January 28, 2012 at 02:06 AM
> Conclusion: identity theft.
Bearing on eligibility = zero.
> The Constitution clearly states that both parents of an eligible president must be U.S. citizens
No, it doesn't mention parents at all.
> hence the definition of NATIVE BORN, as, for instance, I am: both my parents were citizen
Funny, I thought "native born" and "natural born" were two different things? And not even top birfer Presidential candidate MacLeran is able to properly differentiate between the two?
I think you just made a Freudian slip - you know very well both terms mean the same, i.e. born on the soil and nothing else.
> at the time of Obama’s birth, there was a Barry Soetoro living in Hawaii.
Care to show proof? Never heard that specific argument before (just like Taitz claiming Obama being born in Indonesia, WTF?).
> If I caught one of my employees having lied on their application, I’d fire that employee
Unless your company reserves that authority to the board of directors ("Congress"), in which case it wouldn't matter if you're the superior of said employee.
And if the board of directors says "no, we're not firing him", there is no way the other employees can force them. *duh*
Posted by: The Magic M | January 28, 2012 at 04:48 AM
Thank you, thank you, and I thank you. That was the easiest $20 I ever won. I bet my wife that you would attack me rather than try to introduce evidence to support your side, which, in your case, is to not follow the law of the land (Native vrs Natural born. God, are you ever predictable!).
Look, I know you're not too smart, but try and understand that it's all about the Constitution: there is nothing else in your immature imagination that is at stake, NOTHING.
As a citizen, even you can access Obama's Social Security number and learn that it's a fake. Remember, Obama is spelled S-o-e-t-o-r-o, or is it any of the other twenty some names that hes used?
Posted by: D | January 28, 2012 at 06:12 AM
Well, that tells anyone is that your wife, Fran McCleran, the one that sounds worse than a cat sing'n in the back alley, is short $20. But that's about all.
Will you take her out for some fat back and greens later on???
Posted by: Kramer | January 28, 2012 at 06:32 AM
And speaking of identity theft. What I've sent is just the tip of the iceberg. If you require additional information/proof, I'll provide it for you. I don't have all the information regarding the names, addresses, Social Security numbers, but I have a lot more than I've sent you. The court in Georgia has the rest. Enjoy reading about your de facto two-bit con artist pesident.
(Note - Edited to remove alleged addresses and SSN numbers Please note, spam and personal information are not allowed to be posted in comments - Patrick McKinnion)
Posted by: D | January 28, 2012 at 07:37 AM
Sorry for the messed up formatting above. I missed a bracket. :(
Posted by: Suranis | January 28, 2012 at 09:45 AM
What? I posted a long reply to Mr McClaren Above, it posted, and then I hot Post another comment and it was deleted. Stupid ass blog provider :(
Posted by: Suranis | January 28, 2012 at 09:47 AM
@KDLarsen -
Agreed. There are only 2 possible reasons for shortening the date from Feb 5 to Feb 1 that I can come up with - both of which lead to wanting to get this done and over with as quickly as possible.
I already mentioned the one (get rid of the stink & bad PR from this case off one's desk as quickly as possible).
The other - as ballots have already gone out, any serious effort to consider "changing" ballots and reissuing them, would need to be done as expediently as possible.
Of course, I don't forsee the 2nd option happening, unless the SoS is trying to use this whole debacle to create a political stunt.
Posted by: G | January 28, 2012 at 09:53 AM
Ok Here it is again,m the shortenred version
OPOVV here. Your observations and conclusions of the court proceedings in Georgia are why policemen don’t put too much credence in eyewitness accounts: they’re unreliable. I suggest that you go over the transcript to determine what really took place in that courtroom on the 26th.
Which will be paid for by the fogbow. You dont expect your blogs to actually pay for anything out of your donations, do you?
Besides Obama’s record of having used multiple Social Security numbers, the one that he is currently using was issued to a person that was born in 1890, and, according to the Social Security Administration, was not issued to Obama.
Jean Paul Ludwigs number was a completely different number (redacted) than President Obama's (redacted) And he died in 1981 at which point Barack Obama had already recieved his social Sec number
Obama provided a false Social Security number on his Selective Service form.
See above
The first Birth Certificate was proven to be a fake, as was the second Birth Certificate (by the way, ever wonder why anyone would provide TWO separate Birth Certificates? Maybe the first was a fake, ever think of that? Just turns out the second one is a fake, too).
"Proven" by a man who lied about his credentials as a document examiner, turned out he was a professsor of Statistics, and has wandered into "proving" that Obama is Malcolm X's son becasue Obama occasionally wears sunglasses. In short, a pathetic loon
Obama has used multiple names, addresses, Social Security numbers in the past. Conclusion: identity theft.
Susan Daniels only got 29 partial hits. That means that 39 Social sec numbers matched a part of Obamas social sec number. There were no full matches.
Obama’s book was introduced as evidence, and it was noted that Obama claimed that his father was a Kenyan citizen, and therefore a British subject. The Constitution clearly states that both parents of an eligible president must be U.S. citizens, hence the definition of NATIVE BORN, as, for instance, I am: both my parents were citizens, and, matter of fact, both my grandparents were U.S. citizens.
Oh It CLEARLY states, does it. Let us consult the book of MINOR vs HASPERATTE, the binding precedent book of the birthers
b>The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.
So Minor states flat out that the constitution CLEARLY states bugger all. Have you read the constitution recently?
Lets go to the word of the man who wrote the constitution
James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)
“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection… The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”
So James Madison, the father of the constitution, clearly states that parentage is irrelevant. What a surprise.
I could go on, but the end result was that Obama was never vetted properly. One interesting point: at the time of Obama’s birth, there was a Barry Soetoro living in Hawaii.
There was 3 John O'Shaughnessys living in my town when I was born. Big deal.
The witnesses presented by the plaintiffs’ lawyers, and I was one of the plaintiffs, Thank you very much, were all experts and came across as just what they were: reporters of facts.
One would think that all Americans would champion any cause that would defend and support the Constitution, and it is rather disturbing why some of our citizens, such as yourself, run and hide from the facts. If Obama is ineligible, and to all prudent people it would certainly appear that he is, he should be removed from government employment. If I caught one of my employees having lied on their application, I’d fire that employee and replace with one that was qualified. It’s called following the rules. It isn’t difficult to do, nor to reason why.
Following your analogy, of some loon came into my office every week with new reasons why My employee was a bad man I'd be throwing him out after the second time it was found that his accusations were total lies.
And he was vetted by the American people, by congress and the secret service. And President Obama signed a sworn statement in Arizona stating he was a Natural Born Citizen, to no-ones objection. He will sign another one to get on the ballot this year.
How come I know more about American Patriotism and law than you and I'm not even living in America?
(SSN redacted - Patrick McKinnion)
Posted by: Suranis | January 28, 2012 at 10:04 AM
@ OPOVV -
Yes, your side was allowed to vent in an open hearing and put anything you wanted to on the record, unchallenged. That is the full extent of what you did. Nothing more.
Just because your side said a bunch of stuff on the stand in this particular forum neither makes it "fact", nor makes your witnesses "experts", nor even makes any of their points relevant at all.
You simply were given a public forum to make your "arguments" in a manner that had very little difference from filing your frivolous motion in the first place. That is it.
The judge now has to review everything he is given and make a recommendation to the SoS, who has to also review that recommendation in light of the narrow scope of the only issue at hand here - ballot access.
GA allowed you to simply be heard, that is all. Doesn't mean that they believe anything you say. Sorry.
All the SSN and PDF crapola and other such nonsense simply has no relevance to the legal issue of ballot access in the GA primary - NONE. So that was just wasted venting time that will have no bearing or relevance on what the SoS can do.
You like to call Obama's COLB & LFBC "fakes", but that is just you wanting to call them that. Sorry, but your mere wishes aren't evidence and don't make it so. The state of HI, which is the only official authority that matters on this particular issue, fully backs them up.
Nor was there any doubt or secret about his father's Kenyan citizenship, prior to the last election. Your own people just foolishly read that book into the record, in order to point that out. You do realize that was a best selling book, written back in the early 1990's, don't you? So thanks for putting into the record that it was an open and obvious point about his father's background for well over a decade before he even ran for President. LOL! You've just used the court to demonstrate that it was a known public issue for a very long time and that obviously, it had no bearing on causing any concern in his getting elected in 2008. *duh*
So in summary, congratulations on getting your day of venting in a courtroom. If it helped you folks just to vent your spleens and get some of your anger off your chest, then good for you.
Beyond that, sit back and wait for the ruling. You haven't proved nor won anything yet. The actual provisions of the law at stake here are all that matter. You will soon find out how they are applied.
Posted by: G | January 28, 2012 at 10:12 AM
D - well, if you are Thomas MacLeran, note that while we don't practice the censorship you've come to expect from the Pest and eFail and Birther Report, I do not allow either spam or personal information (alleged or confirmed) to be posted in comments. Please note that for future reference.
I edited out a mass of information that looks like what Susan Daniels has been claiming. You do know the databases she used for that data have a disclaiming pointing out that the information isn't confirmed.
Both the short form COLB and the long form have been confirmed - repeatedly, by the state of Hawaii as valid and legitimate. Nobody with a background in document forensics has ever said either was a fake. Which can't be determined from an image or PDF anyway.
(Note, many scanners with OCR ability will create a PDF with "layers", due to the OCR overlay. I can scan your FEC paperwork and create a file with "layers", but it doesn't mean your paperwork was a forgery)
(Note the second - birthers were discussing how to claim the long form as a forgery in 2009. Which tends to suggest none of you were interested in what the results were anyway)
The Constitution offers no definition of what a "Natural Born Citizen" is. 200+ years of US law and court decisions regarding citizenship have come to a definition that a "Natural Born Citizen" means someone with citizenship at birth. The only citizenship-related case to claim otherwise was the "Dred Scott" decision, which was overturned by the 14th Amendment. The popular birther definition is based upon a translation of de Vattel's "The Law of Nations" that came out ten years after the Constitution was ratified, and isn't in earlier English translations or the original French.
I'm quite happy to defend and support the Constitution. Particularly against those who are trying to ignore or rewrite it.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 28, 2012 at 10:33 AM
The Birthers are angrier that the President IS eligible than if he were not. It's the Birthers who brought up the subject of eligibility, THEY have proven that he is eligible and now they're mad.
After the COLB was released and the issue settled it has been about nothing more than spite and an excuse to hurl ugly insults for the Birthers.
Posted by: Bob | January 28, 2012 at 10:42 AM
"D" - I will point out that you used the term "Native Born" in your post. And that it's the birthers who claim that "Natural Born" and "Native Born" are two separate things. It's hardly a personal attack to point out the term you yourself used.
Also I find it interesting you claim to have been a witness, yet I didn't anyone with your name get sworn into the witness stand? Did you mean you observed the courtroom proceedings, rather than gave testimony as a witness?
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 28, 2012 at 10:42 AM
(Note - Edited to remove alleged addresses and SSN numbers Please note, spam and personal information are not allowed to be posted in comments - Patrick McKinnion)
OPOVV here. The information that McKinnion refused to post is in the public domain, and has been since 2008. For those of you who want the truth, do a little research on your own, it's not that difficult to do. Identity theft is a serious crime and the extent of Obama's multiple Social Security numbers, names, addresses, point in one direction: money laundering.
This is not some childish games about "sides", or "I'm right, you're wrong. Na Na Na Na Na Na."
It's about the Constitution. If it is your desire to live a lie, to believe in lies, then nobody can help you. If, however, you are a seeker of the truth, and are an honest and honorable person, then you have nothing to fear if the truth is on your side.
I must say, McKinnion, that you don't do anybody any favors when you offer no proof of whatever it is you are for, which seems to be Sharia Law for America.
You are, most likely, one of the uninformed that haven't received the memo that Islam is a political philosophy, and NOT a religion. You are also, most likely, a believer of the fantasy of a "moderate Muslim".
It's people such as yourself is why America is going down the tubes, and quickly: you contribute nothing to the future of Freedom. All you do is whine and complain. Why don't you take a minute and figure out you've been had, are being used, and are aiding and abetting the enemy, which is ignorance and stupidity.
You ramp and rave: I supplied you with public information about Obama's use of multiple Social Security numbers, which proves idenity theft. My God, we don't even know if Obama is his real name, or haven't you figured that out yet? And if you haven't figured that one out yet, there's a lot more that has eluded you, and will continue to elude you, for having such tunnel vision that you fail to comprehend the serious threat to the Constitution.
Those Social Security numbers that I sent you are all valid, the last four numbers have been X'ed out because they are valid numbers, which Obama has used. Court records are in the public domain.
Hiding the truth from your readers isn't being responsible. Take a walk through Arlington National Cemetary and reflect on the Constitution, maybe it'll help you.
Posted by: D | January 28, 2012 at 11:00 AM
D - Actually it came from a database that Susan Daniels accessed, one with a disclaimer stating the information may not be accurate.
And "public domain" doesn't mean I'll post it either. I routinely redact the SSN Dr. Orly likes to throw around, as well as email addresses and the like. I even redacted the mailing addresses and phone numbers on your FEC filings, even though it was "public domain".
Oh for pity's sake. Sharia Law?? REALLY? You're playing that hand?? Seriously?? That's like the scene in a western when they run out of bullets and throw the gun.
What am I for? The Constitution and rule of law in this country. The founding principals of this nation. The ideas that all are created equal, that we have the right to bear arms, the freedom to believe (or not) in what religion we will. The freedom to speak our minds. The ideals that built this nation. Not fear, not xenophobia, not hatred, not scary conspiracies, but strengths and passions and freedom.
Here's a clue - I've LIVED in a country under Islamic law (Qatar). I'm more than likely more familiar with the workings of such than you ever will be. I prefer the United States Constitution, thank you. Which is why I get annoyed at the birthers trying to rewrite said Constitution.
As for "Moderate Muslim", as a matter of fact I am familiar with them. Many were my co-workers for that matter. Some from Canada, some from Europe, some from Turkey. And you know what?? When it came to anything other than IT work, they were pretty apathetic about politics and religion. Kinda like the Christian that goes to church only on Easter and Christmas.
They're people. Not the monsters you check under your bed for. People.
As for Obama being "his real name", the birth certificates that have been confirmed by the State of Hawaii show it to be his legal name at birth. No evidence of Indonesian citizenship or adoption has ever been proven, and under Islamic guidelines on adoption, an adopted child NEVER takes on the name of the adoptive father.
I actually wrote about Islamic guidelines on adoption. Enjoy
http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-adoption-barry-soetoro-myth.html
And I've walked though National Cemeteries before. Ever been to the one at Ft. Rosecrans? Very thoughtful place. Next time you go to a National Cemetery, note the grave markers with Islamic crescents - and reflect how somebody who's of a faith you despise still fought for and sometimes died for your country. Then notice the ones with Buddhist markings and all the other religious markings on them and reflect now all of them heard the call of service and duty to their country - and how some paid in blood and death for such.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 28, 2012 at 11:30 AM
I tried. That's all anyone can do.
I shall leave you in fantasy land.
You'll hear from me no more.
Posted by: D | January 28, 2012 at 11:50 AM
D - You;re welcome to post anytime you wish. Just don't assume we'll accept your claims without challenge.
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 28, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Patrick, would you mind editing my post to redact Obamas secutity number? thanks
Posted by: Suranis | January 28, 2012 at 12:54 PM
Suranis - Redacted. Thanks for letting me know!
Posted by: Patrick McKinnion | January 28, 2012 at 01:19 PM
OPOVV blathered:
That's because Islam is a religion, not a political philosophy. Then again, you're just using it to justify your racism and ignorance. Let me give you some quick lessons.
1) Who was the president who stated that he would welcome Muslims who wanted to work for him?
2) Which president had the first meal celebrating Ramadan in the White House?
3) Which president referred to Mohammed as one of the "great inquirers after truth?"
Think it's President Obama? Nope.
1) George Washington: http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/0205/tolerance.html
2) Thomas Jefferson
3) John Adams
http://www.cracked.com/article_18911_5-ridiculous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam.html
Oh, and Benjamin Franklin said they were welcome to preach, and Benjamin Rush said he'd rather have people learn Islam than go without any religious instruction. You might note that these were the Founding Fathers. I'm sure that you'll make a case as to how they were really "anti-American" and wanting to "destroy the Constitution."
Posted by: Norbrookc | January 29, 2012 at 06:06 AM
> I'm sure that you'll make a case as to how they were really "anti-American" and wanting to "destroy the Constitution."
I suppose that, as a true crank conspiracy loon, he'd rather take the "he never said that, historians are lying" approach (remember the part of the birthers who don't simply claim that WKA was "in error" or "doesn't say what you claim" but that it was "part of an ongoing effort to manipulate history").
Posted by: The Magic M | January 30, 2012 at 04:27 AM
Here is a good Snopes article debunking the SS number crap:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/ssn.asp
OPOVV was so gullible he believed an easily debunked lie, and is so immoral that he continues to spread the lie after knowing it is untrue.
He should ask himself which other birther "facts" he believes to be true are actually lies...
Posted by: obsolete | January 30, 2012 at 07:07 AM