It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judgment Day: Birther Taitz Fined $20,000 For Misconduct

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


That's like saying the 16 year old kid in the back of the line at the DMV has the right to see your birth certificate, just because he doesn't believe your eligible for a drivers license.


If I were standing behind you at the DMV and demanded to see your birth certificate because I didn't believe that you were born in the US does that give me the right to see it?

No it doesn't.

[edit on 10/14/2009 by whatukno]




posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Roger Calero, Presidential candidate 2008.

Here is a liitle info, you can look up more if you are interested.
www.timothybirdnow.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:50 PM
link   
Barack Obama and State of Hawaii on the ropes.

www.examiner.com...


The latest legal turn out of Hawaii leaves very little wiggle room for the state.

On July 27th 2009 The Hawaii Department of Health in a press release declared that Barack Obama was a Natural Born Citizen.

Researcher Justin Riggs on July 29th was informed by email that Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett reviewed and approved the Statement released by DoH Director Fukino.

Attorney Leo Donofrio has been investigating the irregularities in the State of Hawaii at his Blog Natural Born Citizen and has published a copy of the emails between Riggs and the Attorney General's office:


emails




According to law, the State of Hawaii must now disclose how it came to the decision that is found in Director Fukino’s July 27th Press Release that was approved by the State’s Attorney General. Haw. Rev. Stat. 28-4 states very clearly that formal opinions of the Attorney general must be made public. Further, The Hawaiian Office of Information Practices in 1991 formally set out the requirements that informal opinions of the AG must also be made available for public inspection. According to Donofrio, under the Uniform Rules of Evidence (Rule 510): “when the conclusions of an informal Attorney General opinion are made public by the agency/client, then the accompanying record of that opinion must also be disclosed to the public:”

The State of Hawaii declared that Obama was a Natural Born Citizen and that this disclosure was approved by the Attorney General of the State. The State of Hawaii must now release any and all communications and documentation that led it to making this determination. Because Janice Okubo on July 29th revealed that the decision was approved by the State’s Attorney General, and the state made its Natural Born Citizen statement, the state is now required by law to disclose how it reached that conclusion. As Donofrio states, there can be no secret law. The State of Hawaii cannot simply make a statement with legal weight, and then when asked to provide how it reached that decision, simply say: ‘You just have to trust us on that’. They must release any and all information that led them to make their public declarations.


[edit on 073131p://bWednesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

The Hawaii Dept of Health has officially stated several times that they have his long form in their records.
Nancy Pelosi has signed a document stating that he meets the Constitutional Requirements.
Congress has passed a resolution stating that he was born in Hawaii.
There is a short form certificate that appears to be genuine.
There are two birth announcements in papers of 1961
His grandmother said he was born in Hawaii



A couple of officials have stated they have the long form, that they have seen it and it is a legitimate birth certificate. The Dept of Health has said nothing officially. Let alone what the certificate actually says. Slightly different than the spin that is used to support his status.

Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, has done things that are unconstitutional in regards to her position. Only a President (or Presidential designee--like a Sec of State) has the authority to negotiate treaties and meet with dignitaries and world leaders as part of US policy as a representative of the US.

Congress passes non-binding resolutions all the time. They even pass resolutions to congratulate the winners of the Super Bowl, World Series, and the National Spelling Bee.

The Short Form is also dated recently. And Fact Check has also had two very different looking Short Forms posted.

Wasn't there some claim that the birth announcement was in a different typeface than the rest of the page? And I could run an Obituary in any Newspaper I wanted to, doesn't make me dead by any means. Typically Birth Announcements come from one of three sources: the hospital has them ran as a courtesy, the local public records submits them or most usually the family has it ran. Just like Wedding Announcements are done.

Hard to validate that statement since she has passed away. No chance to cross examine. And while the other grandmother may have been speaking of the father's birth in Kenya as well as an aunt's claim of the same and the village plaque/statue/commemorative could also be for the father. It is hard to really know unless there and speaking through an honest translator as to what is meant. I was not born in the town that I consider my hometown, in fact the hospital that I was born in has been gone for a few years now. And I am younger than Obama, although not by much.

Personally, I have not seen anything that plainly answers the question one way or the other. I also know that I have yet to have met a politician that I would ask to hold a hundred dollar bill for me for a week either and I have met several. Was friends with one for a while on more of a professional level.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Ahabstar]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 



In 2004, Róger Calero was the SWP candidate for President of the United States and received 3,689 votes,[5] with Arrin Hawkins running for Vice President. Because he is not a natural born citizen of the United States, Calero is ineligible to become U.S. president under the United States Constitution, and so James Harris, the Socialist Workers' Party presidential candidate from 2000, stood in on the ticket in nine states where Calero could not be listed, receiving 7,102 additional votes.[6]

In 2006, Róger Calero appeared on the ballot in New York as the Socialist Workers Party candidate for US Senate. He received 5,127 votes [7].

Róger Calero again ran for President of the United States representing the SWP in the 2008 presidential election, together with Alyson Kennedy for vice-president.[1] Again, James Harris stood in for Calero in several states.[8] In the 2008 presidential election, Calero was on the ballot in five states, where he received 7,209 votes. Coupled with the 2,424 votes received in the five states where Harris was on the ballot.


Róger Calero

He never would have made it, he had someone else stand in on the ballot. Flawed point there, Libertygal, he would have never been confirmed by congress.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by whatukno
 


Roger Calero, Presidential candidate 2008.

Here is a liitle info, you can look up more if you are interested.
www.timothybirdnow.com...


There is no US Constitutional reason for anyone to be prevented from running for President. Anyone can run for President; not anyone can serve as President. The Constitution gives Congress the duty of ensuring that the candidate elected by the Electoral College is eligible.

See the difference? Running for office is not the same as being eligible to hold that office.

In the 1960's pigs ran for President, 4 legged pigs, not Cops. Some states decided this was unacceptable and put restrictions on who (and what!) can get on the ballot. No more Pogo for President. Some states put in an eligibility for office provision and require proof of eligibility. Not all, some. If you don't satisfy their law, you don't get on the ballot.

The Socialist Workers Party got Calero on the ballot in 5 states where he didn't have to demonstrate eligibility for office. In 5 other states, where he was required to demonstrate eligibility and couldn't, the SWP ran a different candidate, James Harris.

So not only is it unlikely that the Electoral College would have elected Calero, the Congress would have refused to certify him as eligible to hold the office.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 



Point being, being on the ballot meant nothing. He only didn't make it because they knew he wasn't legal.

Same cannot be said of Obama. No one knows, and that's the simple truth of the matter.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 


Most everyone knows, it's just the birther movement that for some reason doesn't know.

This is why lawsuit after lawsuit is thrown out, this is why Taitz is being given this fine. It's because this issue is and always has been bogus.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by kozmo
 


Actually, last accounting I read about had it at 1.4 million, precisely the amount he will be awarded for the Nobel Peace prize.

Taitz, if pursued, will only get what she wants, because she can defend her case by demanding discovery in her self defense. That's a win win for her. I feel certain she will appeal the ruling and ask for a trial.

Odd how one judge penalizes her and the another has set an official date for trial on Jan 26th, 2010. Thats just about 3 months away. Judge Carter deems there are in fact merits to make it a worthwhile case to hear, but Judge Carter doesn't.

So, I guess it depends which news you choose to revel in.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Well, I disagree, but that's ok.

Most everyone doesn't know anything, because nothing has ever been proven.

Just show the long form, and it will all be settled. We shall see in January.

And the only reason the other suits have been dismissed is based on standing. Big difference in standing and merits.

[edit on 14-10-2009 by Libertygal]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Here from an old article, I don't think I had read this one.

Sunday, June 27, 2004

web.archive.org...


Sunday, June 27, 2004


Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.

The allegations that horrified fellow Republicans and caused his once-promising candidacy to implode in four short days have given Obama a clear lead as Republicans struggled to fetch an alternative.

Ryan’s campaign began to crumble on Monday following the release of embarrassing records from his divorce. In the records, his ex-wife, Boston Public actress Jeri Ryan, said her former husband took her to kinky sex clubs in Paris, New York and New Orleans.



Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate ?

Now what led them to believe that?

[edit on 113131p://bWednesday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 


I'm really not getting into this AGAIN, over and over and over. It just goes around in circles. Ill tell you why this is bull dunk, you will give me bull dunk arguments why you have to see his birth certificate, and so on and so forth, your arguments get shot down, your side brings up false documents in a vain attempt at legitimacy and so on and so forth.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Hm. I sort of thought a Certificate of Nomination which expressly relates to peridential eligibility was required to be filed prior to the election. Isn't a write in a bit different from a nominee on the ballot?

Also, it was my understanding that Calero was not removed from some ballots because it was too close to the election to reprint the ballots, and was deemed too costly.

Also, didn't Pelosi sign two different Certication of Nominations on Obama? one containg the legalese abput being a Natural Born Citizen, and one not?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


First off, we can agree to disagree, that's all fine. But, understand, I do not have a "side". I simply have personal doubts as to eligibility, and it could be solved by simply showing the long form. I find the whole thing rather intriguing, but please, don't paint me into a corner by making me a "side" of anything. I don't now, nor have I ever picked "sides".



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 




Just to bring some levity to this thread.


I really don't care, I have seen what he presented, the COLB, it has been verified by the state of Hawaii. To me that is good.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by oneclickaway
reply to post by jimmyx
 




the 1.4 mill was donated to charity, but if you had spent 30 seconds on research, you would have already discovered that.
cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com...


And if you had spent even ten seconds reading your own link, you would see it says 'will' donate....not 'has donated.'


yeah...because the POTUS is really lying and nobody will check on that...right...sure.


Now that you bring it up, would be interesting to know if HIllary got her salary cut because she was ineligible to be SoS. To make her "eligible", her salary would have to have been cut to pre-nomination level to comply with the "fix", since she voted for the salary increase prior to her taking the nomination.

Wonder if anyone has checked on that, too?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


No, it hasn't.

But again, we can agree to disagree.



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by rnaa
 


Hm. I sort of thought a Certificate of Nomination which expressly relates to peridential eligibility was required to be filed prior to the election. Isn't a write in a bit different from a nominee on the ballot?


Not sure what you mean here. If you mean when does Congress officially certify that the person elected by the Electoral College is eligible to be President, then that cannot occur until after the Electoral College vote. Until that occurs, Congress has nothing to certify.

... 10 seconds of research later: OK, I see what you are referring too. This is the official notification from Party headquarters to the various State Electoral Commissions of their nominated candidates. Each State will have its own requirements that have to be satisfied before a candidate can appear on the ballot. Some States will require eligibility proof, some will be satisfied with a notarized declaration of eligibility, some won't require any such demonstration of eligibility.



Also, it was my understanding that Calero was not removed from some ballots because it was too close to the election to reprint the ballots, and was deemed too costly.


Dunno. Maybe. There is a general understanding that frivolous candidates are a waste of taxpayers money and the States are generally keen to filter them out as soon as possible.




Also, didn't Pelosi sign two different Certication of Nominations on Obama? one containg the legalese abput being a Natural Born Citizen, and one not?


She probably signed more than 50, one for each State, Territory, Dominion, etc, according to their requirements. And she wasn't acting as a Member of Congress when she did it, but as a Democratic Party Official, specifically as Chairperson of the 2008 Presidential Convention.

Congressional certification of the Electoral College result is another matter altogether.

[edit on 15/10/2009 by rnaa]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by whatukno
 


No, it hasn't.

But again, we can agree to disagree.


Yes, it has.



[edit on 15/10/2009 by rnaa]



posted on Oct, 15 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   
Ok, let me sum this up. Ill try and put it simply.

The major arguments posed by birthers can be summed up thus.

"I have to use a birth certificate in order to get a drivers license, therefore, Obama must show the American people his birth certificate in order to be eligible for the job."

Ok, this is a flawed argument for several reasons, first, yes, you do need to provide proof that you are eligible for a drivers license. You show this proof to the person behind the counter, a person that is legally qualified and certified to affirm the legitimacy of your proof. The 16 year old kid in the back of the line is not qualified nor is that person certified to judge whether or not you are qualified for a drivers license.

Secondly, as the general voter, you do not vote for the president directly, you vote for electors. Electors vote for the president. I hope you can understand that because you have never voted for a president. Therefore just like the 16 year old in the back of the DMV line, you are not qualified, nor certified to make sure the presidential candidate is eligible for the job.

Finally, Obama was vetted by the DNC who was chaired by Nanci Pelosi. She sent out the infamous letters to the states saying that Obama was the candidate that was to be on the ballot. Later when Obama won the election, our congress confirmed him. Just in the same way they confirm supreme court judges. He was confirmed by our legislative branch. Then when all that was done, on January 20, 2009 Obama was sworn in by the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. (not once, but twice.)

"If he just shows his birth certificate, all of this will go away."

The truth is, no it won't, It wouldn't go away if someone went back in time to Hawaii and filmed the birth, took affidavits from all attending, got them certified by the state of Hawaii and brought back the placenta along with a pineapple to prove the point. The reason is that people that believe in this conspiracy have no real grasp on reality. They want this conspiracy to be true so badly they are willing to fabricate evidence to support this theory time and time again.

"He went to Indonesia." or "Hes a subject under British law and therefore ineligible to be president because he has dual citizenship."

Simply put, the United States does not recognize laws from other countries. From birth he was a US citizen, his mother was a US citizen. It doesn't matter where he went on this planet, he is a US citizen. It doesn't matter if he got citizenship elsewhere, the US does not recognize the laws of other countries. The only time the US has to recognize the laws of other countries is when our citizens are in that country. Only then do they recognize the right of that country to have laws. This happens in the case of US citizens being arrested and tried by foreign courts.

I understand that the entire point of the birther movement is just a feeble attempt at trying to remove this president because they don't like him or his policies. But just wishing it to be so, does not make it so. I am afraid that we all are stuck with Obama until at least 2012. Birthers don't want to believe that Obama could have won the presidency legitimately so they have concocted this conspiracy theory in order to try and run him out of office on a rail. This is why this theory is such a joke, it's because it's already established that Obama won the presidency legitimately, It's already been proven that Obama is a natural born citizen and completely eligible for the office. If the Birther movement was about the truth this would have been settled a long time ago. But it's not about finding the truth. It's about running Obama out of office in a feeble attempt by using false means.

It's sad that there are people in this country that are this bitter. It's sad that there are people in this country that are so blind as to ignore facts and embrace the ignorance that is this conspiracy theory. When the facts show one thing, and yet belief blinds people to those facts. It's a sad day for truth.

Orly Taitz didn't get it. If she pursues this idiotic conspiracy theory, the only thing that is going to happen to her is disbarment and a lot of embarrassment. She already is a joke to people. So is the Birther movement. To everyone that matters, (Congress, the Supreme Court) Obama is a legitimate POTUS, and barring committing a high crime or misdemeanor, he will be the POTUS until at least January 20 2013.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join