Closing-in: Supremes Confer On No Birth Certificate Eligibility Crisis
Ted L
U.S. Supreme Court confers on Obama eligibility
Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 23, 2010
9:45 pm Eastern
By Brian Fitzpatrick
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – Is this the case that will break the presidential
eligibility question wide open?
The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard
on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether
President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he
may not be a "natural-born citizen" as required by Article II, Section
1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
Article continues
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=232073
--
Please pray to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for mercy
upon mercy and that the Supreme Court judges will do the right thing.
Anthony M. Kennedy,
Elena Kagan,
John G. Roberts,
Antonin G. Scalia,
Clarence Thomas,
Samuel A. Alito,
Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
Stephen G. Breyer,
Sonia Sotomayor.
DogDiesel
"Ted L" <spamta...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d86445f6-5023-4d1e...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
Article continues
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=232073
Yup, They should rule to hear the cases. And require the marxist Kenyan to
cough up or resign his piece of shit ass.
JLS
> "Ted L" <spamtaddl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d86445f6-5023-4d1e...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> BORN IN THE USA?
> U.S. Supreme Court confers on Obama eligibility
> Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
> Posted: November 23, 2010
> 9:45 pm Eastern
>
> By Brian Fitzpatrick
> © 2010 WorldNetDaily
>
> WASHINGTON – Is this the case that will break the presidential
> eligibility question wide open?
>
> The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard
> on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether
> President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he
> may not be a "natural-born citizen" as required by Article II, Section
> 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>
> --
> Please pray to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for mercy
> upon mercy and that the Supreme Court judges will do the right thing.
> Anthony M. Kennedy,
> Elena Kagan,
> John G. Roberts,
> Antonin G. Scalia,
> Clarence Thomas,
> Samuel A. Alito,
> Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
> Stephen G. Breyer,
> Sonia Sotomayor.
>
> Yup, They should rule to hear the cases. And require the marxist Kenyan to
> cough up or resign his piece of shit ass.
$100 to a nickel says all your prayers to your savage cannibal god
will go unanswered.
You teatard birthers are delightfully funny.
And world nuts daily? Now there's a gaggle of lunatics if there ever
was one.
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
wrote:
>
>"Ted L" <spamta...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:d86445f6-5023-4d1e...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>BORN IN THE USA?
>U.S. Supreme Court confers on Obama eligibility
>Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Posted: November 23, 2010
>9:45 pm Eastern
>
>By Brian Fitzpatrick
>© 2010 WorldNetDaily
>
>WASHINGTON – Is this the case that will break the presidential
>eligibility question wide open?
>
>The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard
>on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether
>President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he
>may not be a "natural-born citizen" as required by Article II, Section
>1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>Article continues
>http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=232073
You need to cash in your 401k, take out a second mortgage, and rip off
the kid's college money -- send the cash to Orly Taitz -- she'll save
you.
Doublewide GOP Trixie
"Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0e8re69e2mfmqp7k5...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:09:15 -0500, "DogDiesel" <nos...@nospam.none>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ted L" <spamta...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:d86445f6-5023-4d1e...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>>BORN IN THE USA?
Palin ws born in N. Korea and is jewish.
Lamont Cranston
> Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
Yes, beyond any doubt. Only kookers and total psychotics believe otherwise.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Ted L
> BORN IN THE USA?
> U.S. Supreme Court confers on Obama eligibility
> Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
> Posted: November 23, 2010
> 9:45 pm Eastern
>
> By Brian Fitzpatrick
> © 2010 WorldNetDaily
>
> WASHINGTON – Is this the case that will break the presidential
> eligibility question wide open?
>
> The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard
> on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether
> President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he
> may not be a "natural-born citizen" as required by Article II, Section
> 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>
> --
> Please pray to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for mercy
> upon mercy and that the Supreme Court judges will do the right thing.
> Anthony M. Kennedy,
> Elena Kagan,
> John G. Roberts,
> Antonin G. Scalia,
> Clarence Thomas,
> Samuel A. Alito,
> Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
> Stephen G. Breyer,
> Sonia Sotomayor.
Here are some other verses to petition from the Lord in your prayers.
Also, please consider examining your own life and see if there are any
accursed things you need to deal with first so that He may hear this
prayer. Remember how God told Joshua to get up and go deal with the
accursed thing (sin) in the camp before coming to God about the battle
at hand to defeat Ai. (Josh 7:10-15)
First, verse: "Neither give place to the devil." Eph 4:27
(President Obama has systematically and relentlessly promoted the
exaltation of sodomy and abortion)
Second verse: "Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the
LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set
king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not
thy brother." Deuteronomy 17:15
(IraqHusseinOsama is not one from among our brethren as called for in
our Constitution,)
Also note that biblical fasting is another spiritual weapon God gives
us to take down the strong holds of the enemy.
Ted L
On this thanksgiving day eve, I am thankful to God that we don't have
to wait for the enemy to agree with our complaint in order to petition
either God or the government.
wy
Yeah, I remember that. Joshua went to the camp and dealt with the sin
- whatever that sin was. Or maybe it was his son. Anyway, then he
went to God to talk about some upcoming battle to knock down Ai. Ai-
yi-yi. Or is it Ai-Ai, Cap'n?
>
> First, verse: "Neither give place to the devil." Eph 4:27
> (President Obama has systematically and relentlessly promoted the
> exaltation of sodomy and abortion)
Systematically and relentlessly? Gee, I wonder how he's had time to
do anything else.
>
> Second verse: "Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the
> LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set
> king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not
> thy brother." Deuteronomy 17:15
> (IraqHusseinOsama is not one from among our brethren as called for in
> our Constitution,)
Who's IraqHusseinOsama?
>
> Also note that biblical fasting is another spiritual weapon God gives
> us to take down the strong holds of the enemy.
Yeah, go fast yourself.
Buster Norris
<scre...@butthole.net> wrote:
>I was born in N. Korea and am a faggot Muslim.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Iarnrod
> "Ted L" <spamtaddl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d86445f6-5023-4d1e...@fj16g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> BORN IN THE USA?
> U.S. Supreme Court confers on Obama eligibility
> Is president a 'natural-born citizen' as Constitution requires?
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Posted: November 23, 2010
> 9:45 pm Eastern
>
> By Brian Fitzpatrick
> 2010 WorldNetDaily
>
> WASHINGTON Is this the case that will break the presidential
> eligibility question wide open?
>
> The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard
> on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether
> President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he
> may not be a "natural-born citizen" as required by Article II, Section
> 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
>
> --
> Please pray to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ for mercy
> upon mercy and that the Supreme Court judges will do the right thing.
> Anthony M. Kennedy,
> Elena Kagan,
> John G. Roberts,
> Antonin G. Scalia,
> Clarence Thomas,
> Samuel A. Alito,
> Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
> Stephen G. Breyer,
> Sonia Sotomayor.
>
> Yup, They should rule to hear the cases. And require the marxist Kenyan to
> cough up or resign his piece of shit ass.
Hey fuzznuts, suck on this: http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg
Hint: Obama is the ONLY president ever to prove he is a natural born
citizen by releasing his birth certificate prior to election. Case is
closed. Not in dispute.
Tim Crowley
> 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
> Article continueshttp://www.wnd.com
K000k a D000dle Do.
Tim Crowley
>
> Yup, They should rule to hear the cases. And require the marxist Kenyan to
> cough up or resign his piece of shit ass.
hint: you're insane.
Tim Crowley
K000k a d000dle d0.
Tim Crowley
Hell yeah, you can petition all day. The American People say DENIED.
*us*
prodigious amounts of corporate tax fraud, including Enron�s), US Secret Service,
Securities & Exchange Commission (with more stock fraud records), and Citibank�s Salomon
Smith Barney, the Mayor�s Office of Emergency Management and many other financial
institutions. [Online Journal]"
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/cutter.html?q=cutter.html
Dänk 666
> You teatard birthers are delightfully funny.
>
> And world nuts daily? Now there's a gaggle of lunatics if there ever
> was one.
Google is your friend, try using it:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-446.htm
Dänk 666
Iarnrod
Hint: DENIED.
Dänk 666
The decision isn't expected until Monday. I agree with you that it
will be denied, but on the grounds that the petitioner cannot
demonstrate how he has been personally injured by an possibly illegal
Obama presidency, without actually addressing the birth certificate
issue.
This principle of requiring a demonstration of personal injury to sue
can be found in other cases the Supreme Court has refused to hear.
For example, Michael Newdow sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance
declared unconstitutional, but the SC declined to hear the case since
he could not demonstrate how he was personally harmed by the Pledge.
He has sued on behalf of his school-age daughter, but since he did not
have legal custody, he lacked any grounds to sue. Rightists then
interpreted this non-decision as an official ruling in their favor.
Similarly, leftists like you will interpret the SC's dismissal of the
Kerchner petition as an official ruling that Obama's birth certificate
is valid.
Until the Supreme Court makes an official ruling one way or the other,
the birth certificate controversy has not been settled. It is
possible that some clever lawyer can craft an argument that his client
has been personally injured by an illegal Obama presidency, at which
point the SC may choose to hear the case. Too bad Johnny Cochrane is
dead, he could have used his famous Chewbacca defense, and Obama would
already be out of a job.
*us*
into secret custody since 9/11."
http://www.pbs.org/flashpointsusa/20040629/infocus/topic_01/timeline_sep2001.html
*us*
confirms that it has been making weapons grade anthrax in recent years,
in violation of an international treaty."
http://www.pbs.org/flashpointsusa/20040629/infocus/topic_01/timeline_sep2001.html
*us*
television, saying, "I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent
attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons.""
http://www.pbs.org/flashpointsusa/20040629/infocus/topic_01/timeline_sep2001.html
Iarnrod
> On Nov 25, 10:25 pm,Iarnrod<iarn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 25, 10:02 pm, Dänk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 24, 8:33 pm, Tim Crowley <timmyturm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 24, 11:28 am, Ted L <spamtaddl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
>
> > > > > Article continueshttp://www.wnd.com
>
> > > > K000k a D000dle Do.
>
> > >http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-446.htm
>
> > Hint: DENIED.
>
> The decision isn't expected until Monday.
There isn't going to be any decision, kook.
> I agree with you that it
> will be denied, but on the grounds that the petitioner cannot
> demonstrate how he has been personally injured by an possibly illegal
> Obama presidency, without actually addressing the birth certificate
> issue.
Hint: http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg
There *is* no birth certificate issue. Case is closed. Obama is the
only president in our history to release his birth certificate before
the election to prove his natural born citizenship.
> This principle of requiring a demonstration of personal injury to sue
> can be found in other cases the Supreme Court has refused to hear.
> For example, Michael Newdow sued to have the Pledge of Allegiance
> declared unconstitutional, but the SC declined to hear the case since
> he could not demonstrate how he was personally harmed by the Pledge.
> He has sued on behalf of his school-age daughter, but since he did not
> have legal custody, he lacked any grounds to sue. Rightists then
> interpreted this non-decision as an official ruling in their favor.
> Similarly, leftists like you will interpret the SC's dismissal of the
> Kerchner petition as an official ruling that Obama's birth certificate
> is valid.
Wrong. The state of Hawaii says it is valid and the court can't change
that. Hint: http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg
> Until the Supreme Court makes an official ruling one way or the other,
> the birth certificate controversy has not been settled.
Yes, it has been settled. Hawaii settled it and there is no dispute.
SCOTUS will never rule because there is nothing to rule on. Hint:
http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama.jpg
> It is
> possible that some clever lawyer can craft an argument that his client
> has been personally injured by an illegal Obama presidency, at which
> point the SC may choose to hear the case.
Nope. It cannot happen since Hawaii certified Obama's birth on US soil
more than 35 years ago. There is no fact thjat can ever change this.
> Too bad Johnny Cochrane is
> dead, he could have used his famous Chewbacca defense, and Obama would
> already be out of a job.
Not possible. You must be thinking of Panama Jack McCain, who could
never have assumed the presidency without a Supreme Court ruling on
his citizenship status.
*us*
looking into the bank's role in the WorldCom mess that she couldn't provide
them with all the information they sought because some of it was destroyed
in the attack on the World Trade Center.
http://killtown.911review.org/wtc7/collapse.html
"At the time of its destruction, Building 7 housed documents relating to numerous SEC
investigations. The files for approximately three to four thousand cases were destroyed,
according to the Los Angeles Times."
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/index.html
"Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000
to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment
banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom.
..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so
much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz
Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases." [New York Lawyer]"
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/cutter.html?q=cutter.html
See also:
http://everythingishistory.com/2009/09/10/10-questions-you-should-have-asked-in-2002-about-911/
Undisputed.
Lamont Cranston
Fuck off, kooker.
Dänk 666
> On Nov 26, 12:36 am, Dänk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> > Similarly, leftists like you will interpret the SC's dismissal of the
> > Kerchner petition as an official ruling that Obama's birth certificate
> > is valid.
>
> Wrong. The state of Hawaii says it is valid and the court can't change
Remember that I am not siding with the "birthers," just examining the
legal issues involved. The "Full Faith and Credit" clause says all
states are required to accept legal documents, judicial rulings,
licenses, etc. of other states, unless Congress specifies otherwise.
There is no similar requirement that the federal government accept
documents from states, and in fact the U.S. Passport Office has
rejected some official Texas birth certificates after learning of a
scheme in which midwives illegally signed documents for babies
actually born in Mexico.
Obama's birth certificate is valid, it really is an official document
issued by the State of Hawaii. However, as you can see in the example
I cited above, this does not mean that the information contained in
that birth certificate is true. No other state can challenge the
information contained in the birth certificate, but the federal
government can. However, after fifty years, all the hospital staff is
dead and all the paper records likely destroyed, so proving anything
is impossible.
> > Too bad Johnny Cochrane is
> > dead, he could have used his famous Chewbacca defense, and Obama would
> > already be out of a job.
>
> Not possible. You must be thinking of Panama Jack McCain, who could
> never have assumed the presidency without a Supreme Court ruling on
> his citizenship status.
I didn't vote for McCain, but I agree that the Supreme Court would
have had to rule on his eligibility. The Panama Canal zone was
effectively a U.S. territory at the time, and both of McCain's parents
were U.S. citizens. One could argue that an army brat, born while his
parents were stationed in Germany or Japan, is also ineligible to be
president.
Iarnrod
> On Nov 26, 1:25 pm,Iarnrod<iarn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 26, 12:36 am, Dänk 666 <dank...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> > > Similarly, leftists like you will interpret the SC's dismissal of the
> > > Kerchner petition as an official ruling that Obama's birth certificate
> > > is valid.
>
> > Wrong. The state of Hawaii says it is valid and the court can't change
> > that. Hint:http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/graphics/birthCertObama...
>
> Remember that I am not siding with the "birthers," just examining the
> legal issues involved.
There are none. Only with McCain, who was born in Panama. Obama's
proven fact of birth on US soil closes the matter.
> The "Full Faith and Credit" clause says all
> states are required to accept legal documents, judicial rulings,
> licenses, etc. of other states, unless Congress specifies otherwise.
Bingo.
> There is no similar requirement that the federal government accept
> documents from states, and in fact the U.S. Passport Office has
> rejected some official Texas birth certificates after learning of a
> scheme in which midwives illegally signed documents for babies
> actually born in Mexico.
Immaterial. The federal government does not verify state documents.
> Obama's birth certificate is valid, it really is an official document
> issued by the State of Hawaii. However, as you can see in the example
> I cited above, this does not mean that the information contained in
> that birth certificate is true.
It means it must be regarded as true absent evidence of fraud. There
is none here.
> No other state can challenge the
> information contained in the birth certificate, but the federal
> government can.
No, it cannot.
> However, after fifty years, all the hospital staff is
> dead and all the paper records likely destroyed, so proving anything
> is impossible.
It's already proven.
> > > Too bad Johnny Cochrane is
> > > dead, he could have used his famous Chewbacca defense, and Obama would
> > > already be out of a job.
>
> > Not possible. You must be thinking of Panama Jack McCain, who could
> > never have assumed the presidency without a Supreme Court ruling on
> > his citizenship status.
>
> I didn't vote for McCain,
I didn't say you did.
> but I agree that the Supreme Court would
> have had to rule on his eligibility. The Panama Canal zone was
> effectively a U.S. territory at the time, and both of McCain's parents
> were U.S. citizens. One could argue that an army brat, born while his
> parents were stationed in Germany or Japan, is also ineligible to be
> president.
I would side with that but of course the courts would have to decide.