FactCheck only confuses.
RE: Born in the U.S.A.?
RE: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Reply:
Yes, so what if you can get a US State Department passport, good for international travel, using the Hawaii COLB? But, the passport only identifies the bearer as a US citizen, subject to the US Constitution, and all laws and treaties there under.
However, neither the Hawaii COLB, nor a passport based on it, can be used to differentiate between a native citizen, a natural born citizen, or a naturalized citizen.
Only on examination of the vital statistic record(s), and/or a certified copy of the vital statistic record(s), can a determination of the category of citizenship be ascertained.
But, the question remains, what vital statistic records or certified documents were used by the Democratic National Committee to vet Barack Obama for the office of POTUS?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Saturday, September 19, 2009
The DNC 2008 Nomination Certificate from Sacramento, CA
I asked a friend in Sacramento, CA, to obtain the document from the CA Secretary of State.
Note the DNC logo is more clear, the same typos, but compared to other documents from DNC, the differences in signatures, indicates a separate, true and original, notarized document was filed with each state.
Is there a grand conspiracy afoot?
DNC from California Secretary of State
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19949541/SACCA20090916DNCCERT2008
RNC from Tennessee Secretary of State
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19949608/TN-2008-RNC-Nomination-Doc
With a possible 50 cases of election fraud, is it possible to null the election, thus removing Pelosi, Obama and Biden from office.
United States presidential line of succession
References:
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession
2) http://www.saveourstate.org/vforums/showthread.php?p=362213#post362213
# Office Current Officer
1 Vice President Joe Biden (Fraudulent election)
2 Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi (Election Fraud)
3 President pro tempore of the Senate Robert Byrd
4 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
The Sen. Robert Byrd (92) would be President, and SecState Clinton the VP.
However Clinton would be a heartbeat away from becoming POTUSA.
oy vay!
Note the DNC logo is more clear, the same typos, but compared to other documents from DNC, the differences in signatures, indicates a separate, true and original, notarized document was filed with each state.
Is there a grand conspiracy afoot?
DNC from California Secretary of State
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19949541/SACCA20090916DNCCERT2008
RNC from Tennessee Secretary of State
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19949608/TN-2008-RNC-Nomination-Doc
With a possible 50 cases of election fraud, is it possible to null the election, thus removing Pelosi, Obama and Biden from office.
United States presidential line of succession
References:
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession
2) http://www.saveourstate.org/vforums/showthread.php?p=362213#post362213
# Office Current Officer
1 Vice President Joe Biden (Fraudulent election)
2 Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi (Election Fraud)
3 President pro tempore of the Senate Robert Byrd
4 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
The Sen. Robert Byrd (92) would be President, and SecState Clinton the VP.
However Clinton would be a heartbeat away from becoming POTUSA.
oy vay!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/
http://bit.ly/PkPEZ
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=100451
http://bit.ly/2Gqyfz
http://209.157.64.200/focus/news/2303017/replies?c=49
http://bit.ly/1w4YGa
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/assets/gif/M1139416728.GIF
http://bit.ly/eTT0C
http://passportsusa.com/wp-content/gallery/passportusa/edith_front.jpg
Edith Costa Hawaii 1962 http://bit.ly/EN6LS
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/07/31/birth-certificate-lying-still/
http://bit.ly/lMLzg
http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/090728birthcert.gif
http://bit.ly/1V2Wkk
Request For Stay Of Deployment Pending Reconsideration
Request For Stay Of Deployment Pending Reconsideration. The entire Orly
Taitz Esq. Motion is below. See for yourself. [Folks - there are email &
phone Numbers below, lets support the Capt.]
[previous article Fed Judge ... Shreds Constitution see:
http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/content/view/1419/2/]
(Renewed Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice
U.S.D.C. Middle District of Georgia Filed 09/04/2009)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMUS DIVISION
120 12th Street P.O. Box 124 Columbus, Georgia 31902
CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, M.D. F.S., §
Plaintiff, § CivilAction No 4:09-cv-00106-CDL
§
v. §
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, §
GA RRISON COMMANDER, FORT §
BENNING, GEORGIA, §
GEORGE STEUBER, DEPUTY § PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
COMMANDER, FORT BENNING, § STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED § PENDING MOTIONS FOR
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, § REHEARING AND TO AMEND
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto § OR ALTER JUDGMENT
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, §
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
PENDING MOTIONS FOR REHEARING PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE
7.6 and to AMEND and/or ALTER JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 59(e)
Plaintiff Connie Rhodes files this request for stay of Deployment pending
Plaintiff’s Motions for Rehearing and to Amend and/or Alter Judgment
pursuant
to Rule 59(e).
By this Court’s summary grant (on the afternoon of Wednesday, September
16, 2009) of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Document #8, filed on Friday
September 11, 2009), Plaintiff was denied her Fifth Amendment right to
due process of law, in particular, by this Court’s violation of Local
Rule 7 of the United States Middle District of Georgia, to wit:
7.2 RESPONSE. Respondent's counsel desiring to submit a
response, brief, or affidavits shall serve the same within twenty (20)
days after service of movant's motion and brief.
Plaintiff was entitled to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss not
sooner than Thursday, October 1, 2009, without penalty or prejudice,
absent a specific warning from the Court of intention to vary from the
local rules. Plaintiff avers that there is increasing evidence that the
United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to
political pressure, external control, and, mostly likely, subservience
to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously
protested in this case, except that the de facto President is not even
nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Article III Judiciary.
The Court in fact had provided the Plaintiff with no such notice of any
intention to vary the procedural framework of the local rules in this
case. The Court should, upon this ground alone, vacate its September 16,
2009, order of dismissal and STAY THE DEPLOYMENT of Plaintiff Connie
Rhodes. Further, both Plaintiff and her counsel were denied meaningful
access to the Courts by the very fact that this Court entered its
September 16, 2009, ruling without reference to any of the key issues
actually raised in Plaintiff’s Complaint or TRO. The fact that the
Court’s 14 page order does not address any actual statements in
Plaintiff’s complaint by page or paragraph number, or any page citation
to her TRO, suggests to a reasonable and objective mind that the Court
either did not read these documents or was summarily instructed by that
same illegitimate “chain of command” alleged above not to address at
least the three key questions asserted in
Plaintiff’s complaint including (1) a U.S. ARMY OFFICER’S OATH TO UPHOLD
THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, (2)
the historical importance of an independent army corps to the
constitutional balance of powers and Republican Form of Government
guaranteed by the Constitution, and (3) the
Ninth Amendment reservation of rights in the people to question the
legitimacy and eligibility of their elected officials when questions
arise from time-to-time which were not contemplated by the Founding
Fathers.
The Court’s failure to address these three key issues again, standing
alone, is suggestive that the executive branch is exercising control
over the Court’s decision-making process, and is a sufficient ground, by
itself, to justify this Court’s grant of an EMERGENCY STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
for at least TEN DAYS until Plaintiff’s Counsel can exercise Plaintiff’s
rights under Local Rule 7.6 of the United States District Court for the
Middle District of Georgia to file her Motion for Reconsideration and
Motion to Amend or Alter Judgment a because it is “absolutely necessary”
within the meaning of Local Rule 7.6 and because the judgment entered
September 16, 2009, is manifestly unjust and incorrect within the
meaning of jurisprudence construing Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, and will surely result in a VOID JUDGMENT for denial of
due process within the meaning of Rule 60(b)(4) by reason of
the Court’s unexpected wild deviation from the 20 day response period
provided by the Local Rules of this very Middle District of Georgia.
It is reasonably certain that the men who framed the Constitution did
not anticipate the election of a man as a President who appears to have
prevaricated about his place of birth and then ordered his loyal
followers to ridicule all those who questioned the contradictions
inherent in his own biography, such as the obvious fact that his Father
was an (admittedly disloyal and possibly treacherous) Subject of the
British Crown when he was born, even though this fact alone would
disqualify the President as a “natural born citizen”, regardless of his
place of birth.
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for
advocating that a legally conscious, procedurally sophisticated, and
constitutionally aware army officers corps is the best protection
against the encroachment of anti-democratic, authoritarian,
neo-Fascistic or Palaeo-Communistic dictatorship in this country,
without pointing to any specific language, facts, or allegations of fact
in the Complaint or TRO as frivolous. Rule 11 demands more of the Court
than use of its provisions as a means of suppressing the First Amendment
Right to Petition regarding questions of truly historical, in fact epic
and epochal, importance in the history of this nation.
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for
failure to present facts, and yet has ignored or disregarded the facts
concerning Barack Hussein Obama's birthplace sub iudice aliena which
were submitted to the Court in the form of the 1961 Hospital Birth
Certificate submitted in the Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice
(Document 10, entered September 11, 2009) in addition the consistent but
later dated Certificate which was submitted as an Exhibit to the
Complaint and original Application for Temporary Restraining Order.
These documents are FACTS and they went unimpeached, unquestioned, and
yet utterly unaddressed in this Court’s order of summary dismissal. The
fact that the President has admitted his Father was not a citizen, but a
British Subject, at the time of birth, is an incontrovertible fact,
which supports Plaintiff’s charges that the President is an alien. The
Court’s opinion ridicules this point, along with the evidence that “the
President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud
crook,” (Document 13, Pages 7-8). But in so ruling, albeit in obiter
dicta this Court ignores some of the soundest and most carefully
researched and professionally assembled and presented evidence, collated
and substantiated by a former agent of
England’s Fabled “Scotland Yard”. By its contradictory and condescending
tone, the Court thereby denigrates its own asserted standard of
adherence to evidence as the primary arbiter of legitimacy of any
position asserted in litigation.
Plaintiff submits that the clear preponderance of the credible evidence
is that, in quite a few ways, Defendant Barack Hussein Obama has toyed
with and manipulated his identity in order to obtain the President, and
therefore won the “hard fought” Presidential Campaign of 2008 by fraud
and trickery against the American People. The Court should reconsider
the seriousness of its swift dismissal of this Plaintiff’s claims.
Plaintiff submits that to advocate a breach of constitutional oaths to
uphold the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is in
fact a very practical form of “adhering” to those enemies, foreign and
domestic, and thus is tantamount to treason, as Defined in Article III,
Section 3, even when pronounced in Court. The People of the United
States deserve better service and loyalty from the most powerful, and
only life-tenured, officers of their government.
The Court’s failure to address the facts which this Plaintiff has
offered into evidence constitutes a Third Set of Independent grounds for
vacating the September 16, 2009 Order of Dismissal and Entry of Judgment
in Defendants’ favor, and of granting this Plaintiff at least a ten day
Emergency Stay of Deployment Pending Motions for
Rehearing Pursuant to Local Rule 7.6 and to Amend and/or Alter Judgment
Pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Finally, Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes submits that the Court has
misunderstood that she has no objection to obeying the de facto
Commander-in-Chief’s orders via chain of command within the United
States. Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes clarifies that she objects to
every order entered under the authority of this illegitimate regime.
Plaintiff merely clarifies that she believes herself to be at risk of
international prosecution for war crimes absent protection of the Geneva
Convention if she follows this particular Commander-in-Chief’s wartime
policy abroad. The situation in Iraq may indeed be much the same as it
was a year ago under a different President and Commander-in-Chief, but
the international status of that President as Commander-in-Chief may be
radically different owing to the frauds, which led to his election victory.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes asks and requests this Court
retract and vacate its sarcastic and biting dismissal of September 16,
2009, and grant her EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR STAY OF DEPLOYMENT PENDING
MOTIONS FOR REHEARING PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7.6 and to AMEND OR ALTER
JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiff asks this Court to take Judicial Notice of the “Fact” that
both Local Rule 7.6 and Rule 59(e) allow ten business days from the
entry of an order to be reconsidered, or for
which amendment or alteration is sought. Accordingly, absent judicial
warning to the contrary, for good and just cause, Plaintiff expects that
she should have ten Court
business days, which is to say until September 30, 2009, to file her
Motions for Reconsideration and to Amend or Alter Judgment, although it
would be just and right and therefore authorized by law for the Court to
vacate its own judgment of dismissal immediately and simultaneously
grant this Plaintiff’s Emergency Request for Stay of Deployment.
Respectfully submitted,
THURSDAY September 17, 2009
By:_________________________
Orly Taitz, DDS, Esq.
Taitz Esq. Motion is below. See for yourself. [Folks - there are email &
phone Numbers below, lets support the Capt.]
[previous article Fed Judge ... Shreds Constitution see:
http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/content/view/1419/2/]
(Renewed Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice
U.S.D.C. Middle District of Georgia Filed 09/04/2009)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMUS DIVISION
120 12th Street P.O. Box 124 Columbus, Georgia 31902
CAPTAIN CONNIE RHODES, M.D. F.S., §
Plaintiff, § CivilAction No 4:09-cv-00106-CDL
§
v. §
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, §
GA RRISON COMMANDER, FORT §
BENNING, GEORGIA, §
GEORGE STEUBER, DEPUTY § PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
COMMANDER, FORT BENNING, § STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED § PENDING MOTIONS FOR
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, § REHEARING AND TO AMEND
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto § OR ALTER JUDGMENT
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, §
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
PENDING MOTIONS FOR REHEARING PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE
7.6 and to AMEND and/or ALTER JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 59(e)
Plaintiff Connie Rhodes files this request for stay of Deployment pending
Plaintiff’s Motions for Rehearing and to Amend and/or Alter Judgment
pursuant
to Rule 59(e).
By this Court’s summary grant (on the afternoon of Wednesday, September
16, 2009) of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Document #8, filed on Friday
September 11, 2009), Plaintiff was denied her Fifth Amendment right to
due process of law, in particular, by this Court’s violation of Local
Rule 7 of the United States Middle District of Georgia, to wit:
7.2 RESPONSE. Respondent's counsel desiring to submit a
response, brief, or affidavits shall serve the same within twenty (20)
days after service of movant's motion and brief.
Plaintiff was entitled to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss not
sooner than Thursday, October 1, 2009, without penalty or prejudice,
absent a specific warning from the Court of intention to vary from the
local rules. Plaintiff avers that there is increasing evidence that the
United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to
political pressure, external control, and, mostly likely, subservience
to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously
protested in this case, except that the de facto President is not even
nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Article III Judiciary.
The Court in fact had provided the Plaintiff with no such notice of any
intention to vary the procedural framework of the local rules in this
case. The Court should, upon this ground alone, vacate its September 16,
2009, order of dismissal and STAY THE DEPLOYMENT of Plaintiff Connie
Rhodes. Further, both Plaintiff and her counsel were denied meaningful
access to the Courts by the very fact that this Court entered its
September 16, 2009, ruling without reference to any of the key issues
actually raised in Plaintiff’s Complaint or TRO. The fact that the
Court’s 14 page order does not address any actual statements in
Plaintiff’s complaint by page or paragraph number, or any page citation
to her TRO, suggests to a reasonable and objective mind that the Court
either did not read these documents or was summarily instructed by that
same illegitimate “chain of command” alleged above not to address at
least the three key questions asserted in
Plaintiff’s complaint including (1) a U.S. ARMY OFFICER’S OATH TO UPHOLD
THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, (2)
the historical importance of an independent army corps to the
constitutional balance of powers and Republican Form of Government
guaranteed by the Constitution, and (3) the
Ninth Amendment reservation of rights in the people to question the
legitimacy and eligibility of their elected officials when questions
arise from time-to-time which were not contemplated by the Founding
Fathers.
The Court’s failure to address these three key issues again, standing
alone, is suggestive that the executive branch is exercising control
over the Court’s decision-making process, and is a sufficient ground, by
itself, to justify this Court’s grant of an EMERGENCY STAY OF DEPLOYMENT
for at least TEN DAYS until Plaintiff’s Counsel can exercise Plaintiff’s
rights under Local Rule 7.6 of the United States District Court for the
Middle District of Georgia to file her Motion for Reconsideration and
Motion to Amend or Alter Judgment a because it is “absolutely necessary”
within the meaning of Local Rule 7.6 and because the judgment entered
September 16, 2009, is manifestly unjust and incorrect within the
meaning of jurisprudence construing Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, and will surely result in a VOID JUDGMENT for denial of
due process within the meaning of Rule 60(b)(4) by reason of
the Court’s unexpected wild deviation from the 20 day response period
provided by the Local Rules of this very Middle District of Georgia.
It is reasonably certain that the men who framed the Constitution did
not anticipate the election of a man as a President who appears to have
prevaricated about his place of birth and then ordered his loyal
followers to ridicule all those who questioned the contradictions
inherent in his own biography, such as the obvious fact that his Father
was an (admittedly disloyal and possibly treacherous) Subject of the
British Crown when he was born, even though this fact alone would
disqualify the President as a “natural born citizen”, regardless of his
place of birth.
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for
advocating that a legally conscious, procedurally sophisticated, and
constitutionally aware army officers corps is the best protection
against the encroachment of anti-democratic, authoritarian,
neo-Fascistic or Palaeo-Communistic dictatorship in this country,
without pointing to any specific language, facts, or allegations of fact
in the Complaint or TRO as frivolous. Rule 11 demands more of the Court
than use of its provisions as a means of suppressing the First Amendment
Right to Petition regarding questions of truly historical, in fact epic
and epochal, importance in the history of this nation.
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for
failure to present facts, and yet has ignored or disregarded the facts
concerning Barack Hussein Obama's birthplace sub iudice aliena which
were submitted to the Court in the form of the 1961 Hospital Birth
Certificate submitted in the Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice
(Document 10, entered September 11, 2009) in addition the consistent but
later dated Certificate which was submitted as an Exhibit to the
Complaint and original Application for Temporary Restraining Order.
These documents are FACTS and they went unimpeached, unquestioned, and
yet utterly unaddressed in this Court’s order of summary dismissal. The
fact that the President has admitted his Father was not a citizen, but a
British Subject, at the time of birth, is an incontrovertible fact,
which supports Plaintiff’s charges that the President is an alien. The
Court’s opinion ridicules this point, along with the evidence that “the
President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud
crook,” (Document 13, Pages 7-8). But in so ruling, albeit in obiter
dicta this Court ignores some of the soundest and most carefully
researched and professionally assembled and presented evidence, collated
and substantiated by a former agent of
England’s Fabled “Scotland Yard”. By its contradictory and condescending
tone, the Court thereby denigrates its own asserted standard of
adherence to evidence as the primary arbiter of legitimacy of any
position asserted in litigation.
Plaintiff submits that the clear preponderance of the credible evidence
is that, in quite a few ways, Defendant Barack Hussein Obama has toyed
with and manipulated his identity in order to obtain the President, and
therefore won the “hard fought” Presidential Campaign of 2008 by fraud
and trickery against the American People. The Court should reconsider
the seriousness of its swift dismissal of this Plaintiff’s claims.
Plaintiff submits that to advocate a breach of constitutional oaths to
uphold the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is in
fact a very practical form of “adhering” to those enemies, foreign and
domestic, and thus is tantamount to treason, as Defined in Article III,
Section 3, even when pronounced in Court. The People of the United
States deserve better service and loyalty from the most powerful, and
only life-tenured, officers of their government.
The Court’s failure to address the facts which this Plaintiff has
offered into evidence constitutes a Third Set of Independent grounds for
vacating the September 16, 2009 Order of Dismissal and Entry of Judgment
in Defendants’ favor, and of granting this Plaintiff at least a ten day
Emergency Stay of Deployment Pending Motions for
Rehearing Pursuant to Local Rule 7.6 and to Amend and/or Alter Judgment
Pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Finally, Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes submits that the Court has
misunderstood that she has no objection to obeying the de facto
Commander-in-Chief’s orders via chain of command within the United
States. Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes clarifies that she objects to
every order entered under the authority of this illegitimate regime.
Plaintiff merely clarifies that she believes herself to be at risk of
international prosecution for war crimes absent protection of the Geneva
Convention if she follows this particular Commander-in-Chief’s wartime
policy abroad. The situation in Iraq may indeed be much the same as it
was a year ago under a different President and Commander-in-Chief, but
the international status of that President as Commander-in-Chief may be
radically different owing to the frauds, which led to his election victory.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes asks and requests this Court
retract and vacate its sarcastic and biting dismissal of September 16,
2009, and grant her EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR STAY OF DEPLOYMENT PENDING
MOTIONS FOR REHEARING PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7.6 and to AMEND OR ALTER
JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RULE 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiff asks this Court to take Judicial Notice of the “Fact” that
both Local Rule 7.6 and Rule 59(e) allow ten business days from the
entry of an order to be reconsidered, or for
which amendment or alteration is sought. Accordingly, absent judicial
warning to the contrary, for good and just cause, Plaintiff expects that
she should have ten Court
business days, which is to say until September 30, 2009, to file her
Motions for Reconsideration and to Amend or Alter Judgment, although it
would be just and right and therefore authorized by law for the Court to
vacate its own judgment of dismissal immediately and simultaneously
grant this Plaintiff’s Emergency Request for Stay of Deployment.
Respectfully submitted,
THURSDAY September 17, 2009
By:_________________________
Orly Taitz, DDS, Esq.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Soldier ordered not to challenge Obama's eligibility?
Army doctor claims she was barred from answering judge's call to court
Posted: September 14, 2009
9:23 pm Eastern
By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Military litigation team attending emergency hearing
Capt. Connie Rhodes, who claimed her superiors had prevented her from attending her previous, emergency court hearing, finally stood before a judge today to question the constitutional eligibility of her commander in chief.
Rhodes, a medical doctor and Army officer, filed suit in U.S. District Court in Columbus, Ga., earlier this month, requesting a restraining order preventing her deployment overseas on the basis that the top of the chain of command, President Barack Obama, has not demonstrated himself to be a natural born citizen under the U.S. Constitution.
Full article ...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109845
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr8AXCcy4YM
Posted: September 14, 2009
9:23 pm Eastern
By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Military litigation team attending emergency hearing
Capt. Connie Rhodes, who claimed her superiors had prevented her from attending her previous, emergency court hearing, finally stood before a judge today to question the constitutional eligibility of her commander in chief.
Rhodes, a medical doctor and Army officer, filed suit in U.S. District Court in Columbus, Ga., earlier this month, requesting a restraining order preventing her deployment overseas on the basis that the top of the chain of command, President Barack Obama, has not demonstrated himself to be a natural born citizen under the U.S. Constitution.
Full article ...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109845
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr8AXCcy4YM
Judge questions Orly Taitz claims to have Obama birth certificate in hearing where Army officer fights deployment
During a hearing in U.S. District Court Monday, an attorney for an Army officer fighting deployment to Iraq questioned Barack Obama’s legal right to serve as president, asserting he was born in Kenya, not Hawaii.
Judge Clay Land, inquisitive throughout the 90-minute hearing, said he will issue a decision on Capt. Connie Rhodes’ request for a temporary restraining order by noon Wednesday 9/19/09.
Rhodes was represented by Orly Taitz, a California lawyer and a national figure in the “birther” movement that claims Obama does not meet the qualifications to be president.
Full article ...
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/839473.html
Judge Clay Land, inquisitive throughout the 90-minute hearing, said he will issue a decision on Capt. Connie Rhodes’ request for a temporary restraining order by noon Wednesday 9/19/09.
Rhodes was represented by Orly Taitz, a California lawyer and a national figure in the “birther” movement that claims Obama does not meet the qualifications to be president.
Full article ...
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/839473.html
Government asks judge to dismiss complaint
A motion filed Friday by the government in the case of Capt. Connie Rhodes, who seeks to avoid deployment by challenging the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency, asks a federal judge to dismiss the complaint.
Rhodes, who filed her complaint Sept. 4 in the Columbus Division of U.S. District Court, is represented by attorney Orly Taitz — a national figure in the “birther” movement. Both are expected to appear at a noon hearing today before Judge Clay Land, who postponed a hearing on the complaint Friday because he said he wanted to hear from Rhodes, who wasn’t present.
In her complaint, Rhodes argues that some facts point to Obama not being naturalized or possibly an illegal immigrant.
“This plaintiff cannot in good conscience obey orders originating from a chain of command from this merely de facto president,” Rhodes’ complaint states. “This plaintiff cannot be lawfully compelled to obey this de facto president’s orders.”
Full article ...
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/838731.html
Rhodes, who filed her complaint Sept. 4 in the Columbus Division of U.S. District Court, is represented by attorney Orly Taitz — a national figure in the “birther” movement. Both are expected to appear at a noon hearing today before Judge Clay Land, who postponed a hearing on the complaint Friday because he said he wanted to hear from Rhodes, who wasn’t present.
In her complaint, Rhodes argues that some facts point to Obama not being naturalized or possibly an illegal immigrant.
“This plaintiff cannot in good conscience obey orders originating from a chain of command from this merely de facto president,” Rhodes’ complaint states. “This plaintiff cannot be lawfully compelled to obey this de facto president’s orders.”
Full article ...
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/838731.html
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Ture Conspiracy: What prior knowledge did Pelosi have about BHO?
Online images for certification of nomination raise questions
Posted: September 11, 2009
8:01 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A commentator at Canada Free Press says he has obtained copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Barack Obama as their nominee for president in 2008 that suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew there was an unresolved issue with his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution.
Writer JB Williams describes himself as a "no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy." And he say's he's gotten possession of copies of the documents in question.
The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."
Document #1
Document #2
Document #3
Full article at: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109363
If you prefer, please comment here.
Posted: September 11, 2009
8:01 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A commentator at Canada Free Press says he has obtained copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Barack Obama as their nominee for president in 2008 that suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew there was an unresolved issue with his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution.
Writer JB Williams describes himself as a "no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy." And he say's he's gotten possession of copies of the documents in question.
The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."
Document #1
Document #2
Document #3
Full article at: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109363
If you prefer, please comment here.
Friday, September 11, 2009
Judge postpones birther hearing until Monday
http://www.youtube.com/user/InspectorSmith
Comments
mocorrupt (51 minutes ago)
Judge postpones birther hearing until Monday 9/14/09 at the Federal Court House in Columbus, GA.
Capt Rhodes was in KS. The judge wants to ask her questions. The Army rep. said she will be there on Monday.
Comments
mocorrupt (51 minutes ago)
Judge postpones birther hearing until Monday 9/14/09 at the Federal Court House in Columbus, GA.
Capt Rhodes was in KS. The judge wants to ask her questions. The Army rep. said she will be there on Monday.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Federal Judge rules police cannot detain people for openly carrying guns
Just respect the Constitution - its that simple!
On September 8, 2009, United States District Judge Bruce D. Black of the United States District Court for New Mexico entered summary judgment in a civil case for damages against Alamogordo, NM police officers. The Judge's straight shootin' message to police: Leave open carriers alone unless you have "reason to believe that a crime [is] afoot."
The facts of the case are pretty simple. Matthew St. John entered an Alamogordo movie theater as a paying customer and sat down to enjoy the movie. He was openly carrying a holstered handgun, conduct which is legal in 42 states, and requires no license in New Mexico and twenty-five other states. Learn more here.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d9-Federal-judge-rules-police-cannot-detain-people-for-openly-carrying-guns?cid=exrss-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner
On September 8, 2009, United States District Judge Bruce D. Black of the United States District Court for New Mexico entered summary judgment in a civil case for damages against Alamogordo, NM police officers. The Judge's straight shootin' message to police: Leave open carriers alone unless you have "reason to believe that a crime [is] afoot."
The facts of the case are pretty simple. Matthew St. John entered an Alamogordo movie theater as a paying customer and sat down to enjoy the movie. He was openly carrying a holstered handgun, conduct which is legal in 42 states, and requires no license in New Mexico and twenty-five other states. Learn more here.
http://www.examiner.com/x-2782-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m9d9-Federal-judge-rules-police-cannot-detain-people-for-openly-carrying-guns?cid=exrss-DC-Gun-Rights-Examiner
Hillary fed up?
Hillary Clinton is said to be frustrated with her lack of authority as secretary of state and resentful of the glacial pace of the White House vetting process. "
President Obama's picks fly in even if they didn't pay their taxes. But her picks take forever," noted one Democrat. "Plus, she has no real clout over Holbrooke or Mitchell."
Richard Holbrookeis Obama's "special representative" for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
George Mitchell is "special envoy" to the Middle East. Clinton is said to be considering quitting to retake her old US Senate seat now held by Kristin Gillibrand-- or running for governor, as one rumor has it. "Her argument will be that Gillibrand is in danger of losing the seat to the Republicans," said a source. But Gillibrand won't voluntarily step aside, unlike Rep.
Nita Lowey, whom Clinton nudged out of the race in 2000. "You couldn't blow Gillibrand out of that seat with dynamite," said our source. Clinton's rep did not get back to us by deadline.
Hillary Clinton is said to be frustrated with her lack of authority as secretary of state and resentful of the glacial pace of the White House vetting process. "President Obama's picks fly in even if they didn't pay their taxes. But her picks take forever," noted one Democrat. "Plus, she has no real clout over Holbrooke or Mitchell." Richard Holbrooke is Obama's "special representative" for Afghanistan and Pakistan. George Mitchell is "special envoy" to the Middle East. Clinton is said to be considering quitting to retake her old US Senate seat now held by Kristin Gillibrand -- or running for governor, as one rumor has it ...
http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/hillary_fed_up_QIZlU17EoXQvXht1Y2Cg2O
President Obama's picks fly in even if they didn't pay their taxes. But her picks take forever," noted one Democrat. "Plus, she has no real clout over Holbrooke or Mitchell."
Richard Holbrookeis Obama's "special representative" for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
George Mitchell is "special envoy" to the Middle East. Clinton is said to be considering quitting to retake her old US Senate seat now held by Kristin Gillibrand-- or running for governor, as one rumor has it. "Her argument will be that Gillibrand is in danger of losing the seat to the Republicans," said a source. But Gillibrand won't voluntarily step aside, unlike Rep.
Nita Lowey, whom Clinton nudged out of the race in 2000. "You couldn't blow Gillibrand out of that seat with dynamite," said our source. Clinton's rep did not get back to us by deadline.
Hillary Clinton is said to be frustrated with her lack of authority as secretary of state and resentful of the glacial pace of the White House vetting process. "President Obama's picks fly in even if they didn't pay their taxes. But her picks take forever," noted one Democrat. "Plus, she has no real clout over Holbrooke or Mitchell." Richard Holbrooke is Obama's "special representative" for Afghanistan and Pakistan. George Mitchell is "special envoy" to the Middle East. Clinton is said to be considering quitting to retake her old US Senate seat now held by Kristin Gillibrand -- or running for governor, as one rumor has it ...
http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/hillary_fed_up_QIZlU17EoXQvXht1Y2Cg2O
BREAKING!!! Judge Carter is Granting us Expedited Discovery - Immediately !!!!
If you know anyone near Columbus, GA, please forward this to them!
From: Neil Turner
To: 'Jeff Schwilk'
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:18 PM
Subject: Judge Carter is 'giving her expedited discovery - immediately';
Jeff;
I just talked to Orly:
She has 2 good news items that she is very busy with right now:
1. Judge Carter is ‘giving her expedited discovery - immediately’.
2. Judge Land will allow her to present before the court in GA. She is leaving now to fly to GA to appear before Judge Land at the Federal Building in Columbus, GA at 2:00 pm tomorrow (Friday, 9/11/09).
She would like as many military supporters to be there as possible. I called Carl Swensson (RiseUpForAmerica.com), and he will see what he can do. If you have any contacts there, please advise them.
Neil
From: Neil Turner
To: 'Jeff Schwilk'
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:18 PM
Subject: Judge Carter is 'giving her expedited discovery - immediately';
Jeff;
I just talked to Orly:
She has 2 good news items that she is very busy with right now:
1. Judge Carter is ‘giving her expedited discovery - immediately’.
2. Judge Land will allow her to present before the court in GA. She is leaving now to fly to GA to appear before Judge Land at the Federal Building in Columbus, GA at 2:00 pm tomorrow (Friday, 9/11/09).
She would like as many military supporters to be there as possible. I called Carl Swensson (RiseUpForAmerica.com), and he will see what he can do. If you have any contacts there, please advise them.
Neil
Media Reporting on Obama Eligibility Court Case !
Federal judge allows Obama eligibility case to go forward
By Linda Bentley | September 9, 2009
SANTA ANA, Calif. – On Sept. 8, U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter ordered a scheduling conference for Oct. 5, 2009, allowing the Obama eligibility case filed by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. on behalf Captain Pamela Barnett, Alan Keyes and others to proceed.
Carter wrote, “The responsibility for the progress of litigation in the federal courts falls not only upon attorneys in the action, but upon the court as well. Accordingly, the court issues this order.”
Taitz filed a declaration of Lucas Daniel Smith with an exhibit on Friday.
Smith, a 29-year-old American citizen from Iowa, signed an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, stating he “traveled to Kenya and Mombasa, in particular, with the intent to obtain the original ...
Also see:
Please donate >> Many of you have asked how you can contribute to this important case. Donation information can be found on this website:
www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1 (paypal or mail a check). Direct PayPal link:
By Linda Bentley | September 9, 2009
SANTA ANA, Calif. – On Sept. 8, U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter ordered a scheduling conference for Oct. 5, 2009, allowing the Obama eligibility case filed by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. on behalf Captain Pamela Barnett, Alan Keyes and others to proceed.
Carter wrote, “The responsibility for the progress of litigation in the federal courts falls not only upon attorneys in the action, but upon the court as well. Accordingly, the court issues this order.”
Taitz filed a declaration of Lucas Daniel Smith with an exhibit on Friday.
Smith, a 29-year-old American citizen from Iowa, signed an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, stating he “traveled to Kenya and Mombasa, in particular, with the intent to obtain the original ...
Also see:
Please donate >> Many of you have asked how you can contribute to this important case. Donation information can be found on this website:
www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1 (paypal or mail a check). Direct PayPal link:
Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
BORN IN THE USA?
Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for challenge to Obama
Posted: September 08, 2009
4:42 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Is this the footprint of baby Barack Obama?
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice ...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109242
Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for challenge to Obama
Posted: September 08, 2009
4:42 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Is this the footprint of baby Barack Obama?
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice ...
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109242
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Impose federal mandated standards on every state
Michelle C
September 5, 2009 7:34PM EST
Now that the Federal judge has refused any delay in implementation of mandatory E-Verification system for all government contractors. It is time to impose federal mandated standards on every state and local government as well, not to forget every business nationwide. But not on a voluntary basis anymore? For once the open border, globalists lawsuits have been finally opposed by the courts. But we cannot, must not allow them to gain the advantage again, as they have in the past. We must in addition fight against any path to citizenship. It will be a running battle against special interest groups contrary to unemployed citizens and legal residents. In 1986 the immigration control and reform act became law, but was undermined, mismanaged and severely under funded. What we had was an important piece of legislation that was disregarded and used fraudulently.
GOOGLE--NUMBERSUSA & JUDICIAL WATCH FOR MORE DETAILS.
Instead of moving towards another controversial new immigration reform law, the legislators can author amendments to the Simpson/Mazzoli bill? First and foremost it requires no more Amnesties? Next! Follow the example of Australia's and now the United Kingdom's strong opposition to mass immigration. Overwhelmed by slack laws, Britain and Australia have addressed the massive problem, by allowing only the well educated, tradesman and professional people into each nation. Unlike ourselves the
US politicians have catered to big business—IN CORPORATE WELFARE--and covertly removed any serious enforcement at the borders or ports of entry. Years of intentional apathy and self indulgence has allowed the tolerant invasion of destitute foreign workers and families, costing taxpayers trillions of dollars in welfare benefits. The Border States specifically have succumbed to millions of illegal occupiers who have drained government treasuries.
A public option in health care can never be, while taxpayers are forever opening their wallets to supporting the poor of other lands? We cannot afford to subsidize foreign workers anymore? The bill has no restriction in the wording to authenticate a persons legal status. Personally, I want a single payer system to stop the profiteering by insurance companies, but I don't want to be taxed for underwriting illegal immigrants and their families? Even if they add an amendment declining illegal immigrants from the health care bill, they will still be included if the Democrats enact another path to citizenship?
Then what about the others on the opposite side of our weak fence, they will hear the Amnesty bell chiming and rush for the border, or enter as tourists in an airport.
Allowing people into America as guest workers to work in agriculture became a parody. Given amnesty in 1986 they moved away from the fields and moved to higher paying jobs bring in their immediate family members. In 1986 the 3.5 million legalized people fraudulently materialized to be 5 million.
Today under labor laws the guest workers who enter under special visas, are
supposed to return to their country of origin? This of course never happens and therefore hundreds of thousands disappear into America and then farmers must import more to pick fruits and vegetables. Mandatory E-Verify, to control illegal immigration on a nationwide grand scale would drive foreign aliens from the workplace, when they are identified.
The career politician’s who cheat taxpayers by prostituting their services to big business, must not stay in Washington to defy public voices ever again. A POSSIBLE REWARD FOR REPORTING SUSPECTED EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS, CALL THE IRS HOTLINE 1-800-829-0433 GOOGLE their website! The IRS does not take kindly to employers that seek to evade taxes by paying cash for day labor as this is especially common practice at construction sites.
Call up the politicians you voted for at 202-224-3121 and tell them NO MORE AMNESTIES!. YES TO A PERMANENT E-VERIFY! BUILD THE ORIGINAL TWO-TIER FENCE! ENFORCE THE 1986 (IRCA) IMMIGRATION LAW THAT'S ON THE BOOKS. DON'T OVERPOPULATE
AMERICA!
Copy, Paste and distribute freely
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/08/31/daily91.html
September 5, 2009 7:34PM EST
Now that the Federal judge has refused any delay in implementation of mandatory E-Verification system for all government contractors. It is time to impose federal mandated standards on every state and local government as well, not to forget every business nationwide. But not on a voluntary basis anymore? For once the open border, globalists lawsuits have been finally opposed by the courts. But we cannot, must not allow them to gain the advantage again, as they have in the past. We must in addition fight against any path to citizenship. It will be a running battle against special interest groups contrary to unemployed citizens and legal residents. In 1986 the immigration control and reform act became law, but was undermined, mismanaged and severely under funded. What we had was an important piece of legislation that was disregarded and used fraudulently.
GOOGLE--NUMBERSUSA & JUDICIAL WATCH FOR MORE DETAILS.
Instead of moving towards another controversial new immigration reform law, the legislators can author amendments to the Simpson/Mazzoli bill? First and foremost it requires no more Amnesties? Next! Follow the example of Australia's and now the United Kingdom's strong opposition to mass immigration. Overwhelmed by slack laws, Britain and Australia have addressed the massive problem, by allowing only the well educated, tradesman and professional people into each nation. Unlike ourselves the
US politicians have catered to big business—IN CORPORATE WELFARE--and covertly removed any serious enforcement at the borders or ports of entry. Years of intentional apathy and self indulgence has allowed the tolerant invasion of destitute foreign workers and families, costing taxpayers trillions of dollars in welfare benefits. The Border States specifically have succumbed to millions of illegal occupiers who have drained government treasuries.
A public option in health care can never be, while taxpayers are forever opening their wallets to supporting the poor of other lands? We cannot afford to subsidize foreign workers anymore? The bill has no restriction in the wording to authenticate a persons legal status. Personally, I want a single payer system to stop the profiteering by insurance companies, but I don't want to be taxed for underwriting illegal immigrants and their families? Even if they add an amendment declining illegal immigrants from the health care bill, they will still be included if the Democrats enact another path to citizenship?
Then what about the others on the opposite side of our weak fence, they will hear the Amnesty bell chiming and rush for the border, or enter as tourists in an airport.
Allowing people into America as guest workers to work in agriculture became a parody. Given amnesty in 1986 they moved away from the fields and moved to higher paying jobs bring in their immediate family members. In 1986 the 3.5 million legalized people fraudulently materialized to be 5 million.
Today under labor laws the guest workers who enter under special visas, are
supposed to return to their country of origin? This of course never happens and therefore hundreds of thousands disappear into America and then farmers must import more to pick fruits and vegetables. Mandatory E-Verify, to control illegal immigration on a nationwide grand scale would drive foreign aliens from the workplace, when they are identified.
The career politician’s who cheat taxpayers by prostituting their services to big business, must not stay in Washington to defy public voices ever again. A POSSIBLE REWARD FOR REPORTING SUSPECTED EMPLOYERS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS, CALL THE IRS HOTLINE 1-800-829-0433 GOOGLE their website! The IRS does not take kindly to employers that seek to evade taxes by paying cash for day labor as this is especially common practice at construction sites.
Call up the politicians you voted for at 202-224-3121 and tell them NO MORE AMNESTIES!. YES TO A PERMANENT E-VERIFY! BUILD THE ORIGINAL TWO-TIER FENCE! ENFORCE THE 1986 (IRCA) IMMIGRATION LAW THAT'S ON THE BOOKS. DON'T OVERPOPULATE
AMERICA!
Copy, Paste and distribute freely
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/08/31/daily91.html
Arpaio’s dislike of Goddard propels look at governor run
Phoenix Business Journal - by Mike Sunnucks
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s interest in a 2010 run for governor is fueled in part by his rivalry with Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, according to sources who asked not to be identified.
Goddard is expected to be the Democratic nominee for governor next year.
The AG is investigating the Sheriff’s Command Association for possible state election law violations. SCA’s contributors include some real estate developers and business executives and is headed by Joel Fox, a Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office captain. Fox denies wrongdoing and Arpaio stresses SCA had no direct connection to his campaign.
More ...
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/08/31/daily91.html
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s interest in a 2010 run for governor is fueled in part by his rivalry with Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, according to sources who asked not to be identified.
Goddard is expected to be the Democratic nominee for governor next year.
The AG is investigating the Sheriff’s Command Association for possible state election law violations. SCA’s contributors include some real estate developers and business executives and is headed by Joel Fox, a Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office captain. Fox denies wrongdoing and Arpaio stresses SCA had no direct connection to his campaign.
More ...
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/08/31/daily91.html
TUE AM 0730AM SANTA ANA FEDERAL COURT PRIORITY
9-8-09 TUE 0730AM SANTA ANA CA FEDERAL COURT Rm 1-053
Judge David O. Carter OBAMA ELIGILIBILITY
NOTICE OF HEARING on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 (8:00 am PST)
RE: OBAMA/SOETORO ELIGILIBILITY-DISCOVERY
(NOTE: A Fox News producer has stated that they feel that this hearing is important and newsworthy,
and that they will be in the courtroom. Please attend if you can.)
As reported by: Orly Taitz, August 31, 2009
Judge: David O. Carter
Time/Date: 8:00 AM Pacific - Tuesday, September 8th 2009
Location: Federal Court building in Santa Ana, CA
Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse
US District Court
411 W 4th St # 1-053, Santa Ana, CA - (714) 338-4751
David O. Carter, Rm 1-053 Santa Ana
Google Map location:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&source=hp&q=us%20district%20court%20411%20w%204th%20santa%20ana&rlz=1W1GGLD_en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl (Marker ‘A’ on the Google map)
Hearing: Motion for expedited DISCOVERY of records relative to eligibility of Obama/Soetoro for POTUS and CINC.
Notify your Congress-members (State & Federal), Governors, A/G’s, all news media, and anyone that you believe would be interested in knowing about or attending this hearing. This is a matter of critical importance to our being able to maintain our Constitutional Republic.
The Constitution and its requirements for eligibility for POTUS and CINC must be upheld .. no one should get a free pass .. no one is above the Law of the Land – The Constitution of the United States of America.
If motion is granted, a Court-order would be issued demanding some or all pertinent records (birth certificate, passports, school records, college records and papers, travel records, citizenship records, etc.) relative to establishing eligibility as a ‘Natural-Born’ U.S. Citizen to be a bona fide President and Commander in Chief.
OPEN to the PUBLIC
(Please attend if you can)
Judge David O. Carter OBAMA ELIGILIBILITY
NOTICE OF HEARING on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 (8:00 am PST)
RE: OBAMA/SOETORO ELIGILIBILITY-DISCOVERY
(NOTE: A Fox News producer has stated that they feel that this hearing is important and newsworthy,
and that they will be in the courtroom. Please attend if you can.)
As reported by: Orly Taitz, August 31, 2009
Judge: David O. Carter
Time/Date: 8:00 AM Pacific - Tuesday, September 8th 2009
Location: Federal Court building in Santa Ana, CA
Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse
US District Court
411 W 4th St # 1-053, Santa Ana, CA - (714) 338-4751
David O. Carter, Rm 1-053 Santa Ana
Google Map location:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&source=hp&q=us%20district%20court%20411%20w%204th%20santa%20ana&rlz=1W1GGLD_en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl (Marker ‘A’ on the Google map)
Hearing: Motion for expedited DISCOVERY of records relative to eligibility of Obama/Soetoro for POTUS and CINC.
Notify your Congress-members (State & Federal), Governors, A/G’s, all news media, and anyone that you believe would be interested in knowing about or attending this hearing. This is a matter of critical importance to our being able to maintain our Constitutional Republic.
The Constitution and its requirements for eligibility for POTUS and CINC must be upheld .. no one should get a free pass .. no one is above the Law of the Land – The Constitution of the United States of America.
If motion is granted, a Court-order would be issued demanding some or all pertinent records (birth certificate, passports, school records, college records and papers, travel records, citizenship records, etc.) relative to establishing eligibility as a ‘Natural-Born’ U.S. Citizen to be a bona fide President and Commander in Chief.
OPEN to the PUBLIC
(Please attend if you can)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
