|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Point-Counterpoint WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
A special message from:
From The Desk Of Gary G. Kreep Dear Friend the Constitution, Barack Hussein Obama is not happy! When his taxpayer paid U. S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") attorneys walked into court on October 5, 2009, expecting United States Federal District Court Judge David Carter to immediately dismiss the birth certificate case, he did not get his way! Their legal arguments were hollow and unconvincing. and after hearing hours of argument, Judge Carter "took the matter under submission." He has still not issued a ruling, 14 days later! According to the DOJ Attorneys: The President is above the Law and the Courts! The DOJ attorneys told the Judge that no Court in the United States had the right to rule on whether Barack Hussein Obama was eligible to serve as President of the United States! In their view, he could only be impeached and/or disqualified from the Office of President under the 25th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. THIS IS NOT TRUE! As USJF pointed out to the Court, both in our pleadings and in our oral presentation at the hearing, both the impeachment statutes, and the 25th Amendment require a sitting President. However, if Mr. Obama is not eligible to serve as President, he could not be, and never was, a sitting President, so those options for removal could not apply. Therefore the courts would have jurisdiction. Monday, October 5, 2009, , at 8:30 a.m., in California, was a critical milestone for our entire legal and public relations effort to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate, as well as other documents, to prove whether he is eligible to serve as President of the United States. And with your support USJF was able to be there to argue the case. This case has an excellent chance to survive the Department of Justice motion to dismiss, and it has proven to be the best chance for America to have a hearing on the merits on this critical Constitutional issue. What happened that day in Court? It's very simple -- the DOJ attorneys brought up every argument that they could to try to persuade the Court to dismiss this case USJF provided sound legal arguments against all of the DOJ legal theories, and we were the only ones to do so; otherwise the whole case could have been over right then and there! The USJF oral arguments at the hearing may well be the difference between this case surviving or being dismissed. The Judge raised issues critical to our case: 1.Did U.S. Senators question the eligibility of Mr. Obama? (Only USJF was able to tell the Court that Senators Coburn and Shelby and a number of House of Representative members had done so.) 2.Were objections made by Members of Congress when the vote of the Electoral College was certified? (Only USJF was able to tell the Court that NO, then Vice-President Cheney had not performed his required duty of asking for objections, so there could have been none raised.) DOJ attorneys also argued that only Congress, and/or the Electoral College, could decide on the eligibility of Mr. Obama. Fortunately, the USJF legal team, and only the USJF legal team, filed pleadings pointing out that the DOJ legal arguments in this regard WERE WRONG! And, I was there to argue against those false claims. People at the hearing and those who have found out what happened there since have been contacting USJF, thanking us for standing up for the truth! But the fight is not over yet! We expect a ruling from the Court any day now. If we defeat the dismissal motion, then we're immediately filing pleadings ("discovery") seeking Mr. Obama's birth certificate, his college records, and much, much more. AND, we'll be seeking to depose Mr. Obama ASAP! And if the Court grants the motion to dismiss, we'll be immediately filing an appeal of the decision! Judge Carter has set a trial date of January 26, 2010 in this case. To keep that date, we need to defeat the DOJ dismissal motion, and then, IMMEDIATELY, move right into the discovery phase discussed above. BUT THAT WILL BE VERY EXPENSIVE, AS WE WILL NEED TO: Retain attorneys in Washington, D. C., to take the Obama deposition. Retain attorneys in Hawaii to take the deposition of those in control of the Obama birth records and school records. Take the deposition of Occidental, College officials to obtain Obama school records Retain attorneys in Massachusetts to take the deposition of Harvard. Law School officials to obtain Obama school records there. Pay the cost of the court reporters for all of these depositions. Plus, Pay the cost of serving the subpoenas on the various witnesses. We expect the DOJ, as well as Mr. Obama's private attorneys, to fight us every step of the way! Mr. Obama's attorneys will file motions to block the depositions in each and every state, and the District of Columbia, trying to block us from obtaining the truth at every turn ! WE WILL NEED MORE HELP TO: Question the issue of the passport files of Mr. Obama! We're going after the records of how he traveled abroad without a United States Passport in the 1980's, as he admits doing. Question the issue of his alleged adoption by his step-father in Indonesia! We'll be seeking records about that also! Resolve questions about his Selective Service files! We'll be seeking records concerning that also! But, first, we have to get past the DOJ dismissal motion! The DOJ's motion to dismiss also claims that our clients have no "standing," and that the matter is "political." But, if we as citizens of the United States have no "standing" to verify the citizenship of the man occupying the White House, who does? If our Federal Courts have no jurisdiction to hear this case, who does? It's not a "political" question, it's a CONSTITUTIONAL question! Last November, people said we were crazy to pursue this issue. Now, we've been shown to be right in our pursuit of the truth. It's not just the original birth certificate that they're refusing to release. Barack Obama's legal team has spent, according to published reports, over $1.4 million dollars so far to STOP anyone from seeing ANY of his actual identification documents, and many other documents. WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide? WHAT is he afraid of? WHY doesn't he just release these documents to prove if he is a natural-born citizen and therefore qualified serve as President -- especially his actual birth certificate? When Barack Obama officially entered the office of President, he became, in essence, apparently, a "pretender to the throne." According to the Constitution, only a "natural born citizen" can occupy the presidency. Even though he was sworn in on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama is NOT legally the President of the United States, unless he can prove that he is a "natural born citizen." What's more, every action taken by him while he occupies the White House may be invalid. If he cannot legally be President, every law passed by Congress will be null and void because the Constitution clearly requires that all laws be signed by the President... and, without a legally elected and sworn in President in office, that becomes an impossibility. This Constitutional crisis must be ended! And it must be ended NOW! And that's just what we're fighting to do. The United States Justice Foundation is spearheading a campaign to protect the United States Constitution... and your liberty. We have to press our case to stop Barack Obama from, apparently, illegally holding the Presidency, despite the ongoing threats against us. We are speaking of filing additional lawsuits and administrative actions, over and above the dozens already filed, Are you willing to see the Constitution shredded by the Left? Will you sit back and do nothing while a foreign-born person may be illegally occupying the White House as President of the United States? P.S. This is the biggest political cover-up in American history! It would be so simple to release the documents to PROVE Obama is a natural-born citizen... IF THEY HAD THE DOCUMENTS! America has never before faced such a threat. Everything we hold dear is at risk with Barack Obama sitting as President without him releasing his actual birth certificate, plus the dozens of other documents that he refuses to produce. Please remember that we are fighting in the California Appellate Court system. Barack Hussein Obama thinks he can get away with DUPING the American people and DESTROYING the U.S. Constitution. DON'T LET HIM DO IT! |
||
|
That's a joke, son. |
Can you say Kon-spear-a-cee?
Oh me oh my. Isn't there a special forum for these kinds of threads???  |
|||
|
Member |
Hah! Birthers are so much fun...
That's because most of the others have been dismissed for a complete lack of any evidence...and in the case of Orly Taitz's attempts, a complete lack of legal competence. What relevance would any of those documents have apart from the birth certificate? Natural-born has nothing to do with college records or "much, much more." The question of standing is complex, and the courts have steadily refused to allow standing to challenge government acts simply because of a plaintiff's status as a taxpayer or citizen. IANAL, but I suspect that only the members of the Electoral College might be granted standing - and it is possible, even likely, that since they completed their election and the House certified the results, the Court will find the whole question moot. The actual, legal birth certificate has been released, certified, confirmed, recertified, and reconfirmed. That archive copy the birthers are so intent upon seeing is not a valid legal document, and the Governor of Hawaii has confirmed that it matches the legal, released certificate. The calls for his college records, passports, and other irrelevant documents show that no amount of proof will satisfy the birthers - so, frankly, any further effort to appease them is pointless. Agreed. I suspect that's the reason that this court has allowed the case to proceed a bit farther. Let it go to a real decision on the merits, which will be in President Obama's favor. That still won't shut the birthers up, but it is the only thing that still has any shot of quieting them a bit. I only hope that the judge treats Kreep as well as the judge in the Georgia case is treating Taitz. He'd better keep begging for funding - he may need it to pay off the sanctions for filing frivolous suits. |
|||
|
|
That's a joke, son. |
Yes a hell of a resume: a Russian immigrant, real estate agent, lawyer and dentist....a real looker too. Hubba hubba.  |
|||
|
* |
I think it is the Constitution that mentions "due process" - - -
Wandering and Wondering |
|||
|
|
* |
And that means she should not have legal standing? How far right conservative male chauvinist of you - - All lawyers must look like this I suppose:  Wandering and Wondering |
|||
|
----------------  Proud Member ----------------  |
Gary Kreep...no irony there.
Putting aside the issue of standing--obviously, Mr. Kreep and the USJF have decided that they can overcome the continued dismissals of these cases for lack of standing by insisting that they have standing---the 'If You Don't Believe Me Just Ask Me' argument. I'm not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express this year...Here's my take on the concept of standing: "If he's not eligible, then I would suffer harm." Wrong. No harm has been proved. No standing. "I can prove he's not eligible, therefore I have suffered harm, and should be granted relief." Right approach, but he can't prove that without an assumption on the part of the court that his fishing expedition will bear fruit--or fish. He posesses no evidence--no foreign birth certificate, no smoking gun--and apparently no admissible offer of proof. He'll never get a date to punk John Roberts in front of Fat Tony and The Supremes that way... You're not sending this guy money, are you John?
Since we're tossing silly questions around: What would give a US District Court Judge the authority to compel the production of academic records from another sovereign country? How would academic records from Harvard be relevant to President Obama's eligibility to run for the Office? Now go a-way or I shall taunt you a second time! |
|||
|
|
That's a joke, son. |
She is a fricken commie. I heard she was good at teeth. |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Y.......A......W......N
 |
|||
|
 |
It's hard to believe there are still people flogging this poor dead horse. The finest minds in the world not to mention some of the richest, most powerful people in the world, many of whom would have much to gain if President Obama were found to be a pretender have accepted President Obama's credentials and admitted that the president is totally legitimate
It's time to admit that there are certain facts that are immutable. Fact 1, The world is round, not flat. Fact 2, The entire universe does not revolve around our sun. Fact 3, Barack H. Obama is the duly elected president of the United States. How come I pressed "One for English" and still can't understand a word the dude is saying? |
|||
|
* |
Just out of curiosity, why doesn't Obama reveal his birth cert to once and for all silence the birthers? The more Obama holds out, the more these whackadoos keep up with the nonsense!
JMHO, I could be wrong... |
|||
|
 "My word is my bond"  |
actually MFS the better question is why hasn't Obama been transparent like he said he'd be with many things - the certificate is one of them. I do concure with Vic however in that Hillary would have sniffed this tid-bit out if it would have gotten her anywhere. Personally though I think she's just waiting for the right moment and then she's gonna kick Obama quite hard in the nuts. Back to openness, if I recall that was a big talking point of his during the campaign... I haven't seen much tranparency to date though - and todays "secret" meeting behind closed doors on the health care bill makes one wonder what exactly this boy has up his sleeve and does not further his "most open administration in the history......" line. One Flag......One Heart......One Nation............EVERMORE |
|||
|
Member |
Um... because he did? |
|||
|
|
That's a joke, son. |
The state has already verified his birth. Even if he did as you say, they would just concoct another issue to whine about. |
|||
|
Experienced Member |
Here is the part that I find troubling - and it always gets glossed over.
Barack Obama Senior’s attendance at the University of Hawaii has been well established. He attended the University from 1959 until he graduated (Phi Beta Kappa) in June of 1962. President Obama was born in August of 1961. Obama Sr was only able to attend the University of Hawaii by way of a scholarship that paid for practically everything (however, it was a charitable contribution that paid for his airfare from Kenya to Hawaii in the first place). Neither Obama Sr. nor his family could afford a plane ticket in the middle of his schooling in Hawaii. If the story that Obama Sr. took his new wife home to Kenya for their son to be born and then returned shortly after (two round trip tickets from Hawaii to Kenya and back again). Where did he get the cash for such an extravagant airfare? Remember, this was the early 1960s when only the very, very rich could afford plane tickets (airfare, adjusted for inflation was four to five times as expensive in 1961 as it is today). Add to this the fact that there were a limited number of airlines, so less competition (there were no economy airlines). Today's cost for a SINGLE round trip ticket from Honolulu, HI to Nairobi, Kenya on American Airlines (the average of the major carriers) - $4,152 (I searched for a fare leaving Honolulu to Nairobi on November 1 and returning from Nairobi to Honolulu on November 21 using CheapTickets.com) That means, adjusting for inflation and buying two round trip tickets in 1961, the cost would have been the equivalent of somewhere between $32,000 to $40,000 in today's dollars. WHERE DID TWO STARVING COLLEGE KIDS GET THE MONEY TO HAVE AFFORDED SUCH A LUXURY IN 1961?  ... sorry, but that dog don't hunt. |
|||
|
Forums Metrics Management |
Remember that the CIC is the person to whom we most owe all of our dedication. You may criticize the person; but the Office may NOT be criticized; that is a violation of the TOS.
MODS: Look out for this one. "There are those who believe there are two types of people in the world: Those who believe there are two types of people; and those who don't." John Mahoney... |
|||
|
|
Member |
 But The_Bonesaw, is that because in "1961" the dollar was still only "$1.00" thus the cost was only "$4,152"? |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
A better question would be, why would he spend 1.4 Million to avoid answering the questions when he campaigned on transparency? |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Havent you guys learned how to play the connecting the dots game before forming conclusions based on bias and political affiliation? Remember, Dot# 1 Hilliary dropped out of the race and endorsed Obama while she still had a good shot. #2 The Clintons are very powerful people with resources foreign and domestic. #3 Philip Berg is thier personal attorney and the one who filed the suit. #4 Obama spends 1.4 million to prevent disclosure? Why? #5 She gets a high position in gov. Obama becomes President. #6 Obama is focused on health care bill that was Hilliaries pet project during Clintons administration and soundly rejected. This take priority over the war. #7 Possible back room politics????? Thats how the connect the dots game goes and produces not proof but reasonable doubt. Rather than forming conclusions based on personal bias and political affiliation. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
$4,152 was a year's average pay in 1961.  Do you really not understand inflation, or are you just trying to be "funny"?.. Because there are readers here who really can't grasp this concept. If you truly don't understand, I will be glad to explain it to you. Better still, assuming you aren't old enough to remember 1961, perhaps your mother or grandmother is. Ask your mom how much more stuff she was able to buy with a single dollar in 1961 than she is today. In 1961, a Hershey bar costs 5 cents, it costs 75 cents today. A first class postage stamp was 4 cents in 1961. Gasoline was about 31 cents a gallon. A brand new full size Chevrolet automobile retailed for $2,529 However, there was a trade-off for this since the average wage in 2008 was $41,334.97, 10 times more than it was in 1961 ($4,086.76 per year). So, although you could buy a buttload more Hershey bars and Chevrolets in 1961, you had to try and do that with a much lower income than we have today. http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/COLA/AWI.html ... So... no. A dollar in 1961 did not buy what a dollar buys today - not to mention you glossed over the point that airfare in 1961 (when adjusted to today's dollar) was up to four or five times greater in 1961 than it is today. Even assuming that somehow the cost of airfare was equivalent to what it is today, I don't know any college students, married with no jobs, living on their own (with a new baby, no less) who could afford the extravagance of even $8,000 in round trip airfare (which is what it would cost right now today). This message has been edited. Last edited by: The_Bonesaw, |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Don't forget conartist since she seems to be riding this case all the way to the bank using money from gullible birthers to make herself rich. |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
A better question is why fools continue to believe birther nonsense when the Birth Cert. has been verified MULTIPLE times? |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Using an inflation calculator...
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi I determined that a $4,152 ticket in 2008 would have cost $599.23 in 1961. However, statistical data shows that airfare was four times higher in 1961 than it is today (only the very rich could afford it). Let's just pretend that a round trip ticket was twice as much in 1961. That comes out to $1,198.46 per ticket (uh oh.. but those kids had to buy two tickets so... $2,396.92 is what they paid in 1961. Run that through the calculator again and you will find that the very least those tickets cost was $17,068.50 in today's dollars. Hell, you only need to realize that the average American wage was only $4,086 per year in 1961 to understand that the cost of those tickets was more than six months pay. And that's if I'm being more than fair that they were only twice as much as they are today; assuming they were up to four times as much, then the tickets cost more than a year's pay. http://mysite.verizon.net/vze6l53f/whatflyingwaslikeinthe1960s/ Two college kids with no jobs, newly married with a baby on the way, somehow manage to come up with between six months’ to a year's pay to buy two round trip tickets to Kenya... ... I remain incredulous.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
Before asking that one, perhaps we should first ask - DID he spend 1.4 million to avoid answering the questions? Do you have a source for that number? Because the most likely source, the WorldNetDaily, produced that number deceptively. The facts are that the law firm Perkins Cole received that much from the Obama campaign. They were also the firm defending him from these silly lawsuits. However, that's not the only service they performed for the campaign. Almost certainly not even a significant percentage of the services for which they were paid all that money. So claiming that they got $1.4 mil for hiding his birth certificate is complete fabrication. For anyone a little slow on the uptake, let's use an illustration. I spent $250 at the store yesterday. I bought a pack of pencils at the store yesterday. How much did I spend on pencils? If you said $250, you're qualified to be a birther. And I have a pack of pencils I'll let you have for half-price. |
|||
|
|
Lead Moderator, Veterans Issues Forums davem-milcom @cinci.rr.com Founding Member DVG  |
In today's money that $8,000 (I checked it with 21 day advanced purchase and it is about the same) is 4 months net pay for someone making the average income. That is a save every buck you can type of trip for the next 2 years for most people.
|
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
Nonsense is it? Then why did he spend so much to block the information that still hasnt been accepted or the case dismissed? Only a fool woul answer a question with a question If he cant answer it. Like to try again for effect this time? |
|||
|
|
New Member |
It's obvious that the Birthers can continue to ask the same question over and over and over again and that nothing, not newspaper articles announcing his birth in Hawaii, not the Governor saying he confirmed the birth certificate, not the release of the certificate by Hawaii or the fact that his family was living in Hawaii will satisfy.
The want a video from the delivery room. It's like watching the Twilight zone........... |
|||
|
|
Highly Experienced Member |
This of course this site you can verify is more credible than those that claim otherwise. More he said she said and no proof. Sounds like a replay of 9/11 he said she said claims counter claims and no proof leaving our society divided, speculating and in the hands of the power brokers. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Good point. Try this. Go back to your original source for that number - not an opinion piece, the actual story that made that claim, even if it is WorldNutDaily. Post a link, let us take a good close look at their exact wording. I'll bet that it supports what I said - linking the total spent ($1.4 mil) and the one task they care about (defending against birthers), and carefully implying that the money all went for that, without actually stating it. I'd search for it myself, but frankly wading through the WND cesspool makes my brain hurt. In any event, you're the one making the extraordinary claim - that the sitting President is unqualified for his office, despite being confirmed for the ballots by the electoral process in all 50 states, elected by the Electoral College, confirmed by the House, sworn by the Chief Justice, and with his birth certificate (excuse me - COLB, since you probably think that makes a difference) confirmed repeatedly by the governor of Hawaii. It is up to you to provide the extraordinary evidence to support your claim. This piddly claim of "he's spending money on a defense, so there must be something he's hiding" is weak and circumstantial even if proven - but since that's all you've got, you can AT LEAST support that properly. |
|||
|
Highly Experienced Member |
she isn't going to make herself rich if she keeps having to shell out STFU fines from judges. She can always supplement her lawyer income selling real estate or fixing teeth though. Good to have something to fall back on. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Point-Counterpoint WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide
