This story has not been getting much in the way of traction in the media, but it should have.
Those who have attacked Barack Obama’s eligibility to be on the ballot finally got their day in court. Not only did they get their day in court in one state, more may be following.
All of the eligibility suits that followed Obama’s 2008 victory were dismissed. In what can only be described as a crazy rationale, the courts ruled that American citizens do not have the legal standing to bring those suits. Several courts pointed out that the proper time to bring those types of suits is before the election.
So that is exactly what has been done.
Orly Taitz, who deserves the award for the most tenacious woman in America, has repeatedly tried to get her day in court. Federal Courts have dismissed her suits and at least one Federal Judge imposed financial sanctions against her.
This time, the suit was brought in a state court in Georgia. The allegation is simple. The plaintiffs claim that Obama is not a natural born citizen and therefore ineligible to appear on the Georgia ballot.
Obama hired counsel who tried to stop the case from going forward. For a change, Obama lost every argument. Finally Obama himself was subpoenaed for the hearing.
Obama ignored the subpoena and his lawyer did not show up for the hearing.
The judge went forward with a hearing on the issue of whether Obama is eligible to be on the ballot. The Plaintiffs put on their evidence. While the judge did exclude a couple of evidentiary matters, for the most part the evidence was all admitted.
Now, we wait on the judge’s ruling.
The judge will issue a written ruling and it is hard to believe the ruling will be anything other than Obama cannot appear on Georgia’s ballot. When one party does not appear to contest the allegations, they generally do not win.
It will be hard for Obama to appeal this decision because appeals are based on the trial record and Obama’s team did not show up for the trial.
Obama’s team could try to sue in Federal Court to compel Georgia to put Obama on the ballot but it is hard to see that effort being successful either, since absent some showing of discrimination or other illegal activity, the decision to place candidates on a ballot is an issue that has always belonged to the states.
Similar lawsuits have been filed in Alabama, though at least two out of three have been dismissed.
If Obama is excluded from the ballot in Georgia, it will be amazing news, though it may not affect the election outcome. Georgia is a red state that Obama was not counting on winning.
However, once the Georgia case is decided, similar challenges should be launched in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia.
These are must win states for Obama. If he were excluded from one or more of these states, it would become almost impossible for Obama to win reelection.
Click on the link and read the article before you jump to conclusions. The link wording is somewhat misleading.
Here is another article on this topic. My hope is that this can go somewhere: From Paul Revere web-site.
Subject: Obama Blocked In 5 States From Primary Ballot
Obama Blocked From Registering For Alabama State Primary Until Eligibility Is Validated By Court.UPDATE: An Alabama Court has announced that it will hear arguments as to whether Barack Hussein Obama II is in fact eligible to appear on the State Presidential Primary Ballot.
UPDATE: GEORGIA SECRETARY OF STATEhttp://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/26/video-today-obama-on-trial-in-georgia-constitutional-eligibility-hearing-in-georgia/
DEMANDS PROOF POSITIVE!
Susan Daniels Testifies in Atlanta: Obama's Social Security Number is Fraudulent
BREAKING => Two New States Massachusetts And Obama’s Very Own Illinois Challenge Barrack’s Official Ballot Eligibility.
New Hampshire Lawmakers Require Obama To Produce Vault Long Form Birth Certificate.http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/11/affidavit-new-hampshire-cit...
And how has Congress handled this matter? Everyone has done nothing, not one challege, not one has filed for Articles of Impeachment, not one investigation. They all must be removed from office for not following their oath of office. One big cover up. America, wake up.
Ballot eligibility is 10th amendment, e.g.State, matter! Not Federal, really.
That all states were "asleep at the switch" in 2008 is regrettable. 2012 ballots are a different matter!
Please see my post directly below. This subject is covered exhaustively and thoroughly by Leo Donofrio, the NJ attorney who knows more about getting rid of Obama than anyone else in the nation. Also, people should quit tauting Rudio and Jindal, etc for VP, or Pres. later. Neither is "natural born"!!!!!
A MOVE TO IMPEACH OBAMA SHOULD NEVER BE ATTEMPTED. HE IS NOT A VALID PRESIDENT, AND TRYING TO IMPEACH HIM WOULD ONLY LEAD TO A LEGAL MORASS AND HELP HIM IMMENSELY BY CONFUSING THE ISSUE.. ONLY A VALID, SITTING PRESIDENT CAN BE IMPEACHED. AS DONOFRIO EXPLAINS ON HIS WEB SITE, AND ACTION OF "QUO WARRANTO", WHICH MUST BE BROUGHT IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT OF D.C., IS THE ONLY WAY TO INVALIDATE HIM. IT WOULD BE LIKE HE WAS NEVER THERE. EVERY LAW HE SIGNED AND EVERY APPOINTMENT HE MADE WOULD BE INVALID. HOW GREAT FOR THE COUNTRY WOULD THAT BE???
Judson, since you are an attorney, you can probably verify what I am about to say. The original case in Georgia that was tried first yesterday, was filed by a member of The Madison Forum, here in Atlanta, by the name of David Welden. I am proud to say that the case was filed right after I gave a very thorough, detailed presentation to that organization on "natural born" three months or so ago (I am including,below, a list of all of the sites I used for the basic research, plus three of the organizations who reported on the trial yesterday, one with a full recording of the proceedings). I even posted my research on this site at the time I made my presentation, or there abouts. I have been giving presentations to Tea Party groups for a couple of years now.
The first case yesterday was by David Welden. I believe he filed first (on his own and not being an attorney ), and on the basis of "natural born". After the case was accepted, a conservative foundation, by the name of the Liberty Legal Foundation, agreed to represent Mr. Welden with an attorney by the name of Van R. Irion. Taitz filed her case as a "birther" case, as I understand it (I believe she sometimes files after finding out there are other cases already pending in any given state, or district). There were three cases filed, and the other two seperated their case for Taitz's, as many people do, if they are not making the same arguments. The detail on this was on wnd.com yesterday (Taitz was representating Joseph Farah, founder and president of World Net Daily, or, wnd.com, among others).
I was unable to make the trial, but it was broadcast on the internet. Unfortunately, the quality was very poor, so I was later please to find the following information on the internet, and from sources within The Madison Forum. I was very pleased that Jeroms Corsi (lead reporter for WND and author of several books on Obama and this subject) provided this information on World Net Daily (http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/georgia-court-told-obama-slam-dunk-disqu...). A short, blow by blow, account here: http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/?p=4138#more-4138. And another here, on WesternlJournalism.com (another company originally founded by Joseph Farah) which has a full video of the proceedings: http://www.westernjournalism.com/results-obama-eligibility-hearing-...
(As a side note, I corresponded directly with Joseph Farah and his editor, David Kupelian, and Jerome Corsi - who was publishing a boor "Where's The Birth Certificate" at the time - last spring, trying to get them off the "birther" movement, and into "natural born", and asking them if they could introduce me to anyone with money that would help me get a web site off the ground. Farah was very curt, saying "you don't change a winning strategy", meaning the "birther movement"'. I didn't know about Corsi's book coming out at the time.
It is interesting that the first article touting "natural born" to the proper degree on WND was today, since Farah was backing one of the attorneys. So much for the common folk trying to deal with those in power.
The site would have emulated the power and succcess NumbersUSA.com in forcing Congress to its will on immigration. With such a site- for which I would repay any supporters from contributions later - I could force Rep. Issa and Rep. Boehner to investigate "natural born" in Congress, and thereby make it so well known, that a case of "quo Warranto" could be brought against Obama and Obama can be invalidated before the next election. I still believe it can be done. I borrowed this idea from Leo Donofrio of NJ, the most knowledgeable attorney on this subject in the country. He came out of retirement to bring the first case against Obama being taken off the ballot in NJ in '08, and the only attorney to get a case on this issue to conference of the Supreme Court twice.
I also asked the same of Roy Beck of NumbersUSA, Floyd Brown of Western Journalism, Donald Trump, Richard Viguerie of ConservativeHQ.com and several others. They all answered directly, but completely ignored the issue and my request.)
Glad I got that off my chest, as an aside.
Those experiences with people of national prestige and power, has led directly to my writing this today. For those who may be interested, now, in knowing the details behind "natural born", directly below is all the research I gathered for three and a half years on this subject. I am providing all of this information because I think it is extremely important, in order to help this case be effective, for every person possible to call their local TV stations, as well as Fox News in New York, and demand that they report it accurately. Otherwise they are going to ignore it as much as possible. I watched the news last night, both local and national, and the reporting was, in almost every case, pathetic and inaccurate, at best. Bret Beir on Fox did give a very short, accurate statement, but it was not enough to tell you what really happened. I believe that if all of us ask all of our friends to do the same, we can be effective in forcing the stations to report accurately. That is why I have included my research, so that all of you can be very well versed in all of the issues, history, and Supreme Court casee that affirm the defintion of "natural born".
As an example, I called the news room of one of the network stations last night which had a pathetic mention on its early news. It was so vague and inaccurate, and such a short "blurb", that they had just as soon not mentioned it. It was clear the reporter did not even have any background in the issue. Fortunately, the lady with whom I talked, got interested after a few minutes, when I told her enough to convince her that she knew absolutely nothing about the facts of what this is all about. Consequently, I offered her my research, which she enthusiasticly accepted. I will check back with her later, to see if it accomplished anything. I did have a short conversation on the personal side, which encouraged my thinking that she willl, at least, be open minded about the subject.
So, in closing, let me urge each of you to please contact your local affiliates and offer them this information in an effort to effect what they say. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I think some will be swayed to report what the hell is going on and what can be done about it. At least, they will be informed.
Research Sites Defining "Natural Born" and It's Origin
Compiled by Richard Harper, Atlanta, GA
A to Z, compactly in one fell swoop, in chart form:
Franklin's letter to Dumas on 1775 edtion of de Vattel's book being used by the Constitutional Convention:
Thomas Jefferson. Shows he is known to have made margin notes in his personal copy of The Law of Nations:
Davis Ramsay, founder and great historian from South Carolina:
This one is the most conclusuve and convincing sites about the Founder's using deVattel's "The Laws of Nations" to determine the meaning of "natural born"
This one really lead to the one above:
Proves they used deVattel's definition, and not Blackstone's
And, another on the same subjects from the International Judicial Monitor:
This will introduce you to Canada Free Press, who does a better job about reporting on what is really going on in America than any of our own media:
Plus another article by them:
This is a good, basic discussion of the term, plus all the Supreme Court cases on the term:
This is an article plus reference listing down the side of the page by one of the attorneys who submitted one of the first cases to the Supreme Court and is still fighting that battle. Thank God we have citizens who are willing to devote this kind of time and energy for our country:
To learn why he must not be impeached under any circumstances:
To learn about “Quo Warranto” go here”
http://www.devvy.com/new_site/obama-conundrum-051111.html and here:
And last, go here to read the most professional brief written on the entire subject of getting rid of Obama by attorney Leo Donofrio of New Jersey (who came out of retirement to fight legally for our country) who filed with the Supreme Court before Obama’s inauguration to stop him from becoming President and where the “Quo Warranto” idea started:
http://devvy.net/pdf/mar09/leo_all_parts.html (Be sure to go to all links in the brief to get the entire picture. This is basic, excellent legal breifing done by a superb attorney, so be prepared that it will read that way
And last, the man (Leo Donofrio of N.J., who came out of retirement to fight this battle) who knows more about this subject than anyone in the country. On the main page, there is a calendar that has to be used to take you too all of issues he has discussed since filing the first cases before the election ('08) to take all candidates off the NJ ballot, since none were "natural born". He is the only attorney to get two cases to conference before the Supreme Court on Obama's eligibility It reads like a legal brief, since he is a superb attorney. However, it gives you more facts and reasoning than any other source available.
Case Submitted To Supreme Court for Misconduct of Clerk on original submission by Leo Donofrio in November, 2008. This is listed to show how early this issue caused "illegal" reactions in high places:
I hope Obama does not win re-election
That would give the Dems a good excuse to run Hillary. I'm not sure that would be a good thing.
Exactly what I was thinking!
If we had the House and Senate I don't think that would matter.
This is bad reasoning.