Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Edwin Vieira - In the Shadow of Nemesis

Edwin Vieira - In the Shadow of Nemesis

Ratings: (0)|Views: 30|Likes:
Published by Juan del Sur
As this commentary is being written, the latest runaround in the judicial flim-flam of “who lacks ‘standing’ to demand production of Barack Obama’s original Hawaiian birth certificate (if one actually exists)” has just taken place. According to a newspaper report, Hawaiian Judge Bert Ayabe has dismissed a suit filed by one Andy Martin, on the ground that Martin “does not have a direct and tangible interest in the vital statistic records being sought, namely the birth certificate of President Obama.”

Perhaps one may gauge the circumspection and even-handedness with which Ayabe approached the case by recalling that Barack Obama is not yet “the President of the United States,” only the ostensible “President elect” once removed (because he has been purportedly “elected” only by the voters, but not yet by the Electoral College as certified by the President of the Senate under the Twelfth Amendment). And the underlying issue in Martin’s suit is whether Obama is even constitutionally eligible to hold the Office of President. So Ayabe’s decision exhibits a rather strong undercurrent of question-begging and special pleading.
As this commentary is being written, the latest runaround in the judicial flim-flam of “who lacks ‘standing’ to demand production of Barack Obama’s original Hawaiian birth certificate (if one actually exists)” has just taken place. According to a newspaper report, Hawaiian Judge Bert Ayabe has dismissed a suit filed by one Andy Martin, on the ground that Martin “does not have a direct and tangible interest in the vital statistic records being sought, namely the birth certificate of President Obama.”

Perhaps one may gauge the circumspection and even-handedness with which Ayabe approached the case by recalling that Barack Obama is not yet “the President of the United States,” only the ostensible “President elect” once removed (because he has been purportedly “elected” only by the voters, but not yet by the Electoral College as certified by the President of the Senate under the Twelfth Amendment). And the underlying issue in Martin’s suit is whether Obama is even constitutionally eligible to hold the Office of President. So Ayabe’s decision exhibits a rather strong undercurrent of question-begging and special pleading.

More info:

Published by: Juan del Sur on Sep 25, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/24/2009

pdf

text

original

 
Edwin Vieira – In The Shadow of NemesisPage 1 of 9
IN THE SHADOW OF NEMESIS
 
By Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.December 8, 2008NewsWithViews.comhttp://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin186.htm  As this commentary is being written, the latest runaround in the judicial flim-flam of “wholacks ‘standing’ to demand production of Barack Obama’s
original
Hawaiian birth certificate(if one actually exists)” has just taken place. According to a newspaper report, HawaiianJudge Bert Ayabe has dismissed a suit filed by one Andy Martin, on the ground that Martin“does not have a direct and tangible interest in the vital statistic records being sought, namely the birth certificate of President Obama.”
 
Perhaps one may gauge the circumspection and even-handedness with which Ayabeapproached the case by recalling that Barack Obama is not yet “the President of the UnitedStates,” only the ostensible “President elect” once removed (because he has been purportedly “elected” only by the voters, but not yet by the Electoral College as certified by the Presidentof the Senate under the Twelfth Amendment). And the underlying issue in Martin’s suit is whether Obama is even constitutionally eligible to hold the Office of President. So Ayabe’sdecision exhibits a rather strong undercurrent of question-begging and special pleading.In a like vein, Ayabe ruled that Martin was not among the set of individuals to whomHawaiian law grants a right to inspect birth certificates. Of course, the more importantinquiry is whether the restraints
Hawaiian
law imposes
generally 
on public inspection of theState’s records must yield to an implied cause of action
under the Constitution of the UnitedStates
for any American citizen to establish whether or not
Barack Obama in particular
iseven “eligible to the Office of President” now that his status as a “natural born Citizen” has been (and is being repeatedly) challenged. [See Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and Article VI,Clause 2]
 
 Worse yet, Ayabe scored Martin for failing to prove that “irreparable harm will occur if therecords are not provided.” Perhaps neither Martin nor Ayabe has read my previous article,“Obama Must Stand Up Now or Step Down,” which outlines only some of the more obvious“irreparable harm” that must ensue if an usurper seizes control of the Presidency. But one would hope that a “judge” might have some independent familiarity with the Constitutionsufficient to lead him on his own to the correct conclusion. For, as that article shows,substantial “irreparable harm” from such usurpation can be established beyond peradventuresimply by reading the Constitution.
 
Not satisfied with this blunder, Ayabe ruled that Martin had provided “insufficient evidenceto indicate that the public interest supports” disclosure of the supposed birth certificate.“There is a reasonable belief that the public would rather preserve confidentiality of vitalhealth records,” Ayabe held. Although that “belief” might be arguably “reasonable”
in thegeneral case
(yet not very persuasive even there), it is patently, even childishly, ridiculous inthis particular case, where only the complete disclosure of the record (if such record exists)can answer the question of Obama’s eligibility, on which America’s future political stability 
 
Edwin Vieira – In The Shadow of NemesisPage 2 of 9
may rise or fall.
Can there be any public interest whatsoever in theconfidentiality of [a single] vital health recordrelating to a single individualwhen such continued “confidentiality” plausibly threatens this whole countryswell-being?!
 
So much for Martin’s lawsuit. It would be laughable if its result did not hammer anothertwisted judicial nail into America’s coffin. Martin’s suit, moreover, is not the last of its typethat will be dismissed on purported “standing” grounds, because the judge-contrived rules of “standing” applicable to this situation are sufficiently illogical, non-scientific, and even anti-intellectual—that is, contrived from question-begging and ultimately undefinable,unverifiable, and unfalsifiable legalistic mumbo jumbo—that they can rationalize whateverresult judges desire to reach, howsoever illogical, perverse, and even dangerous to thenational interest it may be. And, particularly in this situation, judges will desperately desire toescape having to take upon themselves the responsibility for the political consequences—letalone the odium whipped up by Obama’s touts in the big media—that will flow from thecourts’ declaring Obama ineligible for the Office of President. Which responsibility and vilification wily judges can craftily evade by denying that voters, electors, candidates, and various other would-be litigants have “standing” to challenge his eligibility. For then the judges can claim both that, on the one hand, they have no authority to declare Obamaineligible because no litigant has “standing” to demand such relief, and that, on the otherhand, by dismissing the cases solely on “standing” grounds they have not declared himeligible, either. Perhaps when each judge publishes these rulings, the statue of Justice holdingthe sword and scales should be replaced in his courtroom with one of Pontius Pilate washinghis hands.
 
 Although this poltroonish judicial strategy has succeeded in some areas in the past, it willprove bootless, as well as myopic, in this case. The next steps in the process of selecting aPresident are: (i) for the Electoral College to vote, and then (ii) for Congress to count those votes. The Twelfth Amendment provides (in pertinent part) as follows:
 
The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President * * * ; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President * * * and they shall make distinctlists of all persons voted for as President, * * * and of the number of votes for each, which liststhey shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed * * * to the President of the Senate;—ThePresident of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives,open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;—The person having the greatestnumber of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from thepersons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for asPresident, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President.But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from eachstate having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members fromtwo-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. * * *
 
The Amendment specifies no grounds, procedure, or standards on or by which any elector’s vote may be challenged for any cause, by either the Electors or Members of Congress. ButCongress has enacted a statute that partially addresses this matter:
 
 
Edwin Vieira – In The Shadow of NemesisPage 3 of 9
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of theelectors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o’clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of theSenate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, asthey are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to becertificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented,and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States * * * ; and said tellers, having then readthe same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted * **, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereuponannounce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declarationof the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses.
Upon such readingof any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call forobjections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall stateclearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall besigned by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote orpaper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shallthereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for itsdecision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner,submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and noelectoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified * * * from which but onereturn has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been soregularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. * * *
[Title 3,United States Code, Section 15 (emphasis added)]
 
Even if this legislation is itself a constitutional implementation of the Twelfth Amendmentunder the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18), it does not purport toprovide for, let alone guarantee, a correct result:
 
First, without an objection “signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives” no inquiry at all can go forward. Yet the mere absence of an objection—particularly without any explanation—cannot preclude the possibility that an Elector’s voteought to be the subject of an objection and may prove on examination to be objectionable.Indeed, in these times, the very absence of an objection may indicate only that “the good old boys” in Congress—Democrats certainly, and Republicans most likely, too—have “cut a deal”among themselves behind the scenes in order to suppress an investigation the inevitable andunavoidable results of which would demonstrate the utter bankruptcy, if not criminality, of the present electoral process—in that an individual possibly not “eligible to the Office of President” and his handlers may have managed to bamboozle, bribe, blackmail, or otherwisesubvert, suborn, or silence both of the “two” major political parties, the big media, thepundits, and every public official with civil or criminal jurisdiction over elections throughout both the General Government and the States.
 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->