bctzwy

This has been the most entertaining, (though frivolous court case) brief I have ever read. I doubt the lawyers who brought this case to court could withstand the same scrutiny for their own proof of birth to be US citizens as our current President has. They have wasted quite a bit of taxpayer money on this. I hope this ends this issue in our court systems.

bctzwy

This has been the most entertaining, (though frivolous court case) brief I have ever read. I doubt the lawyers who brought this case to court could withstand the same scrutiny for their own proof of birth to be US citizens as our current President has. They have wasted quite a bit of taxpayer money on this. I hope this ends this issue in our court systems.

paraleaglenm

J. Carter determined jurisdiction over constitutional law, or statutory law. He chose no jurisdiction, however . . . . . . In the matter of eligibility and standing, both are rooted in constitutional law. Article II requires a Natural Born Citizen, or Citizen, at the time of Adoption of this Constitution. The birth certificate, or incidents of case law mentioning 'natural born citizen,' do

monback

Who can allege their interests were harmed? Who has a private interest? Who can assert their own claim to the office occupied by the incumbent defendent? Who can set forth the facts and is considered a 342200234real party342200235 in interest in bringing action for quo warranto? SARAH PALIN She is an individual that is the real party in interest in bringing action for quo warranto. Sara Palin could file a compl

JNagarya

"This lawsuit was never about military personnel avoiding deployment to a war zone!" Then why was that the claim made to the court by Taitz and her client -- which client wass making exactly that claim: that she could not be deployed in accordance with an illegal order? Because, of course, you have even less clue about the requirements of court rules than does Orly Taitz. "It has always been about Obama's ineligibility to serve as President of the United States and to issue orders as Commander-in-Chief," Which hasn't been proven, therefore is not the truth. That's why the effort to "discover" YET ANOTHER copy of his birth certificate. ". . . potentially placing hundreds and thousands of lives in harms way." Here's a reminder: 1. The US troops in Afghanistan were put into that harm's way by G. W. BUSH. Di you rant and rave about it then? No: you ranted and raved in defense of everything he said and did. 2. Bush, et al., LIED the US into ILLEGALLY invading and occupying non-threatening sovereign nation Iraq, and in so doing not only put US troops in harm's way but got thousands of them KILLED. Were you ranting and and raving in "concern" for the lives of US troops then? No, you were not; you were ranting and raving in defense of everything Bush said and did.

JNagarya

"CHRISNJ" -- "1. Plaintiffs are only asking the court to allow discovery which will reveal the truth - whether Obama is a constitution article 2 natural born citizen eligible to be POTUS." I'll try to make this real simple for you: In order to run for public office, one must prove, in accordance with long-existing Elections Law, IN ADVANCE, that one is -- 1. A citizen of the US. 2. Old enough to hold the office. That means Barak Obama satisfied the requirments of the law when he ran for the Senate -- both born in the US, and old enough. He had to do the same thing when he decided to run for President. And again he satisfied the requirements of the law, beginning with the Constitution. Last but not least on the point: the REPUBLICAN governor of Hawaii VERIFIED that Barak Obama was born in Hawaii. So you're certin on this point: Hawaii is a state within the US. "Congress will remove Obama when he is found to be ineligible!" That is "conclusive"; and there is no evidence to support that conclusion -- which is why, of course, all the BS nonsense effort to obtain copy of his brith certificate -- which obtaining of copies has already been done again and again and again. "Not the court! What a lame excuse for a judge!" The judge has an actual education in actual law. You do not. That must mean you know more about law than the judge. One last thing: produce YOUR "long form" birth certificate and with that PROVE you're a citizen of the US. And if you DON'T do that, then get the hell out of the US, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT!

trog69

Thank you for providing this, Georgetown JD.

martfic

Thanks for sharing. Very nice information. Steve Bill, http://www.namestatic.com

JMPEsq

"Plaintiffs are only asking the court to allow discovery which will reveal the truth" Why should the court order discovery to reveal "the truth" when the answer is already known, and has been proven to the satisfaction of the non-crazy people? The courts should not be in the business of forcing the government to accede to the requests of lunatics who push forth bizarre conspiracy theories.

ChrisNJ

Plaintiffs are not asking the court 'to intervene and overthrow' a president who was elected by "We the people"! 1. Plaintiffs are only asking the court to allow discovery which will reveal the truth - whether Obama is a constitution article 2 natural born citizen eligible to be POTUS. Congress will remove Obama when he is found to be ineligible! Not the court! What a lame excuse for a judge! 2. Votes for an ineligible candidate are null and void! The 69 million voters were deceived into voting for an ineligible candidate! So judge Carter is saying: since enough people made the mistake, the mistake doesn't matter? He is NOT saying whether there was mistake or no mistake made when Obama's name was placed on the ballot. He is saying: since no one caught the mistake, or everyone thought he was eligible (not true, we caught it, but no one would listen to us!), and the mistake has been made by all parties, so shall it be: the mistake does not matter! The people who made the mistake get to keep the results of their mistake, the h*** with the other millions who saw the mistake but couldn't stop/correct it due to rampant corruption at every level of government!? So the people who got money from other citizens in error from the government get to keep the money if there are 'enough' of them, whereas the people from whom the money was taken will just get a 'too bad!'? For if the government takes the money back from those who got it, there will be riots which should be avoided at all costs. The civil citizens who money was taken in error don't riot so they can just be ignored?

Sunnstarr

Just as in the O.J. Simpson case, our legal system has been used to avoid a 'perceived' violent and damaging reaction by the general population to justice being served - and so, one more cowardly judge resorts to tortured logic and avoids doing the right thing. This lawsuit was never about military personnel avoiding deployment to a war zone! It has always been about Obama's ineligibility to serve as President of the United States and to issue orders as Commander-in-Chief, potentially placing hundreds and thousands of lives in harms way. In dragging his feet about additional troops to Afghanistan, as requested by the very same General he put in charge, Obama has proven that he is more interested in giving the Muslim world a hand than winning a war for the very American citizens that elected him. Judge David O. Carter has just missed his place in history as a patriot, and instead joined the ranks of cowardly and immoral traitors to the United States Constitution. Judge Carter's lack of knowledge beyond his military and legal experience has proven to be his Achilles’ heel. He most obviously does not understand what the real dangers to our nation are. Namely, that Obama and his handlers are only interested in dismantling the Constitution and destroying the Dollar, in order to surrender American sovereignty and make way for the North American Union and a New World Order. Obama and his ilk probably believe that in this New World Order, with the backing of International Law and hate crime legislation, supported by multiple nuclear-armed Islamic groups and countries; that somehow, we are all going to reach 'détente' and live happily ever after. Maybe Judge Carter does not understand that Islam will not stop until it conquers the entire world and converts it to follow its ways, or die trying. Judge Carter definitely does not understand that there is enough evidence this very day that Obama is not only a fraud, but that all of his actions thus far betray a childish ideology and a most distinct loyalty to the Muslim world. To say that this is evidence of a 'divided loyalty' would be to give him too much credit for attempting to achieve a balance. This just simply is not the case. The truth will eventually come out. However, it may be too late to save our Republic. God help the next Judge Carter that is tested during this critical time in American history. All we need is one righteous man to stand up for the truth. God save America.