2008 Election

This is where the action is regarding President-elect Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility

2010 Election

Will the Dems lose their majorities by November 2, 2010?

Initiatives

American reform has always started from the bottom, up. Track various State-based reformation initiatives here

Money

It makes the world go around, especially DC and Wall Street

Qualifications

Who’s checking up on officeholder eligibility? Find out here

Home » Activism, Eligibility, Kerchner v. Obama, POTUS

Eligibility Update: Kerchner v. Obama Plaintiff Time Extension Granted; HR1503; NRO on Obama, Docs

Submitted by Phil on Thu, Jul 9, 200916 Comments
Eligibility Update: <i>Kerchner v. Obama</i> Plaintiff Time Extension Granted; HR1503; NRO on Obama, Docs

Mario Apuzzo, attorney for Plaintiffs in Kerchner v. Obama, reported that he had asked the Court for additional time during which to respond to the Defendant’s previously-filed Motion to Dismiss. He has now posted that the Court has granted his time extension:

The new motion day is Monday, August 3, 2009. I will file our opposition papers at least 14 days prior to the new motion day, and the defendants shall file their reply papers, if any, at least seven calendar days prior to August 3, 2009.

WorldNetDaily reports that Rep. Bill Posey’s (R-FL) HR1503 — a bill introduced in Congress that would direct the Federal Election Commission to, among other things, receive background documentation, including birth certificates, from any presidential candidate’s campaign — has recently garnered two additional cosponsors

The newest additions are Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., and Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas.

They joined Reps. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; John Campbell, R-Calif.; John R. Carter, R-Texas; John Culberson, R-Texas; Bob Goodlatte, R-Va.; and Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas, in support of Posey’s H.R. 1503 plan.

A spokesman for Blackburn said in Tennessee a 16-year-old has to document his or her birth to get a driver’s license. Her constituents, the spokesman said, were losing faith in the system because of the absence of a requirement for the president to show evidence of his or her eligibility.

Carter spokesman Brent Hall said it just seemed logical to address the issue so that the question never reappears in future elections.

A participant at a forum on a political website noted “average citizens have to have a copy of our birth certificate just to apply for a passport, but the president of the United States doesn’t have to show theirs??? This doesn’t make sense at all.”

Besides the support that is growing in the U.S. HouseSen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., [my link] says he’s in favor of both state and federal demands that future presidential candidates have a formal procedure to document their qualifications.

“The bill requires any federal candidates’ campaign committee filing with the Federal Election Commission to produce a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate,” Coburn wrote. “If the bill makes it to the Senate, I will likely support it.”

WND earlier reported when Posey talked about his idea on a radio program..

“The last election is over,” Posey said in the interview. “I don’t think that outcome is going to change. Personally, I think it’s futile to go there, but looking toward the future I think it would be reckless if we do not do everything we could to eliminate problems like that in the future. And that’s why I filed the bill.”

His comments came on the Andrea Shea King Show.

“I don’t think a Supreme Court would remove a president from office if they heard the case. But … we should make a good faith effort to make sure that things in the future are as they should be,” he said.

National Review Online’s David Kahane presents commentary on the perceived logistics behind former Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin’s resignation and, in the process, suggests that journalists ought to go after “Barry’s” birth certificate and other background documentation, if they are to be even-handed about things:

If you had any sense, you would start using our tactics against us. After all, you have a few lawyers on your side. Sue us. File frivolous ethics complaints against all our elected officials until, like Sarah, they go broke from defending themselves. (David Paterson would be a good place to start.) Challenge the constitutionality of BO2’s legion of fill-in-the-blank czars — none of whom have to be confirmed, or even pass a security check. (Come to think of it, neither did Barry.) Let slip your own journalistic dogs of war, assuming you have any, to find Barry’s birth certificate, his college transcripts, whether he applied to Occidental as a foreign student, and on which passport he traveled in 1981 to Pakistan with his friend Wahid Hamid, for starters.

You might also want to think about interviewing New York literary agent Jane Dystel, who a) contacted the totally unknown Obama in the wake of an adulatory New York Times piece in 1990 and b) got him a $125,000 advance for a memoir that c) he couldn’t write, even after a long sojourn in Bali, which d) got the contract canceled, whereupon e) Dystel got him $40,000 from another publisher, following which f) the book finally came out to glowing reviews and g) Obama fired her. Wouldn’t she have an interesting story to tell?

Of course, you won’t. You’re too nice, too enamored of history and tradition to realize that the rules have changed. Remember, I live and work in a town where, “Hello, he lied,” isn’t a joke; we men of the Left are perfectly comfortable lying, cheating, and stealing — hello, Senator Franken! — in order to attain and keep political power. Not for nothing is one of our mottos, “By Any Means Necessary.” You see, we’re the good guys, and for us the ends always justify the means. We are, literally, shameless, which is why Bill Clinton is now a multi-millionaire and Eliot Spitzer is already on the comeback trail.

In Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, “the fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.” This is the book that “Reset” Rodham (what ever happened to her?) and BHO II grew up reading and continue to live by. If you don’t understand that that’s the way we see you — as the enemy — then you’re too dumb to survive. Remember that for us politics is not just an avocation, or even just a job, but our life. We literally stay awake nights thinking up ways to screw you. And one of the ways we do that is by religiously observing Alinsky’s Rule No. 4.

Did Sarah stand for “family values”? Flay her unwed-mother daughter. Did she represent probity in a notoriously corrupt, one-family state? Spread rumors about FBI investigations. Did she speak with an upper-Midwest twang? Mock it relentlessly on Saturday Night Live. Above all, don’t let her motivate the half of the country that doesn’t want His Serene Highness to bankrupt the nation, align with banana-republic Communist dictators, unilaterally dismantle our missile defenses, and set foot in more mosques than churches since he has become president. We’ve got a suicide cult to run here.

And that’s why Sarah had to go. Whether she understood it or not, she threatened us right down to our most fundamental, meretricious, elitist, sneering, snobbish, insecure, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders bones. She was, after all, a “normal” American, the kind of person (or so I’m told) you meet in flyover country. The kind that worries first about home and hearth and believes in things like motherhood and love of country the way it is, not the way she wants to remake it.

What you clowns need, in other words, is a Rules for Radical Conservatives to explain what you’re up against and teach you how to compete before it’s too late. Luckily, since I care about money even more than I care about politics, I have just such a book in the proposal stage, currently making the rounds of various publishers, assuming any of them are wise enough to take me up on it.

And, yes, this time it really is personal.

— David Kahane is pushing for a new national holiday to commemorate the destruction of Sarah Palin, and is hopeful that his senators, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, will co-sponsor it, along with Henry Waxman in the House. You can second the motion atkahanenro@gmail.com or on Facebook.

Other updates include the following:

  • As had been originally reported via a commenter in a previous posting here, it appears that both UPI and Snopes.com have decided to change their stories regarding Mr. Obama’s birthplace (at least Snopes.com maintains both Hawaiian locations as potential birthplaces for the President);
  • WorldNetDaily similarly reports, as I have, that Hawaiian officials now accept short-form certifications for proof of citizenship for certain State programs. It is important to note that State program eligibility is mutually exclusive from presidential eligibility and that the long-form certificates are still available, especially in person.
  • TheObamaFile.com has an analysis for why FightTheSmears.com is currently offline.

See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:

-Phil

16 Comments »

  • ramjet767 says:

    HR 1503 Presidential Candidates Constitutional Eligibility Documentation Bill now has 10 Signers! It is gaining signers each week now. See the list of sponsor/co-sponsors at:
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1503

    Read some essays and research, legal, historical, and linguistic, about Article II Natural Born Citizenship at:
    http://www.thebirthers.org/

    RJ

    P.S. Help support and defend our constitutionally provided liberties:
    http://www.protectourliberty.org/

  • Civis naturaliter natus says:

    Black Lion,

    Mind your civility: it is not a sign of maturity or righteousness that you hurl ad hominems at someone who is working for purposes contrary to your political creed or legal opinions.

    As for the Military case in Georgia:

    Major Cook, a highly decorated officer, has consented to file suit accordingly, and Orly has already filed the papers with the court seeking stay and quo warrento…

    Info on her blog…

    Have a nice day

  • GeorgetownJD says:

    ” … she has a lot of lawyer friends … ”

    If she has a lot of lawyer friends, why was Orly trying to recruit ME to file cases for her in other jurisdictions?

  • Black Lion says:

    Civis naturaliter natus says:
    July 10, 2009 at 10:02 am

    “Black Lion, what has already been proven?”

    That President Obama is a US citizen by virtue of being born in the US. The only people that think otherwise are a less that 1% of the population.

    “But in any event, the said military personel declined.”

    They declined because they would be in big trouble with a Article 85
    hearing and an incompetent attorney. I doubt she will get one active duty individual to join her frivilous suit.

    “Oh and Black Lion, the Supreme Court of the USA recognizes Orly’s status as a lawyer and allows her to practice before their bar. So you might want to retract those defamatory remarks you just made about her, because she has a lot of lawyer friends who can sue you for libel and defamation…”

    Whether or not the SCOTUS recognizes her is irrelevant. You must be licensed as an attorney in any state you want to practice law in. And she cannot get licensed in any state but CA because she did not attend an accredited law school. That is fact. So she can bring out all of the so called lawyer friends she may have. After seeing her filings I would not be afraid of anything she or her so called lawyer friends could do. She is such a pathetic lawyer she makes Berg look like John Jay. She has never won a case.

  • Civis naturaliter natus says:

    Black Lion, what has already been proven?

    But in any event, the said military personel declined.

    Sue, the case is not a political one, it is a constitutional one, therefore your Obot comment page link, is worthless advice.

    Oh and Black Lion, the Supreme Court of the USA recognizes Orly’s status as a lawyer and allows her to practice before their bar. So you might want to retract those defamatory remarks you just made about her, because she has a lot of lawyer friends who can sue you for libel and defamation…

  • Civis naturaliter natus says:

    I can understand how frustrating it must be for Obots when the websites which they have used to support Zero keep disappearing or chaning what they are claiming.

    The Latest

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103531

    is that Fight the Smears has disappeared for several days. I guest the phony info on it, was getting Obama’s lawyers into many difficult places, in an attempt to defend him.

    I think that it is more likely that Biden will soon be our next president, not on account of Obama being impeached, or exposed as ineligible, but because the Dems themselves force him to resign, since he is fact becoming an indefensible, lead albatross…

  • brygenon says:

    The statement “He [Apuzzo] has now posted that the Court has granted his time extension,” is not really right. The extension is automatic upon serving the letter to the parties and filing it with the court. The court’s local rule 7.1(d)(5) reads:

    The time within which to file papers, including the brief, in opposition to a dispositive motion may be extended once by the party opposing the motion for a period not to exceed 14 days. Such extension does not require the consent of the adversary, the Court, or the Clerk. To obtain the automatic extension a party must file with the Clerk, and serve upon all other parties, a letter invoking the provisions of this rule before the date on which opposition papers would otherwise be due under L. Civ. R. 7.1(d)(2). That letter shall set forth the new motion date, which shall be the next available motion date following the originally noticed date. No other extension of the time limits provided in L.Civ.R. 7.1(d)(2) and (3) shall be permitted without an Order of the Court, and any application for such an extension shall advise the Court whether other parties have or have not consented to such request.

    http://pacer.njd.uscourts.gov/rules/Order7-1.pdf

  • Sue says:

    I pray before a active military person takes Dr. Taitz up on her invitation, he/she will consult with a jag officer first. Also, you might want to read this before posting Dr. Taitz invitation elsewhere.

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/07/08/orly-and-presidential-orders/

  • Black Lion says:

    So we are supposed to believe David Kahane that the media was too tough on poor Sarah (I can see Russia from my house) Palin and that these ethics complaints were not justified? Really. I guess he forgot about the following….

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Sarah Palin unlawfully abused her power as governor by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, the chief investigator of an Alaska legislative panel concluded Friday. The politically charged inquiry imperiled her reputation as a reformer on John McCain’s Republican ticket.

    Investigator Stephen Branchflower, in a report to a bipartisan panel that looked into the matter, found Palin in violation of a state ethics law that prohibits public officials from using their office for personal gain.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27105917/

    It is a stretch for him to say that the media is ganging up on Sarah Palin. She is the one giving rambling press conferences without any sort of a coherent thought. She was found to have violated a state ethics law. And there could be others. We don’t know and he definately does not know. And comparing that to the “Birth Certificate” issue, where the President has supplied a document stating he was born in HI that so far cannot be refuted with legally admissible evidence is disingenous at best.

    And as for his comment “…Hello, he lied,” isn’t a joke; we men of the Left are perfectly comfortable lying, cheating, and stealing — hello, Senator Franken! — in order to attain and keep political power.”

    I guess he forgot about Governor Mark Sanford, a governor that lied, left his state unattended to be with his “girlfriend”. Instead he mentions Gov. Paterson of NY. Funny. Or Senator Ensign, who used campaign funds to pay off his “girlfriend”, who is the wife of a friend of his and worked for him. But he mentions Al Franken, who was just sworn in this week. What about Rep. Mark Foley, who liked 17 year old boys, or Senator Larry Craig, who liked bathroom stalls. Or Newt Gingrich or John McCain, who cheated on their wives while they were in the hospital.

    The point is that article was biased and horribly written. I would speculate that both parties have their share of skeletons, but for him to imply that the liberals or democrats are somehow the only ones guilty and the GOP is clean was laughable at best. But since it came from the National Review, so we should not be surprised.

  • Black Lion says:

    Civis naturaliter natus says:
    July 9, 2009 at 10:18 am
    An open appeal to all Military personal scheduled to be redeployed by Obama:

    An officer has contacted me a few days ago (I will not provide his name), stating that he is about to be deployed to Afghanistan on July the 15th from Fort Benning. We were supposed to file an injunction, a stay of the deployment of this officer to Afghanistan until the eligibility of of Barack Hussein Obama as Commander in Chief is verified.

    I guess there will at least one officer that will be going AWOL and probably subject to be court-martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ, which is desertion with the intent to avoid hazardous duty. I am not sure how many military personnel will risk incarceration, demotion, forfeiture, and a bad conduct discharge to go along with Orly’s half baked schemes. If the court martial is a general court martial, teh maximum sentence is the death penalty, death by firing squad.

    That is a lot to risk for an individual in order to prove something that has already been proven. And if you are going to risk your career and life, would you really risk it with a dentist pretending to be a lawyer? A lawyer that can only practice in CA because she went to an unacredited law school? I seriously doubt that she will get many, if any, individuals to join her crusuade.

  • *) Gist of case: is that defendants are acting outside protected oaths of office, Felonies of aiding /abetting an usurper!

    A). Actions(aiding/abetting) are unconstitutional

    B). Case filed for crimes prior to Obama taking 1st and 2nd attempted Oath of office,

    *) Chenny and many government officials are out of office and cannot claim immunity!

    C ) Defendants Are not protected from ADMITTED crimes of obama that he was British Born not Natural Born(derivative FRAUD/FORGIES, CONSPIRSORY TO COMMIT MASSIVE FRAUD!

    and

    Congressmen, by aiding/abetting in greatest Fraud upon US history:

    (Case law paula jones v clinton)

    1). Apuzzo should hammer the obvious “Circumstancial evidence that Nancy Pelosi , Stopped the Dnc Stampeed to Impeach Bush / Chenney, with votes in congress, (although, a dnc “Witch Burning and dnc Cannibelism). But “Lord of Flies Political Insainity;”

    ____RNC____Blackmailed by Pelosi:

    Rnc (via blackmail): promise to Allow bo to run without Bush or Chenny calling a press conferance exposing Obama!

    See : (school teacher/ Phil’s citations)

    Exibit a):

    Saving Dick Cheney from ‘The Daily Show’? – Josh Gerstein – POLITICO.com
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23915.html

    Exibit b):

    Iraq Revenue Watch: Key Documents
    http://www.iraqrevenuewatch.org/documents/

    Exibit C):

    Iraq Oil: The Vultures are Waiting
    http://www.brusselstribunal.org/Meyer/Oil.htm

    ________ Then

    Chenny would bend- over for whatever corruption that obama/pelosi/reed/schumer/ wanted!

    2). Bigs of RNC/ CALLED OFF DOGS AND ATTACK REHETORIC:

    *******APUZZO STARTED THE STRADGEY OF: LEGALLY PURJURY PENALITIES OF CHENNY AGAINST OBAMA/PELOSI/ REED

    GENIUS OF APUZZO’S CASE IS “SHELOCK HOMES 101″ PUT ONE CRIMINAL AGAINST THE OTHER FOR TESIMONY PROOF!

    3). Apuzzo should argue that media members were murdered, threatened!

    SORROS/OBAMA MURDERED AND THREATENED THIS BEAUTIFUL PERSON TO SCARE THE HELL OUT OF MEDIA FROM TELLING TRUTH ABOUT OBAMA!

    EXIBIT E:

    Daily Kos: W’s “Ann Coulter” actress beaten in home attack
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/20/181529/87

    *)Iraqi Billionaire Threatens Reporters Investigating Rezko Affair :: MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory
    http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/08/26/iraqi-billionaire-threatens-reporters-investigating-rezko-affair/

    *)OBAMA/BIDEN ILLEGALLY KIDNAPED LARRY SINCLARE TO SHUT HIM UP!

    *)OBAMA THREATENED ALLEN KEYS OF FINANCIAL RUIN

    *)OBAMA THEATENED BUSH LAWERS/TAITZ WITH DISBARMENT:

    ETC:

    *) “AL CAPONE / OBAMA /BIDEN/ ET AL
    SHOULD BE NAILED WITH EVERY BIT OF EVIDENCE AND CIRCUMSTANCE EVIDENCE THAT CAN BE DUG UP!

    APUZZO ET AL: HAS GOT TO STOP QUAKING IN HIS FEATHERED SLIPPERS AND KICK OBAMA’S(ET AL) ASS!!!

    )*****
    APUZZO SHOULD ARGUE THAT “HOLDER IS AN UN INDICTED CO-CONSPIRATOR WITH OBAMA/BIDEN ET AL!

    Attorney General, John H. Mitchel; in jail for 18 months, years for what he could not “remember”: exactly as Eric Holder, Obstuction of Justice.

    Holder has taken bribes of promotions, ETC!

  • Roderick says:

    I don’t like this whole thing. This whole thing reeks from head to toe. The United States Senate has no “standing” to ignore the Constitution and no “immunity” from answering to the people who pay their salaries about their actions. I don’t care where this imposter was born. Makes no difference at this point because everybody knows that the imposters father was kenyan. That has got to be clarified for future reference. Until then he is a phony, a fraud, a deceit. Not everybody born in Hawaii is eligible to run for president as they may or may not meet the other constitutional requirements as set forth by the Constitution. In other words if a Mexican is on vacation in Hawaii and he has a child with a Hawaiian girl that child apparently may not be constitutionally eligible to hold the office of president even if the child was born on United States soil. I am not a birther, never was, never will be.

  • Manfred says:

    Rep. Bill Posey: “I don’t think a Supreme Court would remove a president from office if they heard the case. But … we should make a good faith effort to make sure that things in the future are as they should be.”

    Sorry, congresscritter. If any sitting President is found to have taken that office ILLEGALLY, he should be thrown out on his can and prosecuted. EVERYTHING he has signed should be considered null and void. The Constitution is more valuable than the PR protection of the office of President. In truth, such spineless talk isn’t about the office, it’s about the Party system. The office isn’t tarnished with a reprobate holds it, the party that put him there is.

  • JeffM says:

    What a bunch of baloney. Essentially what Posey is saying is that we should all be selective in the enforcement of the constitution.

    To paraphrase him: “We can’t remove a usurper because we didn’t act on it before. But future presidents will go through constitutional scrutany so the current Unconstitutional behavior won’t happen again.”

    He is a certifiable Grade A CONGRIDIOT!!!

  • Civis naturaliter natus says:

    An open appeal to all Military personal scheduled to be redeployed by Obama:

    Annoucement from Dr. Orly Taitz:
    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=2946

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com

    An officer has contacted me a few days ago (I will not provide his name), stating that he is about to be deployed to Afghanistan on July the 15th from Fort Benning. We were supposed to file an injunction, a stay of the deployment of this officer to Afghanistan until the eligibility of of Barack Hussein Obama as Commander in Chief is verified. The documents were supposed to be filed in the middle district of Georgia today. Due to personal reasons this officer cannot be the plaintiff at the moment, however all the pleadings in the case are ready to go. If you know any enlisted or officers, who are ready to be deployed, but want to stay their deployment until Obama’s legitimacy for the posittion of Commander in Chief is verified, please have them contact me. As the case is ready, it can be filed within hours.

    Defend Our Freedoms Foundation
    26302 La Paz ste 211
    Mission Viejo CA 92691

    email: see website above

Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.