Saturday, January 10, 2009

Week 1/4-1/10; Path to BHO Breakthrough or Constitutional Travesty

A week's worth of naturally borne Citizenship in action, with I.O's agenda in the flux
  1. Congress voted Thursday, to "certify" the E.C. vote for The Unkown, Unvetted, Usurping President.
  2. Friday, 1/9, the Supreme Court of the U.S. (SCOTUS) apparently conferred about what to do with pesky Philip Berg. Do they now deign to grant him standing, this mere Sovereign Citizen? Then, on the 1/16, he gets another meeting of the Supreme How 'Bout That BOGUS POTUS Committee. Is Tom Waite right and does SCOTUS not like it that BHO has not responded to Souter's prior... invitation? [Ed. 1/12: even if Souter really did not want to invite attention; it is SCOTUS procedure to receive responses from defendants.]
  3. By Mr. Phil's TRSoL report, Berg v. Obama was not dealt a miscellaneous order Friday. SCOTUS disposition should be announced Monday, as is customary. Phil does a great job of putting this into perspective, here.
  4. Attorney, Orly Taitz appreciates that Chief Justice John Roberts has sent Lightfoot v. Bowen (SCOTUS docket page) to committee for 1/23. Wednesday's I.O. article and interview with Taitz here. Also, Orly Taitz' subsequent press release, over there. She exhorts more letters and other petitions from concerned Americans. Her cover letter to Roberts was an interesting move; maybe it helped, at least in citing some of the known references to the meaning of the Article 2 phrase, natural born Citizen. Be apprised, now: this Lightfoot is not a petition for writ of certiorari, it is an appeal for an injunction against the California Electoral College vote, which has already happened. To I.O's ken, Dr. Taitz will need assistance from someone licensed to present before the SCOTUS, if she wishes to petition for a writ (for full review, oral argument, and quite possibly, for such a thing as a reversal of an unconstitutional election). She describes Lightfoot v. Bowen as a "step," but at least it is a step to bring a federal candidate's standing, along with two of the three arguments against Obama's candidacy to the SCOTUS and we are in uncharged jurisprudential waters.
  5. Orly Taitz is in hyperdrive. Maybe we should all pray for her safety.
  6. What has been transpiring in other cases?: Obama legal challenge scorecard
  7. Well, Broe v. Reed was dismissed, Thursday by the WA Supremes, which notified the local media instead of that first, before any contact with Broe attorney, Stephen Pidgeon, if at all. Huh. And to the SCOTUS Pidgeon will fly. He thinks the WA court, like their Secretary of State may just be saying, "'S'not my job, man" and for some reason does not feel encumbered with the qualifying of a presidential candidiate. If so, they hide in a nationwide cloud of confusion, due to lack of legislative procedure to support the natural born Citizenshp clause and that causes a further confusion regarding "controlling legal authority" (as Al Gore appreciators might remember, i.e., how he avoided prison, per his past foreign fundraising, Hindu monks and all). In Broe v. Reed, Pidgeon refers to all of the three major contentions with BHO II: 1. U.K. citizenship at birth via BHO I, 2. no valid proof of natural born Citizenship provided and, 3. apparent Indonesian citizenship as a child, revoking any U.S. citizenship. Pidgeon's Broe case did receive oral argument by the WA SC, which may help in terms of standing (with all the various "objective" elements for SCOTUS to consider, you do know that, at least for those justices unwilling or unable to apply the finest of epistemological categorization of constitutional law with natural accuracy, a lot of this is subjective for them, don't you?).
  8. Schneller v. Cortes (based upon no valid proof of n.b.C. by Obama) was taken from Pennsylvania to Justice Souter, Thursday, in the attempt to delay the congressional certification of the Electoral College vote and whaddyaknow, Souter denied.
  9. I.O. still finds it more than "odd" that after Donofrio was given the run-around by the SCOTUS clerks and Wrotnowski's filing was sent away for "anthrax testing," Taitz' Lightfoot filing was "lost" before Christmas. Perhaps more on that, later.
  10. PlainsRadio.com-ops: may get to that later, priorities are priorities.
  11. Does the narrative of August, 1961 in the life of Stanley Ann Dunham fit the possibility of a birth outside the U.S.A.? Sam Sewell of The Steady Drip presents, below
  12. Do you know why it shouldn't matter and that BHO is ineligible, anyway? More on this, all over Investigating Obama. Click the "I.O. Docket" index on the sidebar, or the lazy click here).
  13. How about that new kind of case, some have heard about, boiling up in a conservative state? Something having to do with the military? Must be taking a bit more time.
  14. Those Top-5 "Daddy Says No!" nbC article awards that I.O. has not found the time to do yet... um... see the line-up of natural born Citizen articles, here.
  15. Beyond the essential crisis-solving necessary to preserve the U.S. Constitution, against an usurpation by an ineligible candidate, why does it matter that Barack Obama is kept out of the Presidency? Answer, here.
  16. Read up on Obama researcher, Mark S. McGrew's outrage, below -- and hear him on Internet radio
  17. FoxNews is featuring... Casey Anthony a lot, lately. Fox asks why it is that she did not reveal what she knew about her daughter's disappearance and points out that, in itself, is incriminating. I.O. points out, this sounds like Obama and his Hawaiian birth certificate, does it not?
  18. What? BHO Continues to Press His Mega-Money Fundraising?
  19. Keep an eye on that I.O. Sitebar Sidebar, especially "The Unconstitutional Usurper" lineup:

33 comments:

Ted said...

AND FORWARD THIS CHALLENGE ON TO EACH OF YOUR CONGRESSPERSONS AND SENATORS!

CHALLENGE (with answer), CAN ANYONE PROVE THIS WRONG?:–

1. Constitution Article II requires USA President to be “natural born citizen”.

2. BHO’s website admits his dad was Kenyan/British, not American, citizen when BHO was born.

3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution (that both parents must be citizens of USA) co-authored by BHO.

4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.

5. Since the fact of BHO’s dad being Kenyan/British not in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.

6. Therefore, BHO is not inaugurated as President.

7. Vice President Elect Biden is inaugurated Acting President under the 20th Amendment to serve until new President is determined — the procedure for which determination to be set out by Congress and/or the Supreme Court so long as in conformance with the Constitution.

ANSWER TO ABOVE CHALLENGE

IF, when counting the electoral votes, Congress WERE TO find by 1/8/09 that Obama — not being an Article II “natural born citizen” (father Kenyan/British, not American) — fails to qualify as President, Biden would become the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) AND THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR DEFERRAL TO THE SUPREME COURT to enjoin Obama’s inauguration relegating Biden to being merely Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President were duly determined.

(The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, would seem obvious.)

Anonymous said...

Arlen,read this article.I don't always agree with the guy as he buys into the left-right dialectic,but on this Obama thing he makes sense.The BC is locked down tight.Surprised noone has gone after the things he's sugessted here.Devvy has gone the FOIA route,and when not rejected she gets the wrong documents.And they even send it under the wrong name.Curious what Ed says tonight.He had a masterplan until near the end of the show when he asked Steve what do to do.Steve mentioned FOIA or a PI.FOIA is a dead end.And there are scores of ports to cover. http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2009/01/once-upon-birdie.html

Anonymous said...

I just called John McCain's office. They are taking the factcheck.org BC as authentic. They do not want to hear it al all. And then hung up. Our tax dollars at work. Good to know he lied during the campaign that he would fight for America.

Anonymous said...

Does Ed Hale know that Berg has had the same documents he posted last Friday,and for several months?Hope you post updates on tonight's show.Ed is a patriot,but jumps the gun and gives false hope.Sadly,the more professional alternative radio shows aren't covering this subject.Stadtmiller should be interviewing Pidgeon and Taitz and others.Ed is right about Lan though.That guy is bad news.Trashes everyone.He's a NWO shill for sure.

Anonymous said...

LOL on McCain.There is no difference between the parties.If they cared,they would've spoke up long ago.Same with Ron Paul.

Arlen Williams said...

John McCain: a fictitious candidate but war hero, paving the way for another fictitious candidate steeped in the ideology of the kind of people who fought and tortured him.

Where is Rod Serling?

Anonymous said...

Ed's mudslinging is going to turn off Pidgeon as it did Leo.He's got to stay focused.He's bashing Mark and MommaE tonightBut we heard the audio clip where Mark admits Ed had the documents first.Apologizing tomorrow will not do any good.He burns bridges with his rants.

Anonymous said...

Look Ed is just excited. People need to not take this personal. Take a deep breath and get FACTS. It does not matter who gets credit on exposing this outright lie and destruction of our constitution. Everyone needs to keep their eyes on the prize, to save our constitution. Similiar to the goal of the civil right cases in the 1960's. No one person is going to get credit for this. Even in the American Revolution, many played their part to oust England's rule.

WE HAVE TO GET EVIDENCE (e.g. birth certificate, divorce decree, and other documents) to expose this fraud to the masses and give people the room (like the FEDS are doing with Blago) to kick this usurper out.

This is similiar to Nixon and watergate, but at least Nixon was a NBC and a crook. LOL!

rovingpatrol said...

I wrote to my congressman and told him even if he does believe Obama was born here it states in the U.S. constitution BOTH parents have to be natural born. I asked him do we now just follow some of the constitution or or ignore it all together.

No answer...

Arlen Williams said...

Good, rp. They need to get more and more of those letters (and calls).

Anonymous said...

New development, possibly important: Prayer for a Redress of Grievance that Barack Obama is not eligible to be POTUS, as per First Constitutional Amendment.

http://www.axtk.com/

Please read closely. Standard letters, phone calls and emails won't do the trick.

QUOTE: "If not delivered personally, it must be signed before a notary and sent via US Post."

Deadlines: January 7th and/or 19th. Apparently there's another session of Congress on the 19th. (???)

Anonymous said...

Many problems in our country go back to Bush I.

Reagan was the first president I voted for. Under his leadership, our country was taken to new heights. All of this was despite the constant bitching of Bush I, who was always a drag on the Reagan administration and is still a drag on America.

Bush I got my vote once. He made the mistake of selling out to the UN, I still remember his highly publicized speech and thinking, WTF? I also recall his frequent use of the term "voodoo economics," he clearly disliked Reagan and was extremely jealous of his popularity and success.

Clinton and Bush II and Obama are in the same camp as Bush I. McCain is in that camp but the Bushes are so insanely jealous of McCain's status as a war hero that they backed Obama.

I did not vote for Bush II or Obama. I doubt Bush II is as ideologically driven as Bush I but I think Obama will make up for that. Obama is the boy Bush I never had. Bush I and his cronies must be very pleased.

scalefree said...

Ed Hale is a truly remarkable person. I think my favorite thing about him is when he & his buddies shot up a couple of Bigfoots back in the 70s. All hail Ed Hale, mighty Bigfoot hunter!

Anonymous said...

Can you believe this? Even the Father of Modern China has a "certificate of Hawaiian birth"
Dr Sun Yat Sen

See the link and view the scan of his certificate

http://art2sect1clause5.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

What do Barack Obama, the first African-American President,

and

Sun Yat-Sen, the first President of the Republic of China

have in common?



Yes, they were both born in Hawaii.



Click on this link to see Sun Yat-sen’s “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth” despite having been born in Guandong, China.

http://sites.google.com/site/obamabirth/


What a coincidence!

Anonymous said...

Please go to www.wnd.com (World Net Daily) and for a total cost to you of $10.95 FedEx letters will be sent in your name to each Supreme Court Justice guaranteed to arrive in time for their deliberations. The last time World Net Daily offered this opportunity some 60,000 responded.

You do have a voice. Use it!!!

scalefree said...

Phil Berg is a 9/11 Truther. He believes George Bush was secretly behind the WTC attack. Ed Hale says he shot up some Bigfoots on a hunting trip in Texas. These are the people you're putting your faith in. Don't you get it? You've been rolled by conmen, hoaxers & nutjobs.

Anonymous said...

ALERT!!!

Go to the SCOTUS docket page hot link in item #2 above --Orly Taitz case. It has been docketd AS DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE JANUARY 23, 2009 -- AFTER OBAMA'S FRAUDULENT INAUGERATION.

URGNET:

Go to www.wnd.com and FedEx letters ($10.95 total cost) to each Ssupreme Court Justice.

Anonymous said...

Everyone needs to read this article IMMEDIATELY!!!

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/the-people-of-america-and-the-us-congress-preparation-for-the-worst/

Anonymous said...

dear scale free -- the BIGGEST conman, hoaxer, and nutjob is B. Hussein Obama. Don't you get it, this man has lied to you repeatedly, and it is proven. Do you normally continue to trust people in your life that lie to you?

YOU, my friend, have been PUNK'ED big time by UEBO>

Anonymous said...

I guess everyone saw where Dick Cheney closed the electoral vote count without asking for any objections. The fix is in folks.

Anonymous said...

I just spoke with an aide from Sen. Sam Brownback office and he said that those who want to object stand before the VP calls for objections.

Not one of our Republican Senators or Representatives stood up. So much for swearing to uphold our Constitution. May they all caucused and decided it best to let the courts handle Obama's NBC eligibility. This way they can't be viewed as being counter-productive to the new Administration. I hope the Supremes will have more constitutional guts now that the ball is in their laps.

Anonymous said...

Objections are no longer levied orally on the house floor.
They haven't been for years.
Neither were Bush's.

At the time of a state certifying their vote, they are provided an opportunity to object in writing.

No state certificates included any objections and thus no need for Cheney to bring up an already understood contingent of the process.

You've been guessing how it's done and thought today was a big day.
You were wrong.
There was no fix.
The system isn't broken just because it doesn't work for you.

Anonymous said...

It's good that the Electoral Votes were sealed today. Not b0 is officially the President Elect and officially subject to the 20th Ammendment.

Arlen Williams said...

Odd as I see it: the conclusions of the Anon. poster in the comment two places above this are simply not drawn from his own attestations about how objections are ordinarily made.

Pieter Nosworthy said...

Thanks for the outstanding nature of your posting. It is a wonderful consolidation of key information.

http://thenaturalbornpresidency.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

i have posted my first article on newsvine, PLEASE go to the link and comment as many times as you can to try and push it to the front page http://bdimainman.newsvine.com/_news/2009/01/10/2295937-us-supreme-court-fires-warning-shot

Anonymous said...

Keping running up to kick that football, Charlie Brown. Lucy won't yank it away this time.

obamaconspiracy.org said...

I must be dense, but I didn't understand "Is Tom Waite right and does SCOTUS not like it that BHO has not responded to Souter's prior... invitation?"

Which invitation is this referring to?

Anonymous said...

Readers,

There is a long battle ahead of us and there are too many issues for just one Group to address. Many of us who are hopping from group to group and blog to blog are feeling frustrated because there seems to be no direction. If we are to return the power back into the hands of We The People and take back our Country, we need UNIFICATION! A Coalition is the fastest way to build up the resistance so people start paying attention. There is great strength in numbers!

Today, too many of us are spread out across the internet and the sites that we visit DO NOT have the technology in place to allow their members to work in a collaborative fashion. How can we engage in a peaceful resistance when we are pulled in various directions and just end up spinning our wheels?

I believe a Coalition is the answer! A Coalition, which is a Group of Groups, will allow existing Groups to retain their own identites, members and "causes" while allowing us to organize, plan and implement strategies across a larger scale. This way, the Actions that we take can be Coordinated and Purposeful. It will also allow us to share resources and exchange ideas across Groups so we can avoid duplicating our efforts.

Please read more about the United Coalition of We The People USA on http://wethepeopleusa.ning.com/group/unitedcoalitionofwethepeopleusa and read the Welcome letter in the Group Discussion section which details this effort and discusses why a Coalition is neccessary.

Thank you in advance for your patriotism and participation.

Arlen Williams said...

obamaconspiracy.org said...
I must be dense, but I didn't understand "Is Tom Waite right and does SCOTUS not like it that BHO has not responded to Souter's prior... invitation?"
Which invitation is this referring to?
January 11, 2009 10:35 PM


It is, as I understand, a de facto "invitation," to a defendant or respondent which procedurally follows a filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari. The reference to Souter (who denied the petition when he could) is facetious.

My bad -- a bit too cryptic. Adding a link for documentation.

jbjd said...

I have posted on my blog a template for a military Complaint against Barack Obama, seeking Declaratory Relief in federal court. Plaintiffs in this Complaint have standing inasmuch as they are potential Defendants in a military prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice in the future, related to the possibility that in order to uphold their oath of service to support and defend the Constitution they could be compelled to ignore orders given by a CIC they establish in the Complaint they have a good faith belief is Constitutionally ineligible for the job. http://jbjd.wordpress.com/

This Complaint is different from the other Complaints. 1) It does not allege BO is not a NBC; it alleges Plaintiffs have a good faith belief he is not. 2) It does not provide evidence BO is not a NBC; it provides examples of conflicting data. 3) It is only a well-pleaded Complaint and not a Complaint-Cum-Legal-Memorandum in support of a Complaint; the Legal Memorandum follows, once the Complaint is filed. The well-pleaded Complaint gives Defendant notice that Plaintiffs seek a Declaratory Judgment from the Court based on the fact they face imminent liability (as Defendants) under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (Most of the other cases filed were based on Mandamus, that is, the cause of action that allows citizens to ask the Court to order government officials to carry out a ministerial duty of the job. But as I have stated in this Complaint, no provision of any state or federal law explicitly requires any state actor to vet the candidate for POTUS for Constitutional eligibility for the job. These cases tried to impute such a duty; but the courts - judicial branch - will not tell government officials - executive or legislative branch - what to do, absent some clear cut authority.) In this Complaint, Plaintiffs do not ask the Court to tell anyone to do anything. They merely ask for a legal opinion. What Defendant could object to that?)

Arlen Williams said...

jbjd,
A belated thanks for posting this. Have you gone further than this, with anyone? Please send me an email, if you get this by feed.
arlenwilliams // at // yahoo // dot // com