Thursday, January 15, 2009

Obama Makes Himself at Home, at the Supreme Court

In yesterday morning's article, "'Obama, Biden to Visit Supreme Court,' Today, says CBS News," the reader was offered a conversation reflecting what Chief Justice Roberts and Poseur-Elect Obama may have been thinking, but not saying, at yesterday's tea time tour.

While the meeting was held in virtual secrecy, nevertheless the perpetual, neo-Marxist movement campaign of Barack Obama found it very fitting to exploit, at this most delicate hour.

No press was allowed, but Obama posed, relaxed and hanging out in style, for his own photographer, as Biden observes and corresponds (but remains more inhibited by apparent respect). Is that the seat of the Chief Justice over which O Bogus presides?

The following is excerpted from whatever after action report, Tony Mauro was able to assemble in The Blog of Legal Times.
According to Court officials, all the justices except Samuel Alito Jr. joined Obama and Biden in the Court's stately west conference room, where they sat in highback chairs arranged around the fireplace. "Light refreshments" were served. Also on hand were Jeff Minear, counselor to Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., Gregory Craig, Obama's choice for White House counsel, and Alan Hoffman, Biden's deputy chief of staff. No explanation was given for Alito's absence.

The meeting between the two branches resulted from a Dec. 5 invitation sent by Roberts to Obama, inviting Obama and Biden to visit the Court before they are sworn in. Noting that recent predecessors had arranged similar meetings "so that colleagues in public service might become better acquainted," Roberts said the Court "would be pleased to see that sporadic practice become a congenial tradition." Roberts promised a "warm welcome" from the Court. Roberts' friendly tone was notable, since both Obama and Biden voted against his confirmation in 2005.
Is that a smile for the appreciation of history, upon the face of the Chief Justice? He certainly has the opportunity to contribute to history, after all -- simply by doing his constitutional duty, regarding the suits brought before him, sent in order to bring what is concealed in darkness, to light, for the sake of The People and the integrity of our mandated order of self governance.

Or does the smile reflect a bit of the sycophant spirit which has so pervaded America for that one? Time will tell. So nice they got to chat each other up a bit, though.

Mauro compares the kind of meeting this was, as seen from the outside, against a similar initial visit by Clinton and Gore.
But nothing could be learned about the tenor of the Wednesday meeting, in sharp contrast to the last time a similar encounter occurred. In December 1992, Bill Clinton and Al Gore made a highly public visit to the Court, entering and leaving in public view and greeting employees. A press pool was allowed to witness the discussion between Clinton, Gore and the justices. Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush paid a visit to the Court in late November 1980.

The more closed nature of the Wednesday meeting was explained in part as a matter of security, and also the result of the tight schedules of both the hosts and the guests, which left less time for a more leisurely and public occasion.

Still, the rare visit caused a stir at the usually monastic institution, as Court employees gathered in a ground-floor hallway in hopes of catching a glimpse of the pair. Obama and Biden were briefly sighted as they rounded a stairway on their way to and from the Court basement where they had arrived by car with their security detail. As they departed, a clutch of employees cheered, winning waves from Obama and Biden.
Leo Donofrio, Cort Wrotnowski, and Orly Taitz have come up against this Obama fandom among SCOTUS employees. They did a fine job of delaying, not communicating, losing a filing here, sending a filing out for anthrax testing there... all in a day's work, at the ascendancy of the Marxist Messiah.

Not a bad day, to "call in sick," Justice Alito. A dyspeptic day for any others?

Update, 1/17: This comment about the top photo was given me in another place -- interesting:
Obama, dependent on the chair for "support"
Arms crossed - not open, standing behind the chair... hiding??
Not "face to face" with the Supreme Court Justices, but with the camera.
Justices looking downward.

Seems just a photo op to provide an "impression" of his being in control, when everything else about the photo says he's not.
ht: STARWISE

37 comments:

Victor said...

"He certainly has the opportunity to contribute to history, after all -- simply by doing his constitutional duty, regarding the suits brought before him, sent in order to bring what is concealed in darkness, to light, for the sake of The People and the integrity of our mandated order of self governance."

The evidence to date would seem to indicate that the Supreme Court, as well as the lower courts, have been executing their Constitutional duties rather well.

Anonymous said...

Victor desires serfdom.We haven't seen such a blatant display of contempt for the people since pre-magna carta days.Legitimate concerns by the people seeking redress of grievances by petitions and lawsuits are not met with silence in a truly free society.Regardless,of comrade Victor's personal views,he should at least be able to comprehend that much.Barry spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to conceal his records speaks volumes.That's a little thing called common sense.One needn't be a legal beagle to know Barry is a fraud.

Victor said...

Anonymous,

You're absolutely correct when you say that legitimate concerns would not be met by silence.

Can you provide evidence that Barack Obama is "spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to conceal his records," or are you echoing statements you've seen published elsewhere?

If and when anyone can offer conclusive proof of their statements, I will be first in line to listen with all of my attention.

Until then, the lack of evidence and the record of dismissal after dismissal must take precedence - common sense demands nothing less.

Anonymous said...

Re: “Can you provide evidence that Barack Obama is "spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to conceal his records," or are you echoing statements you've seen published elsewhere?”

In fact, this was all made up. There were about seventeen suits before the election and about three or four after it. Only ONE was solely on the subject of an attempt to show Obama’s records, specifically his birth records in Hawaii. In that case, filed by Andy Martin and still under appeal, Martin was the plaintiff against the State of Hawaii and Obams did not take an active role at all. He may have had some lawyers attend, but Martin did not say anything about them filing motions or in any way being active.

All the other cases before the election were primarily about stopping elections, which Obama naturally opposed, and all of them were fought on the defendants side mainly by the States that were being sued and by the Federal Government, the US Solicitor General’s office representing the Federal Election Commission.

In the cases filed after the election, I may be wrong but I think these consist only of the motions filed by Berg and others at the U.S. Supreme Court. If you check the dockets for Berg and Donofrio and Lightfoot (was there one other), you will see that only the plaintiffs filed anything. There is no record of any document filed by Obama in opposition to their motions, yet most were turned down already. Lightfoot is still alive and will go into conference on Jan. 23, but even in this case there is no mention of Obama filing anything. Presumably he would, if the court decides to take the case, but not so far.

So where are the “hundreds of thousands of dollars?”

Anonymous said...

What would have happened in the old days of the United States if President George Washington were succeeded along the presidential line by a hypothetical son of Major-General William Howe who commanded the British forces in the Battle of Bunker Hill and a hypothetical American citizen mother? After the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in the American Revolution, do you think that the American constitution would have considered that hypothetical son a Natural Born citizen? This is a good way to portray Barack Obama II’s citizenship being born to a British father and an American mother, regardless of whether he was born in Hawaii or Kenya.

J said...

Hi Victor,

Let me join this conversation.

The smiles on the face of the Supreme Court justices, at the BHO and JB visit, are signaling the outcome of the remaining eligibility lawsuits. The justices are hell-bent to dismiss them based on “standing”. There is no other description for this behavior than “dereliction of duty” as Alan Keyes put it. Only the congress’ behavior is topping that. Not to mention (the administration), that Chaney at the joint session of congress never even asked the constitutionally required question “Is there any objection?”

The current confirmation process by the nominated Attorney General and others is the height of hypocrisy. They are exposed to detailed and grueling questioning. However, they are nominated by an illegible president. Consequently, the nominees themselves are not eligible. No one is asking the president to prove his eligibility. It would cost him $12 to produce the vault certificate. Is there any common sense left in congress and the courts, or they are all self-serving, and morally corrupt? Why would BHO hire three law firms to protect his secret? Even if the law firms work pro-bono for him (doubtful), would it not be in his interest to end the speculation, the “conspiracy theories” that will hunt him as Watergate hunted Nixon? Can you imagine the media reaction, had McCain refused to open his personal files?

Arlen Williams said...

Time and time again, a leftist (or two, or more) latches onto a particular blog which adheres to American principles. We have Victor.

Whether they have been asigned, simply asign themselves, whether they volunteer or are a part of an astroturfing operation remains to be seen.

I.O. is under no cumpulsion to preserve the posts of people such as this. What they represent is regarded with contempt. Sometimes, however, if posters choose, they are useful.

margie said...

Soetoro / Obama will never be a Natural Born Citizen. He know's he is not. Can you imagine how much Hatred he has for America, that led him to deceive the citizens. Quite sad actually. Foreign Father eliminates Natural Born. 2 America Parent's = Natural Born. Amazing this has happened. America has become designed to be destroyed from the inside out. 9/11/2001. Never Forget.

Victor said...

Anonymous,

I can understand your allusion, but comparing Barack Obama's parents to William Howe and an American mother is a bit misleading - Barack Obama senior was a Kenyan citizen, or a citizen of the British Empire by colonization, and not a military man who fought against this country.

A more apt allusion would be comparing Obama's parents to a Nova Scotian father and Colonial mother... and I'm not sure too many citizens of the time would have had a problem with that.

Victor said...

Arlen, do you hold "what I represent" with contempt because I am offering a dissenting voice here?

Because I ask for evidence?

Because I question how your conclusions have been arrived at?

When have I ever submitted anything that has been disrespectful of you or any other poster here - and how many times have you accused me of lying?

I have mentioned, more than once, that all you need to do is say that I'm unwelcome, and I will leave. It's your blog and your rules, as I have said before.

rx said...

Berg's case is alive and well in the 3rd district court of appeals. SCOTUS denied his stay because the 3rd apeals court hasn't had their say yet. Once they deny it (they won't attempt to address this Constitutional issue - which Berg clearly states in his lawsuit), then Berg will be right back in SCOTUS only this time....with standing because the E.C. votes have been 'certified' by Congress and by then he (Barry) will have been 'sworn in.'

Of course, this does even mention the other lawsuits that will appear before SCOTUS (including the 'military' ones).

Arlen Williams said...

Victor said... ...how many times have you accused me of lying?

I do not recall that I have, Victor. I may have commented about such things as honesty or dishonesty. I may have even called one or more of your approaches dishonest. There are many ways of being dishonest without expressing a literal lie.

Sam Sewell said...

Re: “Can you provide evidence that Barack Obama is "spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to conceal his records," or are you echoing statements you've seen published elsewhere?”

That is a darn good question. I strive for accuracy in everything I do and I insist on citations for claims.

I think Obama is a con-man and very danerous, but we will never expose him with slip shod opinions and rehetoric.

My question is why has Obama not practiced the virtue of full disclosure? Why should anyone need to go looking for records or file law suits to reveal records? Why doesn't Obama just be up-front? This suspicious behavior is not in question and it makes me very guilty. I see Obama's secretive behavior as prima facia evidence of him not being qualified to hold offfice and prima facia evidence of criminal activity. Basicly his behavior is like "taking the fifth". I am sure he is guilty I just can't prove it because Obama will not do full disclosure. And it isn't just the birth certificate:

Records that Obama and/or others refuse to release are:

Original, vault copy of Certificate of Live Birth in the USA

Any INS or port of entry documentation which may have been generated in his infancy or childhood

Obama/Dunham marriage license (discovered by independent research by bloggers)

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license (discovered by independent research by bloggers)

Soetoro adoption records

Punahou School records

Selective Service Registration (Released. But, is possibly an altered document)

Occidental College records

Passports

Columbia College records

Columbia thesis

Harvard College records

Harvard Law Review articles (None, maybe 1, not signed)

University of Chicago scholarly articles (None)

Baptism certificate

Medical records

Law practice client list,

Illinois State Senate records (None, locked up to prohibit public view)

Illinois State Senate schedule (Lost, all other Illinois state senators' records are intact)

Obama is playing cat in a sand box.

Anonymous said...

I had not seen the 2nd picture of Obama signing Roberts' guest book. Everyone looks very pleasant to me in these pics. I have to agree with Victor. The courts are simply acting within their scope. Right, wrong, good or bad. Its like putting a vehicle in the ocean and expecting it to float you to your next destination. That is not what it was intended to do. You can get around the ocean but you need another mode of travel. This is not the way to address this matter.

Ted said...

The current SCOTUS threshold for a MUST STAY of BHO’s inauguration is not whether he is ultimately determined constitutionally ineligible to be POTUS, merely whether there now is SERIOUS QUESTION on his constitutional eligibility, since any determination of inelligibility AFTER inauguration would pose unnecessary civil and military difficulties.

Sam Sewell said...

NUTS! Just no way to edit comments after they are posted.

My comment above should read "This suspicious behavior is not in question and it makes me think he very guilty." But then, you knew that. Just my need for accuracy acting up.

Anonymous said...

Arlen,you are correct.Dump that Victor's posts.It's one thing to debate and exchange ideas and opinions.Quite another to suffer downright Anti-American Leftist propaganda using the cover of "devil's advocate" to sway weak minds away from the freedoms we once enjoyed under a rule by law to a degenerated mob rule type of democracy that always leads and has led us to "Socialism" which is Communism,and soon to be full blown Fascism.When you see people spending so much time posting on blogs that clearly are anathema to their ideology,it is for a nefarious reason.And this is not paid or operated by the government,so you have every right to delete any post or posts at will.

Anonymous said...

Yes,tell Victor is he is unwelcome here.Please!Everyone that has an ounce of disdernment knows that common sense would dictate that Barry would release his records if he truly had nothing to hide.We are not talking about mental health or dental or bank account balances.Just the basics every other American must provide ti not only government agencies but even employers.

Anonymous said...

Look at Victor's 2nd last post.Especially the end where jumps into the brains of others to say they'd have no problem with a person with divided loyalties due to the parents not being in the military.Thus we should have no problems with Barry.In otherwords...hey,forget about the supreme law of the land and do things off the cuff.Hey man,look at the situation.They weren't in the military.WRONG!We know the Marxist background of his parents,but we are not even bringing that into play in the courts.We are asking only for the Constitutional requirements to be met by our elected officials.Not just Barry,but all of them.Victor is not just questioning our methodolgy or asking for proof of claims.He is proseltyzing his Leftist worldview.

Anonymous said...

Vistor has no concerns of upholding the laws of the land.He says that case after case is being dismissed,and there isn't a chance that corruption or dereliction of duty could be factored in.That the focus should not be on Barry and his responsibility to honest and forthright,but rather each and everyone of us must provide documentation to Comrade Victor for every utterance we make.Victor,go peddle your commie drivel elswhere.It isn't working on anyone here.

Greg said...

Wow, what a lot of comments just to say "we don't know if there's really any evidence that he's spent lots of money on lawyers in these cases."

Anonymous said...

Greg,the point is that this Victor character is evading the real issues by finding anything he can in these posts to demnand documentation.And these Google blogs do not post links well,nor should that be the primary concern here.The focus and culpability should be on Barry,and his refual to be "transparaent" with "we the people".That's a Marxist ploy.Get people off on tangents and substantive issues.Well,the replies here expose Victor for what he or she is.

Victor said...

Anonymous, it's the usual way of things to offer proof whenever you make a claim.

When Obama wanted to run for President, he had to file paperwork with each Secretary of State for each state. As part of that paperwork, he had to supply proof he was a natural born citizen. He did so, by supplying his Certificate of Live Birth.

That was all the proof the Secretaries of State needed.

Now come the claims that Obama wasn't born in the United States. Some claim he was born in Kenya. Some in Canada. Some claim he's actually Malcolm X's son, and some say it doesn't matter, because he gave up his citizenship when he was (supposedly) adopted by his Indonesian stepfather.

But where is the evidence to support any of those claims?

You make a claim, you back it up - that's the way the world works in general, and it's definitely the way the legal world works.

But that doesn't matter to some people. They say that a Certificate of Live Birth isn't "good enough," even though it was good enough for all those Secretaries of State, and even though it was good enough for Obama to use it to get a driver's license and a passport.

And even if Obama were to petition Hawaii to release his vault certificate, that still wouldn't be enough for some people, because he's all but admitted he's ineligible, because his father was Kenyan, and it's the father that makes a natural born American.

Except, that's not what the law says. The law says that if you're born here, you're a natural born citizen. It's as easy as that.

So, again, where's the proof to back up these claims and legal theories?

The longer this goes on, the wilder the claims get: hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep records sealed. Where's the proof?

The Supreme Court has to wait until after the Inauguration, because that's the only time the litigants will have standing. Where's the proof?

Make a claim, back it up with proof.

A Senator from Illinois ran for the Presidency. He convinced a majority of Democrats that he was the right man for the job. He later convinced a majority of Americans that he was right for the job. The Electors voted, the Congress certified the vote, and next Tuesday, we'll have a new President.

Is everyone, from the State of Hawaii to the Democratic National Party to all those voters across the country, to every member of the House of Representatives and the Senate, to the Supreme Court, conspiring to put a usurper into the Oval Office?

Does that make even a little bit of sense?

Find the proof to support the claims. Find a Kenyan birth certificate, or an Indonesian citizenship record. Find anything to support any of the claims being made.

Make a claim, back it up. That's the usual way of things.

Anonymous said...

Victor said "When Obama wanted to run for President, he had to file paperwork with each Secretary of State for each state. As part of that paperwork, he had to supply proof he was a natural born citizen. He did so, by supplying his Certificate of Live Birth."

Victor also said "Make a claim, back it up."

Anonymous said...

The lies that Victor spews are legion.There's no point in constantly offering up the proof we do have at this point,which is certainly enough for law-abiding patriotic appointed and elected officials to act upon.It's clear to many of us that even with a vault copy of Barry's BC it will likely be ignored.Do you think all the leaders openly calling for a NWO are joking?It's out in the open now,regardless of what the controlled msm is saying to the dumbed down masses.Barry is a trojan horse and a mystery man.But he couldn't pull this charade off alone.He isn't the first tyrant in history to hoodwink a nation with little buzzwords of "change" and "believe".And it's been pointed out to Herr Victor.And if anyone were to flood this blog with a million links to the concrete proof we have at this point he would use the art of pilpul to rationalize it away.All that Victor wants to hear is this: Kerensky,Kaganovitch,Lenin,Stalin,Marx,Mao,Pot and a few other classical miscreants that are music to his ears.Boot this guy,or delete his comments.His rants aren't funny at this important juncture in history.This crisis is going to be felt around the globe.And Victor,take the Hanuman idol with you on the way out the door. http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=122240;title=APFN

Arlen Williams said...

Anon, the irony of Victor's demand for proof is humorous, I agree. Do you suppose he actually doesn't know that this "COLB" that he has presented is not an actual, valid, and evidentiary birth certificate?

What I wonder though is, if I ban Victor, one way or another, does that mean that two others will take his place?

I do wonder at what it takes, for someone to dwell so consistently in the intellectual realm of his opposition. I can understand doing that either for pay or for a reason deemed very important, but that's about it.

So, even if Victor is "acting alone," apparently he thinks this blog is important -- i.e., that there is really something at stake here, about Barack Obama.

And if he is a part of an astroturfing scheme, would not the same be true? Else, why would it be a coordinated effort?

Arlen Williams said...

BTW, "art of pilpul" -- excellent term.

Anonymous said...

Wow, what a lot of comments just to say "we don't know if there's really any evidence that he's spent lots of money on lawyers in these cases."

Given the following:
- The very long list of documents that one would normally expect to made public.
- The only way to suppress, obfuscate, seal and hide these documents is to engage legal counsel.
- Legal counsel is not free, regardless of who pays for it, someone pays for it.

One can safely say Obama has spent a lot of money (directly or indirectly) to hide his past.

Dennis Lee said...

One can only hope that the Constitution still has precedence in this matter. We will see if the SCOTUS still believes or not.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the justices just wanted to obtain the president-elect's fingerprints and DNA left on the teacup provided during the light refreshments.

Sam Sewell said...

The burden of proof is on Obama. Obama has not uet proven that he is a natural born citizen.

Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB

http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2008/12/keyes-v-lingle-case-dismissed-forensic.html

Anonymous said...

from A. Patriot
Don't ban Victor. If we don't allow dissenting voices, one day OUR dissenting voices won't be heard. Oh wait, that's already happening! So sad, but so true...

Victor, interesting that you say it's the 'usual way of things to offer proof when you make a claim.'

And yet, Obama is claiming to be a NBC but will not offer proof. Yes, he posted a document online. Yes, partisans in Chicago were allowed to touch it. What about regular people, especially those who might not agree with him? And please don't say no proof would ever be enough. That's just foolish. If he has nothing to hide, why doesn't he provide the vault copy to Fox or Drudge so they can put this to rest? Sure, maybe some will never give it up, but MOST would.

There's an interesting video I saw at therightsideoflife dot com that shows an interview with Alan Keyes. He makes a great analogy... if someone wanted to buy a piece of land from you, they would ask for the deed. Would you say, "oh, it's posted online, you can just look at it there"? Or, "here is the name of someone who has touched the actual deed, just call him"? No, because the person would assume, and rightly so, that you don't have the deed. Or, at the very least, that something is fishy. The buyer wouldn't then be told that the burden of proof is on him to find the deed. If you can see how ridiculous this is, why can't you see it when it applies to BHO? We're not talking a land purchase; we're talking LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD.

You say the SOSs had to verify his eligibility. Yet, when people have written to them to request that information, they are told that someone else (FEC, DNC, even voters themselves) has the responsibility to vet the candidate. WHAT? They all have their fingers pointing to each other, and no one has bottom line accountability.

Given this could ALL be put to rest by his producing, rather cheaply, an original vault certificate to be verified by a forensic document specialist, and YET HE WON'T, aren't you at least the littlest bit curious?

Anonymous said...

I say ignore Victor and his one-sided comments. Anon @ 10:52AM just made a great point, is O claims to be a NBC then prove it, not with the altered Certification of Live Birth he posted, but with the long-form original.
BTW, his sister was born in Jarkarta...why does she have a Hawaiian birth certificate??

Anonymous said...

Victor has not bothered to back up his claim that 50 Secretaries of State had seen Obama's Certificate of Live Birth.

Therefore the facts: no (repeat NO) SOS has ever seen Obama's Certific-ATE of Live Birth. The point at issue in the Berg (PA), Donofrio (NJ), Wrotnowski (CT), Taitz (CA), Pidgeon (WA) et al cases was that S'sOS claimed in court it was not their job to require the cadidates to qualify themselves; they accepted a candidate's legally-binding signed attestation and a letter from the DNC ( or RNC) "certifying" eligiblity: ie it was an honor-system, where the Committees posed as quasi-state authorities. There never was a Certifici-ATE of Live Birth - how could there be when Obama won't release it (whatever it is) from Hawaiian custody ? Obama posted photos on several websites of a Certific-ATION of Live Birth, which is a different animal altogether, and no one is on record as ever seeing a paper copy except the minions who claimed to have taken "snaps".

Here are my claims...backed up:

The address for Mr and Mrs Obama I in the BHO II newspaper birth announcement was a lie - records show a different family entirely lived there and the next-door neighbor at the time (still resident) confirms the Obamas did NOT live there. So what else about that announcement was a lie ? [Baro affidavit: not rebutted]

Obama has NEVER produced any documents proving citizenship, only posted online some doctored photos (not admissible in court) of a prima facie (ie not sufficient if challenged) Birth Certificat-ION, which is available for non-US births on a relative's sayso. [Polarik and Lines afidavits: not rebutted]

BHO II parents' divorce documents falsely claim required periods of residence for BHO I and Mrs Obama. The Dunham-Soetoro divorce documents falsely claim Mrs Soetoro and daughter are US citizens: Mrs Soetoro expatriated on marriage; her daughter was Indonesian-born and Indonesia doesn't permit dual citizenship. [Public record, Indonesian Constitution and Law: not rebutted]

Obama's Selective Service registration includes several impossible anomalies ( eg USPO stamp, wrong date, 2008 number etc ) which establish it as another crude forgery. [Expert discussion at debbieschlussel.com: not rebutted]

Obama has comprehensively lied on the record about his employment at BIC and Chicago in the early 1980s. [Co-workers at analyzethis.net and Cbsnews.com 2007: not rebutted]

Several contract employees (including one hire from Obama's ex-CIA Homeland Security Advisor's firm) were fired after illegally accessing on several occasions in 2008 Obama's State Dept records (which might contain birth certificates, naturalization certificates, or oaths of allegiance etc). [Public record and national media]

The Obama Transition, without precedent, contemptuously used a simulacrum of the US Great Seal, and improperly acquired a ".gov" domain, in order to lend spurious authenticity to a fictitious "Office of the President-Elect" and a fraudulent election "victory". As Seal, so COLB ? (18 USC Sec. 713 ...(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States... or any facsimile thereof...for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.) [Public record and national media: not rebutted]

Anyone see a pattern here...anyone smell anything ? There is the great big steaming pile of spit under Obama. He will never be free of its odor. He will stink worse than Johnson, Nixon, Bush 1, Clinton, and Bush 2 combined. Obama knows he's an illegal President and has demonstrated sociopathic contempt for morality, constitution, and law. [Interview question: What is the nature of sin? Obama: Anything that is out of line with my values]. No law or order issued through an Obama usurpation can ever be legal ! His gameplan is to make everyone from the Supreme Court down complicit so they can never remove him by uniting around the truth.

The lies of Obama are repeated because Obama's liars need them to be true. They are very afraid of the truth. That is why they'll do/say anything to prevent it coming to court, especially the court of public opinion. Don't you see: liars know what the truth is...so reverse the lie. They're in your face 'cos they know. They know. We now face the same dilemma as the victims of Hitler, Indira Gandhi, Milosevic, Mugabe, and Raila Odinga: How far are Obama's fanatical zealots prepared to go to keep a criminal in power.

Oh by the way I might have voted for Obama...but I woke up. If Obama is allowed to retain the Presidency I am leaving the US: a fascist state outside the rule of law = banana republic.

PdeB

Anonymous said...

Arlen says: "Anon, the irony of Victor's demand for proof is humorous, I agree. Do you suppose he actually doesn't know that this "COLB" that he has presented is not an actual, valid, and evidentiary birth certificate?" Arlen,that is very true.Of course he does.And sadly,some people misconstrue him,as he desires,as a dissenting voice,when he is an agent provocateur.One poster says banning him affects our free speech in the future.Nonsesne.An example of honest dissent is when you or I rebuke people like Lan or Ed ["Let me tell ya whut when I swallow my spaghetti and fix the mics"Hale]for irresponsible reporting and false leads and misinformation,knowingly or by an honest mistake,And then banned or maligned for it.Not so,with Herr Victor,Marxist comrade at arms.You bring up salient points on whether banning him would bring more trolls here.And that your blog is certainly oomportant or these commies would not spend so much time with the long posts.So it's up to you.But,I am glad you can see through these fools,including the good guy-bad guy tactic.You called out Sam awhile back.Mostly,he is Anti-Obama but will at times will show his true colors.Things are going to "change" rapidly in the next 6 months or so from all my research on planned destruction of the USA to merge us into the NWO.And the opposition knows that people are waking up due to little blogs like yours and radio shows on the internet.Thanks for your work.I found you on Orly's blog when you left a link a month ago.You can read my comments on her blog under name messenger .Keep up the good work.I still say you should boot Victor,but it's up to you. ------------- messenger

JeffM said...

Where is that picture of the TWEED RING when you need it??

Wait... Here you go:

http://www.vw.vccs.edu/vwhansd/HIS122/Images/Tweed%20Ring%20Cartoon.gif

Arlen Williams said...

Jeff, that picture would go well with the Zapem article about the efforts of the national bipartisan combine to flaunt the Constitution.