Donofrio Ups the Ante v. Comments Discrediting Scalia's Referral and Full Court's Distribution to Conference

There seems to be an effort to discredit the action that Scalia and the SCOTUS took on Friday, Dec. 5, upon the Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz petition to stay the Electoral College vote. As you may know, this case was referred by Justice Alito and accepted by the full court to committee, which will assess the case this Friday, Dec. 12, in order to decide upon any further action. It could grant a stay, deny the case, call for a brief from the opposition, call for oral arguments, etc.

Whether the debunking effort is merely ad hoc, or being orchestrated, I cannot say, though the Axelrod Astroturfers are infamous. But I can relate this blogospheric attack, then post Leo Donofrio's replies. While Donofrio's own suit of the New Jersey Secretary of State was denied, he is representing Cort Wrotnowski, in his petition of the SCOTUS, based upon a Connecticut filing against its own SoS.

In the comments below an illinoisreview.com piece, "Supreme Court refers Obama natural born citizen question and moves forward," on Monday 12/8, is found this bold attempt at the debunk:

The Supreme Court has a rule: a litigant may request a stay from the Justice for the circuit where their case arose. If it is denied, they can come back and ask another Justice of their choice. When that happens, the 2nd Justice always refers the matter to the court for conference, so they can get all 9 to agree on throwing it out and be done with it.

If they ever get something they want to grant, they ALWAYS issue an order to the other side requesting opposition. No court would ever issue a stay without having first have heard from both sides.

Obviously, publicity-seeking vexatious litigants have now figured out that they can get a lot of attention by this 2-step process -- its a sure way to get the trash they file listed on the docket. I suppose we can expect this to continue all the way up through January 20th.

Posted by: Vera | Tuesday, December 09, 2008 at 02:18 AM

Similarly, in Donofrio's own Natural Born Citizen blog article, today: "The Washington Times Coverage of Donofrio and Wrotnowski SCOTUS Cases," he cites this criticism, as reported by Times reporter, Tom Ramstack:

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s nonvoting Democratic delegate to Congress, speculated that the Supreme Court is considering appeals that challenge Mr. Obama’s citizenship only long enough to reject them “and lay to rest manufactured doubts about the legitimacy of Obama’s election before the inauguration.”

To this denigration dealt by Rep. Norton, Donofrio responds in his piece:

That’s a rather absurd statement. Frivolous cases aren’t graced with any respect at all. If it deserves immediate denial, then they deny it. But on the same day the order came down rejecting my case, Justice Scalia referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz to the full Court and it was distributed for the Dec. 12 conference.

If the Court wanted to send a message as Norton suggests, they could have denied Cort’s case at the same time as mine. Now that would have sent the message she suggests.

For example, when a stay application is renewed to a second Justice, that Justice may deny it straight away rather than referring it to the full Court. Examine the following two SCOTUS dockets where stay applications were denied by the first Justice and then denied by the second Justice upon renewed application:

No. 07A638
Title:	Ate Kays Company, Applicant v. Pennsylvania Department of General Services, et al.
Docketed:
Lower Ct:	Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District

Case Nos.:

(175 EM 2007)

~~~Date~~~	~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feb 1 2008	Application (07A638) for a stay pending appeal, submitted to Justice Souter.
Feb 2 2008	Application (07A638) denied by Justice Souter.
Feb 6 2008	Application (07A638) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.
Feb 7 2008	Application (07A638) denied by Justice Scalia. —————

No. 7A421 Michigan, Applicant v. Corey Ramone Frazier Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Michigan Case Nos.: (131041) Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) for stay pending disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Stevens. Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Stevens. Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) refiled and submitted to Justice Alito. Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Alito.

The intrepid New Jerseyan draws two examples from the SCOTUS record and puts more chips on the table. But, this does not satisfy one comments poster, who sees the bet and raises, as follows:

JudgeDredd Says:
December 10, 2008 at 12:06 pm

The second time you submit to a second justice, if they deny without submitting to the full court for review, you can submit it a third time. By sending it to the full court for review they can get rid of your case FASTER because that is your last shot. Your case will be one of thousands that the clerks pick through and recommend.It is very very possible (likely?) that not one justice has even seen your brief much less read it.The justices never even see the vast majority of applications.The court takes up such cases at its discretion and you have no Constitutional right whatsoever to even have it considered.

Donofrio sees the bet of JudgeDredd and calls:

Doesn't matter. If you submit it the first time or the second time, the Justice you submit it to has the option of referring it to the full Court and once it's referred, the Court may then deny it together. Upon the referral, if the full Court denies it without distributing it for conference, THEN NO 3RD RENEWAL IS ALLOWED. So, if the Court wanted to send a stern message they could have denied Cort's case as a full court on Monday without scheduling it for conference. Your point is in error. Once the full Court denies the application, you can't resubmit it to a 3rd Justice.

Thus, Leo maintains a countenance of confidence in his case and certainty in his place at the SCOTUS conference table. That tends to boost I.O.'s confidence.

Whom do you believe won the hand?

Are you a student of the SCOTUS who would like to state your case, here? If so, the "comments" link awaits you. Or, maybe something just "strikes you," somehow.

Or, if you wish to pass this question on to a litigious lifeline, please click the envelope.

<<<<<<<<<<<<> I.O. <>>>>>>>>>>>>

Addendum: Since much of this post comes across on the negative, I will mention another, rosier scenario, postulated by many. It "holds" that Scalia (and Thomas, perhaps others) may have wanted to dispose of the Donofrio suit in favor of a stronger Wrotnowski case and thus, he waited for the denial of Donofrio v. Wells and immediately referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.

In the same set of comments, Donofrio's remarks:

December 10, 2008 at 11:36 am

Just because a Justice refers it to the full Court, the full Court is not obligated to distribute it for conference. Upon Scalia's referral, the Court could have sent a stern message of denial without ever having distributed it for conference. The Court could have acted on Cort's application on the same day they denied mine by simply denying his. But they didn't. I don't know what it means, but neither does anybody else who isn't a SCOTUS Justice.

Plains Radio Webcast, Listener's Notes: Wrotnowski, Donofrio, Pidgeon

Live updating through the evening -- my notes from tonight's Plains Radio Webcast. (Parenthetical comments are by I.O., AW.) After Jill Stanek, on the state of the pro-life movement in an American culture steeped in death are featured Natural Born Citizen Challengers, Cort Wrotnowski (CT), Steve Pidgeon (WA) and Leo Donofrio (NJ) and... Chester A. Arthur.

Interview of Cort Wrotnowski...

• Donofrio's research on President Chester A. Arthur's covered-up U.K. citizenship brings new implications that will be included in the filing before the SCOTUS.
• If a SCOTUS hearing is held, Wrotnowski plans for Donofrio to present his case.
  
• Press is avoiding Wrotnowski, while it plays up the denial of Donofrio's hearing.
• Adam Liptak of the New York Times is inqiring, also Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune (obdurate leftist propagandist I've had experience with - AW).
• Joe Thunder reporting on the liveliness of the National Press Club press conference today, by others bringing suit (on the birth certificate). Thunder videotaped it. Pastor Manning was there (oh, oh) in addition to Orly Taitz. Thunder will post on his site, tomorrow afternoon, freedommarch.org. [I.O. Ed., audiotape, here]
  
• At one point, one of our objective-as-Goebbels journalists told Ms. Taitz, "...just go home...."
  

During the break, I see on I.O's sidebar that Leo Donofrio has updated his blog about the Wrotnowski progress at the SCOTUS.

• Adulterated allegiances are very dangerous for a nation's Commander in Chief to have.
• After December 15, charge of the process of determining the presidency is passed from the Electoral College (provided they vote, that day) to Congress and the chances of effectiveness of law suits are diminished.
• Ed Hale pass along from Leo Donofrio that he believes Wrotnowski's case is very strong, with advantages over Donofrio vs. Wells. "Layman" Ed says he thinks this is indicative of positive results.
• A caller wonders if and when Obama's side will be called in and will weigh in.
• Cort has to beg off -- claims he's busy. ;-`
• The Political Pastor program is signing off; TPP announces his chat room at Plains Radio.
  
• Ed Hale will have Steve Pidgeon on, who is bringing suit before the Washington Supreme Court.

Break -- if they need to keep beating the SCOTUS over the head with 2x4's so be it, until they gain constitutional sense.

Now, Karen and Ed Hale's Lions' Den program - it's a long, rich, historical evening at Plains Radio, interviewing Steve Pidgeon...

• Pidgeon's case has standing.
• Discussion of the 1790 statute, setting forth a "natural born citizen" (BTW, this phrase was specifically stricken from the stature in 1795.) requiring both parents to be citizens and the father, a resident of the USA. This disqualifies Obama.
  
• The 14th Amendment calls anyone born in the USA a "citizen." (However, see the declaration of the framer of the 14th amendment, about being a "natural born citizen!"). And this requires Obama's mother to have been 19 (longer story made short) when Barack-II was born. She was 18.
• Suit says Obama, a. not a natural born citizen, b. not a citizen, and c. arrrghhh!! the program winked out on me and it isn't coming back up!

If/when I can regain the broadcast, I'll be back to it. Coffee... want... coffee.... // OK, it's back for me.

• I'm guessing that point "c." above is that his Indonesian citizenship revokes his American citizenship (or perhaps he point "c." has to do with the birth certificate).
• Pidgeon's suit may bring the first case with standing having to do with the birth certificate before the SCOTUS.
• Caller from New Zealand brings up the writing of John A. Bingham (framer of the 14th Amendment) regarding allegiance, to be a natural born citizen.
• Obama became a Kenyan citizen officially in 1963, then an Indonesian citizen. He was apparently adopted, from the Lolo Soetoro / Ann divorce records, by an Indonesian citizen. If he is an American citizen after these facts, this means Obama is a naturalized citizen, and utterly not a natural born citizen by anyone's construct.

The one and only Leo Donofrio, Esq. is now on the program...

• Talking about how lame and inexperienced the states are, at even considering how to verify the citizenship qualifications of candidates. (How can one certify without verifying?)
• About the history of Chester A. Arthur's huge cover-up campaign to hide his U.K. citizenship. He appointed Justice Gray, who is the very one who wrote the opinion in the Wong Kim Ark case which liberalized American citizenship requirements! (That sounds eerily familiar, if you have read what friends of BHO are opining about citizenship.)

Break. I'm getting angrier, now. Blood pressure rising. "History repeats itself." -- history of corruption of the sacred trust we place in elected officials. God, if you are judging America, please spare the most innocent and punish most, those who most deserve it.

• Donofrio's point seems to be that allowing a fictitious president allows a great deal of dishonesty -- it allows a corrupt U.S. President. Justice Gray may have been writing "that opinion to sanitize Arthur's citizenship." Quid pro quo dealing is implied.
  
• All of Arthur's decisions and actions are tainted for history.
• Per Arthur's example, "You can't have a precedent if it is a fraud."
• Donofrio being Donofrio -- warns Pidgeon to investigate how Roger Calero was not allowed ballot access, for the sake of precedent. (Whatever one says about his NJ style, Donofrio is an excellent tactician and strategist.) Says that someone from the SoS had Calero removed and who did that should provide sworn testimony, to build the case. (Selective investigation and disqualification.) There could be a cover-up in WA.
  
• Donofrio believes Wrotnowski's application is much better drafted.
• Donofrio explains how the judge in NJ misapplied his suit: action in lieu of a prerogative writ became forced by the court into a writ of lesser application. Then, they refused his motion by a hoodwink excuse, based upon the procedural error the court itself created. (I'm not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV, so pardon my terminology.)
  
• (BTW, I'm wondering, since Wrotnowski is not a lawyer and Donforio says he was/is pleased at how much better his case is drafted -- it would seem, before Donofrio got to it -- did they get help from another attorney, in cognito? I did take Latin and I played a lawyer in a couple 5th grade vignettes.)
• The goofball idea that the SCOTUS should turn down the challenges, to avoid unrest and "overturning the will of the people." (David Horowitz is haranguing at conservatives challengers on this, for one.) Donofrio: "I'm sorry, it's not a real election if it's two fraudulent candidates."
• Pidgeon tells Donofrio that if the SCOTUS weren't interested in the case, it would have been rejected without going to conference. (My point: depends on the Justice.)
• Donofrio: even though he blogged about the idea that the SCOTUS might have preferred the strength of the Wrotnowski case, he was (stunned) when blog commentators told him Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz was referred to conference, a few minutes later!
• A stay of the Electors before Dec. 15 would be in order, because otherwise there would be a conflict of laws.
• Allowing not a strictly "natural born Citizen," could allow an orchestrated agent provocateur to become U.S. President. (What about someone of the kind who, during his campaign, would hold a rally in Germany, before hundreds of thousands, claiming himself a "Citizen of the World?")
  
• Caller commends those bringing these cases, affirming that the United States Constitution is worth sacrifice.
  
• Ed Hale asks someone for a pack of cigarettes and to his credit says "please."
• Discussion shifts (degrades? I hope not) into some contention of the likely success of the quest for the original certificate of live birth (COLB) but rises back to the point that this is the responsibility of the states' Secretaries of State, to which Pidgeon and Donofrio agree.
• Ed Hale requests that Donofrio and Pidgeon come back Friday night.
• Leo has to work all night on the new Chester A. Arthur brief and Cort Wrotnowski will drop it off in SCOTUSville tomorrow.

End of broadcast.
Prayers are in order.

• End note, 12/9, 2:10am: Despite the media gates, some do pay attention, but just who? Well, among others, I.O. just got a view from Hanoi -- via a Google search: "Wrotnowski obama."
  

Hey, here's an idea -- pick some of the media gatekeepers you most wish to bother and...
SEND it to the psy-ops jocks!! -- email envelope, below
(And they've called President Bush "incurious." -- Try, ostrich-headed.)

PS: my apologies, but not inclined to do much proof reading of the above.

Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz "Natural Born Citizen" Case Referred to Full Court by Justice Scalia (about Obama's foreign father)

Justice Scalia, by referring Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz to committee on December 12 may allow the Supreme Court to decide upon Barack Obama's status as a presidential candidate before the currently scheduled Electoral College election day, December 15.

This case is essentially similar to the case of Leo Donofrio, who assisted Connecticut resident, Cort Wrotnoski, in drafting it. According to Donofrio, the basis is very much the same (not essentially about the birth certificate, but regarding a foreign father) and it includes additional corroborative research and/or reasoning. Also, the history of this case is less problematic for the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) than the Donofrio case, due to a suspicious misfiling of the latter case by a New Jersey judge which may have provoked a question of standing before the Supreme Court.

My best suggestion for getting good interpretation of this is to visit Leo Donofrio's blog, where he has opined about Justice Scalia's potential thinking. Also, FreeRepublic.com, keyword: obamatruthfile (which will also likely include interesting discussion of numerous kinds). Also, Plains Radio Network, Inc. forum and The Obama File, Latest News.

Wrotnowski and Donofrio may be interviewed tonight on the Plains Radio Network, to discuss today's actions, possibly at 7pm CT (I do not know, but this has been their habit).

See The Donofrio "Natural Born Citizen" Challenge, for an analysis of this case, which would disqualify Obama, based upon the foreign citizenship of his father (and disqualify McCain, based upon his birth outside of American territory). It has very weighty constitutional merit, by documented contemporaneous meaning of "natural born Citizen."

The Donofrio case was denied, this morning. I will be updating this Weblog, to help you give you a snapshot of where the entire process is.

John Jay's request of the "natural born Citizen" requirement
click image to enlarge | h/t: FReeper: BP2