THIRD Obama/Soetoro Case Docketed by SCOTUS

Meanwhile, a THIRD case challenging the Constitutional eligibility of the candidate known as Barack Hussein Obama II (also known as Indonesian citizen Barry Soetoro) has been docketed at the Supreme Court of the United States.

Is Obama Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of POTUS?

America Must Know.


Update:
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg quickly denied Wrotnowski’s application for stay one day after it was submitted to the United States Supreme Court.


Update:
refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.

5th Obamagate case reaches the Supreme Court

About these ads
This entry was posted in Presidential Eligibility. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to THIRD Obama/Soetoro Case Docketed by SCOTUS

  1. smrstrauss says:

    Here’s what it would take for Obama to have been born in Kenya.

    (1) It would have taken a lifetime of covering up by his mother before and after the birth of Obama in Kenya (IF he were born in Kenya of course).

    She could not have told a friend at college that she was excited that she soon would be travelling to Kenya to see her in-laws because, of course, a friend could have remembered it all the way to 2008. Or the friend could have told another friend.

    And, she could not have told a friend after the birth in Kenya “Say, let me tell you, it’s really an experience giving birth in Africa” because a friend could have remembered it even to 2008, or the friend could have told another friend, who would have remembered.

    And, she could not have told even her son when he was a kid or a teenager because kids and teenagers tend to talk, and the friends that they have told could have remembered it even to 2008.

    Even though she went to Kenya to see her in-laws and was presumably proud that she was doing that, she did not have any pictures taken with them or leave any pictures of her with them. Or, she or Obama himself arranged for all the photos to be burned in the years following that trip.

    So, in order to believe that Obama was born in Kenya, a lot of what is normal about taking trips and talking frankly about your life has to be eliminated. It is normal to take photos, but there are no photos. It is normal to tell people about trips, but no one was told (or they are all dead or sworn to secrecy, which is hard to believe in itself).

    (2) Obama’s mother, Ann, would have had to travel to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy.

    This is intrinsic to the born-in-Kenya theory.

    But let’s examine it. For most pregnant women, even today, if they had a chance to travel before the ninth month of pregnancy, or after it, they would. Why? Because it is easier to get around and see things when you are not carrying all that weight, and because there is always a chance of sickness. This was even more the case in 1961, when the statistics of stillbirth were higher than now.

    So, if they went to Kenya at all (which is unlikely because of item 1 above), it is more likely that they traveled before the ninth month, such as during the Christmas break from college, or Spring break, or right away in June when the college ended courses for the summer. Or, they planned to travel after the birth, taking Obama with them, but never made the trip because a year later the couple was breaking up. It is highly unlikely that they took the trip in the ninth month of pregnancy, and even more unlikely LATE in the ninth month, when the birth might occur on a plane or in a car in Kenya.

    Also, since it is a long trip, and they did not have direct flights Hawaii-Africa at the time, it would be more likely that they would want to see some of the sights along the way. Doing that makes a long and expensive trip seem more worthwhile, since in the process of going to Kenya you also get to see New York and London and maybe Rome or Cairo on the way to Kenya, or the other way via Tokyo. But to do this would mean that you planned the trip to take it when when walking around and seeing the sights is not so difficult for a pregnant woman, such as as many months as possible before the birth, or after the birth.

    (3) Obama’s mother would not have wanted to travel to Kenya when she was pregnant because to travel to Africa in those days required a Yellow Fever shot, which is not good during pregnancy.

    (4) IF Obama’s mother had traveled to Kenya in 1961, there would be official records of that trip available in Kenya.

    According to the theorists of Obama’s birth in Kenya, this is explained by the Kenyan government having sealed Obama’s files, which otherwise would have shown his Kenyan birth documents, his mother’s arrival in Kenya, and his own travel documents (or his being entered on his father or mother’s passport) after his birth in Kenya.

    But to say explain the absence of such official documents to the Kenyan government requires it to be part of the conspiracy, and it has to be a universally successful conspiracy in Kenya. By that I mean that not only is the Kenyan government covering up, but all members of the government or hospitals who may have had a chance to look into either the immigration or birth records must be keeping the secret. That means that many people who knew about Obama’s mother being in Kenya or about the birth in Kenya must be keeping the secret. But why should they? They might mention the fact that they saw the files at a bar for a free drink. Or they might bring the story to a newspaper, or a wire service.

    (5) Not merely the Kenyan government has to be party to the conspiracy.

    The officials in the state of Hawaii have to be conspiring as well. You will recall that in early November they issued a press release and subsequently were interviewed by the Honolulu Advertiser, saying that they had looked into Obamas’ files and from the contents of those files could confirm the accuracy of the Certification of Live Birth that Obama has posted on Fightthesmears.com and shown to FactCheck.org and Polifact.com.

    There are some conspiracy theorists who assert that what the officials in Hawaii did not say was that they had looked into the files and found a KENYAN birth certificate in the files. If so, they were intentionally misleading and were part of the conspiracy. To say that the certificate of live birth, which says on it that Obama was born in Honolulu, on the Island of Oahau, and in the County of Honolulu, is accurate after seeing a document from Kenya is a lie, and if it were shown that Obama really had been born in Kenya after giving the impression that he was born in Hawaii, the officials would be subject to prosecution for fraud. They would be very very unlikely to do that.

    So, the officials in Hawaii and FactCheck and Polifact would have to be part of the conspiracy.

    (6) On the other side of the story, the only “facts” that seem to weigh against the officials from Hawaii’s evidence that Obama was born in Kenya and the vast improbability of his mother traveling in the ninth month of pregnancy, is the tape recording of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother, who apparently said that she was present at his birth in Kenya.

    There are a number of explanations for this: the most obvious being that she did not understand the question, the one that is not so very nice is that she is an old lady. The point to remember about this interview (and I urge you to listen to it again) is that it was not conducted in order to obtain useful evidence that Obama was either born or not born in Kenya. It was designed to get a “yes” to the question whether she had been present when he was born.

    If the interview had been a fair investigation of whether Obama had been born in Kenya, it would have asked questions to demonstrate that Obamas’ grandmother understood the question or that she was not confused about being “present.”

    In such cases, it is normal to ask verifying questions along the following lines: “How long were Obama’s parents in Kenya before the birth?” “Did they travel to your village first, or go to the hospital and deliver the child first?” “How many days did Obams’s mother spend in hospital after delivering the child?” “In what month was the birth?” “What hospital?” And then there are questions along these lines: “If he was born in Kenya, why aren’t there any photos of him with his grandparents in Kenya?”

    (7) Other than the grandmother, who is on tape, there are also claims that other Obama relatives in Kenya said the same thing, that he was born in Kenya. However, these reports all stem from the same sources, Corsi and WND, and have not been verified by anyone else. And, they also have not been asked such questions as how long Obama’s parents were in Kenya before the birth and why there are no photos.

    Re: the simple question: “Mr. Obama, where is your birth certificate?”

    The first answer to this is that a certification of live birth is a birth certificate, but not in the sense of being the original document issued either by the hospital or by the state at the time of birth. But it is a birth certificate in the sense of being a document issued by the state relevant to the birth and declaring that the person was born at that time and in that place.

    But you may say, “why hasn’t he released his original birth certificate?” The first answer is that it is unnecessary. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that there is a document in the files showing that he was born in Hawaii. The certification of live birth, with the location of birth being in the USA, is enough for the US state department to issue passports, and in this case it has.

    A longer answer would be along the following lines: Has anyone prior to this election asked to see the birth certificate of any president or presidential candidate before? I mean, did we ask to see Tom Jefferson’ s birth certificate, Tyler’s, Polk’s, Lincoln’s, Wilson’s, Hoover’s, FDR’s, JFK’s or either of the two Bushes’?

    But in this case, the person has already shown his certification of live birth. Despite that a few people are asking that he show even more than that.

    Why, since the certification of live birth proves his birth in the USA, since it is incredible to think that his mother traveled to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy and kept the secret all her life, and since the only ones who are asking for him to POST his original birth certificate are right-wing bloggers, should he do it?

    To be sure, there are still some law cases pending, which might have the effect of requiring Obama to show his hospital birth certificate. IF so, there is an original birth certificate, in the files, (we know because the officials in Hawaii said so) and Obama can arrange to have it shown to the court. A court would be the right place to show it, not on-line, and a court would have the facilities to authenticate such a document. But unless a court asks to see it, why should he post it?

    IF a court doesn’t ask to see it, then what? Well, you can keep on thinking that he was born in Kenya, although there is no evidence and it is most unlikely, or you can get on with your life. Did you know that there are still some people who believe that the US government continues to hide the bodies of aliens in Rosewell, NM?

  2. smrstrauss,

    Thank you for your comment.

    If you re-read this post, you’ll see that I don’t even mention Kenya. I think the Indonesian citizenship is the biggest concern.

    His last name and his citizenship were both changed when he was adopted by his Indonesian step-father Lolo Soetoro. Whatever citizenship Barack Hussein Obama II had was renounced when he became Barry Soetoro, citizen of Indonesia. And oh, by the way, his religion was listed as Islam. And oh, by the way, he has openly confessed, in Arabic, with a first-rate accent:

    Allah is The Greatest.
    Allah is The Greatest.
    Allah is The Greatest.
    Allah is The Greatest.
    I bear witness that there is no deity except Allah.
    I bear witness that there is no deity except Allah.
    I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.
    I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.

    (Those are the [translated] opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, which he recited “with a first-rate accent”.)

    But he has not openly confessed this:

    Jesus is Lord.

    In fact, while he claims to be a “committed Christian”, he rejects the truth of Jesus Christ:

    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

    John 14:6

    “Committed Christian” Obama/Soetoro said:

    I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell. I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.

    Clearly, “his God” is not Jesus Christ.

    …let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

    Acts 4:10-12

    He admitted earlier this year that he travelled to Pakistan in 1981. U.S. citizens were not permitted to travel to Pakistan in 1981. What country’s passport did he use to go to Pakistan? It appears that he travelled to Pakistan with an Indonesian passport. Since he was over 18 at that time, that means he, as an adult, chose Indonesian citizenship and renounced his U.S. citizenship (because Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship).

    And it is very telling that Obama considers Jakarta, Indonesia (not Honolulu, Hawaii) as the “starting point” of his Hope to Assault the White House. You tell me why he allowed his book to be given the following title:

    Assault Hope: From Jakarta to the White House

    I ask in complete seriousness:

    A mere seven years after 9/11/2001, did millions of Americans just vote for an Indonesian Jihadist Muslim?

    A Different “9/11 Truth”

    This is not a joke, and this is not a game. This is about thousands of lives lost to Jihadists, and ensuring that only a Natural Born Citizen, with complete and undivided loyalty to the United States of America, is allowed to hold the office of President of the United States.

    In Memory of My Friend

    The Unseen Victims of 9/11/2001

    Support And Defend Our Constitution

  3. smrstrauss says:

    If we lay aside the question of Obama being born in Hawaii (he was born in Hawaii) and consider only the law cases that seek to disqualify him for reasons other than the location of his birth, we find that there are three approaches.

    (1) Revolving around Obama allegedly having lost his US citizenship due to dual nationality with Indonesia, when he went there when his mother re-married and when he attended Indonesian schools.
    (2) Revolving around Obama allegedly having lost his US citizenship due to allegedly having traveled on a foreign passport (an Indonesian passport).
    (3) Revolving around Obama allegedly not being a natural-born US citizen due to the combination of his having dual nationality at birth because of his father’s being a Kenyan (at the time a British subject since Kenya was a colony at the time.

    Taking these up in order.

    As to (1) there have been several Supreme Court rulings on this, with the decision being in all cases that a child cannot lose his US citizenship due to having the combination of dual nationality AND his parents renouncing his US citizenship when he was a child. The court ruled that only when a person becomes an adult can he himself relinquish US citizenship.

    You will see the proof of this at:
    http://www.richw.org/dualcit/cases.html

    In particular look at the Elg case:

    Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)
    Marie Elizabeth Elg was born in the US to Swedish parents, who took her back with them to Sweden when she was a baby. Shortly after her 21st birthday, she obtained a US passport and returned to the US.
    Some years later, the US government attempted to deport her on the grounds that when her parents had taken her to live in Sweden, she had become a Swedish citizen (under Swedish law), and as a result had lost her US citizenship. It was argued that an 1869 citizenship treaty between the US and Sweden, providing for the orderly transfer of citizenship by immigrants, called for loss of US citizenship following Swedish naturalization. This was one of the so-called “Bancroft Treaties” enacted between the US and numerous other countries between 1868 and 1937.
    The Supreme Court ruled, unanimously, that the actions of Elg’s parents in obtaining Swedish citizenship for their daughter could not prevent her from reclaiming US citizenship and returning to the US as an adult, provided she did so within a reasonable time after reaching adulthood.

    Obama returned to the USA before he was an adult.

    As to (2). It turns out that this is based on a completely mistaken premise. The US has no policy that would strip someone of US citizenship due to she or he traveling on a foreign passport. This is simply not mentioned in the State Department’s advice on the matter. See:
    http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

    In addition to travel on a foreign passport not being a reason that one can lose US citizenship, the State Department stress that it is difficult to lose citizenship by accident. This is because its standard for loss of citizenship requires someone to take an active role in relinquishing citizenship. In its words, “with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship.” The State Department guidelines read:

    “…the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.”

    As to (3): This is a completely novel legal theory brought by Leo C. Donofrio, which argues that even if Obama was born in Hawaii the simple fact that his father was from Kenya and did not have US citizenship at the time of Obama’s birth meant that Obama was not “natural born” because natural born means more than the place of birth. Donofrio argues that the natural-born citizenship requirement of Article II should be read in the context of the 14th Amendment which says that a citizen must be born or naturalized AND “subject to the jurisdiction” of the USA.

    Donofrio argues that Obama was not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA because his father was not a citizen and hence Obama was under the jurisdiction of the other country.

    This is a highly novel theory, but the Supreme Court does not often accept novel theories. Moreover, this flies in the face of the simple fact that Article II of the constitution does not specifically rule out dual nationality, and that the common-language definition of a natural-born citizen has so far meant a person who was born in the USA. The issue of jurisdiction is unclear. It is unlikely to mean what Donofrio says, which was that Obama at the time of his birth was under the “jurisdiction” of Kenya or Britain.

    More likely, jurisdiction means only that Obama was not born in a foreign embassy or consulate, where he would be under the jurisdiction of a foreign government.

    To be sure, he had dual nationality, but the constitution does not rule out people who have dual nationality from being president. If it had intended to do so, it would have. So, the Donofrio theory is unlikely to get the votes of the strict constructionists on the court, and the theory is not likely to get the votes of the liberals or the swing votes.

  4. smrstrauss,

    Thank you again for a very thoughtful comment.

    To have dual citizenship, both countries must allow dual citizenship. It is my understanding that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship. If you become a citizen of Indonesia, you renounce any other citizenship. I understand that the case law you cite could mean that it only matters what Obama did once he turned 18. That is why the passport issue is so relevant. If Obama obtained and used an Indonesian passport, then he became an Indonesian an Indonesian citizen and actively renounced his U.S. Citizenship.

    Even if Indonesia did allow dual citizenship, I believe that “natural born citizen” was intended to ensure undivided loyalty to the United States of America. Therefore, I believe that dual citizenship and “natural born” citizenship are mutually exclusive.

    Lastly, if his legal name was changed to Barry Soetoro when he was adopted, if he never changed it back then his name is still Barry Soetoro, and the name on the ballot is not his name.

    But, in the end, it doesn’t matter what you or I think… it matters what the Supreme Court Justices think.

    Have you ever wondered why Obama had his college records sealed? What if he attended as an “international student”, a citizen of Indonesia?

    Obama/Soetoro is the most “undocumented” Presidential Candidate in history:

    Original, vault copy birth certificate — Not released
    Certificate of Live Birth — Released — Counterfeit
    Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released
    Soetoro/Dunham marriage license — Not released
    Soetoro adoption records — Not released
    Fransiskus Assisi School School application — Released
    Punahou School records — Not released
    Selective Service Registration — Released — Counterfeit
    Occidental College records — Not released
    Passport (Pakistan) — Not released
    Columbia College records — Not released
    Columbia thesis — Not released
    Harvard College records — Not released
    Harvard Law Review articles — None (maybe 1, unsigned?)
    Baptism certificate — None
    Medical records — Not released
    Illinois State Senate records — None
    Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost
    Law practice client list — Not released
    University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

  5. smrstrauss says:

    Re: To have dual citizenship, both countries must allow dual citizenship. It is my understanding that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship. If you become a citizen of Indonesia, you renounce any other citizenship.

    This is simply not true. If Indonesia waves a flag and says “you once had dual nationality, but you do not anymore” that doesn’t affect US law, and of course it shouldn’t affect US law.

    SO, let us say that some court in Indonesia was convinced that Obama gave up his citizenship. As far as they are concerned he is Indonesian and Indonesian only.

    But the Indonesian decision only applies to Indonesia. In the USA, our laws apply, and they say that children cannot lose their citizenship because of what their parents do.

    In this case our law applies, as it should.

  6. 1) Under what nation’s passport did Obama travel to Pakistan as an adult?

    2) Did Obama/Soetoro ever provide proof of citizenship to obtain a U.S. passport, or did he only use the Senate loophole that allows Senators to obtain passports without having to provide documentation?

    3) Excellent and detailed commentary on the Natural Born Citizen issue.

  7. smrstrauss says:

    Re: “both countries must allow dual citizenship. ‘

    Not true. Often there are cases when one government thinks there is only single citizenship and if the person is in their possession they do things like draft the guy. The other country then screams and sometimes breaks off relations.

    In this case our law and the law of Indonesia can conflict. In Indonesia the actions of his parents are relevant to his nationality. (By the way, the Indonesian government is asking Obama to visit, and they didn’t even mention the words “Indonesian citizen. So the very idea that he had dual nationality with Indonesia may be false.)

    But in any case, even if he had dual nationality with Indonesia AND the Indonesians THOUGHT he had given up US citizenship, he cannot lose his US citizenship. One of the real good things about this country is that we protect our citizens (at least legally) and so our laws are strict on the matter. No matter what Indonesia thinks or thought, Obama (and no US citizen) can be deprived of his US citizenship unless he himself gives it up by a voluntary act when he is an adult.

    So what is the effect of this. Well, in Indonesia they thought he was an Indonesian and an Indonesia only and so he went to the school. But even if they thought that he was an Indonesian, that doesn’t make him an Indonesian. He would lose his citizenship only if a US federal court ruled that he had lost it, and according to the precedents laid down, that can only be voluntarily and as an ADULT.

    Since he returned to the USA before he was an adult, no issue.

    Re: The passport issue.

    Not true. Look at this site: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

    As you can see, there is no mention of traveling on a foreign passport. Why would you think it would be illegal, much less a grounds for losing your US citizenship to travel on the passport of the other country that you are a dual national with? I know journalists who do it all the time.

    In addition to travel on a foreign passport NOT being a reason that one can lose US citizenship, the State Department stress that it is difficult to lose citizenship by accident. This is because its standard for loss of citizenship requires someone to take an active role in relinquishing citizenship. In its words, “with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship.” The State Department guidelines read:

    “…the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.”

    Re: believe that “natural born citizen” was intended to ensure undivided loyalty to the United States of America. Therefore, I believe that dual citizenship and “natural born” citizenship are mutually exclusive.

    This is the issue that the Donofrio case raises and it is a subtle issue, and the only one that has a chance in my opinion. But ask yourself, does this case have the votes at the Supreme Court? If the court does not act, there is nothing to this theory.

    I agree that there is some chance that the court might hear this case, but a remote chance. After all, the Constitution does not specifically mention dual nationality being a barrier to citizenship, and in this case the court might well ask, “so he was a dual national at one time, is he one now?” and if not, bang out goes the case. Then the whole thing rides on the meaning of the word “jurisdicition” in the 14th Amendment. Donofrio argues that it means “allegiance,” but that is not clear at all. It might simply mean, as cases have held in the past, that it refers to cases when citizens of foreign countries are born within their embassies in the USA, and since the US has no jurisdiction over the embassies, they are not citizens. (And this right can be granted to areas in hospitals as well.) Or, the court may simply hold with the old definition of natural born as being born in the legal territories of the USA. But, I grant you, there is some chance the court might rule against Obama. If it does, I am prepared to obey the court. If it doesn’t act or finds for Obama, I hope you will as well.

    Re: Lastly, if his legal name was changed to Barry Soetoro when he was adopted, if he never changed it back then his name is still Barry Soetoro, and the name on the ballot is not his name.

    Yes, IF it was changed under US law. But what makes you think that there is something in Obama’s birth records that would show that his name had been changed? If so, it would not be the original birth document but an amended birth document. If there had been an amendment in the file, and his name had been changed, then he could not apply to receive his COLB as Barak Obama. He would have had to apply as Barry Soetoro, and since he did apply as Obama and received the document, it is not logical that there would be a name change in the file.

    So, what if his name was changed in Indonesia and not in the USA? Nothing, of course. Quite a few people take foreign names in foreign countries.

    Re: Have you ever wondered why Obama had his college records sealed? What if he attended as an “international student”, a citizen of Indonesia?

    Maybe he did: IF he had dual nationality. But that is not illegal and it may not be a constitutional barrier.

    But it may not be true. Don’t you think that the colleges and universities involved would have taken a look at their files by now, and most likely the fact would have leaked by this point? I mean during the campaign, maybe a Republican took a look at the file. In any case, it was always the responsibility of the McCain campaign to find such things out, and if it were the case and they didn’t publish it, that is their fault. On the other hand, maybe they found out that there was nothing in his college records of interest. By the way, all college records are “sealed” in that they are private documents.

    Re: Under what nation’s passport did Obama travel to Pakistan as an adult?

    As I commented on above, you cannot lose your US citizenship simply by traveling on a foreign passport.

    Re: ‘Did Obama/Soetoro ever provide proof of citizenship to obtain a U.S. passport, or did he only use the Senate loophole that allows Senators to obtain passports without having to provide documentation?”

    The answer is that if he never lost US citizenship, he did not have to provide any more proof than any other US citizen, an official government record that he was born in the USA (or in the case of naturalization, proof of naturalization, of course, but that does not apply in this case). Since Obama was born in the USA, his Hawaii COLB would be all that is needed to obtain a US passport, and I believe I read somewhere that that was what he used in obtaining his US passport.

  8. smrstrauss,

    Thank you for your comment. I appreciate when someone expresses their disagreement with well thought-out and respectful responses, not just inane cursing (as some others have done).

    We’ll have to see what happens at SCOTUS. I have no way of knowing if they will agree with me or with you.

    But again, thank you for your comment.

  9. smrstrauss says:

    Re: We’ll have to see what happens at SCOTUS. I have no way of knowing if they will agree with me or with you.

    As I’m sure you heard by now, today (Dec. 8) the Supreme Court threw out the Donofrio case.

    Apparently the Berg case is still alive, but as I said before, even if that gets a hearing, the issue is not directly Obama’s citizenship but whether Berg has the standing to sue. In the unlikely event that the SC hears the Berg case and decides for him, the case would be sent back to the original court that first heard it in order to determine the facts. That court would then have to decide whether a COLB is adquate proof or whether it needs to see further documents.

    That could take a while.

  10. As I’m sure you heard by now, today (Dec. 8) the Supreme Court threw out the Donofrio case.

    False. The SCOTUS denied the application to stay the election, but Donofrio’s case is still “pending”.

    I won’t bother re-typing here what I already wrote at Michelle Malkin’s blog and at Texas Darlin’s blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s