Here is a link to Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs and her compilation of "legal" challenges to the nationality of Obama: Obama's birth certificate forgery
I wrote, "SCOTUS demands that Obama produce a legal birth certificate by December 1, 2008?" Okay, maybe not, maybe I was wrong. Seems like I was...
According to Vente (comments at end) the Supremes have asked Obama, the DNC, and other co-defendants to respond to the Berg Writ of Certiorari and produce all documents produced at the lower court hearings or present a case as to why they don't have to do that. I think... PhotoGal also weighed in with some legal guidance.
Here's one more link, Berg v. Obama et al.: U.S. Supreme Court awaits..
. This one is very interesting and has some troubling information.
Questions remain about Obama's citizenship and the Electoral College meets December 13th. Based on this
, I'm not certain what the Supreme Court has asked Obama, the DNC, and other co-defendants to produce in response to the Berg Writ of Certiorari.
One more good blog post from Infidel Bloggers Alliance, here
Let's see how this turns out. Will Obama and the DNC comply with the Supreme Court or will he defy the Supremes right from the get-go? Then what...
H/T to Larwyn who stays on top of everything that is anything of import on the "net." Thank you, Larwyn, for never tiring when some of us, namely myself, weaken.
One more with H/T to Mustang, at Social Sense
: America the Beautiful
. As Obama said regarding his aunt who has ben given deportation orders, "We are a nation of laws." Well, let's see...
I stand by Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs and by my friend, Mustang. I absolutely will not delete this "evolving" post. I have been doing research and find it interesting beyond the extensive posts credited at Atlas Shrugs where Pamela - to her credit - has done an amazing job of bringing many posts together.
Actually, I don't think it is too much for Americans to want to see legal proof for the nationality of their president or when and where he/she was born. Come on! The MSM went into everything about President George W. Bush even up to and including Dan Rather accepting forged documents and making them news. Give me a break!
My prediction: President-elect Obama, our first 1/2 white-1/2 black president will respond to the Berg Writ of Certiorari, and the Electoral College will cast their votes as directed by the states they represent. No worries, Liberal Socialist Democrats - whom I distinguish from hardworking Americans of the American Democrat variety - President-elect Obama is our next president. I don't care about his ethnicity; I do care about his citizenship. (I was ticked that Obama did not speak to his "non-Hispanic white" heritage. He should not be ashamed of being 1/2 white, right?)
Going forward, I care most about his policies. I disagreed with several of President George W. Bush's policies such as selling our nation to China, signing the unconstitutional North American Union agreement with that thug Vicente Fox and Martin of Canada, borrowing money from the Saudis, signing the Campaign Finance Reform Act, and pushing his defeated Amnesty bill. At least allow me the right to disagree with President Obama's policies when I find them troubling. I'm not cutting him slack because he is of mixed race, that would be racist. He will be our President and we need to scrutinize his policies. Good grief!
And Joe Biden must be psychic as Russia just announced that they will be placing missiles along the border of Poland. Well, those boys didn't wait 6 months, eh?
Seriously, we gotta have fun... (Dr.D called me on this; and did so correctly. The use of the word "fun" is incorrect especially considering the danger we are in but allow me two things, please. 1) a laugh at the hypocracy of the Left MSM, and 2) that many (NOT ALL) of our 18 - 25 years olds, except for those who have gone to war, are fed by instant gratification - heck, our entire society seems fed by instant gratification today - and some could argue that, as a friend told me, life has a way of teaching us the hardships of life. Sadly, the rest of us will have to pay along with them. As many Americans have no problems with infanticide these days, I seriously hope they don't decide on an "end of life" expiration date for the rest of us.)
And Conservatives MUST NOT rush to evaluate what went wrong. What went "wrong" was that Democrats selected our presidential candidate for us and Republicans moved away from conservative, constitutional fundamentals. That's all...
Note: one more article you may like but miss: Obama wants to 'hit the ground running' on economy
I did a bit of research and found US Supreme Court awaits response to Berg Writ of Certiorari from Obama
Berg did file for an injunction to stay the election pending review of his suit, Berg vs. Obama, and Souter denied the injunction. (This is the same Associate Justice David Souter who voted that a city can condemn private property in order to sell that same private property to another private developer, Kelo vs New Longon, Connecticut.) But the Supreme Court has asked for responses from Obama, the DNC, and other co-defendants by December 1, 2008.
As I said, President-elect Obama is our next president. So now, let's see how he does. With very limited to no respect to my friends of the far-Left MSM, I believe the Conservatives generally will be much more fair to Obama than the Left ever was to President George W. Bush but let's see...
Very good comment from Vente: (I am surprised to learn that Philip Berg is a Democrat lawyer???)
www.obamacrimes.com, Obama Crimes
is the basic website for the case, maintained by Philip Berg, the Democratic Lawyer pressing the case. The defendants are required to FILE A RESPONSE to a Berg's Writ of Certiorari by December 1st. Then the court will decide whether the case has merit in the federal interest. Obama could save every one a lot of time and money and grief by simply producing the documents. Is it arrogance or guilt that prevents it?
n. (sersh-oh-rare-ee) a writ (order) of a higher court to a lower court to send all the documents in a case to it so the higher court can review the lower court's decision. Certiorari is most commonly used by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is selective about which cases it will hear on appeal. To appeal to the Supreme Court one applies to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which it grants at its discretion and only when at least three members believe that the case involves a sufficiently significant federal question in the public interest. By denying such a writ the Supreme Court says it will let the lower court decision stand, particularly if it conforms to accepted precedents (previously decided cases).
and here is what comprises a response from http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/discovery-responses/
A response is part of the discovery (fact-finding) process that occurs before trial. Certain motions that are filed, such as a request for interrogatories, request for production, or request for admission, require the person served with the motion to file a response within a certain time period. Some responses are required to be made under oath. The original response is filed in court and copies are served upon the other parties in the case.
So he (Obama) doesn't have to produce the documents. He can present an argument why he shouldn't have to.
Thank you, Vente! Let's see how it goes... So, the Supreme Court did not deny the Writ; they (at least 4 justices agreed) asked for responses to the Writ by December 1, 2008?
Actually, BO doesn't even HAVE to respond...he merely has the RIGHT to respond, according the to Rules of the Supreme Court.
Rule 15(1) is applicable:
1. A brief in opposition to a petition for a writ of certiorari may be filed by the respondent in any case, but is not mandatory
except in a capital case, see Rule 14.1(a), or when ordered by the Court.
I have seen not one thing that shows an 'order to respond' issued by SCOTUS to BO or the DNC.
I image that there will be a response - filed as close to Dec 1 as humanly possible.
A thank you to PhotoGal... God bless us!