U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:28 PM
 
66,558 posts, read 30,370,727 times
Reputation: 8687

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
A statute cannot amend the Constitution.
I gave you the option of going with the 14th Amendment's 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' clause which at the time of its ratification, according to the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was purposely meant to intend such:
Quote:
"What do we mean by ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means"
A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875

We know for a fact what the intention of the 14th Amendment was. It's a matter of historical record.

If you want someone other than a natural born citizen to be eligible for president, work to get an Amendment ratified. There have been no less than 24 attempts to do so since the late 19th century, and there have been several within the last decade:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/22532204-post76.html

You're fighting an uphill battle, though. NONE of the attempts to Amend the Constitution to allow someone other than a natural born citizen to be Constitutionally eligible to serve as POTUS or VPOTUS have succeeded. Not a one.

 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:35 PM
 
66,558 posts, read 30,370,727 times
Reputation: 8687
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
And here is what judges tell us the Constitution says:
Quote:
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”
Already been factually discredited, here:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/22572981-post723.html
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:35 PM
 
1,606 posts, read 1,357,704 times
Reputation: 933
Quote:
Originally Posted by tropolis View Post
at one point she was testifying as herself until the judge told her to sit down.

that and the crowd laughing behind her back.

GA Hearings: Live Stream (http://www.birthersummit.org/livehearings - broken link)
Orly Taitz is a stupid Soviet infiltrator. The birthers who follow her are a little below swine. 'Nuff said.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:36 PM
 
20,333 posts, read 9,879,284 times
Reputation: 4392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unegadihi View Post
....swearing and insults come from an empty mind struggling to make itself understood.
pot......kettle.....
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Hinckley Ohio
6,722 posts, read 4,433,604 times
Reputation: 1376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McGarrett View Post
Bullcrap. 50 years ago was when America was at it's finest.
Camelot, America at its finest, never imagined you admired JFK so much. Yes, just before the Vietnam war, the Cuban middle crisis, assassins and civil right battles that torn this country apart.
Quote:
There was no political correctness and America's prestine conservative family values and traditions was the gold standard for the world to look upon with envy.
I thought you teabaggers frowned on envy.
Quote:
Our military was highly feared and our education system was in great shape before desegregation was enacted.
so your birther motives are exposed, I assume you oppose "race mixing" but your opposition to Obama has nothing to do with race
Quote:
Also illegal immigration was under control with Ikes
Ike??? 50 years ago, that was 1962, JFK was president was beginning his second year.
Quote:
government program to hunt down and deport illegals deep into Mexico. We need to return to those days of pride and patriotism.
Yes, we need another dem president like JFK along with a democratic controlled congress. Obama only had 7 month before we lost Ted Kennedy's 60th vote, since we have record GOP veto's.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:42 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,582 posts, read 8,289,044 times
Reputation: 4158
There's now a video accompanying the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article. No changes to the article itself, but a video has been added, a short piece apparently from a local TV news station. An OK summary, nothing earth-shaking.

No ruling in ‘birther' challenge *| ajc.com
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:45 PM
 
5,113 posts, read 4,958,314 times
Reputation: 1732
Quote:
Originally Posted by tropolis View Post
at one point she was testifying as herself until the judge told her to sit down.

that and the crowd laughing behind her back.

GA Hearings: Live Stream (http://www.birthersummit.org/livehearings - broken link)
Looks like Obama is a fraud ... as many suspected ...
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:46 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 5,353,464 times
Reputation: 1833
and in other Orly news: Her case against the SSA is going down the toilet.

"01/19/2012 MOTION filed [1353593] by Michael James Astrue for summary affirmance. (Response to Motion served by mail due on 02/03/2012) [Service Date: 01/19/2012 by US Mail] Pages: 1-10. [11-5304] (Gilbert, Helen)"

TAITZ v ASTRUE (APPEAL) (USCA DC) - Appellee'S Motion for Summary Affirmance - Transport Room

Quote:
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. See Defenders of Wildlife v. Gutierrez, 532 F.3d 913, 919 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (reviewing denial of motion for reconsideration for abuse of discretion). The court properly determined that plaintiff had identified no new evidence, and no evidence that, even if true, would undermine the court’s holding. Op. Denying Reconsideration 2-3. The court also rejected plaintiff’s allegations of legal error, noting that plaintiff’s arguments were clearly erroneous, irrelevant, or mere restatements of arguments previously presented to and considered by the court.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:47 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 5,353,464 times
Reputation: 1833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Looks like Obama is a fraud ... as many suspected ...
based on what evidence?

nothing the birthers have presented is evidence of any fraud.

the fraud has been perpetuated by Birthers, like Susan Daniels who testified in court today that she committed identity fraud, by impersonating President Obama to gain access to his SSN record and using e-Verify against the law.
 
Old 01-26-2012, 05:50 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 5,353,464 times
Reputation: 1833
Another Orly case goes down the toilet:

01/23/2012 MOTION filed [1354001] by Kathy Ruemmler for summary affirmance. (Response to Motion served by mail due on 02/06/2012) [Service Date: 01/23/2012 by US Mail] Pages: 1-10. [11-5306] (Gilbert, Helen)

TAITZ v RUEMMLER (APPEAL USCA DC) - Appellee's Motion for Summary Affirmance - Transport Room

No substantial question is presented by plaintiff’s appeal. It is well-settled that “FOIA applies only to an ‘agency,’” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Office of Admin., 566 F.3d 219, 222 (D.C. Cir. 2009), and that “the President’s immediate personal staff or units in the Executive Office whose sole function is to advise and assist the President are not included within the term ‘agency’ under the FOIA,” Kissinger v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136, 156 (1980) (internal quotations omitted). See also 5 U.S.C. § 552(f). This Court has squarely held that the White House Counsel’s Office is not an agency subject to FOIA. See Nat’l Security Archive v. Archivist of the United States, 909 F. 2d 541, 545 (D.C. Cir. 1990); see also Judicial Watch, Inc. v. DOJ, 365 F.3d 1108, 1109 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 2004)



More and more the courts find the skills of Orly Taitz to be severely lacking.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:18 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top