July 16, 2009
Updated list of birth certificate posts
Yes it’s taken awhile. It’s such a worthless little segment because it’s filled with nonfacts and Kitty Pilgrim’s attitude is downright nasty. I wasn’t going to bother but we keep getting asked about it so here it is. Funny thing is she doesn’t realize she is the ignorant one and comes off looking so. The lies are pointed out in red. If you want more detail, follow the link above – everything is explained in post after post.
Forget the facts – it all comes down to one question: Why won’t he just release it?
USArgos
Kitty Pilgrim sitting in for Lou Dobbs, Orly Taitz, Alan Keyes, Errol Louis, John Avlon.
KITTY PILGRIM: Coming up, the discredited rumor that won’t go away. Now, questions about President Obama’s place of birth and his eligibility to be president.
PILGRIM: Well, an Army Reserve major is again raising controversy over President Obama’s place of birth. [It never went away.] Now, the Major challenged his deployment orders claiming that President Obama wasn’t born in the United States, and that renders his orders illegal.
Now, a former presidential candidate, Alan Keyes, also filed a lawsuit challenging the president’s right to hold the office, and a hearing on that suit will be held on Monday.
Now, questions about the president’s place of birth have been asked and answered many times since before the election, and the president’s birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii. [Non fact. The only one who could say that is Dr Fukino and Alvin Onaka and they aren't talking.] The state’s Republic governor and other officials have backed that up. [Lie. All that was said about Gov Lingle: "Fukino says that no state official, including Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently." Besides, they can't possibly know that and if they did they are legally unable to speak about it unless barry gave them permission, which he hasn't.] CNN has fully investigated the issue, found no basis for the questions about the president’s birthplace, [Ridiculous. They do not even know what hospital he was born in because Gibbs doesn't even know.] say but the controversy lives on, especially on the Internet.
Joining me now is Orly Taitz and she represents the Army major and filed the Keyes’ lawsuit. Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes joins us. And on the other side, John Avlon who is a columnist with the DailyBeast.com and author of “Independent Nation.” And Errol Louis, columnist for the “New York Daily News” and a CNN, also an attorney.
And so, let me, just before we start, bear with me a bit. There’s overwhelming evidence that proves that his birth certificate is real [Nonfact. No birth certificate has been made public.] and that was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961. And if you’ll just bear with me, I’ll run through a little bit of the evidence and then we can get to this discussion. Now, the Annenberg political fact check, which is a nonpartisan group, [LIE. barry is directly connected to them. He worked for the Chicago Anneberg Challenge with Bill Ayers. The fact that she doesn't knows this makes clear she doesn't know anything about the issue - or barry for that matter.] went to Chicago to view the birth certificate [If they did that's not what they photgraphed and put on the internet.] last year and they released photos and this statement, “FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. [Now this simply infuriates me. They lie straight out that they physically touched the ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. Even Gibbs admitted that that one-sided piece of paper is NOT a birth certificate. And again, if they did actually see the ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE it's not what they put on their website. They posted a Certification of Live Birth. Period. Something that has not been connected to the ACTUAL original birth certificate that Dr Fukino vouched for.] We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. [State Department requirements do not include natural born status. Meaningless determination.] Our conclusion: Obama was born in the USA, [They can't possibly conclude that. And curiously, why did they not use his full name and why did they not say born in Hawaii?] just has he has always said.”
The Republican governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, on record, she says Obama was indeed born in her state and we should note, she did support John McCain. [I have no idea what she is talking about. Politifact wrote: Even the governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, a Republican who at the time was stumping for John McCain, said it was on the up-and-up. But they - a factchecker - provided no direct quote or reference so it is meaningless.] So, we also have a copy of the “Honolulu Advertiser” the newspaper, August 13, and the “Hawaii Star-Bulletin,” August 14, 1961, both announcing Barack Obama’s birth.
Also, October last year, the director of the Hawaii Department of Health wrote a letter stating, “I have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Senator Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedure.” [Yes. But she did not say what was on it and more importantly she said nothing about that COLB on the internet. And her spokeswoman Janice Okubo, who has not seen his actual birth certificate said: "I don't know that it's possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents."]
PolitiFact.com reissued their results from the investigation they conducted in June of last year and they say, “Since we published Obama’s birth certificate, [LIE. Not a birth certificate.] questions about its authenticity have been frequent and fierce. After reviewing the evidence, we are confident of our rulings.” [And their ruling? A negative. "There is not one shred of evidence to disprove PolitiFact's conclusion that the candidate's name is Barack Hussein Obama, or to support allegations that the birth certificate he released isn't authentic." He didn't release a birth certificate making their "findings" null and void. And the only way to know if that COLB is "authentic" is to see what Dr Fukino saw. There is nothing proving that COLB has anything to do with his birth certificate.]
This is the last one, thanks for bearing with me. The White House press briefing this week, reporter from the “World Net Daily” pressed again about the birth certificate, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said this following comment:
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECY: Do all of your listeners and the listeners throughout this country the service to which any journalist owes those listeners, and that is the pursuit of the Nobel Truth, and the Noble Truth is that the president was born in Hawaii, a state of the United States of America.
[She left out his preceding exchange where he admitted as in "I KNOW" that what was on the internet - the COLB - was not a birth certificate and also that he did not know the name of the hospital barry was born in.]
PILGRIM: Now, Alan Keyes, you’ve been patient letting me get through all that, but what more do you need to be convinced? [What Dr Fukino looked at. That, yes, barry can get.]
(LAUGHTER)
ALAN KEYES, FMR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Some evidence. And the evidence is something that president Obama is strenuously blocking. You ask me to prove that I was born in New York City at the time and hospital I say, and I will give you a certified copy of a full birth certificate with a doctor’s signature, the hospital, and everything else. I won’t direct you to some photograph on the Internet and a bunch of hearsay statements that would not be accepted as evidence in any court of law.
And so the very simple question is, why spend 800,000 to a million dollars blocking the birth certificate? Blocking records at school and college that would in any way have a bearing on the question…
PILGRIM: All right, Alan…
KEYES: Both of his birth and of his citizenship claims at various times in his life. Why is he going to all this trouble, if as they say, the matter is resolved? Can’t be resolved by a bunch of statements and assertions.
PILGRIM: OK, Orly, we have to keep this quicker, but please tell me…[Keyes = 9 sentences.]
ORLY TAITZ, ATTORNEY: OK, Obama never provided his birth certificate. What he provided is certification of live birth that was issued last year that does not have the name of the doctor, does not have the name of the hospital, does not have any signatures. Do you know that Hawaii has a statute 338, that allows foreign-born children of Hawaiian residence to get Hawaiian birth certificates. Did you know that?
PILGRIM: Errol, I would like you to respond. [Taitz gets 4.]
ERROL LOUIS, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS: Listen, I think — I think what we have here is a case where under the guise of saying, well, we can’t trust whether or not he should be president because we don’t have the evidence, it’s actually the reverse. These are folks, and there are a number of them, and some of them are raising money like “World Net Daily” which is as far as I’m concerned, running a scam, where they’re selling all kinds of bumper stickers and stuff like that, and I don’t know what Miss Taitz is taking in the way of legal fees.
(CROSSTALK)
They’re raising legal fees from across the country and the reality is they don’t accept that the president is the president, and, therefore, they work backward and there will never be enough proof to satisfy them.
[He cannot possibly say that until the birth certificate is released.]
PILGRIM: All right, John, I have to let…
You’ve offered a mountain of evidence in addition to two birth announcements. That’s a pretty deep conspiracy. What we have here, you know…
[MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE? Go back and read what "evidence" there was. And he is supposedly a lawyer. At least he separates the birth announcements from the word "proof".]
(CROSSTALK)
JOHN AVLON, DAILYBEAST.COM: No, what we have here is Obama derangement syndrome. This pathological hatred of the president posing as patriotism. Ambassador Keyes says that President Obama has called him a radical communist. You on your blog have repeatedly referred to the administration as Gestapo SS. Which is it? Get your story straight. Is he a Nazi or a communist? You guys are nuts.
[What did he say of importance? Where was discussion of fact, evidence, or proof?]
PILGRIM: Orly, I have to ask you to let everyone at least have their say before you respond to it. I believe we’re out of time, I’m sorry to say.
(LAUGHTER)
TAITZ: Let me say one more thing, in order to be the president, you have to have to have two parents that are citizens. Obama’s father was never a citizen of this country.
PILGRIM: All right, Orly, we have to call it, there. I’m sorry. Thank you very much, all of you, for joining in this very lively debate.
Debate?
Even that’s a lie.
(5-16) Arrest #2 (respectful, takes less than a minute, no handcuffs, no manhandling, no humiliation)
(5-17) POTUS anti-Catholic stance awarded – Catholic priest, Fr Weslin, arrested and jailed (side by side video of POTUS & Fr Weslin)
May 18, 2009
A view from Notre Dame from Alan Keyes.
DISCALIMER: Provided for informational purposes only. This website neither espouses or denounces Alan Keyes’ message.
Speaking only for myself – I find what was done to Fr Weslin nothing short of police brutality/excessive police force and think it should be prosecuted as such. Change his race and/or his religion and it would have been plastered all over the media. As is, it recevied very little media attention. Why? Because of how it would reflect on barry. Media corruption persists.
===========================
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 12:08 PM
Subject: FROM: Alan Keyes at Notre Dame
Last Friday, and again this week, I and others profoundly concerned with the University of Notre Dame’s scandalous invitation and extension of an honorary degree to Barack Obama were engaged in peaceful, prayerful witness to truth on the Notre Dame campus…
then it happened…
We walked onto the campus praying the rosary and bearing witness to the Church’s teaching against the objective evil of abortion. At the behest of Father John Jenkins, the President of the University, we were detained by the UND police and turned over to the civil authorities!
So I went twice to jail, along with two Catholic priests and other brothers and sisters in Christ. I am told that on Thursday unpublicized action was taken by a local Superior Court judge to enforce new, harsher procedures for posting bond in cases such as ours, so that those of us persistent in our witness could be unjustly incarcerated without relief or any opportunity to post bail for days. This judge cooperated with the “powers and principalities” who disgrace Notre Dame with the Obama “honors,” and now violate our constitutional and canonical legal rights to our witness for life. During our arrests we were not defying civil law, but merely obeying the laws of God and the directives of the Church and its leadership!
We sought to counteract the scandalous impression given by University authorities that it is compatible with Christian faith and Catholic teaching to honor and hold up as an example of good conduct someone who has made himself the focus of abortion evil in the world today.
Unlike Father Jenkins, we are acting with respect for Christ’s instruction that people of faith should work out their differences within the communion of the faithful before calling upon civil authorities, who may not act with respect for the laws of God and the teachings of the Church.
This is why I sought to meet with Father Jenkins before I joined in the spiritual rescue efforts occasioned by the University’s scandalous behavior. He refused to respond to my request!!!
In this, Father Jenkins displayed the same obdurate indifference to spiritual considerations that has exemplified his conduct throughout this scandalous affair. He has encouraged a bunker mentality within the University of Notre Dame community, by treating other members of the Body of Christ, even those in communion with the Holy See, as if we are “outsiders.”
This mentality contradicts the “emphasis on Community in Catholicism” cited in the University’s mission statement but utterly ignored by Father Jenkins and his colleagues.
Archbishop Burke of the Vatican and the some 70 American bishops who have demanded that the invitation and honorary degree be withdrawn; the hundreds of thousands who have signed the petition with the same plea; the millions of Catholics and prolife Christians they represent — although part of the Church communion, the body of Christ, and a community of the faithful, all are apparently to be treated as criminals if they dare to set foot on the Notre Dame campus to protect life and protest the University administration’s scandalous judgment!!
Where is the humility that should characterize Christian leadership?
Where is the love toward other believers that should give glory to God?
And where is the respect and the will to stand up and protect innocent, vulnerable life?
Instead of ordering arrests and persecution of those – including PRIESTS – bearing true witness, a faithful Catholic and Christian heart should seek to converse in order to instruct or to learn!
Instead, Father Jenkins has reacted with a harshness that bespeaks fearful guilt, using force to dispose of opposition. If, despite the opinion of the Vatican, the bishops and so many of the clergy, religious and the laity, Father Jenkins and his colleagues are right to honor evil, why are they afraid to deal openly and respectfully with both the Church authorities and fellow believers who disagree?
They react with forceful abuses of their authority because they cannot properly defend their actions in terms of the laws of God and the teachings of the Catholic Church.
They therefore substitute force for persuasion. In this too they honor evil, by imitating its methods.
Please help us expose this grave injustice, as this shocking scandal unfolds!
My Utmost for His Highest Honor,
Alan Keyes
P.S. Father Jenkins continues to arrogantly ignore national and international pleas to hear the concerns from Christians about the injustice of honoring Barack Obama with a podium and degree from Notre Dame, in direct contradiction to the directives of the American Bishops, and in disrepute of the purpose, principles and mission of such a prestigious institution of faith. He has faithful Catholic priests and laity unjustly arrested and jailed for days to silence their witness for innocent life. Father Jenkins and the police powers collude in abuse of the faithful to curry favor with Barack Obama, who is eager for the political credential that “honors” from the University of Our Lady will bring him, to aid in duping a prolife America about his radical anti-life policies. Help us bring public pressure on Jenkins and Obama to force acknowledgement that their abuses of faith and trust diminish Notre Dame’s integrity in on-going scandal, controversy and dishonor throughout the Christian and Catholic community, and bring disillusionment to voters of conscience.
P.P.S. If you are able to help us financially in the battle, our needs are rising! We have dozens of people in jail, including Father Weslin and others with families facing a likely few hundreds of dollars each in court costs and fines, never mind the high $1,000 bail that has been set for each of us. With your faxes of protest, you will help us free our brothers and sisters still in jail, INCLUDING 78-YEAR OLD FATHER WESLIN, of the Lambs of Christ!
March 22, 2009
Somebody thought it would be funny to delete *orly taitz* posts. I spent the day recovering posts from the cache. I don’t know if I got them all. The links in the body of the posts may not match up, so here is a master list - not in chronological order.
Missing Orly Taitz posts
Dear birther haters:
Ben Smith: just another “birther” illiterate
A proposition for Ben Smith & Politico re: birthers
“Politically neutral”
What type of Commander in Chief does this?
body language: barry, biden and the Supreme Court Justices
barry’s birth certificate: Lightfoot v Bowen docket
Lightfoot v Bowen disappeared off SCOTUS Docket
Lightfoot v Bowen is back
(3-13) Orly Taitz delivers documents to Chief Justice Roberts
(3-13) AP reporter’s take on Taitz - Justice Roberts interaction
(3-16) Orly Taitz shout out to Mr Richard Holley in Moscow Idaho for his assistance
(3-16) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (audio/text)
(3-21) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (video)
(3-17) Orly Taitz outs Danny Bickell to Justice Roberts
(3-18) Explanation: Danny Bickell
(3-18) Leo Donofrio vs Danny Bickell
Enlisted vs Commissioned Military Oath of Office
Active member of Military Intelligence signed on with Taitz
Orly Taitz’s military & office holding plaintiffs
Lt Col David A Earl-Graef USAFR MC’s letter to Robert Gates
Ret Major General Carroll D. Childers signs on
State Rep Laurence Rappaport signs on Orly Taitz’s case
TN’s Frank Niceley, Stacey Campfield & Glen Casada join Eric Swafford
State Rep Eric Swafford (R-TN) signs on (2-9)
Rep Bill Posey’s (R-FL) Birth certificate bill (text)
Rep Posey’s Birth Certificate Bill to stop future barrys
Rep Posey being bot attacked for introducing barry soetoro birth certificate bill
Orly Taitz’s upcoming radio appearances (3-7 & 3-8)
Dr Orly Taitz on Matthew Hill Radio Show (2-10)
===================
[may have to click the google cache version of the pdf]
2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED
==============
(3-1) Pre-Litigation Quo Warranto Letter to Atty Gen Holder
(3-13) Orly Taitz delivers documents to Chief Justice Roberts
(3-25) Taitz meets with William Chatfield (Selective Service)
(3-25) Quo Warranto and Application for Emergency Stay re-filed in person
(3-25) Orly Taitz: Documents present and accounted for at DOJ & SCOTUS
(3-26) Orly Taitz letter to Chief Justice Roberts
(3-28) Orly Taitz letter to US Atty Jeffrey Taylor
(4-9) Update on Quo Warranto
(4-10) Orly Taitz’s site cyber attacked…again?
(4-11) Taitz site abruptly shut down because of PayPal investigation
(4-11) Taitz Dossier #5 re PayPal account
===========
Update 11: barry birth certificate
barry’s birth certificate re-visited
COLB vs long form birth certificate
What Dr Fukino’s statement didn’t say
Why can’t the known COLB be subpoenaed?
Dr Ron Polarik’s forgery report (video)
March 13, 2009
I’ve read more legal crap in the last however months and it always ends the same way: denied.
Bottom line: the case is moot, the petitioners failed to identify a duty the respondents failed in performing, it’s too late anyway and the subpoena was too broad and was not properly served.
How did they not know that? barry should have been served 5 days in person/10 days by mail prior to serving Occidental college - they were served on or about the same day.
Did not see anything about financial penalty.
Case No.: 34-2008-8000096-CU-WM-GDS
Honorable Michael Kenny:
1. Application of Robert Bauer to appear as counsel pro hac vice GRANTED.
2. Secretary of State demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
3. President Barack Obama et al. demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
4. Motion to quash the subpoena is GRANTED.
The eye opener:
“appropriate remedy for an issue concerning the qualifications of a President is an action before the United States Congress pursuant to the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution and 3 U.S.C. section 15″
For specifics:
• Petition fails to state a cause of action against the Secretary of State.
• Petitioners have not identified any authority requiring the Secretary of State to make an inquiry into or demand detailed proof of citizenship from Presidential candidates and she had no “ministerial duty” to demand proof.
• “in the manner directed by the Constitution” does not provide an affirmative duty on the electors to discover whether the candidate is a natural born citizen.
• Secretary of State: the petition is moot and there is no judiciable controversy insofar as it relates to the 2008 General Election.
• The controversy is not “ripe” because 2008 is over and would only apply to 2012 and beyond.
• It is too late for relief against the Secretary of State and the California Electors as to the 2008 General Election.
• Elane Huber — Elane Haber (something about appointing a dead elector) just a typo.
• Petition does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against any of the named Respondents.
• Although petitioners allege that documents, statements or other lawsuits raise questions about whether President Obama is a natural born citizen, it does not allege that either the President or the Vice President has failed to perform any mandatory duty under either state or federal law.
• [Mandatory I get – but he has a moral duty to show his birth certificate and no one can argue around it. He says it’s “not about him”, but when The American People want to know and have him prove it - he resists. He is anything but transparent.]
• Court has no jurisdiction over the subject of this action.
• That procedure is for objections to be presented before the United States Congress pursuant to 3 U.S.C. section 15. Petitioners’ belief in the importance of their arguments is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this Court.
• Petitioners have not shown that any of the documents sought could assist in answering the natural born question.
• The subpoena and the associated notice to the consumer were improperly served.
• This lawsuit is moot as to issues concerning President Obama.
***
(3-13) Rep Posey’s Birth Certificate Bill to stop future barrys
(3-13) Rep Posey’s Birth Certificate Bill (text)
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
February 24, 2009
I don't know what happened to the original post. It's getting a "not found" so here it is again.
Petition for Writ of Mandate Keyes et al v Bowen et al. (original pdf)
Some of you have said you can't get the pdf via the HTML so here's a copy of a readable online copy.
At top right you can magnify (arrow) or full screen or you can follow the link below it.
doesn't embed here. See links below.
***
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
2-24 Keyes: "Obama is a radical Communist!"
Here’s the notice of hearing for 3-13-09.
Can't embed over here.
Link to WordPress site.
***
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
2-24 Keyes: "Obama is a radical Communist!"
February 24, 2009
Andrew Malcolm at the La Times still doesn't know the difference between a certification of live birth and a birth certificate.
"In June, the Obama campaign released to The Ticket a copy of the then-senator's Hawaiian birth certificate"
Kind of shows how little journalism is actually done anymore. And what's really amazing is how folks feel free to go after people when they don't even know what they're talking about. They just assume it's crazy. Nobody checks sources or investigates anything and yet they wonder how something could have gotten by the press.
If you've never had the distinct pleasure of watching Ambassador Keyes speak here you go. I would have liked to have see the guy asking him questions, who then laughed, provoking a rant. I was laughing listening to him - not about what he was saying - how he was saying it.
His voice and his facial reactions don't jive. He sounds outraged but keeps looking into the camera and around to see if anyone is hearing him. It's like a grandmother scolding a child and then winking at grandpa.
Selected quotes.
Obama is a radical Communist!
He is going to destroy this country.
We are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist.
The man is an abomination!
He has advocated infanticide.
If they happen to escape the abortionist's intention and are born alive, he actually supported the idea that those babies should be set aside and die.
That is a violation of conscience that is inconceivable.
Is he President of the United States?
I, frankly, refuse to call him that.
At the moment, he is somebody who is an alleged usurper.
He is alleged to be someone occupying that office without the constitutional warrant to do so.
He has refused to provide proof that he is in fact a natural born citizen.
I'm not even sure he is President of the United States.
No! That is not a laughing matter.
We're in the midst of the greatest crisis this nation has ever seen. And if we don't stop laughing about it and deal with it, we're going to find ourselves in the the midst chaos, confusion and civil war.
It's time we started acting like grownups.
This is insanity!
It's as if we've put insane children and adolescents in charge of the country!
Where did we come up with two trillion dollars in the course of the last six months?
Did we wish for it out of the air?
Have people gone mad in this country?
You don't have that money.
We are claiming that a bankrupt government can save a bankrupt banking system
Explain to me how that happens, because I think that's impossible.
He presents silly ideas like this and says 'let's move forward now'...
This is insane!
It's got to lead to the collapse of our economy, and it's going to.
***Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
February 24, 2009
I have been asked many times over the last two weeks to clarify Keyes v Bowen. Here's a quick rundown and there are links at the bottom.
Presidential candidate Alan Keyes, Wiley S Drake and Markham Robinson of the American Independent Party are suing Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State and the California Board of Electors to prevent the certification of the vote in the Electoral College. (Obviously it already happened.)
Similar to Gail Lightfoot v Bowen.
Lawyers for Keyes et al are Gary Kreep and Orly Taitz.
Basis of suit: Secretary of State Sandra Bowen was charged with the responsibility of proving barry was eligible to be president before she put his name on the ballot. The Board of Electors have the same responsibility before they certify the vote.
The basis of barry's ineligibility: he is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution.
That either he was not born on American soil or he lost his citizenship while he was living in Indonesia from age 6-10. If he was adopted by his Indonesian father - he lost his American citizenship because there was no provision for dual citizenship.
Supporting this is barry's claim of traveling to Pakistan at a time when Americans weren't allowed.
Supporting the claim that he was not born in Hawaii is barry grandmother Sarah Obama's claim that he was born in Kenya.
Also that he has never released his original long form birth certificate and the possibility that the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) is a forgery.
NOTE: The claim that he is not a natural born citizen by virtue of his dual citizenship - UK & US - at birth as conferred by his father was basically quashed by the Supreme Court via Donofrio and Wrotnowski.
Keyes sent out a subpoena to Occidental College in an attempt to obtain barry's academic and housing records. If provided, they might provide his place of birth and what he considered his citizenship to be. Such as if he received financial aid as a foreign student.
California Superior Court
Case Number: 2008-80000096
Filing Date: 11/13/2008
Case Type: Writ of Mandate
Case Title: AMBASSADOR DR ALAN KEYES VS. CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE DEBRA BOWEN
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
2-24 Keyes: "Obama is a radical Communist!"
***
I hope that helps because it's all I know. Other links if you need them.
Berg, Wrotnowski, Donofrio
Lightfoot v Bowen
Hollister v Soetoro
Dr Fukino on COLB
COLB vs Long form birth certificate
Birth certificate archive
February 24, 2009
UPDATED: There's some confusion about the Keyes v Bowen case, the Occidental College Subpoena, the Motion to Quash it and the question of financial sanctions. See the links for everything below.
This is how I understand it.
It has been born out in previous cases that "there exists no designated official in the federal government, or the government of the states, directly charged with the responsibility of determining whether any Presidential candidate meets the qualifications of Article H of the Constitution of the United States."
And the courts have consistently ruled that citizens, including retired military on ready reserve, have no "standing" to demand barry prove his eligibility.
So Keyes et al sued the California Secretary of State, Sandra Bowen, claiming that she had a duty to make sure the candidates she put on the ballot were in fact constitutionally eligible.
They also claimed that each California Elector has "an affirmative duty to discover whether the candidate for President for which the elector is seeking election is a 'natural bom' citizen."
Specifically, they sought "to enjoin Secretary Bowen from both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, and from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, until such documentary proof is produced and verified showing that [President Obama] is a 'natural born' citizen of the United States and does not hold citizenship in Indonesia, Kenya or Great Britain."
Basically means they wanted to stop the certification of the vote before it got to Dick Cheney.
Problem is they didn't bring suit until November 13th and did nothing further to stop them. And then there's the simple issue of identifying a "mandatory duty with which Respondents failed to comply with".
There are three outstanding motions set to be heard on March 13, 2009.
And then came the Occidental College subpoena. I'm not sure how they got to that idea. I understand the intent and the potential of what might be found - but why did so much time lapse and why was the suit started 9 days after the election? I don't know if it anything to do with Lightfoot v Bowen - wanting a back up of sorts like Wrotnowski to Donofrio.
And here is where the real screw up was - if the statute barry's lawyers cited is valid, Kreep did not follow proper procedure for the serving of the subpoena.
Why? How could a such a simple mistake be made?
Kreep was to serve barry 5 days (in person) or 10 days (by mail) before they served Occidental College. And when they served Occidental College they should have provided proof that barry was notified in accordance with the statute. Both were sent via mail on 1-15. There is mention of a "Certificate of Compliance" when they clearly were not.
So because it was not properly served Occidental is not legally bound to comply.
Timeline:
11-13 Keyes v Bowen Petition for Writ of Mandate filed
1-15 Subpoenas were served to Occidental College and Bowen et al via US Mail.
1-16 Woocher mailed Keyes' counsel Gary Kreep to request they "cancel or withdraw the subpoena" at least until March 13th when those three motions would be heard. The cancellation would be without prejudice and could be reinstated if the case was still alive on March 14th.
Means they wanted to prevent discovery until the case was thrown out. The same thing they did with Berg v Obama.
1-27 Woocher again contacted Kreep to ask the same thing.
2-2 Kreep emailed Woocher that he wasn't going to withdraw or cancel the subpoena.
2-11 Woocher filed the notice and the Motion to Quash.
According to barry's lawyers the case is moot because:
Keyes et al have not identified a single "mandatory duty" the respondents Bowen et al failed to do.
The subpoena "seeks irrelevant information that could not, under any circumstances, lead to discovery of admissible evidence in this case". [lie]
The subpoena was not properly served.
It's too late for a writ of mandate barring Bowen et al from certifying the vote because it has already been done and barry and Biden were sworn in "on or about" Jan 20th.
I did find these words interesting and wonder why they were included:
The central issue in this lawsuit — putting aside the significant jurisdictional and timeliness questions — is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from the Democratic Party's presidential nominee.
None of the documents sought by Petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question.
Now that is a blatant lie and one they should not have said out loud. It smacks of guilt - not legalese. If he was registered as barry soetoro - like his classmates knew him to be - there is plenty. And if he received financial aid for being a "foreign citizen" then the deal is sealed.
That one statement reinforced the fact that he continues to fight something that according to him and his gazillion lawyers doesn't need fighting.
Why does a man claiming transparency need to be compelled to produce anything?
He lies every time he mentions that word.
And as far as the threat of monetary sanctions - this is what was at the end of the motion:
Respondent moving parties do not, with this motion, exercise their rights under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1987.2, 2025.410, and 2025.420 to seek recompense for their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs necessarily incurred in bringing this motion. However, Respondent moving may do so in the future if Petitioners continue to misuse the discovery process.
Again it seems a tad desperate. If they are so certain that nothing of relevance could be obtained from the subpoena, that the subpoena was improperly served and that the case is moot - why the threat?
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
2-24 Keyes: "Obama is a radical Communist!"
February 11, 2009
Hi ObamaIsAFraud2008 - clarified again for you. (2-24)
Ok since you can't download the pdf of Official Motion to quash (pdf) of the Occidental College subpoena (relevant text) / (Occidental College subpoena (pdf) of barry's academic and housing records below is an UNOFFICIAL text version and here's my understanding of it.
Scroll all the way down to the bottom to see the financial sanction footnote in red AS WRITTEN. It seems awfully desperate to me. barry has enough money to motion them to death.
I am always amazed by how the same bot tone comes through even in legal documents. My guess this was written by a woman who is infatuated with barry and thinks her efforts to protect! him from her fellow Americans who actually believe in the law - to the letter of the law - is going to be noticed. I do hope she is getting paid as much as her male counterparts.
MOTION TO QUASH
BACKGROUND
Petitioners filed this action on November 13, 2008, nine days after the November 4,2008 General Election. The Petition alleges that at least seventeen actions have been filed questioning whether the President is a "natural born citizen" under Article II, Section I, Clause 4 of the United States Constitution. (Pet. ff 62-63, 68, 73.) According to the Petition, these lawsuits suggest variously that although President Obama was bom a United States citizen he somehow lost this status by subsequently obtaining citizenship in Indonesia, or, alternatively, that he was actually born in Kenya and is therefore either a Kenyan or British citizen. (Id.fflf73,79-83.)
The Petition alleges that "[i]n the course of those lawsuits ... it has been determined that there exists no designated official in the federal government, or the government of the states, directly charged with the responsibility of determining whether any Presidential candidate meets the qualifications of Article H of the Constitution of the United States." (Id. f 73.)
The Petition then avers — without citation to any legal authority—that "[b]ased on all ofthe above [allegations], it is the duty of [the Secretary of State]... to obtain proper documentation of [former] Senator Obama's citizenship to confirm his eligibility" to serve as President. (Id. 84.)
It also claims that each California Elector has "an affirmative duty to discover whether the candidate for President for which the elector is seeking election is a 'natural bom' citizen."
The Petition prays for a peremptory writ directed to California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and to the California Electors.
Specifically, Petitioners seek to enjoin Secretary Bowen from "both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, and from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, until such documentary proof is produced and verified showing that [President Obama] is a 'natural born' citizen of the United States and does not hold citizenship in Indonesia, Kenya or Great Britain."
With respect to the California Electors, Petitioners demand an "order barring the California Electors from signing the Certificate of the Vote" pending production of the same "documentary proof." (Id.) But Petitioners admit in their Petition that Secretary Bowen and the California Electors will have discharged all duties associated with the November 2008 General Election on or before December 15, 2008 — which they in fact proceeded to do, without further objection or judicial action by Petitioners.
And it is judicially noticeable that President Obama and Vice President Biden have now been sworn into office.
Since filing suit nearly three months ago, Petitioners have made no effort whatsoever to obtain interlocutory relief. They originally noticed a hearing on the merits of the Petition for March 13, 2009, long after the California officials sued in this case completed all of their duties associated with the 2008 Presidential Election. This hearing date has since been continued by stipulation of all parties to allow the Court to first resolve three pending challenges to the sufficiency of Petitioners' pleadings: a Demurrer by Secretary Bowen; a Demurrer by President Obama,Vice President Biden, and 54 California Electors; and a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by California Elector Joe Perez.
Each of these motions identifies obvious legal deficiencies on the face of Petitioners' pleading, including the fact that Petitioners cannot identify any mandatory duty with which Respondents have failed to comply and the fact that the entire suit has long been moot. These three motions are set to be heard by the Court on March 13, 2009.
Nevertheless, on January 15 or 16,2009, Petitioners served the business records subpoena at issue in this motion on Occidental College. (Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of Motion to Quash ("Woocher Decl.") f 2 & Ex. 1.) On January 15, 2009, Petitioners served all Respondents, including President Obama, with a copy of the subpoena by regular U.S. Mail. (Id. U 3 & Ex. 2.)
After receiving the subpoena, on January 16, 2009, Mr. Woocher, counsel for President Obama,Vice President Biden, and the California Electors, emailed counsel for Petitioners to request that Petitioners "cancel or withdraw the subpoena, at least until such time as the Superior Court rules upon the pending demurrers and motion for judgment on the pleadings." {Id. U 4 & Ex.
Mr. Woocher made clear that "[s]uch cancellation would be without prejudice to [Petitioners'] righttore-issue the subpoena should the litigation remain alive following the court's ruling on those motions." (Id.) After receiving no response, Mr. Woocher again contacted counsel for Petitioners on January 27, 2009 to inquire whether they would agree to postpone the response to the subpoena until after the hearing on March 13,2009. (Id. 1 5 & Ex. 4.)
On February 2, 2009, counsel for Petitioners informed Mr. Woocher via email that Petitioners insisted on proceeding with the subpoena, thereby necessitating the filing of the instant motion. (Id. f 6 &Ex. 5.)
BECAUSE PETITIONERS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1985.3,THE SUBPOENA IS DEFECTIVE AND MUST BE QUASHED.
As an initial matter, the subpoena is invalid for failure to abide by the strict service requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1985.3 ("Section 1985.3").
"Section 1985.3 protects personal records from discovery unless the requesting party complies with certain time and notice requirements." Sasson v.Katash, 146Cal. App. 3d 119,122 (1983); see also Lantzv.Superior Court, 28Cal.App.4th 1839,1848(1994).
One such requirement is that the subpoenaing party must serve the subpoena on the consumer at least five days before service on the custodian of records. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(b)(3). If served by mail within this State, this time limit is extended pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1013(a) to require service on the consumer at least ten days before service on the custodian of records. Id.; see also Cal.Civ.Proc. Code § 1013(a).
The subpoenaing party must also serve the custodian of records with proof of service of the required notice on the consumer whose records are at issue. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code§ 1985.3(c). The Civil Discovery Act also incorporates this same requirement, mandating that a subpoena for personal records be accompanied by a proof of service establishing that Section 985.3's consumer notice provisions have been satisfied. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2020.410(d) Failure to comply with any of Section 1985.3's dictates "shall be sufficient basis for the witness to refuse to produce the personal records sought by the subpoena duces tecum." Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(k).
Petitioners readily acknowledge that the procedural protections of Section 1983.5 apply here. Indeed, they complied in part with Section 1985.3, subdivision (b), by serving on the President's counsel a "Notice to Consumer or Employee" as required by Section 1985.3. (See Woocher Decl. U 3 & Ex. 2.) They even attached to the subpoena served on Occidental College a "Certificate of Compliance," in which they purport to have complied with the statute's clear dictates. (Id.)
However, rather than mailing the Notice and a copy of the subpoena to the President's counsel ten days before the subpoena was served on third-party Occidental College, the Notice and subpoena were mailed either the day before or the very same day Occidental College was served. (Id.fflf2-3 & Exs. 1-2.) This is plainly insufficient under Section 1985.3.
Accordingly, Occidental College need not comply with the subpoena, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(k), and the subpoena must be quashed.
THE TWO CATEGORIES OF DOCUMENTS PETITIONERS SEEK ARE VAGUE, OVERBROAD, AND ARE OF NO RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER TO THIS MOOT LITIGATION.
In addition to the fact that Petitioners failed to comply with Section 1985.3, the subpoena is also vague and overbroad, and seeks documents that are irrelevant to the limited scope of this writ action — an action which, in any event, has long since been moot.
"Although the scope of civil discovery is broad, it is not limitless." Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v.Superior Court, 53 Cal. App. 4th 216,223 (1997). Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010, amatter is only discoverable if it is either "itself admissible in evidence or [if it] appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence." Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2017.10; Pacific Architects Collaborative v.State of California, 100Cal. App. 3d 110,127 (1979)(affirming trial court order denying discovery that was irrelevant); see also Calcor Space Facility, 53 Cal. App. 4th at 223 (third party deposition subpoena for documents is invalid where subpoena was overbroad and sought irrelevant information).
Petitioners cannot satisfy this most basic requirement.
Petitioners' subpoena demands unrestricted access to all of President Obama's "academic and housing records"at Occidental College. But Petitioners could never establish the relevance of any such documents to the subject matter of the case at hand. See Southern Pac. Co. v. Superior Court, 15Cal. 2d 206,209 (1940) (it is court's task on such a motion "to examine the issues raised by the pleadings in the cause, and in light thereof to determine the apparent relevancy); CalcorSpace Facility, 53 Cal. App. 4th at 223 (propounding party"must be able to produce evidence from which a court may determine" whether documents sought are relevant) (emphasis in original).
The central issue in this lawsuit — putting aside the significant jurisdictional and timeliness questions — is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. None of the documents sought by Petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question. Cf.Shaffer v.Superior Court, 33 Cal.App.4th 993,999-1003 (1995) (former law firm client who brought malpractice action against firm claiming unconscionable rates was not entitled to discovery regarding amount paid by law firm to contract staff attorney because such information is irrelevant to unconscionability claim).
The irrelevance of the documents sought is further underscored by the fact that this lawsuit is unquestionably moot. All three pending motions by Respondents seek to dismiss this action in large part because Secretary Bowen and the California Electors have long since completed their respective legal duties in connection with the November 2008 General Election in California. Secretary Bowen already placed the candidates' names on the ballot and, of course, the November election has already taken place. The California Electors were certified by Secretary Bowen on December 1, 2008, and they met and cast their votes for President Obama and Vice President Biden on December 15,2008. The Governor of California certified those results and transmitted them to the President of the Senate on December 15,2008, and President Obama and Vice President Biden were sworn into office on or about January 20, 2009.
It is now far too late for a writ of mandate "barring Respondent Secretary of State ... from both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, [and] from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, and it is likewise too late for a "writ barring Respondent California Electors from signing the Certificate of Vote." (Pet. f 69.) Those are now completed acts. And there is nothing in President Obama's "academic and housing records" from thirty years ago that could in any way aid Petitioners in reviving their case. Cf. TerminalsEquipment Co., Inc. v.City and County of San Francisco, 221 Cal. App. 3d 234, 247 (1990) (denying additional discovery following sustaining of defendant's demurrer as irrelevant and stating that "if appellants were unable to state a viable cause of action on the basis of the facts already available to them, nothing in these disputed documents could do anything to change that")
CONCLUSION
The records Petitioners seek are of no relevance to this moot litigation, and Petitioners failed, in any event, to properly serve the subpoena and notice. The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this Court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place.
DATED: February 11, 2009
STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP
Michael J. Strumwasser
Fredric D. Woocher
Aimee Dudovitz
10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90024
Telephone:
(310)576-1233
Facsimile:
(310)319-0156
Attorneys for Respondents President Barack Obama, vice President Joe Biden, and the California Elector
Respondent moving parties do not, with this motion, exercise their rights under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1987.2, 2025.410, and 2025.420 to seek recompense for their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs necessarily incurred in bringing this motion. However, Respondent moving may do so in the future if Petitioners continue to misuse the discovery process.
****
Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash
3-13 Scheduled Hearing
2-24 Keyes: "Obama is a radical Communist!"
