On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 03:56:24 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 20:56:04 +0700, john B.
wrote:


Johnny...they have indeed presented it to many courts of law. And nearly
ALL of the courts have refused to hear it. Would you want to be the
judge that was responsible for the removal of a US president?


Why not. After all that is what they threatened Agnew with -
prosecution for taking bribes - and he believed that they would. The
people who were set to get rid of Clinton, Nixon and Johnson certainly
weren't afraid.

Agnew wasnt a Democrat...was he? Hummm?

And Clinton had a solidly Republican Congress..and they certainly didnt
impeach him now did they? Hummmm?

Several courts have not refused to hear it..and have ruled that the
state of Hawaii is required to present Obamas birth cert.

So far..Hawaii has....refused.

For someone who posts..you sure dont seem to know much about the
subject.

Odd that, eh wot?

Gunner

sorry, wrong again.

If you are referring to the US District Court in Honolulu you are not
correct.

What actually happened was that the judge, Richard L. Puglisi, issued
an order that required the Hawaii Department of Health appear in
federal court Sept. 14 to show cause why Taitz should be prevented
from seeing whatever original 1961 documents the agency has on record
regarding Barack Obama's birth.

This is somewhat different from what you said. No demand to present
any certificates was made.

It is an order to show cause only. If the Department of Health cannot
show cause then the next step is the issuance of an order to disclose
the document.

You have, as they say, got the cart before the horse.

Cheers,

John B.

Incorrect. As they say...the horse is on the proper end..despite your
hopes and dreams of change.....VBG

The July 5 subpoena granted Taitz by the U.S. District Court for the
District of Hawaii was supposed to allow her to examine the original
1961 Obama birth certificate:

The Department of records REFUSED to allow her to see it as a "privacy
matter"

This despite the alleged PUBLIC release of the birth cert in question.

So now its been taken back to the District Court for enforcement.

The sad part of it is...that a visual examination probably wont be able
to determine if the newly manufactured fraudulant document is real or
not. Im sure the Obama has paid someone in the No Such Agencies to
generate a decent forgery this time. Its been long enough since July
to have done this neatly.


Read mo Court tells Hawaii officials to explain Obama's birth records
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=331517#ixzz1WXXjDLg4

Eh, you jumped the gun a bit, Gunner. The case was decided today:

"Final judgment is hereby entered for defendant [Astrue, the plaintiff being
Taitz], dismissing this case with prejudice."

Ouch! That's not a common thing to do. The judge is threatening Taitz with
imprisonment now:

08/30/2011 35 ORDER denying 12[RECAP] Motion to Compel; denying 18[RECAP]
Motion to Strike; denying 19[RECAP] Motion for Clarification; denying
20[RECAP] Motion for Default Judgment; and denying 22[RECAP] Motion to
Compel. Signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth on August 30, 2011. (lcrcl2)
(Entered: 08/30/2011)

08/30/2011 34 ORDER granting 21[RECAP] defendant's Motion for Summary
Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth on August 30, 2011.
(lcrcl2) (Entered: 08/30/2011)

08/30/2011 33 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth on
August 30, 2011. (lcrcl2) (Entered: 08/30/2011)

[From the judge deciding the case] "As her numerous filings with the Court
demonstrate, plaintiff will stop at nothing to get to the bottom of this
alleged conspiracy. Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.

"Her vehement allegations of fraud consist of mere 'bare suspicion[s]' and
thus fail to satisfy the public interest standard required under FOIA. Id.4

"Anyone who knowingly and willfully uses SSNVS to request or obtain
information from SSA under false pretenses violates Federal law and may be
punished by a fine, imprisonment or both. Id. at 5. As with the registration
acknowledgement form discussed above, the Court can only conclude that
plaintiff has submitted a page that some individual obtained under false
pretenses; that is, by representing himself as the President's employer. The
Court notes that both documents submitted by plaintiff are incomplete; the
address on the registration acknowledgment form and the employer
identification number on the SSNVS page have been blacked out, further
confirming the documents' fraudulent origins. For all of these reasons, the
Court will disregard both documents as well as any arguments made in
reliance on them."


Gunner, you're hereby appointed Chief Bull-Goose Birther Loony, one of the
few gullible saps left in North America who still believes Taitz's crap.

Hat's off to you. It must not be easy to be such a perpetual sucker. Most
such people are either dead from terminal stupidity or walking around in
circles, talking to themselves.

Naw Ed. You've just proved Gunner with the definitive proof that the
documents are false.

After all a federal judge wouldn't have dismissed the case unless
there was something fishy going on, would he?

Cheers,

John B.