At last report, the co-defendants, OBAMA and the Dem. Nat'l Committee, had filed a motion for dismissal of the suit on grounds of lack of standing by Berg, and their claim that harm had not actually occurred which is required for a claim of damages.
On Sept. 29 the court denied the motion to immediately dismiss and asked the plaintiff to file a brief in support of his claim of standing and to define the claim of damge already caused to the plaintiff, all in order to validate the lawsuit being filed and dispute the motion to dismiss. The judge set a due date for the brief of Oct. 2. The plaintiff filed the requested brief on that date and was assured by the court that similar short time constraints will be imposed on the defendant to file a brief supporting their request for final dismissal and disputing the plaintiffs brief in support of the suit. The court also asked the plaintiff's council to attach a draft of the court order the plaintiff seeks to his brief which was done.
In most cases a draft of the order sought is a routine request by a judge which serves to both narrow the scope of orders sought by the plaintiff and also saves the court's time by being used as the official ruling of the court if so decided.
So, once the plaintiff's brief is provided to the defendant they will have four days to respond. That puts us at Oct. 6 or 7 for their due date, and a similar period for the judge to consider both, and then, AND THEN.... And then Along came Joohhhn ..... Loong thin Johhhnn.... uhhhh... no... OOPs, wrong song.
And then, possibly within a similar short time period, a ruling by the court on the motion for accellerated discovery and, maybe even a ruling on damages. Once the discovery motion is granted, the draft ruling states the defendant has 72 hours to produce all of the following, a certified, vault copy of Hawaii's Cert. of Live Birth for Barack Obama, Jr., a certificate of citizenship from the US Dept. of Naturalization or State Dept., and a signed Oath of Allegiance by Obama, required for naturalization. If this order of discovery is not obeyed, or if any of the documents are found to be fake or non-certified, or if they show Obama is a naturalized immigrant, (parents who were not both citizens) the judge will grant the motion to declare Obama citizenship insufficient for eligibility to be president. He will then be liable for the damages claimed and possibly be prosecuted for fraud, forgery, perjury, etc.
Then, today, the court gave The One three days to produce a valid birth certificate proving he was born in these United States.
Why do I think the Clintons are afoot on this mess?
Democratic spokesperson and former Clinton official Kirstin Powers blasted Barack Obama for his inaction during the financial crisis.
Powers also admitted that Gov. Sarah Palin is the only one who gets it:
Kirstin Powers weighed in on the Pelosi-Reid Congress after the bailout vote today. She also talked about Barack Obama and Sarah Palin.
This statement was loaded with goodies:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powers
If their approval rating matched what their own opinion on themselves is they'd be in great shape. You know, it's kind of incredible to watch them patting themselves on the back... The fact of the matter is they're cleaning up a mess. And, the fact of the matter is at least in the short term they created with their inaction in getting this passed in the first place. And, having a bill go down by 12 or 13 votes was just inexcusable to have a vote like that in the middle of the day when the markets are open and you don't even know that you have the votes...
And, in terms of Barack Obama, he didn't make any calls the first time around. I'm glad he was making calls this time.
Another thing that they're not talking about very much was Sarah Palin interestingly was the only person I've heard say anything about it. She said it last night. Is the responsibility or the irresponsibility of the American people... People need to learn to live within their means and not be signing up for loans that they can't afford. Everybody is not helpless. There's personal responsibility and they need to be talking directly to the American people and Sarah Palin is the only one who is doing that.
I think Billary are trying to gin up a little October surprise for Messiobama.
Gotta love it.
10-03-2008
FromWayDowntown
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
Then, today, the court gave The One three days to produce a valid birth certificate proving he was born in these United States.
Unless you have a different source, it's pretty clear that the Court hasn't issued any such order; instead, the plaintiff appended a proposed order setting those terms to his brief in opposition to Obama's motion to dismiss. A proposed order is just that -- a proposal. The court might sign it; it might not. The plaintiff also could have submitted a proposed order declaring any number of things that it hopes to obtain through the litigation -- such efforts aren't unusual (although they are obviously disfavored). But what's in a proposed order is largely irrelevant; until there's a signed order, the court has done nothing.
The fact that the Court asked the plaintiff to respond to the motion to dismiss is certainly suggestive, however, of a belief that the motion to dismiss is meritorious. Courts are frequently reluctant to take draconian steps like dismissal of claims without first affording the party who will lose an opportunity to explain its position. Not saying, by any means, that Obama will ultimately prevail, but I'd be pretty disappointed if I represented the plaintiff and had been asked to respond.
10-03-2008
ChumpDumper
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Then, today, the court gave The One three days to produce a valid birth certificate proving he was born in these United States.
It would be nice had that court order been signed by the judge and stamped.
And not dated "September _____, 2008"
Berg has a history of releasing documents that he would like to see but have not been issued by any court.
So whottt and yoni are now sucking the cock of a 9/11 twoofer.
Gotta love it.
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
Unless you have a different source, it's pretty clear that the Court hasn't issued any such order; instead, the plaintiff appended a proposed order setting those terms to his brief in opposition to Obama's motion to dismiss. A proposed order is just that -- a proposal. The court might sign it; it might not. The plaintiff also could have submitted a proposed order declaring any number of things that it hopes to obtain through the litigation -- such efforts aren't unusual (although they are obviously disfavored). But what's in a proposed order is largely irrelevant; until there's a signed order, the court has done nothing.
The fact that the Court asked the plaintiff to respond to the motion to dismiss is certainly suggestive, however, of a belief that the motion to dismiss is meritorious. Courts are frequently reluctant to take draconian steps like dismissal of claims without first affording the party who will lose an opportunity to explain its position. Not saying, by any means, that Obama will ultimately prevail, but I'd be pretty disappointed if I represented the plaintiff and had been asked to respond.
Awww, go on now, spoil my fun.
How 'bout that Clinton hack, Powers, taking shots at Obama...
10-03-2008
sook
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
"palin is the only one that gets it"...:lmao
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sook
"palin is the only one that gets it"...:lmao
To what do you attribute the astronomical viewership for last night's debate? Joe Biden?
10-03-2008
FromWayDowntown
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
To what do you attribute the astronomical viewership for last night's debate? Joe Biden?
Trainwrecks. People love to look at trainwrecks, and I'm sure many thought that the debate would afford that infrequent chance to actually see it happen.
Of course, as we know now, Palin stayed on script enough to mostly avoid that problem.
10-03-2008
ChumpDumper
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Everyone thought "The Office" or "CSI" was going to be on.
10-03-2008
FromWayDowntown
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Everyone thought "The Office" or "CSI" was going to be on.
That, or that the Phoenix Suns were playing.
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
Trainwrecks. People love to look at trainwrecks, and I'm sure many thought that the debate would afford that infrequent chance to actually see it happen.
Of course, as we know now, Palin stayed on script enough to mostly avoid that problem.
Nah, I don't think so...
These folks weren't expecting a trainwreck.
Obama, on the other hand, had to read his prais for Biden from a teleprompter...
10-03-2008
FromWayDowntown
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
Nah, I don't think so...
That's surprising and obviously non-partisan. :rolleyes
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
These folks weren't expecting a trainwreck.
I'll admit that I don't likely know any of those people, but the people that I know were almost unanimously citing the trainwreck factor as driving their interest to watch the debate -- even those who support McCain.
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
That's surprising and obviously non-partisan. :rolleyes
I'll admit that I don't likely know any of those people, but the people that I know were almost unanimously citing the trainwreck factor as driving their interest to watch the debate -- even those who support McCain.
Considering the treatment she's received from the mainstream media, I'm not surprised.
10-03-2008
PixelPusher
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
Considering the treatment she's received from the mainstream media, I'm not surprised.
How dare the media ask follow up questions and broadcast her answers!
10-03-2008
ChumpDumper
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
I can't believe they had the nerve to ask her what news magazines she reads!
That's so unfair!
10-03-2008
FromWayDowntown
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PixelPusher
How dare the media ask follow up questions and broadcast her answers!
Really, the fact that they're asking her questions at all is objectively appalling. That they would compound that offense by seeking substantive responses on issues that many 8th and 9th graders can readily discuss is insane -- they might as well have waterboarded her or something!
And the patently obvious choice to cut the video so that the answer to one question is portrayed as having come after an entirely unrelated question is, well, just mean.
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
And, how the hell did we miss this?
Greta asks the question that no one in the media will ask -- "How is a close association with Rev. Wright different than a close association with David Duke?" -- and the usually gregarious, smooth Clinton is stumped.
He eventually recovers and says the election is "fundamentally" about other things. But his five seconds of silence say it all.
10-03-2008
ChumpDumper
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Does anyone else find it hilarious that Yoni couldn't wait to change the subject of his own thread?
10-03-2008
PixelPusher
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
What does reminding everyone that the GOP tries and fails to appropriate rock songs without the artists approval have to do with kook lawsuits or the mean ol' media beating up poor little Palin?
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by PixelPusher
What does reminding everyone that the GOP tries and fails to appropriate rock songs without the artists approval have to do with anything?
It's a kick-ass song. I like it.
10-03-2008
Shastafarian
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Does anyone else find it hilarious that Yoni couldn't wait to change the subject of his own thread?
I mean, when you get shot down that fast it's only natural to want to change the subject.
10-03-2008
Yonivore
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
“It’s amazing, you know, she’s been thrust into the national spotlight with very little preparation and I think that, all things considered, you saw a very composed and effective debater last night.”
Hey. Don't be too rough on 'em. At least they got the date right.
10-03-2008
ChumpDumper
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
And they did actually wait until after the debate this time.
10-03-2008
Shastafarian
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Yeah I mean, no campaign is truly and completely inept. I'm waiting for an ad where they blamed Obama for the passing of the Bailout Bill before it passed...oh wait that already happened. Maybe the next step is McCain accidentally shooting Brokaw in the face during the debate.
10-03-2008
sook
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
poor yoni..if only he would have posted something not so blatantly stupid, or was a bullshitter like whottt
10-04-2008
ploto
Re: I think the Clintons are behind it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown
Unless you have a different source, it's pretty clear that the Court hasn't issued any such order; instead, the plaintiff appended a proposed order setting those terms to his brief in opposition to Obama's motion to dismiss. A proposed order is just that -- a proposal. The court might sign it; it might not. The plaintiff also could have submitted a proposed order declaring any number of things that it hopes to obtain through the litigation -- such efforts aren't unusual (although they are obviously disfavored). But what's in a proposed order is largely irrelevant; until there's a signed order, the court has done nothing.
The fact that the Court asked the plaintiff to respond to the motion to dismiss is certainly suggestive, however, of a belief that the motion to dismiss is meritorious. Courts are frequently reluctant to take draconian steps like dismissal of claims without first affording the party who will lose an opportunity to explain its position. Not saying, by any means, that Obama will ultimately prevail, but I'd be pretty disappointed if I represented the plaintiff and had been asked to respond.
