Supreme Court brushes off challenge to Obama's citizenship

[constitutional]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrMIDsLQOJg&e

The Supreme Court turned down "an emergency appeal" but does this mean they will hear about it later? How can they simply say "no comments" and turn down a case?

[Zippyjuan]

No. Means they chose not to hear it at all.

[Matt Collins]

No. Means they chose not to hear it at all.Pathetic

[heavenlyboy34]

No. Means they chose not to hear it at all.
:(

[zach]

Figures.. the truth, according to them, is meant to be imprisoned.

[Original_Intent]

We are not going to enforce any rules that we don't want to, and we forbid you from protesting when the rules are not followed. You are peons and have no standing to have any say in your government, that is being handled by your betters.

Go back to your homes, peasants! There is nothing to see here!!!

[libertarian4321]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrMIDsLQOJg&e

The Supreme Court turned down "an emergency appeal" but does this mean they will hear about it later? How can they simply say "no comments" and turn down a case?

The Supreme court turns down many cases every year- they just don't have time to hear the case of everyone who doesn't like the result he got in the lower courts.

I was a little surprised Thomas even brought it up for consideration.

[constitutional]

The Supreme court turns down many cases every year- they just don't have time to hear the case of everyone who doesn't like the result he got in the lower courts.

I was a little surprised Thomas even brought it up for consideration.

This case is a big, it's on national t.v. You'd think they would have the sense to provide a reasonable reason.

[nate895]

The Supreme court turns down many cases every year- they just don't have time to hear the case of everyone who doesn't like the result he got in the lower courts.

I was a little surprised Thomas even brought it up for consideration.

The difference is, this would be a landmark decision. It would go down with Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board, Roe v. Wade, and countless others.

[Truth Warrior]

Just as previously predicted on the RPF. :rolleyes: No brainer. I may get tired of typing Kenyan POTUS.

[dannno]

It's like on South Park where Jimmy the crippled kid from birth was saying that he should get more attention than Christopher Reeves because Christopher Reeves was crippled from an accident.



Jimmy: Say, would you guys like to join our club? Oh, I'm sorry. You can't. You aren't crippled.
Kyle: What?
Jimmy: To be in our club, not only do you have to be c-c-crippled, but you have to have been born that way. Do you know what that means? No butthole Superman asswipe Christopher Reeve!
Stan: That's nice, guys. We're just gonna stay out of this one.
Cartman: Hey, wait a minute! You guys can't just start a club and tell me I can't be in it!
Jimmy: Sorry, able-bodied, you can't join.
Cartman: Can too!
Jimmy: Hey Timmy. How many able-bodied people does it take to screw in a light bulb? One. You know what you call an able-bodied guy on the doorstep? Whatever his name is.
Cartman: Oh God-damnit!!
Kyle: Cartman, just stay out of it.
Cartman: But they say I can't be in their club!!
Stan: Cartman, trust me.




Jimmy: Are they crippled from birth or are they cripple wannabes like Christopher Reeve?
McGillicuddy: ...Oh, I am stayin' out of this one.



The Supreme Court is stayin out of this one..

[devil21]

The Supreme Court reviews all of the lower court decisions before deciding to hear the case. They only hear something like 5% of all appeals filed and those 5% are usually cases that have questions still unresolved by the lower courts. Is the Obama thing an "important case"? Probably. Does the SCOTUS need to hear it if they are going to affirm the lower courts opinions? Nope. SCOTUS is basically saying that the lower court's decisions were accurate and there is nothing for them to review.

[libertarian4321]

The Supreme Court reviews all of the lower court decisions before deciding to hear the case. They only hear something like 5% of all appeals filed and those 5% are usually cases that have questions still unresolved by the lower courts. Is the Obama thing an "important case"? Probably. Does the SCOTUS need to hear it if they are going to affirm the lower courts opinions? Nope. SCOTUS is basically saying that the lower court's decisions were accurate and there is nothing for them to review.

Probably. They didn't give a reason, but I suspect they consider it a nuisance case and are affirming the lower court decision.

[libertarian4321]

The difference is, this would be a landmark decision. It would go down with Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board, Roe v. Wade, and countless others.

Only if they took the case and overturned the lower court- not a chance in Hell that was going to happen.

[nate895]

Only if they took the case and overturned the lower court- not a chance in Hell that was going to happen.

They could have ruled who actually had standing, as that was the reason for dismissal in the lower court, that alone would make it landmark.

[John of Des Moines]

The SC will only hear a case about the BC issue if a lower court steps in and rule against tptb.

[Truth Warrior]

Somebody call Kenya and suggest halting the birth site monument construction. :D

[Deborah K]

As a very wise and insightful caller on Washington Journal said this morning, and I paraphrase, "there has been a groundswell of discontentment and mistrust of the gov't by the people of America, [tptb] needed something drastic to make people believe in the system again."

Obama was their solution. If the Supremes were to take on this case, and if it were proven that he was in fact NOT a citizen of the US and therefore NOT eligible for the Presidency according to the Constitution, the backlash would be 1000 times worse than the Rodney King trials. You'd have to be an idiot to take on the responsibility for that.

Face it people, Obama is just another puppet in a long line of puppets being put out front to appease the sheeple. Nothing will ever change until the people rise up as is described in the Declaration of Independence......

.....when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

[Truth Warrior]

as a very wise and insightful caller on washington journal said this morning, and i paraphrase, "there has been a groundswell of discontentment and mistrust of the gov't by the people of america, [tptb] needed something drastic to make people believe in the system again."

obama was their solution. If the supremes were to take on this case, and if it were proven that he was in fact not a citizen of the us and therefore not eligible for the presidency according to the constitution, the backlash would be 1000 times worse than the rodney king trials. You'd have to be an idiot to take on the responsibility for that.

Face it people, obama is just another puppet in a long line of puppets being put out front to appease the sheeple. Nothing will ever change until the people rise up as is described in the declaration of independence......

.....when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.--such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government.

+ 10,000

qft!

[PatriotG]

As a very wise and insightful caller on Washington Journal said this morning, and I paraphrase, "there has been a groundswell of discontentment and mistrust of the gov't by the people of America, [tptb] needed something drastic to make people believe in the system again."

Obama was their solution. If the Supremes were to take on this case, and if it were proven that he was in fact NOT a citizen of the US and therefore NOT eligible for the Presidency according to the Constitution, the backlash would be 1000 times worse than the Rodney King trials. You'd have to be an idiot to take on the responsibility for that.

Face it people, Obama is just another puppet in a long line of puppets being put out front to appease the sheeple. Nothing will ever change until the people rise up as is described in the Declaration of Independence......

.....when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

Very Well Stated Deborah!

[AdamT]

LOL did anyone actually expect anything different. All branches of government are treasonous jokes.

[Theocrat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrMIDsLQOJg&e

The Supreme Court turned down "an emergency appeal" but does this mean they will hear about it later? How can they simply say "no comments" and turn down a case?

It seems that not only have our executive and legislative branches ignored their respective duties to honor and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, but now our judicial branch has followed suit, as well. One wonders why we even sware these individuals into their offices...

[bojo68]

The Supreme Court reviews all of the lower court decisions before deciding to hear the case. They only hear something like 5% of all appeals filed and those 5% are usually cases that have questions still unresolved by the lower courts. Is the Obama thing an "important case"? Probably. Does the SCOTUS need to hear it if they are going to affirm the lower courts opinions? Nope. SCOTUS is basically saying that the lower court's decisions were accurate and there is nothing for them to review.

OR, the lower court record isn't sufficient for SCOTUS hearing at this point. The case in question has lower court complications, the one they scheduled for Friday does not.

[anaconda]

Can any Constitutional lawyer tell us how we can get out Constitution enforced? What is the "right" or "proper" legal course?

[Doktor_Jeep]

Yes it will have been OK to drop the case for fear of "LA Riots time 100".

but you will see SCOTUS and DC in general take a different tune when, after the great <insert name of mind-control subject driven school/mass massacre here>, they will not "see" the potential for Lexington Green times 1000.

[bojo68]

As a very wise and insightful caller on Washington Journal said this morning, and I paraphrase, "there has been a groundswell of discontentment and mistrust of the gov't by the people of America, [tptb] needed something drastic to make people believe in the system again."

Obama was their solution. If the Supremes were to take on this case, and if it were proven that he was in fact NOT a citizen of the US and therefore NOT eligible for the Presidency according to the Constitution, the backlash would be 1000 times worse than the Rodney King trials. You'd have to be an idiot to take on the responsibility for that.

The Supremes wouldn't be responsible for a "backlash". The people responsible would be the various state secretaries, demo/repub parties, the media for intentionally sitting on the story, and the voters that ASSumed everything was rosy and didn't check for themselves. Even then, "backlash" would be the responsibility of those doing so, not the supremes.

I don't know about you, but for me, if the supremes backpedal on this one, all that crap I said in grade school about "I pledge allegiance" is out the window.
There's a possibility of a "backlash" if they DON'T rule on it too.

[rpftw88]

So the s.c. is worthless then? ok, i'll ignore it too.

[IPSecure]

So the s.c. is worthless then? ok, i'll ignore it too.


Why not, district courts ignore it...

[nobody's_hero]

Yes it will have been OK to drop the case for fear of "LA Riots time 100".

but you will see SCOTUS and DC in general take a different tune when, after the great <insert name of mind-control subject driven school/mass massacre here>, they will not "see" the potential for Lexington Green times 1000.

The SC justices value their lives more than justice. No surprise there, really. We can't expect the system to self-correct.

I just hope that the system implodes under its own corruption. I think Obama will push people to the brink, and frankly, we need that. We've had too many presidents who will simply walk the line of "pissing off the masses." Maybe our unqualified president to-be will cross it. Maybe Obama will throw the frog immediately into the boiling water.

I see the boom in gun sales (no pun intended) as a positive indication, second only to the fact that some Democrats have already realized they've been had by a DINO.

One step further from left-vs-right politics; one step closer to freedom-vs-control politics. Now—they finally give us something we can work with. :cool:

[Truth Warrior]

It seems that not only have our executive and legislative branches ignored their respective duties to honor and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, but now our judicial branch has followed suit, as well. One wonders why we even sware these individuals into their offices... Hey, you may just be catching on. ;) :cool: Uphold, preserve, protect and defend my ass. It's all just a charade, joke and racket designed to con, amuse, deceive, confuse and entertain the rubes and yokels flocks.

When the Satanic NWO sock puppet "Christian" Kenyan POTUS puts his hand on the Bible and takes the oath of office it means just exactly diddly squat. Just gotta have a shepherd. :p It's just show time. :rolleyes: COTUS and SCOTUS same thing. It's ALL just one interlocked criminal mob machine.

One might even be tempted to call it Luciferian, in all of it's demonic brilliance. ;)

"The system is corrupt, beyond redemption, and is not worthy of my support!"

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/nwo-logo_130x.gif

[Deborah K]

The Supremes wouldn't be responsible for a "backlash". The people responsible would be the various state secretaries, demo/repub parties, the media for intentionally sitting on the story, and the voters that ASSumed everything was rosy and didn't check for themselves. Even then, "backlash" would be the responsibility of those doing so, not the supremes.



Tell that to the dipshits who would unleash their fury on the cities of this nation.


I don't know about you, but for me, if the supremes backpedal on this one, all that crap I said in grade school about "I pledge allegiance" is out the window.
There's a possibility of a "backlash" if they DON'T rule on it too

Well, they already backpedaled. So now what? There won't be any backlash by those in our movement. Just like nothing relevant has happened with the 9-11 movement. (I'm not a truther, btw)

As to pledging allegiance, remember, we pledge our allegiance to our fellow countrymen and our beautiful nation and all the men and woman who sacrificed their lives for it- we don't pledge our allegiance to a tyrannical gov't.

[RickyJ]

There won't be any backlash by those in our movement. Just like nothing relevant has happened with the 9-11 movement. (I'm not a truther, btw)


Actually plenty of relevant stuff has been happening concerning 9/11 truth. The 9/11 truth movement is growing everyday. It was bigger than the Ron Paul "revolution" at its height even before Ron Paul announced he was going to run for President. The 9/11 truth movement is even bigger today. Even Jesse Ventura is now a truther.

I don't know why you are not a 9/11 truther. The facts are out there if you are interested in them.

Sure a bigger movement doesn't mean anything has been done about it, but it is absolutely necessary to have as many people informed about the truth of 9/11 as possible before an attempt to bring the real perpetrators to justice will be successful.

[Deborah K]

Actually plenty of relevant stuff has been happening concerning 9/11 truth. The 9/11 truth movement is growing everyday. It was bigger than the Ron Paul "revolution" at its height even before Ron Paul announced he was going to run for President. The 9/11 truth movement is even bigger today. Even Jesse Ventura is now a truther.

I don't know why you are not a 9/11 truther. The facts are out there if you are interested in them.

Sure a bigger movement doesn't mean anything has been done about it, but it is absolutely necessary to have as many people informed about the truth of 9/11 as possible before an attempt to bring the real perpetrators to justice will be successful.

The movement may be growing but there's been no backlash in the same sense as I am expecting would happen if Obama were to be removed as President. I have studied the 9-11 movement. I don't believe all the theories proposed. However, I believe 9-11 was allowed to happen via Abel Danger.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9756.htm