Birther Earl-Graef , The Honorable John G. Roberts Jr has already addressed your concerns 3 times.Once by swearing in Mr Obama as POTUS and twice by The Supreme Court throwing out 2 birther cases Rhodes v. Macdonald In September 2009, Taitz, filed Rhodes v. MacDonald (Colonel Thomas MacDonald - Garrison Commander, Fort Benning, Georgia) on behalf of Captain Connie Rhodes, a U.S. Army physician, sought a restraining order to stop Rhodes' forthcoming deployment to Iraq. In the request for a restraining order, Taitz argued the order was illegal since Obama was illegally serving as President. On September 16, federal judge Clay D. Land (the same judge who heard Cook v. Good) rejected the motion and denounced it as frivolous.[50] Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news site Talking Points Memo that she felt Land's refusal to hear her case was an act of treason.[51] Two days later, she filed a motion to stay Rhodes' deployment pending rehearing of the dismissal order. She repeated her treason allegations against Land and made several other intemperate statements, including claims that Land was aiding and abetting purported aspirations of "dictatorship" by Obama.[52] Land rejected the motion as frivolous and ordered her to show cause why she should not be fined $10,000 for abuse of judicial process.[53] Upon learning of Land's ruling, Taitz said she would appeal the sanction, declaring that Judge Land was "scared to go against the regime" of the "oppressive" Obama administration, and that the sanction was an attempt to "intimidate" her.[57] On March 15, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the sanctions against Taitz.[58] On August 9, 2011, the federal government filed an abstract of judgment, a document placing a lien in the amount of $20,000 plus interest on all her real property,[59] prompting Taitz to say, "I will pay the money, and I will continue fighting."[60] On January 10, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declined, without comment, to hear the case. Hollister v. Soetoro On March 5, 2009, a lawsuit filed by Philip Berg on behalf of Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force colonel, against Barack Obama (referenced as "Barry Soetoro", the name given at the time of his enrollment in an Indonesian elementary school). The suit was dismissed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The presiding judge, James Robertson, said the case was a waste of the court's time, calling Berg and another lawyer "agents provocateurs" and their local counsel, John Hemenway, "a foot soldier in their crusade." He ordered Hemenway to show cause why he should not pay the legal fees for Obama's attorney as a penalty for filing a complaint "for an improper purpose such as to harass".[35] The district court ultimately reprimanded Hemenway for his actions, and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the dismissal of the case and Hemenway's reprimand.[21] On January 18, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declined, without comment, to hear the case.
We now know that the original judgement and appeal below were circumvented by nuclear reactor approvals (the first in 3 decades) and over $8 billion in loan guarantees granted by Obama. Honorable Brian Kemp Secretary of State of Georgia 214 State Capitol Atlanta, GA 30334 via e-mail to Vincent R. Russo Jr. ESQ VRusso@sos.GA.gov and via Federal Express overnight delivery EMERGENCY APPEAL PETITION TO SET ASIDE RECOMMENDATION ISSUED BY JUDGE MALIHI IN FARRAR V OBAMA OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1215136-60-MALHI, AS RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE IN ERROR, WITH GROSS ABUSE OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION AND IN FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF ALL LAW, PRECEDENTS AND FACTS OF THE CASE; AND FIND CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA INELIGIBLE TO APPEAR ON THE STATE OF GA BALLOT AS A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES Text of Appeal: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Appeal-to-Secretary-of-State-Kemp1.pdf
But we now know that all this was already known, and the republicans suppressed the nuclear approvals deal prior to the birther challenge, so that subsequent disclosure would have a greater dramatic, and it was hoped, damning impact on Obama. This is all revealed on a different guy's blog. ; )
are you aware this was the first case on the merits and not dismissed for procedural reasons... such as the case not being brought at the right time or not being brought by the right party?
I am aware that every birther case has failed,all 80 + of them including 2 that were thrown out by The Supreme Court
Sounds like this one was thrown out because the judge said the case was a waste of the court's time and that their birther case was brought only to harass Hollister v. Soetoro On March 5, 2009, a lawsuit filed by Philip Berg on behalf of Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force colonel, against Barack Obama (referenced as "Barry Soetoro", the name given at the time of his enrollment in an Indonesian elementary school). The suit was dismissed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The presiding judge, James Robertson, said the case was a waste of the court's time, calling Berg and another lawyer "agents provocateurs" and their local counsel, John Hemenway, "a foot soldier in their crusade." He ordered Hemenway to show cause why he should not pay the legal fees for Obama's attorney as a penalty for filing a complaint "for an improper purpose such as to harass". The district court ultimately reprimanded Hemenway for his actions, and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the dismissal of the case and Hemenway's reprimand.On January 18, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court declined, without comment, to hear the case.
This case was dismissed because the judge said it was frivolous ,not because it wasn't brought at the right time or by the right party Rhodes v. Macdonald In September 2009, Taitz, filed Rhodes v. MacDonald (Colonel Thomas MacDonald - Garrison Commander, Fort Benning, Georgia) on behalf of Captain Connie Rhodes, a U.S. Army physician, sought a restraining order to stop Rhodes' forthcoming deployment to Iraq. In the request for a restraining order, Taitz argued the order was illegal since Obama was illegally serving as President. On September 16, federal judge Clay D. Land rejected the motion and denounced it as frivolous.
1. they never got to a question of whether Obama provided proof of eligibility did they? the court rejected the motion.