| |
Main
Date: 08 Jan 2009 12:41:50
From: Neverchop
Subject: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
Supreme Court sets 'natural born' conference to follow inauguration
A legal challenge that alleges Barack Obama isn't a "natural born" citizen
and therefore constitutionally ineligible to be president of the United
States will follow the Democrat into the Oval Office, with a U.S. Supreme
Court conference on the dispute set after the Jan. 20 inauguration.
The court's website today announced that a fourth case on the issue will be
reviewed by justices Jan. 23.
The court now has a conference scheduled Friday on a case raised by attorney
Philip Berg, with another conference on a matter related to the same Berg
case on Jan. 16. Then today the court website revealed the case Gail
Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, will be heard
in conference Jan. 23.
The case initially appeared at the Supreme Court Dec. 12 but was rejected.
It then was submitted to Chief Justice John Roberts, and today's notice
confirmed it was distributed for the Jan. 23 conference.
The California attorney handling the case, said, "The timing of this
decision by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is
absolutely remarkable. On January 7, one day before the January 8 vote by
Congress and Senate whether to approve or object to the electoral vote of
Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, as president of the United States,
Chief Justice Roberts is sending a message to them: 'Hold on, not so fast,
there is value in this case, read it.'"
"This is the message that the chief justice of the Supreme Court is sending
to them. . (The) truth will come out, no matter how many millions Obama is
spending to hide it," she said.
The plaintiffs in the case include a vice presidential candidate on the
California election ballot, four electors and two others.
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Jan 2009 00:44:41
From: pixelfreak
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On 2009-01-08 10:41:50 -0800, "Neverchop" <neverchop@lotto.com > said:
> Supreme Court sets 'natural born' conference to follow inauguration
>
> A legal challenge that alleges Barack Obama isn't a "natural born" citizen
> and therefore constitutionally ineligible to be president of the United
> States will follow the Democrat into the Oval Office, with a U.S. Supreme
> Court conference on the dispute set after the Jan. 20 inauguration.
Alcoa stock just went through the roof..
http://meltyourfaceoff.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/tin-foil-hat.jpg
--
thepixelfreak
|
| | |
Date: 10 Jan 2009 22:56:21
From: Travel A
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
Interesting, thanks for the post. You have the left wing kooks hoping up
and down again.
They believe that the Constitutional requirement to become President is
something that should be scammed if it's a communist Black Panther
trying to get into the oval office.
|
| | | |
Date: 11 Jan 2009 16:26:30
From: Neverchop
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
"Travel A" <nine510@webtv.net > wrote in message
news:9372-49699815-8890@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
> Interesting, thanks for the post. You have the left wing kooks hoping up
> and down again.
Yep, and highly entertaining it is too - lol...
> They believe that the Constitutional requirement to become President is
> something that should be scammed if it's a communist Black Panther
> trying to get into the oval office.
>
Unfortunately for the nation however is the fact that Bidden will probably
be taking the oath before the end of the year. Just after Omama orders a
devastating strike against Iran's nuke sites. He'll claim, "Sum-bitch - he
wasn't even eligible! Oh well, I guess he really was a muslim and it was all
a plot! On my Bidden word of honor."
|
| | | | |
Date: 11 Jan 2009 16:36:56
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
"Neverchop" <neverchop@lotto.com > wrote in message
news:gkdrkg$fvc$1@news.motzarella.org...
>
> "Travel A" <nine510@webtv.net> wrote in message
> news:9372-49699815-8890@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
>> Interesting, thanks for the post. You have the left wing kooks hoping up
>> and down again.
>
> Yep, and highly entertaining it is too - lol...
>
>> They believe that the Constitutional requirement to become President is
>> something that should be scammed if it's a communist Black Panther
>> trying to get into the oval office.
>>
>
> Unfortunately for the nation however is the fact that Bidden will probably
> be taking the oath before the end of the year. Just after Omama orders a
> devastating strike against Iran's nuke sites. He'll claim, "Sum-bitch - he
> wasn't even eligible! Oh well, I guess he really was a muslim and it was
> all
> a plot! On my Bidden word of honor."
Awww, c'mon, pokertoker, not even you can keep beating that dead horse.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 11 Jan 2009 19:24:14
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 11 2009 3:36 PM, James L. Hankins wrote:
> "Neverchop" <neverchop@lotto.com> wrote in message
> news:gkdrkg$fvc$1@news.motzarella.org...
> >
> > "Travel A" <nine510@webtv.net> wrote in message
> > news:9372-49699815-8890@baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com...
> >> Interesting, thanks for the post. You have the left wing kooks hoping up
> >> and down again.
> >
> > Yep, and highly entertaining it is too - lol...
> >
> >> They believe that the Constitutional requirement to become President is
> >> something that should be scammed if it's a communist Black Panther
> >> trying to get into the oval office.
> >>
> >
> > Unfortunately for the nation however is the fact that Bidden will probably
> > be taking the oath before the end of the year. Just after Omama orders a
> > devastating strike against Iran's nuke sites. He'll claim, "Sum-bitch - he
> > wasn't even eligible! Oh well, I guess he really was a muslim and it was
> > all
> > a plot! On my Bidden word of honor."
>
>
>
> Awww, c'mon, pokertoker, not even you can keep beating that dead horse.
200 billion flies can't be wrong.
____________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Jan 2009 23:31:22
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 10 2009 11:56 PM, Travel A wrote:
> Interesting, thanks for the post. You have the left wing kooks hoping up
> and down again.
>
> They believe that the Constitutional requirement to become President is
> something that should be scammed if it's a communist Black Panther
> trying to get into the oval office.
You're normal.
--------
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 21:20:51
From: risky biz
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 8 2009 11:41 AM, Neverchop wrote:
Hey, pokertoker, isn't there some cowflop out in the west 40 of your
neighbor's land that you can go lick?
______________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 17:08:52
From: James L. Hankins
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
"Neverchop" <neverchop@lotto.com > wrote in message
news:gk5hbh$87j$1@news.motzarella.org...
> Supreme Court sets 'natural born' conference to follow inauguration
Hey, pokertoker. Still smoking the *good* stuff, I see.
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 16:00:56
From: Kingo Gondo
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
Still haven't figured out that a conference at the Supreme Court is a mere
formality required before shitcanning 98% of all cases, including these
nutjob cases?
Keep getting your "news" from WND, and there is no danger of you not
remaining a moron for the rest of your life. They actually know better, but
they count on idiots like you being gullible--and you haven't disappointed
them yet.
|
| | |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 16:31:04
From: OrangeSFO
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 8, 1:00=A0pm, "Kingo Gondo" <kingo_nospam_go...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Still haven't figured out that a conference at the Supreme Court is a mer=
e
> formality required before shitcanning 98% of all cases
Don't try to educate them. They're very entertaining.
|
| | |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 13:45:15
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 8, 1:38=A0pm, "La Cosa Nostradamus" <a6f4...@webnntp.invalid >
wrote:
> Still havent figured out that the supreme court is republican ?
Tell you what, Skillz. Since you're so sure Obama is going to be
thrown out of office, let's make a deal. You stop posting between now
and when Obama is declared ineligible for office, and I'll stop
posting after that. Fair enough?
- Bob T.
> On Jan 8 2009 4:00 PM, Kingo Gondo wrote:
>
> > Still haven't figured out that a conference at the Supreme Court is a m=
ere
> > formality required before shitcanning 98% of all cases, including these
> > nutjob cases?
>
> > Keep getting your "news" from WND, and there is no danger of you not
> > remaining a moron for the rest of your life. They actually know better,=
but
> > they count on idiots like you being gullible--and you haven't disappoin=
ted
> > them yet.
>
> Atheism is drawing dead
>
> _____________________________________________________________________=A0
> RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader :www.recgroups.com
|
| | |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 13:38:01
From: La Cosa Nostradamus
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
Still havent figured out that the supreme court is republican ?
On Jan 8 2009 4:00 PM, Kingo Gondo wrote:
> Still haven't figured out that a conference at the Supreme Court is a mere
> formality required before shitcanning 98% of all cases, including these
> nutjob cases?
>
> Keep getting your "news" from WND, and there is no danger of you not
> remaining a moron for the rest of your life. They actually know better, but
> they count on idiots like you being gullible--and you haven't disappointed
> them yet.
Atheism is drawing dead
_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
|
| | | |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 16:17:32
From: Lynx
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
> Still havent figured out that the supreme court is republican ?
Still haven't figured out that the suggestion that Obama is ineligible is
so lame that it doesn't matter that the Supreme Court is predominately
Republican?
_____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 11:01:29
From: La Cosa Nostradamus
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
A quick Googling shows that I have been stating that Berg is the guy. They
never listen, they never learn
On Jan 8 2009 1:41 PM, Neverchop wrote:
> Supreme Court sets 'natural born' conference to follow inauguration
>
> A legal challenge that alleges Barack Obama isn't a "natural born" citizen
> and therefore constitutionally ineligible to be president of the United
> States will follow the Democrat into the Oval Office, with a U.S. Supreme
> Court conference on the dispute set after the Jan. 20 inauguration.
>
> The court's website today announced that a fourth case on the issue will be
> reviewed by justices Jan. 23.
>
> The court now has a conference scheduled Friday on a case raised by attorney
> Philip Berg, with another conference on a matter related to the same Berg
> case on Jan. 16. Then today the court website revealed the case Gail
> Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, will be heard
> in conference Jan. 23.
>
> The case initially appeared at the Supreme Court Dec. 12 but was rejected.
> It then was submitted to Chief Justice John Roberts, and today's notice
> confirmed it was distributed for the Jan. 23 conference.
>
> The California attorney handling the case, said, "The timing of this
> decision by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is
> absolutely remarkable. On January 7, one day before the January 8 vote by
> Congress and Senate whether to approve or object to the electoral vote of
> Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, as president of the United States,
> Chief Justice Roberts is sending a message to them: 'Hold on, not so fast,
> there is value in this case, read it.'"
>
> "This is the message that the chief justice of the Supreme Court is sending
> to them. . (The) truth will come out, no matter how many millions Obama is
> spending to hide it," she said.
> The plaintiffs in the case include a vice presidential candidate on the
> California election ballot, four electors and two others.
Atheism is drawing dead
-------
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2009 10:46:49
From: Bob T.
Subject: Re: Eligibility issue to follow Obama into Oval Office
|
On Jan 8, 10:41=A0am, "Neverchop" <neverc...@lotto.com > wrote:
> Supreme Court sets 'natural born' conference to follow inauguration
>
> A legal challenge that alleges Barack Obama isn't a "natural born" citize=
n
> and therefore constitutionally ineligible to be president of the United
> States will follow the Democrat into the Oval Office, with a U.S. Supreme
> Court conference on the dispute set after the Jan. 20 inauguration.
>
> The court's website today announced that a fourth case on the issue will =
be
> reviewed by justices Jan. 23.
>
> The court now has a conference scheduled Friday on a case raised by attor=
ney
> Philip Berg, with another conference on a matter related to the same Berg
> case on Jan. 16. Then today the court website revealed the case Gail
> Lightfoot et al v. Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State, will be he=
ard
> in conference Jan. 23.
>
> The case initially appeared at the Supreme Court Dec. 12 but was rejected=
.
> It then was submitted to Chief Justice John Roberts, and today's notice
> confirmed it was distributed for the Jan. 23 conference.
>
> The California attorney handling the case, said, "The timing of this
> decision by the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is
> absolutely remarkable. On January 7, one day before the January 8 vote by
> Congress and Senate whether to approve or object to the electoral vote of
> Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, as president of the United State=
s,
> Chief Justice Roberts is sending a message to them: 'Hold on, not so fast=
,
> there is value in this case, read it.'"
>
> "This is the message that the chief justice of the Supreme Court is sendi=
ng
> to them. . (The) truth will come out, no matter how many millions Obama i=
s
> spending to hide it," she said.
> The plaintiffs in the case include a vice presidential candidate on the
> California election ballot, four electors and two others.
Welcome back, pokertoker. We knew you wouldn't let reality interfere
with your little fantasies. I look forward to your whining about
Obama for at least four more years.
- Bob T.
|
|
