Monday, September 07, 2009

Why Is DOJ Involved In Upcoming Obama Lawsuit?

Before we address that question, I wanted to state that the Van Jones czar controversy absolutely proved one thing about the Media of Mass Deception. They will ignore any issue that does not bode well for their usurper-in-chief, Mr. ObamaFRAUD. Because Jones has resigned, they now have to cover the story.

This morning, Megyn Kelly of Fox News told Julian Epstein (a Dem strategist) that they did a Lexus Nexus search and did not find any stories or reports on the Jones controversy until Jones had resigned. In other words, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS etc. did not do their job!! Reminds me of the FACT that the Lamestream media did not do their job in vetting Obama either.

Speaking of Obama, the upcoming ineligibility-for-POTUS lawsuit court date tomorrow is, of course, also being ignored by the media. I ran across the following post over at The Obama File and decided to post it in it's entirety here (below).

I do not recall seeing the Department of Justice ever making any statements or requests (at least not those that have been publicly reported) having to do with any of the Obama eligibility lawsuits. I could be wrong about this, but I thought most - if not all - calls for dismissal of lawsuits against Obama came from his private attorneys.

Anyway, here is the latest post at The Obama File:

[Note: Obama File author comments in purple.]

DOJ To Judge: Dump Ambassador Keyes Lawsuit

The Justice Department is urging a federal court to toss out a lawsuit in which prominent attorney Orly Taitz, who is representing Ambassador Alan Keyes and 200 military members, is challenging Obama's Constitutional qualifications to be president.

In a motion filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana, Calif., government lawyers did not directly rebut the theory Taitz propounds that Obama was not born in Hawaii as he claims and as asserted by Hawaiian officials as well as contemporary newspaper birth notices. Instead, the federal attorneys argued that the suit is inherently flawed because such disputes can't be resolved in court and because the dozens of plaintiffs can't show they are directly injured by Obama's presence in office.

"It is clear, from the text of the Constitution, and the relevant statutory law implementing the Constitution’s textual commitments, that challenges to the qualifications of a candidate for President can, in the first instance, be presented to the voting public before the election, and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in the Congress," Assistant United States Attorneys Roger West and David DeJute wrote. "Therefore, challenges such as those purportedly raised in this case are committed, under the Constitution, to the electors, and to the Legislative branch." -- you don't say! -- so I guess if Obama secured his office through fraud, it's OK with the Obama JustUs Department -- what a shocking surprise!

Lieutenant Jason Freese and some other plaintiffs in the case claim they have a real injury because they are serving in the military commander by Obama, the alleged usurper. However, West and DeJute say that argument is too speculative.

"The injuries alleged by Plaintiff Freese and the other military Plaintiffs herein, are not particularized as to them, but, rather, would be shared by all members of the military and is an inadequate basis on which to establish standing," the government lawyers wrote. -- Same old argument -- "Standing" -- the American People have no right to know who and what Obama is, nor where he comes from -- he's special, you know.

Another plaintiff in the suit, Alan Keyes, is a three-time, longshot presidential candidate who ran most recently in 2008. Yet another is Gail Lightfoot, an ultra-longshot vice presidential candidate in 2008. The DOJ argues that they were not directly aggrieved by Obama's election because they never had a mathematical chance of winning.

"The [lawsuit] does not allege, nor could it allege, that any of these Plaintiffs were even on the ballot in enough states in the year 2008 to gain the requisite 270 electoral votes to win the Presidential election," the motion states. -- So what? Since when did winning a political office become a prerequisite for running?

The Justice Department brief takes a few shots at the wackiness of the birthers, accusing them of trafficking in "innuendo" and advancing "a variety of vaguely-defined claims purportedly related to a hodgepodge of constitutional provisions, civil and criminal statutes, and the Freedom of Information Act."

Those arguments notwithstanding, the DOJ lawyers were pretty kind to the birthers and to Taitz, since the filings in the case are replete with spelling errors, among others. Taitz submitted another purported foreign birth certificate for Obama last week in a filing labeled, "Kenian Hospital Birth Certificate for Barack Obama."

The case is set for a hearing Tuesday morning before Judge David Carter.

This biased report could have been written by Obama, himself. I have removed many of the pejoratives that Gerstein sprinkled "liberally" throughout the source article. This Obot doesn't mention that Taitz is representing Ambassador Allen Keyes, the Independent Party candidate for POTUS, and 200 military officers and non-commissioned officers till halfway through this smear job.

I guess Gerstein believes that "a three-time, longshot presidential candidate" or "an ultra-longshot vice presidential candidate" is not entitled to justice. These lefties make me want to hurl! It's all justice for me, but not for thee, with these people.

Only an Obama Justice Department,
protector of the New Black Panther Party, could claim a plaintiff shouldn't be heard, shouldn't receive justice, because, "...they never had a mathematical chance of winning."

Furthermore, what in the hell is Justice Department lawyers doing defending Obama in this suit? It's bad enough that Obama has
illegally spent at least $600,000 from his campaign funds to keep his bona fides from the American People -- now he's got Civil Service lawyers from the Justice department representing him.

Gerstein, doesn't miss a chance to "Alinsky" Taitz and her clients because of "spelling errors." I wonder how Gerstein would do if he had to write his cheap-shot article in Russian, Taitz' native language -- by the way, Taitz is a dentist as well as an attorney -- I wonder what professional degrees Gerstein holds?

We'll see tomorrow whether Federal District Court Judge, David O. Carter, a highly-decorated US Marine, will stand tall, or stand small.

I asked an attorney practicing in the federal courts -- Why is the Department of Justice involved? What legal business it of theirs? Obama has his own attorneys. These DOJ attorneys have signed this filing as "Attorneys for Defendants." -- this is her response:

I have no idea. If it is a non-issue, they need to stay out of it. I have not read their motion, but if they are arguing that the election has already occurred and the timing of the suit is the problem, then they must be grasping at straws.

If Obama is not eligible to be President under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution b/c he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S., he is a Usurper and the challenge can happen at any time even under what Leo D'Onofrio called Quo Warranto action in the DC Court.

Obama could have used private lawyers, but he's trying to use the weight of the DOJ to intimidate the Judge into submission.

I think
Lucas Smith has something they don't want to have exposed.

And how come four DOJ attorneys are representing Obama in this matter? George S. Cardona, Acting United States Attorney; Leon Weidman, Assistant United States Attorney; Roger W. West, Assistant United States Attorney, First Assistant Chief, Civil Division; and David A. DeJute, Assistant United States Attorney, all signed this filing as, "Attorneys for Defendants."

What happened to Obama's private attorneys? Why are Civil Service attorneys representing the Usurper at the taxpayer's expense? Is it just to intimidate the judge?

If there's no case, how come it takes four high-ranking federal attorneys and a small army of private ones to defend Obama from the reasonable inquiries of American citizens? Is this even legal?

And how did Gerstein get the word of the DOJ action -- he wrote this article last night -- in the middle of the night. He timestamps his article at
02:27 AM (at end of article).

Who has Gerstein been getting his information from? From Justice, that's who. So Gerstein is obviously an Obama agent -- he's getting his talking points in the middle of the night from "sources unknown" inside the Obama "JustUs" Department.

I have had some thoughts about what Obama is hiding. Could it be that his "father" - Obama Sr. - learned that another man impregnated Stanley Ann and that Obama Jr. was not his son? Could this have led to Obama Sr. leaving the child and mother so abruptly to continue his education?

I tried to find out what year the first paternity DNA test was ever done. In one obscure article, the date was 1986. Does anyone know if that date is correct?

Many bloggers have covered Obama's eligibility issue. Some (like me) have even speculated that Obama Sr. is not Obama Jr.'s real father. I still think that if true - it would explain a lot.

1. It would explain why Obama Sr. left the mother and child so abruptly to attend school. Could it have been a blood test that revealed he wasn't the real father?

2. It would explain why Obama is hiding so many of his papers. Any one of them could reveal what he is desperately trying to hide.

3. It would explain why Obama had no contact with his father for all those years - except for the one photo of them together when he was a child (looked about 7 yrs. old?)

4. It would explain why Obama was so close to Frank Marshall Davis and labeled him as his "mentor" in one of his books. Perhaps he was his real father?

5. It would explain why Obama hasn't helped any of his so-called Kenyan relatives; or his "brother" who lives in a hut.

Oh...never mind. This is all just speculation. But if an American (i.e. Frank Marshall Davis or Malcolm X Little) is Obama's biological father, then that might explain why the CIA, FBI, Homeland Security Dept., Secret Service, and any other scrutinizing organization is not concerned about his eligibility for POTUS.

But then again - why would someone go to such lengths (and huge expense) to hide his true, biological father's identity?

We must ask ourselves - which story seems more plausible?

Hat Tips:

The Obama File

The Astute Blogger

Israel Insider

P.S.'s not only Conservatives and Republicans that are celebrating Glenn Beck's outing and subsequent cause for Van Jone's resignation - Moderate Democrats at Hillbuzz are grateful too!! (Hat Tip commenter: jonathan h. , hampton, VA at Defend


Politico: Glenn Beck up, left down and Van Jones defiant

One commenter makes a great point which refutes Jones' complaint that it was a "smear job":

Darby64: Sep. 6, 2009 - 6:30 PM EST
Smear campaign? His racist filth came out of his own mouth. What smear campaign? This guy is a loser, and it is all 100% his own fault.


MurrayA said...

My copy of Michelle Malkin's "Culture of Corruption" arrived yesterday, and I have already read the first chapter. Oh dear! All the reports on her site, Gateway Pundit, Hot Air, Townhall, Newsmax, etc. etc. have not told the half of it! Watergate's moles are nothing to this mob of crooks. Even our own Rudd government, which is all about spin, spin, and more spin, is positively pristine by comparison.

I posted Luke 21:28 yesterday deliberately, because I believe that the move toward global government, which Obama's crowd backs to the hilt (he's a "citizen of the world" you know - that's why he's not concerned about border protection and national sovereignty), this is a very definite sign of the end of our age. I know that sort of thing has been said before, and I am far from predicting dates, as some foolishly do, but I am saying, "Be ready as never before".

Christinewjc said...


In your opinion, is Malkin's book a disappointment?

I was afraid of that. I have found out that she does not think that the Obama ineligibility issue is valid. I'm not exactly sure why, but I think that it might have something to do with the fact that she (Michele) is not a "natural born citizen" either. She is a U.S. Citizen, of course, but her parents were born in the Phillipines.

Also, I know that people are complaining that Glenn Beck will not discuss the birth certificate/Obama ineligibility issue either. However, I think (speculation on my part) that he might be the person who WANTED to discuss it, but was forbidden to do so by his "bosses" at Fox News Channel. I'm sure that he realizes that if he defied his bosses at Fox and is fired, he would not be able to warn us about Obama's administration and the danger it presents to our freedoms.

Luk 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

We are witnessing the signs of the times that the prophets prophesied and Jesus reiterated during his 3 year mission on earth. All of the predictions are happening with break-neck speed now. Many things that have been revealed by end times biblical scholars are coming true in this generation. Hundreds of prophesies about Jesus Christ were fulfilled by Him. The rest will be fulfilled at His second coming. Ever since the State of Israel was formed again in 1945 - dozens and dozens of prophesies have come to fruition.

Yes. I agree. The time for our redemption draweth nigh!

MurrayA said...

Is the book a disappointment?
No! Definitely not. She has revealed a network of corruption that one would not have believed unless she had done her painstaking research and compiled dossiers and records a mile thick (to use some hyperbole).

No she does not believe that the birth certificate issue is valid. she is on record as putting that in the "truther" category. I disagree here, but otherwise she is spot on.

As far as that issue is concerned, I think both Glenn Beck and Rush would like to run with the issue, as Joseph Farah has been doing all along, but probably for personal reasons they don't want to stick their necks out too far. Glenn in particular is probably hamstrung by the guidelines on Fox News, but he might be doing so on his talk-radio show, which I don't hear.

Whatever, it seems that the issue is hotting up. Look at the lead item on WND at present.

Christinewjc said...

Hi MurrayA,

Glad to know that Malkin's book exposes so much of the corruption that many Conservatives warned about during Obama's lying campaign!

It kinda surprises me that Michele would lump those who question Obama's natural born citizen status and eligibility for POTUS due to Article II, Section 1 Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution! Oh well...guess we can't agree on everything.

I just discovered something! My Histats site showed that 56 people came over to my blog to view this post via Yahoo News. Here's the link:

Go to the box where it states:

Most Blogged About
Obama school speech released; Update: Obama’s priority in speech; Update: Reagan got political in his speech
Hot Air TV - Mon Sep 7, 1:02 pm EDT
Blogs About This Story (31)
The President’s speech to the school kids: Yawn! Much ado over nothingLeaning Straight UpWhy Is DOJ Involved In Upcoming Obama Lawsuit?Talk WisdomDear Leader's speech to his future Youth BrigadesBrain ShavingsHow to brainwash a schoolchildRumproastSend your kids to school — with caffeineBookworm Room26 - 30 of 31Prev Next

And you will see Talk Wisdom listed!