The dregs of birther remainders.

[Lani]

Maybe the birthers avoided Hawai'i because they were afraid that their cold bitter hearts might melt in the warm sunshine.

I remember some birthers came to Honolulu to see or get the birth certificate. They went to Department of Health Vital Records and of course, they were denied. They thought they could walk in and get any person's certificate.

[northland10]

IIRC, Orly sued somebody in Hawaii as that is where we got the assistant AG in Hawaii using the phrase, "an inartfully collated, defectively stapled, and misordered collection of pages".

[Reality Check]

IIRC, Orly sued somebody in Hawaii as that is where we got the assistant AG in Hawaii using the phrase, "an inartfully collated, defectively stapled, and misordered collection of pages".

Orly sued the Hawaii DoH. Mike Dunford lived in Hawaii then and gave us several memorable first hand accounts of the hearings. One of the funniest moments wass when Orly brought her so-called experts Paul Irey and Doug Vogt to the DoH with microscope in hand and assumed they could march right into the archives to examine President Obama's birth certificate. The guards of course stopped them.

No same person could have made up the crap Orly tried to pull over and over.

[pipistrelle]

Maybe the birthers avoided Hawai'i because they were afraid that their cold bitter hearts might melt in the warm sunshine.

I remember some birthers came to Honolulu to see or get the birth certificate. They went to Department of Health Vital Records and of course, they were denied. They thought they could walk in and get any person's certificate.

That'd be a stupid assumption. Aren't we all told not to hand out things like SS# and birth dates like candy?

[jemcanada2]

I remember a very frustrated Hawaii deputy attorney general Jill Nagamine (one of Foggy’s pretend girlfriends) trying to explain to Orly why a subpoena from her lolsuit in Georgia wasn’t valid in Hawaii without going through the correct process.

Narrator: Orly never figured out the correct process

[bob]

Yes, Taitz did file in Hawaii.

A handful of other birthers did as well. Andy Martin, IIRC.

[realist]

Yes, Taitz did file in Hawaii.

A handful of other birthers did as well. Andy Martin, IIRC.

Indeed. Andy Martin filed at least 3 time in Hawaii.

SC9337~1.PNG (70.29 KiB) Viewed 571 times

SC5B87~1.PNG (126.94 KiB) Viewed 571 times

[bob]

P&E comments:

I am just recovering from a two month bout of respiratory illness.

* * *

I’m getting up there in age. While I will not live forever. I’m hoping some of my words will.

* * *

I’m educated as an Electrical Engineer with a sub-major in digital logic with both hardware and software. So I’m trained to think logically, study the data, use truth tables and boolean algebra, and reach a conclusion. I’m not a lawyer nor have I aspired to be one. The now deceased Mario Apuzzo was my lawyer. I enjoyed working with him on my lawsuits re Obama and enjoyed our private debates where we both learned from each other. He had a wonderful family who I met several times over the years. Mario was a great writer, lawyer, warrior, patriot, and father in this battle. He loved his adopted country. Not all knew it but he was a naturalized U.S. Citizen. He was also a champion soccer player in the striker position. I miss him a lot.

Candidates for the Dead Birthers thread? (NADT!)

The way they are all -ing each other feels like a still-alive memorial.

Bonus:

CDR Kerchner’s article further supports and ratifies the conclusion — now, virtually inescapable despite the contrary pontifications of the Congressional Research Service; former U.S. Solicitors General and the Indiana Court of Appeals in its flawed Ankeny opinion

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

[Volkonski]

[Sam the Centipede]

P&E comments:

I’m getting up there in age. While I will not live forever. I’m hoping some of my words will.

Kerchner hopes his words will live on. Mm. Mario Apuzzo's exploits have not touched anybody outside the birther/anti-birther communities since he departed this life. I can't even remember the names of other dead birthers, let alone their, ah, insights.

[bob]

This isn't birther per se, but very birther adjacent:

Standard Newswire: Lawfulness of Biden Administration Cabinet in Question Upon Failure to Produce Oaths of Office:

On April 12, 2023, Todd S. Callender, Esq. of Disabled Rights Advocates PLLC, and Kenneth W. Ferguson, Esq. of Ferguson Law, P.A., filed on Petition for Writ of Quo Warranto, on behalf of Petitioner, Lisa McGee, to the US Attorney in the District of Columbia, requesting: 1) true, correct and non-defective required affidavits of Oaths of Office for the appointed and elected cabinet members of the Biden Administration; or the immediate removal of all named parties for failure to abide their this statutory requirement; and 3) if removed, then to void all their official acts ab initio.

* * *

Ms. McGee previously sought the required affidavits via the Freedom of Information Act requests (FOIA); and not one of the aforesaid appointees have produced a compliant affidavit consistent with the statute. Either the affidavit(s) are nonexistent, wanting, or the appointee has failed or refused to provide the mandated affidavit to hold their respective offices.

Nb.: They "filed" with the U.S. Attorney, not a court. So this performative act will be duly round filed.

Missing Oaths of Office will render a majority of the Biden Administration Cabinet unlawful and their official acts from the date of appointment void. Failure to produce the affidavit(s) to the US Attorney will provide the necessary jurisdiction to the Federal District Court of Washington D.C. to issue said Writ Quo Warranto.

In other words, they're pulling a Laity and believe this paper-throwing will give the D.D.C. jurisdiction to hear their inevitable lawsuit.

They're anti-vaxxers, BTW.

[realist]

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

To be fair, they do have to submit their request to the Attorney of DC first. If the Attorney refuses to take action, then they can attempt to file a Quo Warranto on their own, but...

STANDING!

[Lani]

I forgot most of what happened with the birther idiots wandering around in Honolulu. The good thing about it was that 4 of us Fogbowers met up a few times in Honolulu for dinner cocktails. I'll remember the names tomorrow, probably. Our now famous attorney, a neonatal nurse, and the chair of a charity.

[bob]

P&E: The Role of States and “POPE’s” in Presidential Eligibility Determinations

P&E: Revisiting the POPE Option:

"THE END GAME"

A few weeks ago, your humble servant offered an article suggesting a way of getting the “natural born Citizen” (“nbC”) presidential eligibility issue under Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution before the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Usual "DeMaio" snipped.]

Accordingly, your humble servant offers the following proposed non-exclusive template, acknowledging that there are likely many more:

Section 1: Declaration of Intent

It is the intent of this statute to require, as a precondition to the placement of any person’s name as a candidate for President of the United States or Vice-President of the United States, on any primary or general election ballot, documentary proof of constitutional eligibility as a “natural born Citizen” under Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

Section 2: Proof of Presidential Eligibility

Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, a person declaring his or her candidacy for the office of President of the United States or Vice-President of the United States, and as a precondition to placement on either a primary election ballot or general election ballot, shall, not later than ninety days prior to the deadline for the printing of said primary or general election ballots, provide to the Secretary of State written documentary proof of the person’s constitutional eligibility as a “natural born Citizen” under Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution.

Section 3. Criteria for Proof of Presidential Eligibility

A. Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, in order to satisfy the requirements of Section 2 of this Act, the documentary proof shall consist exclusively of:

(1) documentary proof of the U.S. citizenship status of both of the candidate’s parents at, but not after, the time of the declared candidate’s birth, whether the parents themselves be native-born, natural born or lawfully naturalized; and

(2) documentary proof of the birth of the declared candidate within the geographic boundaries of the United States of America, including incorporated territories thereof, but excluding unincorporated territories thereof.

B. The documentary proof required under Paragraph (A) of this section shall consist solely of original sealed or certified copies of birth certificates or parental certificates of naturalization, with uncertified copies, photographs or Internet images of same being specifically disqualified and excluded.

Section 4. Prohibition

The Secretary of State is prohibited from placing on a primary or general election ballot the name of any purported candidate subject to this Act who has failed within the prescribed time limit to provide the required documentary proof to the Secretary of State. A failure by the Secretary of State to comply with this prohibition is declared to be a Class ___ felony.

Section 5. Emergency

This act is deemed to be necessary to address an emergency, and is therefore further declared to take effect immediately upon the signature of the Governor.

This cosplaying must be fun for "DeMaio," and it relieves Rondeau of creating more content.

In all candor, the likelihood of a statute of this nature ever making it to the desk of a governor willing to sign it rather than veto it may be remote[.]

Yathink?

[Luke]

Not bothering to post it, but I'd ask the birther brain trust, "What about adopted kids born in America?".

[Sam the Centipede]

Not bothering to post it, but I'd ask the birther brain trust, "What about adopted kids born in America?".

Oh, that's easy, based on their usual analysis: if the kid is white and right-wing, s/he's a good Amurickan citizen, nachrul born an' all. Brown or left of fascist, ah, more tricky, probably a filthy Kenyan communist infiltrator.

It's not really about birth, it's about "us" and "them" for birthers.

[bob]

Some jerk* is still baned, but I've already seen that asked answered: adoption isn't an exception.

Birthers' "blood and soil" beliefs mean loyalty magickly flows in your veins.

[Luke]

So no adopted kids can be president? Impressive.

Scoop Rondeau is on it! She contacted the law firm and got a copy of the Quo Warranto. She spares no effort on the meaningless.

Story: https://www.thepostemail.com/2023/04/19 ... ppointees/

The "Petition": https://www.thepostemail.com/wp-content ... rranto.pdf

[Sam the Centipede]

I am guessing that Rondeau and her coterie of assholes did not feel that a quo warranto investigation was ever appropriate for Trump and his bunch of unethical and incompetent clowns although they claim it's vitally important now. These assholes pretend to be impartial and objective while only harassing and insulting those who aren't right-wing nutjobs. Strange that.

[bob]

Scoop Rondeau is on it! She contacted the law firm and got a copy of the Quo Warrano. She spares no effort on the meaningless.

Story: https://www.thepostemail.com/2023/04/19 ... ppointees/

My favorite bit:

In the same paragraph, the attorneys cite Sibley v. Obama, 866 F. Supp. 2d 17 (D.D.C. 2012), aff’d, 2012 WL 6603088 (D.C. Cir. 2012), which refers to a case filed by Montgomery Blair Sibley, then an attorney in the Washington, DC area, and, according to U.S. District Judge John D. Bates at the time, “asserts so-called ‘birther’ claims against President Barack Obama, aiming to have him ousted from office and to have his name removed from the ballot in November 2012 because he supposedly was not born in the United States.”

SPOILER: Sibley lost; twice.

With respect to Sibley, the "petition" says:

Stated differently, it is used to question the authority of an individual asserting a right and title to a public office or appointment; and intended to prevent or challenge the exercise of those powers that are not conferred by law.

The "petition" "overlooked" this part:

Before this Court may evaluate the merits of his claims, plaintiff must demonstrate that he has the requisite standing to bring this lawsuit, and that the Court may grant the relief he seeks. Federal courts have jurisdiction over a case or controversy under Article III of the U.S. Constitution only if the plaintiff has standing to sue. Kerchner v. Obama, 612 F.3d 204, 207 (3d Cir. 2010). Standing under Article III requires: (1) violation of a legally protected interest that is personal to the plaintiff and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) a causal relation between the injury and the defendant's challenged conduct; and (3) likelihood that a decision for the plaintiff will compensate for the injury. A generalized interest of all citizens in constitutional governance does not suffice to confer standing on one such citizen. (Drake v. Obama, 664 F.3d 774, 779 (9th Cir. 2011).) . . .

Plaintiff lacks standing to challenge President Obama's current tenure in office, just as others who have made similar claims contesting President Obama's eligibility for the presidency were found to lack standing. The injury plaintiff asserts is not particular to him. See Kerchner, 612 F.3d at 207 (citing Berg v. Obama, 586 F.3d 234, 238–39 (3d Cir. 2009)).

Bonus:

Outstanding. Keep pounding at the door. One day it will be opened.

"Any day now."

If there's one person who should be able to predict the outcome of this paper throwing, it is Laity.

And, "for completeness," when the D.D.C. tossed Laity's quo warranto, it cited ... Sibley.

[northland10]

The "petition" "overlooked" this part:

Standing under Article III requires: (1) violation of a legally protected interest that is personal to the plaintiff and actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) a causal relation between the injury and the defendant's challenged conduct; and (3) likelihood that a decision for the plaintiff will compensate for the injury. A generalized interest of all citizens in constitutional governance does not suffice to confer standing on one such citizen. (Drake v. Obama, 664 F.3d 774, 779 (9th Cir. 2011).) . . .

I assume the omitted citation was Lujan. Oh, they hate that one and probably think it is some liberal plot. Just ignore that Scalia wrote that opinion.

Lujan, Twombly, and Iqbal. Those be drilled into my brain by now. However, they seem to be forgotten easily by Birthers, and GIL.

[bob]

I assume the omitted citation was Lujan.

Yes; of course.

I thought it was hilarious Rondeau got excited because the "petition" cited Sibley. Because Sibley is exactly what the D.D.C. will cite when dismissing the inevitable lawsuit that will follow this grifting theater.

[Luke]

Still don't care enough to tangle with Scoop Rondeau, but there's a beautiful concern trolling that could deeply compliment Chuckles on how Kerchner v. Obama is so important to the petition and will guarantee its success. It's also fun when in quoting something Rharon is forced to print stuff like “asserts so-called ‘birther’ claims".

The Drake v Obama cite is one of my favorites. After losing 200+ cases, all the birthers have to show for it is precedents directly in opposition to what they wanted. And they paid for them. Wonder if Chuckles, Laity & Co ever think of that. Hope they do. Thanks, birthers!

[bob]

Still don't care enough to tangle with Scoop Rondeau, but there's a beautiful concern trolling that could deeply compliment Chuckles on how Kerchner v. Obama is so important to the petition and will guarantee its success.

I left a comment that I doubt will be published. It did reference Kerchner's case, but with less of your ... gloss.

Edit: P&E comment:

When the D.C. district court dismissed Laity’s quo warranto petition, it cited Sibley’s case.

And it when the D.C. district court dismissed Sibley’s petition, it cited Kerchner’s case (and others).

*