4um: 'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case - President's attorneys file motion demanding birth, college records be withheld from public

Title: 'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case - President's attorneys file motion demanding birth, college records be withheld from public
Source: World Net Daily
URL Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88746
Published: Feb 13, 2009
Author: Bob Unruh
Post Date: 2009-02-14 13:02:50 by Rotara
Ping List: *Obama Reality Check* Subscribe to *Obama Reality Check*
Keywords: None
Views: 259
Comments: 13

A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be "monetary sanctions" against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn't qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" citizen in that post.

The suggestion came in an exchange of e-mails and documents in a case brought by former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others in California. The case originally sought to have the state's electors ordered to withhold their votes for Obama until his eligibility was established. Since Obama's inauguration, it has been amended to seek a future requirement for a vetting process, in addition to the still-sought unveiling of his records.

In the case, handled largely by Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation, records were subpoenaed documenting Obama's attendance at Occidental College.

The lawyer for the college, Stuart W. Rudnick of Musick, Peeler & Garrett, urgently contacted Fredric D. Woocher of Strumwasser & Woocher.

"This firm is counsel to Occidental College. The College is in receipt of the enclosed subpoena that seeks certain information concerning President-Elect Barack Obama," he wrote via fax. "Inasmuch as the subpoena appears to be valid on its face, the College will have no alternative but to comply with the subpoena absent a court order instructing otherwise."

Within hours, Woocher contacted Kreep regarding the issue, telling him, "It will likely not surprise you to hear that President-elect Obama opposes the production of the requested records.

"In order to avoid the needless expense of our bringing and litigating a Motion to Quash the subpoena, I am writing to ask whether you would be willing to agree voluntarily to cancel or withdraw the subpoena."

Woocher warned, "Please be advised, in particular, that in the event we are forced to file a motion to quash and we prevail in that motion, we will seek the full measure of monetary sanctions provided for in the Code of Civil Procedures."

Kreep, out of town for a business trip, did not respond immediately, and the motion eventually was filed. It states that the records, which could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students, "are of no relevance to this moot litigation."

The motion also claims the petitioners failed to serve the subpoena properly.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 235,000 others and sign up now!

"The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place," the firm working on Obama's behalf stated.

"The central issue in this lawsuit … is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from Democratic Party's nominee," the motion said. "None of the documents sought by petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question."

The motion then cited a precedent from a case involving a "former law firm client who brought malpractice action against firm claiming unconscionable rates was not entitled to discovery regarding amount paid by law firm to contract staff attorney because such information is irrelevant to unconscionability claim."

The case, with Keyes, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson as plaintiffs, names California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, Barack Hussein Obama, Joe Biden and the state's electors as defendants.

"OBAMA has been inaugurated as the president of the United States. However, to properly assume such office, OBAMA must meet the qualifications specified in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution for the Office of the President of the United States, which includes that he must be a 'natural born' citizen," the amended complaint states.

"OBAMA has failed to demonstrate that he is a 'natural born' citizen. There have been a number of legal challenges before various state and federal courts regarding aspects of non-, lost, or dual citizenship concerning OBAMA. Those challenges, in and of themselves, demonstrate Petitioners' argument that reasonable doubt exists as to his eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

"To avert a constitutional crisis which would certainly accrue after such an election through laborious legal challenges, this writ seeks to require SOS (Secretary of State) to verify the eligibility of a Presidential candidate prior to the candidate appearing on the California ballot. It is incumbent on the candidates to present the necessary documentation confirming his or her eligibility, but, to date, for this past election, OBAMA has failed to do so," the complaint continues.

"An unprecedented and looming constitutional crisis awaits if a President elected by the popular vote and the electoral vote does not constitutionally qualify to serve in that capacity," the case said. "In addition, if OBAMA is not a 'natural born' citizen and not eligible for presidency, OBAMA will be subject to the criminal provisions of the California Elections Code, stating, 'Any person who files or submits for filing a nomination paper or declaration of candidacy knowing that it, or any part of it, has been made falsely, is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by both the fine and imprisonment,'" the complaint states.

WND has reported on multiple legal challenges that have alleged Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some claim he was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama's past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family's move to Indonesia when he was a child and on what nation's passport he traveled to Pakistan in the '80s, as well as conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.

In just the last few days, WND has reported on a developing lawsuit by a team of state lawmakers as well as military officers, both of whom would be bound to follow orders from the president and would need to know whether the orders were legitimate.

WND also reported this week on a separate case that accuses Congress of failing to investigate President Obama's birthplace before approving the Electoral College vote giving him the presidency, after going through that very investigative process for GOP candidate Sen. John McCain.

Several of the cases – including those brought by Orly Taitz, Cort Wrotnowski, Leo Donofrio and Philip Berg, already have been discussed in conference at the U.S. Supreme Court, which has decided not to hold a hearing on any of the merits.

Here is a partial listing and status update for several of the cases:

Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg's latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was denied.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
In Washington, L. Charles vs. Obama.
In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii, which the state's procedures allowed at the time?

I think it means that only a handful of Hawaiian political ticks have actually seen O's actual BC.

This is the Kreep CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE with California Code of Civil Procedure § 1985.3:

The Obama defender comes out of the woodwork. More cut and paste BS. Obama isn't eligible and isn't really president.

Nolu, stacks of court material aside, has His BC seen the light of day, or is it that only a selected few political appointees have attested to it's validity?

This thread title was "Sanctions sought...." The actual court filings do not support that.

The court case involved is in state court and sought an injunction against the Secretary of State, not the birth certificate.

A purported COLB has seen the light of day. The natural born citizenship of Obama has been accepted by all 50 states, and each electoral vote was unanimously certified by a joint session of Congress as having been constitutional. It took all of 1 senator and 1 representative to make a formal challenge.

There is no legal case to be made. You may desire different laws but there is no applicable law to invoke. You may deem the process insufficient. If his BC says his daddy was Malcolm X or Frank Davis he would still be a natural born citizen. Legally, the COLB provides certification of birth in a state and will prevail.

So the answer to my question is nobody has seen His BC except political hacks, dupes, toadies and other bureaucrats seeded away in some corner of a stuffy record room. Gotcha. You partisans are funny :P

4um Traitor
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams

The answer to your irrelevant, diversionary question is that it has no relevance to the lawsuit in main, or to the subpoena and motions which are the topic of this thread.

Title: 'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case - President's attorneys file motion demanding birth, college records be withheld from public

The lawsuit sought a "writ barring Respondent California Electors from signing the Certificate of Vote," not a birth certificate. It's a bit late for that, however, if you believe this lawsuit has merit you are invited to send a generous donation to the cause.

The unlawfully served subpoena sought school records, not a birth certificate. However, if you believe the unlawfully served subpoena has merit, again you are invited to send a generous donation to the cause.

As good ol' Phil Berg acknowledged in a brief, "There are no laws which specifically delegate whose responsibility it is to carry the burden of verifying the eligibility of a President. ... The Constitution or our laws do not contain provisions on who is to make determinations of the compliance of the presidential candidate with Article II, much less that they have exclusive ability to do so."

Congress has enacted Federal law, 3 U.S.C. § 15 empowering only themselves, sitting in joint session, to challenge the eligibility of the candidates upon the counting and validation, as constitutional, of the electoral votes. The congresscritters did not challenge a single electoral vote although they have done so in the past.

Obama has shown whatever he had to, to whomever he had to. You, me, and the people bringing these frivolous lawsuits, he did not and does not have to provide anything. In the absence of any legal merit, each frivolous lawsuit proves the plaintiff does not even have an argument which can survive pretrial motions.