Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Activity in Kerchner v Obama & Congress Case - 2nd Extension of time granted to Defendants

Activity in Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Lawsuit - The motion by the defendants for the second extension in time to answer, move, or otherwise respond was granted. Their new deadline is June 29, 2009. You can read the full order at the link below. When you read the order you will see that the court addressed this second request for an extension in great detail in his five page order. On page two the Judge writes, "In their complaint Plaintiffs assert violations of their constitutional rights alleging that Defendants have failed to conclusively prove that President Obama is a natural born citizen and therefore may not be eligible to serve as President of the United States." Then on page four the Judge writes, "Plaintiffs' Complaint raises significant issues necessitating that the named Defendants engage competent counsel to represent their interests." The Judge points out that the Department of Justice still has not decided who is going to represent whom for the seven defendants in the case. Later he then writes, "The Court is confident that after all the attorneys enter their appearances on behalf of all Defendants, that the case will proceed expeditiously." The Judge of course noted that we opposed the extension. And previously on page two, the Judge noted, "The Court has also received numerous letters from non-parties opposing Defendants' motion [Doc. Nos. 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25]." The order was written and signed by U.S. Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider who serves at the:

United States Courthouse
4th & Cooper Street
Camden NJ 08101

I will comment in more detail later.

Link to a copy of the filed court document for this latest activity: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16253400/

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg NJ 08831
Email: apuzzo [AT] erols.com
TEL: 732-521-1900 ~ FAX: 732-521-3906
BLOG: http://puzo1.blogspot.com

P.S. Also, please feel free to join the discussions and comments in this forum about the subject of the Natural Born Citizenship clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution by [Clicking Here].
####

21 comments:

Hugh said...

So, I take it this is the closest we've ever come to finally realizing the original birth certificate being made available for public examination. It's exciting to see some legal wheels finally in REAL motion.

roger said...

Looks like we got us a perpetual motion machine going here.
RWCX

kscott9 said...

Is it just me or should Ms. Elizabeth Pascal, Assistant United States Attorney, be acting in that official capacity to represent the defendants in this case (especially when the costs are being borne or should be) by the Obama campaign coffers?

Teo Bear said...

I beleive this is good news as it shows some careful thought by the court. In the courts own words these are serious charges and they are taking them seriously.

The court could have stoned walled, but is trying to be fair and impartial. Too long we have seen some courts simply refuse to make a decision or to chastise the plaintiffs. It appears this court is at the very least attempting to take this case seriously and fairly.

Greg Goss said...

They could still move for dismissal. It would be nice if we could get some press to cover this on or before the 29th.

Spaulding said...

Could this be the foot in the door? We could sit and pray that individuals on the court see that a failure to act threatens themselves and their families. But we could be proactive, sending supporting letters to the court, but also making a special effort to involve the media. These are momentus decisions; this may be the only way to stop this czar-filled freight train, deepening insolvancy, military impotence, environmental pay-to-play fascism, designed dependence upon Middle East and Venezuelan oil, and, like Britain, a parallel Sharia legal system. That Justice concedes the need to find legal experts should be news. We can't assume our most public originalist legal spokesman would forsake a tenth week at the top of the NYT best seller list, but there are patriots who have not been afraid to take on this subject - Gordon Liddy, Roger Hedgecock, Bill Cunningham, Barbara Simpson,Glenn Beck, ... Too many believe the eligibility issue had no validity, and/or no chance of being addressed. It has been taken seriously by The Justice Department and, now that Obama's directions are better understood by the public, publicity will help the court to do what is right.

jayjay said...

How does one access the numbered documents in the case such as the non-party letters referenced??

Anyone have a link??

Let's hope that the observation made by the judge about Pelosi and the House not yet having counsel will not be used as an excuse for further artificial delay. It's heartening to see this much decent commentary from the Judge, however.

June 29 should be interesting!!

Puzo1 said...

Hi JayJay,

I'll try to put some example letters in the Document link category in the right column.

Spaulding said...

Why wouldn't those Chrysler dealers, and Chrysler and GM bond holders, who are legally questioning the constitutionality of the president's actions be very interested in Kerchner v Obama? If Obama's objective is to "bring it down baby", consistent with his mentors from SDS and the Weathermen, fighting each constitutional transgression may result in some victories, as millions more lose their jobs, homes, and retirement savings. Obama and his sponsors will have demonstrated the irrelevance of the constitution, and made us all dependent on the state.

Dealers and bond holders can certainly show injury for which the remedy is the invalidation of Obama's usurped presidential authority, which trumps his unconstitution regulation of intrastate commerce (just guessing). If he can stall verification of his birthplace and questions about his British father, he can stall with our money until no one has much left to protect. If he is, as we suspect, illegitimate, none of these cases has relevance. I'm not sure I want a public response, but shouldn't lawyers for these groups be lined up in Mr. Apuzzo's hallway? Don't they need resolution of your challenge for their cases to be relevent?

James said...

Even though the court granted the time extension, I was encouraged by the the following passage written by the judge:

"The Court is confident that after all the attorneys enter their appearences on behalf of all defendents, that case will proceed expeditiously."

I certainly hope the judge means that and the case won't get shelved and a resolution of this matter will come soon.

You have also said that it is likely the defendents will file a motion to dismiss.

Have you thought about trying to come with a motion to dismiss your own case (meaning, how you would go about dismissing the case or think they would go about dismissing the case) and then coming up a a counter motion to defeat it.

That way when they file their motion to dismiss, you will ready for them.

That might prove fruitful as the motion to dismiss seems to have been prevailing weapon that has defeated many such lawsuits on this matter in the past.

Focusing on the defeat of the motion to dismiss seems to be essential in getting case to the merit level and perhaps finally what we have all been hoping for: DISCOVERY!

Sturgis said...

To any one in the media that is following this issue, ask yourself the following questions. When are you going to do your job and report the news? Why are you part of the media black out and how does that make you feel?

allahallahoxenfree said...

You are wearing rollerskates and climbing a mountain of marbles while they shoot firehoses at you from the top. God bless you man. Your instincts here are right, you know it, we know it and anyone with half a brain who has looked into the issue knows it. Don't ever give up. Your name will be in future history books as the man who woke up a nation.

P. Revere said...

Once again I get my hopes up that the courts will finally address this issue and it's great to see you have gotten it this far so let's pray we don't, once again, have our hopes dashed upon the rocks of despair. GO GET EM TIGER!

Unalienable said...

Why is the American TAXPAYER being billed for what can be considered CRIMES committed by a person who WAS NOT a government employee when the crimes were committed?
AND! if the congressional members DELIBERATELY ignored their responsibilities and sworn oaths then WHY are they not PAYING THEIR OWN LEGAL FEES instead of American TAXPAYERS paying for their MALFEASANCE in office? This is what i want to know.

Kevin said...

Mario,
Could you please explain to the non-lawyers in the crowd what the procedural process would be starting on Jun 29th. Obviously not asking you to show your hand but what are the decisions and options that are open to the courts as of Jun 29?

Thanks!

Keep fighting the good fight!!!

Kenneth said...

I was under the impression that the Justice Department was supposed to prosecute wrong doing not defend it!
If this gets it in court I an for it anyway. We can correct the Justice department later.

Richard said...

I've been wondering lately...has anyone ever asked the Hawaiian Department of Health for proof of when Obama requested his Certification of Live Birth (COLB)? The image of his COLB online supposedly has a date of June 2007, and according to Hawaiian Department of Health regulations only Obama can request the COLB.

I'd think a Freedom of Information request could soon determine whether Obama actually requested a copy of his COLB, and whether the date of June 2007 is correct.

If they have no record of his request, or the date is different, than it's obvious that the COLB posted online is a forgery.

Then Nancy Pelosi, the DNC, Dick Cheney, and the rest of Congress are guilty of malfeasance, and are complicite in pertuating this fraud on America.

Puzo1 said...

JayJay wrote and asked on June 9th:

-----------------------
How does one access the numbered documents in the case such as the non-party letters referenced? Anyone have a link??
------------------------

There are links to the key numbered documents in the right column of the blog. Per your request, the referenced non-party letters referenced in the last court order are now provided.

mtngoat61 said...

A proposed narrative to explain the various seemingly conflicting statements made about Obama's birth in Kenya and Hawaii:

Underage U.S. teenager gets pregnant via a significantly older married man from Kenya. An unusual event in 1961.

Mother of teenager is in total shock over the event as would have been many mothers of teenage girls getting pregnant in 1961 and says to her daughter you have ruined your life and will make going to college much harder for yourself and convinces the teenage girl to go to Kenya in the last month of her pregnancy and give up the baby to the Kenyan natural family of the natural father of the child to be raised in Kenya by them.

The Kenyan grandmother of the child attends birth in Kenyan hospital in Mombasa Kenya and is ready to take custody of the child and raise the child for the foot loose and fancy free natural father with multiple wives ... and the U.S. teenage mother is supposed return to Hawaii leaving the child with the natural father's family and restart her life back in Hawaii minus the child ... and go to college. In 1961, pregnant teenage girls giving up children to restart their lives anew was not unusual.

But nature throws the plan a curve ball. Maternal instincts kick in and mother cannot leave the baby in Kenya, either due to pure maternal instincts or in seeing the conditions in Kenya that her child would be raised in with a mostly absentee father over there. Thus she changes her mom's plan and she takes the baby and birth certificate issued by the Mombassa Hospital to the American Embassy or consulate in Kenya and shows them the Kenyan Birth Certificate for her child and "explains" the baby was born unexpectedly in Kenya while there visiting her "husband's" family. U.S. officials then stamp her passport as traveling with an infant child.

Mother gets on plane carrying the child and flies back to Hawaii and appears at the airport arrival with the new baby in tow, much to the shock of her mother, the child's U.S. grandmother. Baby easily is passed through U.S. entry officials due to embassy stamp on mother's passport and the supporting Kenyan birth certificate showing a U.S. citizen is the mother.

Child's U.S. grandmother is still besides herself at this change in plans by the mother of the child. The child's grandmother then knowing or learning from legal advisers how lax Hawaiian birth registration laws were in 1961, then cooks up a plan and scheme with the child's mother, to lie to Hawaiian officials and swear and sign affidavits at the birth registry office that the child was born in Hawaii at home with no witnesses but them, in order to get the child U.S. citizenship (a highly desirable status) to make future travel and life easier on the family and new child. They did this lie and cover up simply to gain U.S. citizenship for the child a highly coveted status for any child, not knowing that this child might someday grow up and try to become the President and thus risk having their whole plans and lies exposed.

Birth registration office then issues the announcements to the two newspapers, as was the offices custom at the time to send the papers lists of babies born, of the birth event which at its source was only based on the false sworn testimony of the mother. Thus the birth notices in the newspapers are not independent data, they all came from the same source, ... false sworn statements from the mother and/or grandmother that the child was born in Hawaii.

Thus under this narrative the birth records in the vaults in Hawaii may be simply sworn affidavits of the mother and grandmother saying Obama was born at home with no witnesses, all based on lies and fraud, which seems to be a common occurrence with Mr. O's entire life.

A suggested narrative to explain events and facts as revealed thus far.

Goat

Polarik said...

Richard: I was wondering if anyone else, besides myself, would bother asking your question, re: "Has anyone ever asked the Hawaiian Department of Health for proof of when Obama requested his Certification of Live Birth (COLB)?"

The asnwer is that last year, I spoke directly with Dr. Alvin Onaka, the State Registrar and Head of the Office of Health Status Monitoring, and in answer to my last question, he told me that "Hawaii never released a COLB for Obama in June 2007 to anyone."

The photos you saw on Factcheck's website were taken of a forged, fabricated COLB, and not a real one.

What you are looking at is, in fact, a printout of the original forged "scan image" posted two months prior to Factcheck, Obama's own Fight The Smears, and Politifact.

I know this because I have created both digital scans and digital photographs (using the same camera that Factcheck used) from real COLBs (about 785 images in all) and there is no way on Earth that these were produced, factually and legally, by Hawaii's DOH.

In fact, the two photos allegedly taken of the reverse side of the same COLB shown from the frontis of a different COLB - one that was also fabricated.

But, it's hard to argue with Onaka's statement, along with that of Janice Okubo, the Communications Officer at the DOH. She told Politifact's Amy Hollyway that "someone had requested it [Obama's COLB] in June 2008." That led Hollyfield to ponder the obvious conundrum of "How can a 2007 COLB, date-stamped June 6, 2007, be requested in June 2008?"

As well as when both the border and the Seal on a 2007 COLB looks nothing like a 2008 COLB.

In short, you are looking at a major birth certificate SCAM involving felony document fraud with a lot of complicit players.

cfkerchner said...

Polarik:

Welcome. I assume you are Dr. Polarik, the person who did the extensive examination of the COLB images online.

http://polarik.blogtownhall.com/

It is very good to hear from you directly. I have been reading and following your work since July of 2008.

Would you be willing to offer some assistance to us and our case and/or document examination and research, when appropriate with our case, to help remove the usurper from the Oval Office. If so, please contact Atty Apuzzo privately per below contact info.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg NJ 08831
Email: apuzzo[AT]erols.com
TEL: 732-521-1900
FAX: 732-521-3906

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
Lead Plaintff