Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The secrecy surrounding this persons past, is unprecedented in our past Presidents.
It is intriguing.
Many that love the truth, are very doubtful of the Presidents past. Especially since it is kept under lock and key, with what has been exposed, seems very sketchy.
But what do we know about Chief Justice Roy Moore? He seems to have issues with Obama.
All RWNJ's do {have issues}, don't they now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow
The secrecy surrounding this persons past, is unprecedented in our past Presidents.
It is intriguing.
Many that love the truth, are very doubtful of the Presidents past. Especially since it is kept under lock and key, with what has been exposed, seems very sketchy.
I am disentriguied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunValleyRoadKing
With all the indignation expressed over wasteful government spending, why are rightwingers so silent on these pitifully wasteful birther lawsuits?
Because they all get their ideas from the same place.
The secrecy surrounding this persons past, is unprecedented in our past Presidents.
Only blithering idiots too buried in the right-wing echo chamber to come up for air actually believe that. We know more about President Obama and have seen more of his personal documentation than any other modern president.
I have never followed the birther movement at all but I ran into this intriguing story on another website. There are two Judges in question. One is newly elected Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore who made headlines over the 'Ten Commandments' being removed from the Alabama courthouse about 10 years ago. He is thinks Obama violated the U.S. Constitution when he ordered military action into Libya. The other judge is Tom Parker who voiced his opinion in a eligibility case brought by Hugh McInnish about Arpaio's conclusions over Obama's birth certificates released. He wrote:
“Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”
The “certain documentation” Parker refers to is the findings of the investigation conducted by Arpaio.
I have no idea when the court date is. The article doesn't say. My question is wouldn't Justice Parker have to recuse himself because of that opinion he wrote?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You ARE kidding, aren't you?
