4 Responses to “Now there are 17 active cases against usurper Obama. See below a case by a citizen of MA Bill Reid. We need every citizen tising against the usurper Obama and our rulling mafia”

1. Tracey Gallagher
   December 11th, 2012 @ 8:30 pm

   As an attorney myself, I have wondered, have you thought about a legal challenge via the FEC is required to deem that anyone who is running for the president is to determine and establish that the candidate is eligible? If they do not what redress do the people have? It is my understanding they do not. What about a FOIA inquiry, has that been conducted on all of the documents submitted by Obama? Moreover, it should be the burden of the candidate not the people to prove that they meet the constitutional requirement. It doesn’t have to be a birth certificate, go a different route and make them establish that anyone who has applied and is accepted how are they deemed to have met the requirements if the FEC is not checking.

2. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
   December 12th, 2012 @ 12:42 am

   FEC stated that they only check contributions. there is no requirement for them to check eligibility.
   If you are really a lawyer, you are welcome to file cases of your own based on your ideas

3. Tracey Gallagher
   December 12th, 2012 @ 6:22 am

   I do want to say that I appreciate all of your hard work. I do criminal defense so I know how it can be and what types of obstacles you come up against even in this type of litigation. With that said, since the FEC is where one can put their name on the ballot who does the checks and balances to ensure that the person who applies meets the requirements? The state I would presume should also do so “prior” to anyone’s name is placed on the ballot. However, this is not done. What redress do the people have if the state courts are not willing to hear the case, i.e., as in Florida it was indicated that the issue was not “ripe” yet until after the election. This is sheer nonsense. Do we as attorneys need to provide our bar number, yes. The burden is on the person seeking to run not on the people to prove otherwise. Time and time again, we see this issue pushed aside from court to court as nobody wants to address this. Point being, since the Constitution clearly defines the eligibility of a person who wishes to run, who then has oversight? A question that needs to be addressed. People are being made to pay money for this Obamacare, now with the 63.00 additional tax, by whom? Someone that we have no clue is even eligible to be the president. The judges need to keep politics out of the court and address this issue. We are the employers and the president is our employee not the other way around. In sum, fill out the papers send in the money and you are then placed on a ballot. What are the checks and balances? It appears there are none. Keep up the good work. I myself am appalled that this issue has never been addressed by any court and the ball just merely keeps getting thrown around like a hot potato since no one wants to address this issue.

4. Bruriah Sarah
   December 12th, 2012 @ 10:07 am

   Dr. Taitz

   Perhaps you might consider what Tracey Gallagher is saying. Perhaps Tracey and/or others might agree to help as they can – with your okay – in filings in the various states that they work in – where you need the work done. Perhaps these attorneys might also consider to help you pro bono. And perhaps the only issue is raising the money for court fees, etc.

Leave a Reply