Based on a report at The Fogbow, the case of Grinols v. Electoral College has been dismissed by federal Judge Morris England in a fairly low-key hearing today in California.
Welcome
Obama Conspiracy Theories since 2008 has been your destination for conspiracy theories and fringe views about Barack Obama. Having an argument with your buddies at the office? You're in the right place. Use the Search box below or check out our featured articles. If you don't agree with what you see, feel free to add your thoughts to the over 250,000 comments others have left. To leave a comment visit the Open Thread.
Also check out The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theoriesConspiracies
Recent Comments
View the site's Comment feed.Donate
Recommended books
- 935 Lies: The Future of Truth and the Decline of America's Moral Integrity
- A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America
- Arpaio De Facto Lawman
- Barack Obama: The Story
- Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World
- Bullspotting: Finding Facts in the Age of Misinformation
- Chasing Phantoms: Reality, Imagination, and Homeland Security Since 9/11
- Conspiracy Nation: The Politics of Paranoia in Postwar America
- Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture
- Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies: The Straight Scoop on Freemasons, The Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Black Helicopters, The New World Order, and many, many more
- Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free
- Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?
- One Electorate Under God?: A Dialogue on Religion and American Politics (Pew Forum Dialogues on Religion & Public Life)
- Our Friend Barry: Classmates' Recollections of Barack Obama and Punahou School
- Religion and the Racist Right: The Origins of the Christian Identity Movement
- The Authoritarians
- The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies—How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths
- The Citizenship Debates: A Reader
- The Development of American Citizenship, 1608-1870
- The New Hate: A History of Fear and Loathing on the Populist Right
- The Paranoid Style in American Politics
- The Scapegoat
- The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory
- Them: Adventures with Extremists
Quick Reference
- Birther aggregator
- Congressional Research Service report on presidential eligibility
- Donald, You're FIred! – FactCheck.org
- Hawaii Department of Health Obama FAQ
- Hawaii verification of birth certificate
- Jack Ryan document collection on Scribd
- Made in the U.S.A. – FactCheck.org
- Nordyke twins birth certificate
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Gurhrie Photo
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Press
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – White House
- Obama Certification of Live Birth
- Obama presidential library
- Obama White House archive site
- Politifact Birth Certificate articles
- Recent court rulings on presidential eligibility
- The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theories
- The Great Mother of all Natural Born Citizenship Quotation Pages
Archives
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- Mastodon
Quick Reference
- Birther aggregator
- Congressional Research Service report on presidential eligibility
- Donald, You're FIred! – FactCheck.org
- Hawaii Department of Health Obama FAQ
- Hawaii verification of birth certificate
- Jack Ryan document collection on Scribd
- Made in the U.S.A. – FactCheck.org
- Nordyke twins birth certificate
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Gurhrie Photo
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Press
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – White House
- Obama Certification of Live Birth
- Obama presidential library
- Obama White House archive site
- Politifact Birth Certificate articles
- Recent court rulings on presidential eligibility
- The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theories
- The Great Mother of all Natural Born Citizenship Quotation Pages
The surprise ending that no one could have seen coming!
WE WON! WE WON! WE WON!
Motion for reconsideration because the judge is a big meanie in 3…2…1…
And what daniel says is the proble, really, because without a major smackdown, and heavy-duty sanctions, she will just keep this going.
SHOCKED i tell you, shocked
How can this be? I thought for sure Orly had Mr. O by the veritable balls this time. That Barack is one slippery usurper! đ
Is there any judge in the land that George Soros doesn’t own?
Yes, Judge Reinhold
SluggoJD: Is there any judge in the land that George Soros doesnât own?
SERIOUSLY? soros must roar at all of the credit you and your ilk gives him
http://www.corey.com/thebulb/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/snoopy.png
Of course he’s not serious. Sluggo is not a birther. How can one be an active participant on this blog and not know that? My apologies if you were joking.
Judge Fudge, but he can’t help you. He’s far too busy being delicious!
Judge Judy.
Taitz v. Mississippi Democratic Party is the last “big” birther suit still pending. 202 down, 1 ( and some minor actions) to go!
“Is there any judge in the land that George Soros doesnât own?”
Judge Roy Moore. Klayman has some hope his case may go forward with Judge Moore on the court. We will see. If there is any HONEST judge across the land, it is Judge Roy Moore. Will Judge Roy Moore have the courage that been so fleeting from all the others. Who knows.
who knows? with your track record, it’s a given you don’t.
So John, once Judge Moore’s court dismisses their case, will you admit defeat? BWAHAHAHAHA
Sheesh, If could have a dollar for every time I have read the desperate hopeful plea “One Honest Judge” since 2009, I could be vacationing in Bora Bora about now…
klayman & moore are both columnists at wing nuts daily: âWe are deeply honored to welcome Judge Moore to WorldNetDaily,â said WND Editor Joseph Farah.
no conflict there for an “honest judge”
Where is the confirmation that it was dismissed?
The people in the court who heard the Judge say it…. or would that be forged too do you think? lol
We’re waiting for the State of Hawaii to prepare the documents. Stand by.
That’s JudgeMaster Soros, Sluggo!
He doesn’t own Judge Dredd. Not that he would do de birfers any favors … do birfers like iso-cubes? I would like birfers in iso-cubes.
Hell, living in Bora Bora by now….
Just give him a minute to cover up the 9th Commandment on his traveling monument, and he should be good to go.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/137449622/EDCA-ECF-125-2013-04-22-Grinols-v-Electoral-College-Minutes-Re-Hearing-Motion-to-Dismiss-GRANTED
Check it for layers and smiley faces.
No word from Orly at 6:30 Pacific time, 9:30 EST!!! SEND SYMPATHY CARDS!
On Reality Check Radio, they mentioned she was driving back home, maybe with her used second hand x-ray machine.
3 hours ago, ORYR posted: According to Obots at today’s Obama identity fraud hearing in California Judge England dismissed the case with no sanctions.
I’ll update this post later today with confirmation and Dr. Taitz’s statement… and more details when available…
I couldn’t get the Reality Check broadcast to come in- it was live but I couldn’t get it. I’ll wait for a replay.
Oh- it seems to be coming in a little. At first all I got was images (empty chair, Carmen, etc)- then one sentence of dialogue.
You can download it from iTunes.
Huh? lol
Thanks Arthur. Donna must not know I’m one of the early anti-birthers, from way way back in the days of TheObamaFile and Sammy Korir, Texas Darlin, TechDude, etc.
Hard to believe this crap just goes on and on like this.
LOL worthy of a chuckle.
I know you’re a fake birther, you gotta be a fake birther, someone playing the role of the perfect birther, because nobody in real life can be as stupid as you, right???
You’re back for more embarrassing moments? Haven’t you been diced and sliced and basically ground into disgusting hamburger meat enough times already?
LOLOLOL I love it!! Best post of the month!
Well, if he is truly honest, he will also dismiss… Somehow John still does not understand our legal system…
John also fails to comprehend that the only relief which Klayman’s lawsuit asks for is de-certification of of the 2012 presidential election results in Alabama if the candidates fail or provide proof of eligibility. Which means that even if Klayman were to win the suit, it would change absolutely nothing since Obama didn’t win any of Alabama’s electoral votes.
That’s a major fail as well.. Who finds these lawyers?
Don’t forget those who aren’t seriously deluded are aiming for the propaganda value. They believe if they win in Alabama, it would be a game-changer for the 2014 elections (just like they hoped to influence the 2012 Presidential elections last year).
It’s amazing what passes as victory in birtherstan these days.Actually it’s a loss-loss – if they had been sanctioned, they could appeal the sanctions and “win”.
Grifters and gullible idiots, foxes and hens, in short the birther community.
Out of curiosity, john, have you actually / ever contributed any $$$ to any of the people whose fights you claim to support?
The (only) part that saddens me (a teeny weeny bit) with Birfoons is, based on the general witnessed demographics of the faithful who turn up at “events”, that they are heavily weighted towards the retired or otherwise on a fixed/restricted income.
These are people who (apart from the intellectual dissonance of screaming about feckless SOCIALIST COMMIE LIEBERALS whilst usually supping deep from socialised medicine and government pensions) can’t ACTUALLY afford to hand over their gelt to the grifters.
But they do, again and again and again.
They are the PBI of the Birfoon world, hurting themselves whilst the few at the top of the tree, with no ACTUAL care or emotional engagement in the issue other than for partisan or personal aggrandisation live very comfortably off them. True parasites.
Still, the Birfoons do it voluntarily so bad cess to them.
None – sorry, but we own all of them.
Yeah, like Moore doesn’t know the 1st Amendment. His Ten Commandments monument in the courthouse foyer was unconstitutional. He put it there at 3 AM. That’s courage.
Who cares?
Judge England and the state of California said that Orly’s case was moot. Actually, Orly is absolutely right, her case is certainly not moot. However, Orly kind argued that it was poorly. Orly’s case represent a legal issue “capable of repetition yet evading review.” This applies to Obama. The disturbing conclusion we left with to birthers is the following:
OBAMA CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF TERMS AS POTUS.
So the issue is ripe and will continue to be ripe.
Wait! What about the 22th Amendment!????
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice…..”
Note the key words “elected” and “President”.
The 22nd Amendment ONLY applies to the President and Elections:
This means Obama can run for VICE PRESIDENT an unlimited number of times and can obtain the Presidency through sucession.
Having said all of this we know the Vice President involves electoral votes as well.
So in the end, Orly is absolutely right and Judge England and State are just plain wrong.
Obama can be on the California ballot in 2016, 2020, 2024 and on and can continue to receive electoral votes.
And remember someone who must be eligible to the President must be eligible to the Vice President as well.
John, just what do you expect Roy Moore to do? He’s just one justice in one state, one that voted for Mr. Obama’s opponent, so Moore can’t take any electoral votes from the president. Even if he were to carry the Alabama SC with him, the decision would mean nothing. Any decision that purports to somehow affect the national election would swiftly be reversed and dismissed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
What are you looking for, a way to say the score is 200-odd to 1 against the birthers rather than 200-plus to 0?
I should also point out that the qualifications for the Vice President are the same as for the President. So no one who had been elected to two terms as President could serve as Vice President.
In the case of Roe v. Wade (which was moot as to Roe by the time it was decided by the Court), there was no question that the issue of abortion would come up again.
It is hugely unlikely that Barack Obama would attempt to run for Vice President. Therefore, the exception to the mootness rule does not apply.
Birfer nonsense was predicted by the Bard:
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
I would note that people who are not retired tend to have to be at work on a Monday morning. The sample from yesterday is biased.
Nevertheless, the maxim says “idle hands are the devil’s workshop” and people of limited means, but unlimited time, tend to go online a lot, where there is no shortage of prettily-packaged nonsense.
“I should also point out that the qualifications for the Vice President are the same as for the President. So no one who had been elected to two terms as President could serve as Vice President.”
Obama could conceivably run for Vice President again and again but only could get the Presidency through sucession, that is if the President resigned or died. Obama is only forbidden to run for President again as result of an election. There is no term limit on SERVING, only on being elected. In addition, Obama could run for Congress again and could become Speaker of the House. In that case, he would 3rd in line for the POTUS.
John, Orly is wrong and Judge England and the defendants’ counsel are correct regarding the mootness issue. You seem to think that the “capable of repetition yet evading review” doctrine applies, but that’s only because you are clueless about what it applies to. (Well, I could have stopped at “you are clueless”.) The doctrine refers to an evolving condition of the plaintiff that moots an action before it can be heard and ruled upon. Plaintiff. Like a pregnant woman suing for her reproductive rights or a parolee whose parol has been revoked but his sentence will be completely served before his revocation challenge has ben heard.
Obama is not a plaintiff. So tell us, John, what condition does Orly have that will vanish before her frivolous suit makes its way through the courts?
More likely President Hillary Clinton will nominate him to the Supreme Court to replace either Justice Thomas or Justice Scalia
I read the 12th Amendment more broadly than you do. Either way, my other point stands: the scenario is unlikely to come up, and therefore is not an exception to the mootness rule. Because the scenario is speculative, it does not constitute a real case or controversy, and this places it outside the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
Do you know if there were going to be any botg at the Vermont Supreme Court (Paige v. Obama) today?
I’m hoping for a state Supreme Court opinion that smacks down the two-citizen parent theories of Mario Apuzzo in that case.
Absolutely correct. As the 12th Amendment states “. . . no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.” So, not yet 35 years old, ineligible to be VP. Not a natural born citizen, ineligible to be VP. Not 14 years a resident of the US, ineligible to be VP. And since, as the 22nd Amendment states, “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice . . ., then twice elected President, ineligible to be VP. Amendment 22 created a new, negative qualification for President, &, under the eligiblity provision of Amendment 12, for the VP as well, something john hasn’t taken into account.
Similarly, the Presidential Succession Act bars those who are constitutionally ineligible to be President from being in the line of succession. So if he became Speaker of the House, he would be “skipped over” in the line of succession.
The only way for Obama to become President again (or Acting President) is for the law to be changed or the Constitution to be amended.
So you are saying that there is no reason to fear the future?
Actually that would be a clear conflict of interest, IMHO. Could one of our resident Lawyers chime in here please? Wouldn’t Moore be likely to recuse himself if both he and Klayman are columnists for the same “news” agency?
Yep. Birthers ALWAYS come to the most disturbing (and absurd) conclusions. Birthers ALWAYS imagine the worst. That’s what they live for.
ROTFL… Birthers are not very good in logic I would say, that’s the only ‘disturbing’ conclusion.
Well, John continues to spound some incredible lunacy…if Obama was going to be “president-for-life,” why didn’t he just do it right after the inauguration or after he won the Nobel Peace Prize, when he had the Senate, House, and polls supporting him, jail the birthers on the spot, and save us all a lot of money. Why even BOTHER to contest the 2012 election?
The first thing Hitler did after taking power was make sure he had no way to lose it. He didn’t wait eight years to shred the Weimar Constitution, he did it right off the bat. Same thing with all these other dictators, tinpot and otherwise. Real dictators don’t waste time or screw around when becoming “Maximum Leader” or “The Last King of Scotland.” They start right away. Usually by whacking their fellow revolutionaries, who are the greatest threat to them.
And “John” and the rest of the birthers are running around free as bats, their web pages in business, making their protests, filing their court cases.
It’s amazing how the tyrannical government never gets round to becoming a tyranny.
But back to Orly….I guess the judge wasn’t listening when she said, “Let me feeeeeneeeeesh!”
Not to mention that Moore endorsed Klayman in his failed senate run in Florida, and Klayman has called Moore his “friend” and “hero”.
An ethical judge would recuse himself due to conflict of interest. So I don’t expect Moore to recuse himself.
SluggoJD
john:
âIs there any judge in the land that George Soros doesnât own?â
Judge Roy Moore.Klayman has some hope his case may go forward with Judge Moore on the court.We will see.If there is any HONEST judge across the land, it is Judge Roy Moore.Will Judge Roy Moore have the courage that been so fleeting from all the others.Who knows.
I know youâre a fake birther, you gotta be a fake birther, someone playing the role of the perfect birther, because nobody in real life can be as stupid as you, right???
**********
john:
Judge England and the state of California said that Orlyâs case was moot. Actually, Orly is absolutely right, her case is certainly not moot. However, Orly kind argued that it was poorly. Orlyâs case represent a legal issue âcapable of repetition yet evading review.â This applies to Obama. The disturbing conclusion we left with to birthers is the following:
OBAMA CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF TERMS AS POTUS.
***********
How does one come up with that conclusion? John really IS that clueless. With logic like this, Taitz and Klayman should have him talking to the judges in Mississippi and Alabama… đ
john
Judge England and the state of California said that Orlyâs case was moot. Actually, Orly is absolutely right, her case is certainly not moot. However, Orly kind argued that it was poorly. Orlyâs case represent a legal issue âcapable of repetition yet evading review.â This applies to Obama. The disturbing conclusion we left with to birthers is the following:
OBAMA CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE AN UNLIMITED NUMBER OF TERMS AS POTUS.
*************
Oh, John…….your critical thinking function is clearly moot. I declare, when it’s time for your autopsy, the coroner is going to look at your brain and declare: “Perfectly new! It’s never been used!”
John is, as always, wrong. According to the 22d Amendment a President is limited to, at most, 10 years in office, and only then if he started off by serving no more than 2 years of his predecessor’s term.
Sorry, I continue to believe John is merely someone acting out a role as the quintessential birther, something I don’t find funny. Energy should be directed towards fighting real battles, not fake ones.
Here’s a video posted on Infowars by Alex Jones disclaiming the Associated Press connection between his conspiracy theories and the Bosston bombings.
http://www.infowars.com/video-ap-ties-infowars-com-to-boston-bombing/
Glen Beck long ago dissociated from the birther movement, and so did Fox news, even though they are both right wing religious propagandists. I also learned that Hannity of Fox was very good friends with the deceased Breitbart.
oops, I posted the above in the wrong spot, and no edit time left.
I have been reading this (Doc’s) blogsite for several months now, and I’ve really enjoyed it. I am not so much an Obot as I am an anti-Birther; it is hard to fathom how much stupidity and racism still exists in this country – with the Birthers attempting to hide their racism behind the facade of “patriotism.” We have to keep fighting such stupidity and racism, and I apprecite the Doc for doing so.
This is my first comment on this site. I thought I would respond to the comments of those who are so “absolutely certain” that Obama could never serve as President after January 20, 2017. (Like I said, I am not an Obot, nor am I advocating in any way that Obama serve as President after his current term expires. However, while I am not a Constitutional Law professor, I am an attorney (and have been for more than 20 years) and have, at least, studied the issue before.)
Here’s my comment to those people: You are wrong. The Constitution does NOT absolutely prohibit someone from BEING President for a period of more than ten years. The Constitution only prevents someone from being ELECTED more than twice (or more than once if the President served more than two years of the previous President’s term). Thus, a person who had been previously elected President twice could still subsequently SUCCEED to the Presidency, if that person had been nominated Vice-President by a different President when a vacancy arose in the office of Vice-President and the nominee (i.e., the former President) had been confirmed by a majority vote of both houses of Congress. (See the 25th Amendment.) When the new President resigned, the former President (now the Vice-President) would automatically become President (ala Gerald Ford).
If the drafters of the 22nd Amendment had wanted to make someone who had been previously elected President twice ABSOLUTELY ineligible to ever serve as President again, they could have – and WOULD HAVE – said that. They had certainly used the word “eligible” before in the Constitution. It would have been as simple as saying something like, “No person shall be eligible to serve as President who shall have been previously elected to that office twice….” But, they didn’t say that. AND WE CAN’T READ THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE 22ND AMENDMENT!!! WE CAN’T “ASSUME” THE DRAFTERS’ INTENT ON THAT ISSUE!!! For all we know, the intent of the drafters may have been to allow a method where someone with the experience a two-term President would obviously have garnered to possibly succeed to the Presidency again through the “appointment/succession” process. I’m not saying that is necessarily the case, nor do I believe there is any type of likelihood of a two-term President ever subsequently succeeding to the President, BUT IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PERMISSIBLE (at least, currently).
Now, I’m glad I got that off my chest. It’s just that I have a problem with pompous “know-it-alls” who hold themselves out as such “experts” on the Constitution, when it is overwhelmingly evident they have never done anything more than “skim” the document. I suppose, if it came down to it, a court could disagree with me in the future. So, I’m certainly not saying I’m infallible on the subject. But, I at least know what the Constitution says – and I don’t read words into it that aren’t there (as Birthers and so-called “experts” on this site are prone to do).
Thanks.
Well, I must say that while you qualify your comments a bit in places, you rather come off as a pompous “know-it-all” yourself, and of course no one knows whether you’re really an attorney with 20 years experience, or just someone pretending to be one. My experience is of course limited, but you don’t write like the attorneys I am familiar with. Your failure to make a structured legal argument and cite authority also is a red flag. Of course, you could just be talking down to some bloggers. Still, at the critical points of the argument rather than making an argument you shout (ALL CAPS).
In fact, a little research shows that the argument has been made by at least one prominent academic that you’re wrong. Matthew J. Franck of Princeton identified the kind of error he thinks folks like you make by saying:
The “Gray” referred to in the quotation is Brian Gray, a California law professor that agrees with you.
Franck says:
Yes, I have a problem with pompous “know-it-alls” too.
If the 22nd Amendment was not intended to make two term presidents ineligible to hold the office of president or act as president, the bolded clause would be unnecessary. A person could hold the office or act as president for more than 10 years under the 22nd Amendment, by succession as VP or the Succession Act (hypothetical: as Speaker, becomes Acting President for three years after a terrorist strike takes out the top officials, then runs as VP and becomes President for four years after the President is incapacitated by a stroke following the inauguration, would still be eligible to run as President at the next election). The 22nd Amendment uses election to toll presidential ineligibility.
Also, the 12th Amendment bars anyone ineligible to be President from being Vice President. It does not limit this ineligibility to being elected Vice President, so a person ineligible to be President may not be elected or appointed Vice President.
Of course, the Political Question Doctrine would bar the courts from having jurisdiction if the President and Congress decided to violate this aspect of the Constitution, so it doesn’t mean it can’t happen.
More importantly, it could have come up for Roe again. If her lawsuit had been dismissed, she could have become pregnant again and if she wanted to get an abortion she would have had to start her legal fight all over again. That’s the sort of legal Catch-22 which the âcapable of repetition yet evading reviewâ doctrine is intended to address.
And here is the kicker – there are no eligibility requirements to be a Supreme Court Justice. A Supreme Court Justice doesn’t even have to be a U.S. citizen.
Birther heads would explode if Obama were to be nominated to SCOTUS.
Indeed. While I think Obama is a very bright guy, there are probably better choices for the Supreme Court. I can’t help but wonder what Obama will do after he leaves office in 2017. He’ll only be 56 years old.
I could imagine a teaching career for him.
Presidents receive a pension of $199,700. A Supreme Court justice gets a salary if $213,900.
President of Kenya. [Ow, stop hitting me. Angel, stop biting me. Excuse me, Max just sunk his claws and teeth into me. What a reaction.]
I also don’t think it is a position he would particularly enjoy.
I’m late to the party, but…
Klayman sounds like he’s been shopping for a judge.
It’s the only way they can do it, Donna. LOL
Seek psychiatric help, young man. Sooner, rather than later.
Again wrong… How unfamiliar these obama haters are when it comes to our laws and Constitution.
Sigh…
Yoyopa obviously isn’t a lawyer. He’s just turning the wheels to keep the money coming in after Grinols. The birther celebrities gotta make their money SOME way, don’tcha know! In other words, Grifters gotta grift.
Would it be too much to ask that her lawyering license vanish?
Books, paid speeches, campaigning for the next Democratic Presidential candidate… He could renew his law license and make big money by just giving his name to a big law firm (how about “I’m being represented by Obama, Boies, Schiller & Flexner”? ;)).
In other words: “What would
JesusClinton do?” đI’m upset…John didn’t answer my post! That’s Communism!