The elite establishment’s favorite state-sponsored conservative journalist – George Will – garnered the most media attention with his insult-riddled tirade against Donald Trump and anyone who would dare question Barack Obama’s US citizenship status and history. Calling Trump a “bloviating ignoramus” for merely quoting Barack Obama, Will set all standards of professionalism aside to blast the President’s critics.

Never to be outshined by anyone, the elite establishment’s favorite state-sponsored liberal journalist – Wolf Blitzer – did his best to out-do Will. In a live interview on CNN, Blitzer accused Trump of, “beginning to sound a little ridiculous.” Trump turned the tables and told Blitzer, “I think you sound ridiculous.”

Read the Whiteout Press article, ‘Birthers Bust Obama on Citizenship with Evidence’ for more information.

DNC gets personal

The liberal and conservative corporate media aren’t the only ones scrambling to protect President Obama from ‘the birthers’. The Democratic National Committee has bypassed attacking the Liberty Legal Foundation – the law group filing many of the challenges to President Obama’s eligibility – and instead, is attacking the lead lawyer for the Foundation personally.

Van Irion, the lead attorney for the Liberty Legal Foundation, announced that the DNC had petitioned the court to sanction him. “Last week the DNC filed a motion for sanctions against me, “Van Irion said, “They accuse me of an ‘inexcusable attempt to perpetrate a fraud on the Court’. They claim that I colluded with unnamed members of the Tennessee Republican Party to name a sham organization so that LLF could get a default judgment against a defendant with ‘Democratic’ in its name. They also accuse me of asserting frivolous legal claims.”

Irion goes on to explain, “Note that this motion is not against LLF or any other party to our lawsuit. This is a personal attack against me. It’s an attack against my personal reputation and my license to practice law. Let me be clear: the DNC’s accusations against me are false.”

The attorney goes on to defend his reputation saying, “Shockingly, the DNC’s first accusation is more absurd that its second accusation. Accusing me of perpetrating a fraud on the court would be hilarious if it wasn’t such a serious charge. I hate corruption and deception. I’ve dedicated my professional life to rooting out and exposing corruption in high places. I do not use the tools of corruption and deception to expose corruption and deception.”

The NDPUSA

In their attempt to serve papers on Democratic state organizations in Tennessee that vouched for Barack Obama’s legal ability to hold the office of US President, Van Irions and the LLF stumbled across a Democratic Party shell organization. The group calls itself the National Democratic Party USA.

In their motion to sanction Irions, the DNC accuses the LLF lawyer of conspiring with the NDPUSA to rig a quick and easy verdict against a Democratic group. As Van Irions explains, the LLF wasn’t able to locate anyone associated with the group to serve papers on. Surely if the LLF set up a sham Democratic Party organization to gain an easy win, they would have won. Instead, the case never went forward because nobody could be found.

Van Irions and the LLF could only speculate who set up the NDPUSA. “The truth is that we still don’t know who set up the NDPUSA, Irions said, “It could be a scam perpetrated by the Tennessee Republicans, or the Tennessee Democrats, or someone else completely. We simply don’t know.”

White House lawyers call accusations un-Constitutional

In one of the more bizarre arguments made on behalf of President Obama, his lawyers filed a motion in the Arizona eligibility court case asking that all challenges by the LLF be dismissed. The President’s lawyers argue that it is not the jurisdiction of the courts or the US Constitution to decide who can and can’t hold the office of President. Instead, President Obama’s attorneys insist the voters on election day have the final legal say.

Based on the President’s legal argument, that would mean a 5 year-old child, a deceased polar bear or an alien from outer space could legally hold the office of US President if the voters elect them. LLF attorney Van Irions spared no words in responding to the motion. “Considering the poor job our public schools have done teaching about the Constitution, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear this argument coming from a member of the media,” Irions said, “But to have this argument actually filed in federal court, by an attorney that supposedly understands constitutional law, is surprising and sad.”

Another issue in the legal battle in Arizona is the Democratic Party’s right to represent on Barack Obama’s candidate filings that he is eligible to serve as President. Admittedly, no Party officials or state government has ever verified Barack Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President. And the DNC is arguing that preventing them from printing the words confirming Obama’s eligibility would be a violation of their First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

Van Irions, the LLF lead attorney counters, “We responded that the First Amendment does not grant the Democratic Party a right to commit fraud.”

For more information on the controversy surrounding President Obama’s birth certificate, birthplace and eligibility to hold the office of President, read the Whiteout Press articles, ‘Questions about President Obama’s Birth Certificate’, ‘Obama Ballot Challenge in 6 States’ and ‘Obama Eligibility Surprise – Fed Court may hear Case’.

Subscribe to Whiteout Press. It’s FREE and you can unsubscribe at any time. Simply submit your email address at the top of the page.