Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:23 pm Post subject:

Orly has filed a Quo Warranto action in WDC.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/25861986/Orly-Taitz-Quo-Warranto-in-DC-1-25-10
_________________
'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan

TexasBorn · Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:41 pm Post subject:

Just watching Beck who states that this whole issue with Obama's NBC status is a ridiculous conspiracy theory. What is it that these people don't get? Do they not look at the information and investigations? Are we ALL nuts and he is right? If I am a nutcase and this whole thing is just a gigantic scheme to get Obama out of office? I want to know! I have never been a conspiracy theory follower but why is it that even supposedly even handed and truth seeking people like Beck completely blow this off? I am pissed and on the verge of giving up on this myself. Is there no justice?
_________________
...I call on you in the name of Liberty, of patriotism & everything dear to the American character, to come to our aid...

William Barret Travis
Letter From The Alamo Feb 24, 1836

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 6:59 pm Post subject:

April · ALIPAC Executive Officer Joined: Dec 07, 2006 Posts: 21781

Newest Alert, Please join in!!! Smile

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-186708.html
_________________

Running FULL FORCE AGAINST AMNESTY for ILLEGALS!!!!

AirborneSapper7 · Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:04 am Post subject:

Democrats suddenly interested in Obama birth certificate

Senate campaign director has plan to harm Republicans running for office

Posted: January 27, 2010
9:30 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

During this year's U.S. Senate races, it will be Democrats raising the issue of President Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

Politico reported Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chief Robert Menendez is distributing a memo to U.S. Senate campaign offices stating Democrats need to demand that their opponents answer a series of questions, including, "Do you believe that Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen?"

The report said Menendez wants to use the questions to "frame" opponents and "drive a wedge" between moderates belonging to the GOP and those who have adopted the tea party standards advocating limited government, lower taxes, fewer regulations and more freedom for Americans.

The Democrat memo said, "Given the pressure Republican candidates feel from the extreme right in their party, there is a critical – yet time-sensitive – opportunity for Democratic candidates.

"We have a finite window when Republicans candidates will feel susceptible to the extremists in their party. Given the urgent nature of this dynamic, we suggest an aggressive effort to get your opponents on the record."

The Politico report listed the following questions for Democrat to ask of Republican opponents:

* Do you believe that Barack Obama is a U.S. citizen?

* Do you think the 10th Amendment bars Congress from issuing regulations like minimum health care coverage standards?

* Do you think programs like Social Security and Medicare represent socialism and should never have been created in the first place?

* Do you think President Obama is a socialist?

* Do you think America should return to a gold standard?

The memo instructs that if a GOP candidate says no, make his or her "primary opponent or conservative activists know it."

Demand the truth by joining the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

Democrats dominated the Senate agenda in President Obama's first year in office because of their filibuster-proof 60-40 vote majority. But since Republican Scott Brown's stunning victory in Massachusetts, winning a U.S. Senate seat held by Democrat Ted Kennedy for nearly five decades, Menendez has urged his party's candidates to "run scared," Politico said.

The website for the Democrat committee already has started demonizing Republicans in the "tea party" movement challenging Washington's tax-and-spend agenda, massive health care takeover and plans for huge new energy taxes.

"Is the angry, irrational mob known as the 'Tea Party' one and the same as the Republican Party?" the site says. "After a summer of yelling about 'socialism' and 'death panels' at town hall meetings, they have mobilized behind a number of Republican Senate candidates. We saw how energized they were in Massachusetts. If more of these candidates are elected in November, it will become harder and harder to make any progress in Washington."

Wall Street Journal blogger James Taranto questioned the logic of Democrats raising the eligibility issue.

"Are we given to understand that the Democrats intend to run for office by raising questions about Barack Obama's eligibility to be president?" he asked. "That has got to be the most brilliant campaign strategy since Michael Dukakis and Max Cleland raised questions about their own patriotism."

One participant in a forum at New Jersey.com said the Democrats obviously just don't understand the level of concern Americans have.

"Menendez you are so far out of touch you have no idea of what you talk about. You don't even know what the tea [party] movement stands for. You somehow think they are all right wing conservatives. How wrong you are. They are from every walk of life from all parties and none. They represent everything good in this country and what has made us great. Thats (sic) something you and yours will never understand. All you know is take take take and spend spend spend. Thats (sic) what the teabager movement wants to stop."

WND has reported efforts to raise the question of Obama's eligibility at the state and national levels. Several state legislatures are working on proposals that would require presidential candidates to submit proof of their eligibility.

Since Obama's election, numerous lawsuits have been filed alleging he did not meet the U.S. Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural born citizen." The lawsuits have asserted he either was not born in Hawaii as he claims or was a dual citizen because of his father's British citizenship at the time of his birth.

The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama's birth could be obtained.

Among the states where election qualification or eligibility requirements are being considered or developed include Oklahoma, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Virginia, New York and others.

The proposals essentially are moving the same direction as a federal measure proposed by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.

Posey's H.R. 1503 states:

"To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution."

The bill also provides:

"Congress finds that under … the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years."

The sponsors' goal is for the bill to become effective for the 2012 presidential election. The legislation now is pending in a House committee and has more than a dozen co-sponsors.

Key to the arguments over Obama is the fact is original long-form birth certificate never has been released. A second significant factor is the multitude of documents that Obama has kept from the public.

Besides his actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Thirdly, another significant factor is the estimated $1.7 million Obama has spent on court cases to prevent any of the documentation of his life to be revealed to the public.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=123375
_________________
I'm a Conservative ~ "BOO" and According to Obama and Napolitano I am (AKA) the "Boogieman"

MinutemanCDC_SC · ALIPAC Hero Elite Joined: Jan 04, 2006 Posts: 1507

jemmie · ALIPAC New Recruit! Joined: Jan 28, 2010 Posts: 2

Unless he shows his birth certificate he is hiding something.
_________________
Top Honeymoon Destinations

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:41 am Post subject:

TexasBorn,

Also understand that not everyone gets it or wants to get it. Here in Maine we have a forum identified as 'As Maine Goes' and I have posted recently (after a long absence) on the subject that never goes away. After a few days of what I considered informative postings regarding Obama's eligibility, the forum was locked.

You can read about my intellectual adventure into the minds of Maine here:

http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/story-refuses-go-away-obama-us-citizen?page=7

The editor posted one final message before he locked the forum that said:

HJ -

I really don't want your singular interest in this topic to be the reason this topic remains forever on page 1 of AMG's Public Square. It is a topic, as I've written before on AMG, that someone should either vow to resolve or, failing that, let the topic alone. But short of major breakthroughs of proof positive news regarding the president's origin of birth - I have zero interest in dedicating as much of AMG to this topic as you seem to think the topic warrants.

I recommend you start your own blog. You can do so for free here and here. Then if you run across breatkthroughs as I've defined them - we can talk about your sharing them with AMGers.

Open minded people and truth seekers always frustrate close minded people.

I have since received correspondence from other AMG posters who have expressed concern with the forum shutdown. I should note that this is the second forum on this topic (that I am aware of) AMG has shut down. Why?

How's that old saying go... 'there are none so blind as those who will not see... unless it is those who will not look.'
_________________
'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan

TexasBorn · Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 10:46 am Post subject:

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 3:19 pm Post subject:

TexasBorn · Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:38 pm Post subject:

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:35 am Post subject:

Orly Taitz Quo warranto Case 1:10-cv-00151-RCL document with exhibits, filed 1-27-10.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26037475/Orly-Taitz-Quo-Warranto-Complaint-Exhibits-1-27-10
_________________
'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan

FreedomFirst · ALIPAC Master Joined: Nov 18, 2008 Posts: 424

Very interesting development in Texas, where Pelosi failed to sign the DNC eligibility certificate (which says nothing about Constitutional qualification) at all.

http://jbjd.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/remember-the-alamo/

Click the link to read about this, and to view the Complaint of Election Fraud lodged with the TX Attorney General just yesterday.

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:02 pm Post subject:

TexasBorn · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 12:16 pm Post subject:

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:03 pm Post subject:

jbjd has also produced other useful discussion and documents on his/her site, including the following '3-card Monte' explanation of Bob Bauer's manipulation of the federal court system.

=======================

COUNSEL for DNC SERVICES CORPORATION PERFORMS 3 CARD MONTE for FEDERAL COURT

Jbjd blog page at: http://tinyurl.com/ykehc8q
posted on Monday, November 23rd, 2009

Bob Bauer, currently White House Counsel, was formerly the Counsel to DNC Services Corporation and Obama for America, Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign. (BOB BAUER BIOGRAPHY - http://tinyurl.com/yfx8n7r ) In January 2009, he defended Mr. Obama in Hollister v. Soetoro ( http://tinyurl.com/yepbugg ), a lawsuit aimed at exposing his client was Constitutionally unqualified for POTUS. HOLLISTER v. SOETORO (Mr. Hollister was represented by Attorney Phil Berg.) Mr. Bauer submitted his usual Motion to Dismiss – this was not the first lawsuit aimed at reaching his client’s eligibility – but this time, seeking to take advantage of the opportunity provided by this lawsuit to end the barrage of eligibility based challenges both inside and outside of the courtroom, he added something new: a footnote asking the judge to take judicial notice of certain facts, which notice he would recycle to construct the fiction, his client was Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

“Judicial notice” is a term found in the Federal Rules of Evidence. It applies to getting facts into the court record and, once those facts have been added to the record, assigns what weight this evidence will receive. (For a full explanation of judicial notice, see the Federal Rules of Evidence at http://www.scribd.com/doc/26053897/Federal-Rules-of-Evidence-2010 )

Simply put, a judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Mr. Bauer wanted the federal court to take judicial notice of these facts.

1. His client, Barack Obama “publicly produced a certified copy of a birth certificate showing that he was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu Hawaii.”

This fact is true. But it fails to establish, his client is Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

The only such self-authenticating ‘document’ his client “publicly produced” was that heavily redacted Certification of Live Birth – recall, Mr. Obama re-named this, his “Official Birth Certificate” – posted on “Fight the Smears,” the web site clearly advertising in the footer, this was “PAID FOR BY BARACK OBAMA.” But even if the document was authentic AND the information contained therein was true, at best this could only establish his client is a “native” citizen, but not Natural Born. Mr. Obama admitted right on that site, this COLB only established he is a “native citizen” and not Natural Born. (See, MODEL COMPLAINTS OF ELECTION FRAUD TO STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL IN APPLICABLE STATES, on this page: http://tinyurl.com/ykehc8q )

Question: Since Bob Bauer was motivated to stave off attacks against his client by trying to construct Mr. Obama’s Constitutional qualifications for POTUS, why did he try to get the court to take judicial notice that his client publicly produced a certified document showing he was born in HI, when even assuming the fact he produced such a document also meant, he was actually born in HI; that fact could only establish he was a “native” citizen but not Natural Born as required by the Constitution?
Answer: Because if the court had taken judicial notice of these facts which implied his client was born in HI; Mr. Bauer could have perverted such notice into the meme, the federal court has now ruled, his client was born in HI; and, further, Mr. Bauer would have claimed, being born in HI makes him a NBC, propaganda which he and his clients, DNC Services Corporation, would have plastered throughout the print and electronic media. This campaign of propaganda emanating from the man who wrote the book – literally – on federal election law likely would have neutralized the mounting challenges to his client’s Constitutional qualification for POTUS.

Anyway, while referring to this ‘public production’ of a document showing his client was born in HI, Mr. Bauer did not submit the ‘original’ COLB to the court.

Question: Given that Mr. Bauer asked the court to take judicial notice his client produced that COLB, for what reason did he fail to produce for the court, the actual document?
Answer: Because he knew that COLB posted on his client’s blog is bogus.

2. Mr. Bauer wrote, “See, e.g., Factcheck.org, “Born in the U.S.A.: The truth about Obama’s birth certificate,” available at http://www.factcheck.org/elections 2008/born_in_the_usa.html (concluding that the birth certificate is genuine, and noting a contemporaneous birth announcement published in a Honolulu newspaper).”

These facts are true, too. But they also fail to establish, his client is constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

Mr. Bauer omits the name “Annenberg” from the proper title of the organization; and fails to reveal to the court, this group is sponsored by his client’s former employer, Chicago Annenberg Challenge, information the court is unlikely to know, absent his revelation; and which financial relationship a reasonable person would expect him to reveal as material to the court’s consideration. He also fails to name the “Honolulu newspaper” he claims printed that “contemporaneous birth announcement.” (The court could not know, APFC failed to name this publication which they “not[ed],” too, unless Mr. Bauer revealed this material information.) Recall, this ‘announcement’ is actually an unattributed image posted anonymously on the td blog, which APFC admits it copied from that site to post on theirs. RUMORS, LIES, AND UNSUBSTANTIATED ‘FACTS’ ( http://tinyurl.com/y87swv6 )

Not surprisingly, while seeking judicial notice APFC noted this contemporaneous newspaper birth announcement showing his client was born in HI, Mr. Bauer did not submit an ‘original’ of that document to the court, either.

Plus, notwithstanding Mr. Bauer has now asked the court to take judicial notice [Annenberg Political] Fact Check said the document Mr. Obama publicly produced is “genuine,” again, he failed to produce that “genuine” document for the court.

Question: Why did Mr. Bauer ask the court to take judicial notice APFC said, the COLB his client publicly produced was “genuine”; but fail to introduce into evidence, the actual COLB?
Answer: Because he knew that COLB posted on his client’s blog is bogus.

3. Mr. Bauer asked the court to take judicial notice, “Hawaii officials have publicly verified that they have President Obama’s “original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.” ”

This fact is true. Again, it fails to establish, his client is Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS.

Hawaiian officials allegedly made this statement in late October 2008. Notice, the statement attributed to these officials does not include the words, ‘This “original birth certificate” we have on file indicates, Mr. Obama was born in HI.’ Indeed, Mr. Bauer does not allege these officials said, ‘He was born in HI.’ http://blogs.starbulletin.com/inpolitics/certified/

Lucky for us, the federal court took no such notice. Getting lay people to understand the fact that nothing in the public record establishes BO is a NBC, has been challenging enough, without having to explain the difference between these judicially noted “facts” and the lies Mr. Bauer and the members of the Corporation he represents would insist these facts actually mean.

Luckier for Mr. Bauer, neither Judge James Robertson nor Mr. Berg inquired as to where is this “genuine” document of HI birth he claims his client “publicly produced”; or the “contemporaneous birth announcement published in a Honolulu newspaper”; or the “original birth certificate” HI officials claim to have on file. (How do you suppose Mr. Bauer would have responded to such request from the bench or opposing counsel, for production of that “original birth certificate” those HI officials said is “on record”?) Because Mr. Bauer is a member of the D.C. Bar and according to the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct, these examples of lack of “Candor to Tribunal” ( http://tinyurl.com/ye4j425 ); or lack of “Truthfulness in Statement to Others” ( http://tinyurl.com/yapkv7j ); or failure to display “Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel” (http://tinyurl.com/ybngtq7 ) could cost Mr. Bauer his license to practice law. See, DC RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT ( http://tinyurl.com/5kcxbg ).

Which leads us to Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, 3rd in line of Presidential succession who, acting in a non-governmental role as Chair of the 2008 DNC Convention, swore in August 2008 Mr. Bauer’s client was Constitutionally qualified for POTUS in the official DNC Services Corporation Certifications of Nomination that were submitted to election officials in dozens of states to get his name printed on the general election ballot.

Question: Instead of asking for judicial notice of representations made by APFC, notice which at best could only establish his client was a “native” of HI but not “Natural Born”; why didn’t Mr. Bauer ask the court to take judicial notice of Nancy Pelosi’s Certifications, let alone submit even 1 (one) of those Certifications into the court record?
Answer: Because he knew Nancy Pelosi’s sworn Certifications of Nomination submitted to state election officials are bogus, too.

Question: But given that Bob Bauer was willing to risk his license to practice law by tricking the court into taking judicial notice of misleading facts that, at best, could only establish Barack Obama was a “native” born citizen, anyway, and which notice he would have to message in order to dupe Americans into believing this meant, his client was also Constitutionally qualified for POTUS; why was he unwilling to risk his license on Nancy Pelosi’s Certifications, which explicitly stated, his client was Constitutionally qualified for the job of POTUS, judicial notice of which fact the court likely would have granted, and which notice more likely could have persuaded the public of the fact, his client was Natural Born?
Answer: Because at that time, Nancy Pelosi was his client, too, and under the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct, he could not exonerate one client facing a civil lawsuit by incriminating another in criminal election fraud.

For your information, here are CONTACTS AT THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BAR ( http://www.dcbar.org/inside_the_bar/contact_us/index.cfm ).
_________________
'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 3:20 pm Post subject:

For those who watched the Obama SOTU message, you already know that Obama took at least one cheap shot at the Supreme Court. Jon Christian Ryter has fired off a rebuttal, including a copy of the video with Justice Alito shaking his head in disapproval of Obama's comments.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/26059568/Jon-Christian-Ryter-Obama-Denounces-the-Supreme-Court
_________________
'No arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is as formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women.'- Ronald Reagan

AirborneSapper7 · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:06 pm Post subject:

D.C. court case demands Obama explain eligibility

Contends president's allegiance is to Britain, Kenya, Indonesia

Posted: January 29, 2010
12:20 am Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A prominent attorney who has shepherded a number of high-profile legal cases challenging Barack Obama'seligibility to be president has brought a "Quo Warranto" case to district court in Washington, D.C., alleging his allegiances have included Britain, Kenya and Indonesia.

A Quo Warranto action, first recorded some 800 years ago, essentially is a demand to know by what authority a public figure is acting. The case, brought by California attorney Orly Taitz on behalf of herself, was assigned to Chief Judge Royce Lamberth.

Taitz told WND that in a separate action she has filed a notice of appeal with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals of the dismissal of a case she brought on behalf of Ambassador Alan Keyes and dozens of other individuals in California challenging Obama's eligibility.

She previously attempted Quo Warranto cases on behalf of government officials, without response. This time she filed the action directly with the court on her own behalf.

"The case revolves around the federal question of eligibility of the president under Quo Warranto," she wrote.

An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, an organization founded by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, previously told WND the demand was a legitimate course of action.

Demand the truth by joining the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

"She basically is asking, 'By what authority' is Obama president," he told WND when the issue first arose. "In other words, 'I want you to tell me by what authority. I don't really think you should hold the office.'"

Eidsmoe said it's clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents that "he does not want the public to know."

According to the online Constitution.org resource: "The common law writ of Quo Warranto has been suppressed at the federal level in the United States, and deprecated at the state level, but remains a right under the Ninth Amendment which was understood and presumed by the Founders, and which affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

Taitz' claim states Obama, whom she identifies as "Acting President of the United States," has refused "to present in any court of law or to the public any vital records that would show his eligibility as for U.S. presidency based on Article 2, section 1 of the Constitution, as one born in the United States to two citizen parents without allegiance to any other sovereignties. From birth and until now Mr. Obama had citizenship and allegiance to three other nations: Great Britain, Kenya and Indonesia."

WND has reported on the multiple legal cases challenging Obama's eligibility in addition to efforts to raise the question at the state and national levels.

Several state legislatures are working on proposals that would require presidential candidates to submit proof of their eligibility. And a similar proposal has been introduced in Congress by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla.

The claims are that Obama does not meet the U.S. Constitution's requirement that a president be a "natural born citizen." The lawsuits have asserted he either was not born in Hawaii as he claims or was a dual citizen because of his father's British citizenship at the time of his birth.

The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama's birth could be obtained.

Taitz previously submitted the request to Attorney General Eric Holder and Jeffrey Taylor, the U.S. attorney for D.C., but did not get a response.

Taitz told WND shes's been a victim of propaganda, intimidation and threats because of her efforts to uncover information about the president.

Her website also has been subjected to repeated hacking attacks, and she informed WND the only reliable way to reach her is her mailing address at: 29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Rancho Santa Margarita, Calif., 92688.

Her filing in Washington asks:

* What is Respondent Obama's standard and burden of proof of his birthplace under Quo Warranto and ethical duties? – Considering Obama's first cousin Raila Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, sealed alleged records of Obama's birth in Mombasa; while the state of Hawaii holds Obama's 'original' sealed birth records, allows registration of births out of state, allows registration based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence and seals original birth records.

* Does the state of Hawaii's withholding Respondent Obama's original birth records by privacy laws breach the U.S. Constitution by obstructing [people who want to] challenge, validate and evaluate qualifications of presidential candidates based on legally acceptable … records.

* Does the restrictive qualification for president of 'natural born citizen' over 'citizen' include allegiance to the U.S.A. from birth without any foreign allegiance, as required of the commander in chief in time of war to preserve the Republic, including birth within the jurisdiction of the U.S.A. to parents who both had U.S. citizenship at that birth, and having retained that undivided loyalty?

* Does birth to or adoption by a non-citizen father or mother incur foreign allegiance sufficient to negate being a 'natural born citizen' and disqualify a candidate from becoming president?

Other questions relate to a candidate's responsibility to provide documentation of their qualifications under the Constitution's requirements.

"The ex-relators assert that respondent Obama has indeed usurped the franchise of the president of the United States and the commander in chief of the United States military forces due to his ineligibility and non-compliance with the provision of the Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States that provides that the president of the United States has to be a natural born citizen," the case states.

Taitz told WND the summonses in the case already have been forwarded to Obama, and his response could determine the next steps.

The White House has not replied to numerous requests for comment.

Besides Obama's actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation for him includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Another significant factor is the estimated $1.7 million Obama has spent on court cases to prevent any of the documentation of his life to be revealed to the public.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=123428
_________________
I'm a Conservative ~ "BOO" and According to Obama and Napolitano I am (AKA) the "Boogieman"

cayla99 · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:30 pm Post subject:

AirborneSapper7,

Do you or anyone else on this site really believe this will go anywhere?
_________________
Proud American and wife of a wonderful <strong>LEGAL</strong> immigrant from Ireland.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing." -Edmund Burke (1729-1797)

AirborneSapper7 · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:36 pm Post subject:

I don't know... but I also don't think we should ever give up. That's what they want
_________________
I'm a Conservative ~ "BOO" and According to Obama and Napolitano I am (AKA) the "Boogieman"

HighlanderJuan · Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 11:41 pm Post subject:

MinutemanCDC_SC · ALIPAC Hero Elite Joined: Jan 04, 2006 Posts: 1507

MinutemanCDC_SC · ALIPAC Hero Elite Joined: Jan 04, 2006 Posts: 1507

kathyet · ALIPAC Titan Joined: Aug 11, 2009 Posts: 642

MinutemanCDC_SC · ALIPAC Hero Elite Joined: Jan 04, 2006 Posts: 1507

At Hannity Forums, Trip corroborated Emmerich de Vattel with Matthew Bacon and William Blackstone:

Natural born citizen did not need to be "defined" anywhere. it was not created by the United States. It is a term of art with a uniqe and continuing meaning. Even when "natural born subject" was dictated by the Crown and statute, it changed the definition of "natural born" only in that country and was no longer Natural Law.

As I stated previously the British scholar Matthew Bacon recognized "natural-born Subject" in 1736 to be:

whose Parents, at the Time

under the actual Obedience of our King

(Page 77 in Matthew Bacon, A New Abridgement of the Law, Vol 1, 1736)

Not only does this the place of birth [have to] be within the "dominion" (British territory) itself, but it also indicates that the parents must be under the actual obedience of the King. Given this, those who had foreign allegiance did not give birth on British soil to British natural born subjects. This is the same as our own definition today, and the one for "natural born subject" indicated by Vattel.

Only in 1765 did William Blackstone recognize the mandate of the Crown to have changed "natural-born Subject" to be anyone born in British territory, regardless of the parents' allegiance or citizenship. At this point a child was born a natural-born subject if born on British soil, even if the child's parents were aliens.

However, most curiously, Blackstone later wrote the following: