Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

TexasBorn, I agree with your earlier statement, the paper trail will not see the light of day.

Question is why? Would the papers create toom much turmoil? Would the papers implicate persons or parties with some wrongdoing?

If hindsight is 20/20 then perhaps a look into the past could help to bring some light or heat to the matter.

Why did Florida move their open primaries up 1 full month? Why did'nt the Republican party investigate and vet Wonder Boy? Why did John McCain introduce into the mindset of Americans that he was going to run a clean campaign? No mudslinging? How is it possible that his campaign team did not investigate and look into Wonder Boys underwear drawer and get all of the dirt that they could have dug up on him? Since when did politics become so clean? How many congressional districts had been jerrymandered prior to the past election?

No need for conspiracy theories, the answers are all around. JMHO

Do we as Americans really want to go into the next election without looking at how the last one went so wrong? If we are looking for the same results then we should close our eyes and carry on JMHO

Concerning the papers, Americans need to turn up the heat. The Republican party should have some interest,....no?

When all else fails follow the money. Lots of that floating around now.

Highlander, still today I have trouble reading this, shaking my head and wondering how in hell we elected this kind of man to the highest office in the land. It just baffles me beyond words. Could it be that the fix was in and Obama was just a puppet of some other power? How else does one explain such insanity!?

[quote="HighlanderJuan"]This is the ex-FBI article linked in my earlier post:

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

Ex-FBI Agents Outraged at Obama-Ayers Ties

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:46 AM

By: Ronald Kessler Newsmax.com


Former FBI agents who worked the Weather Underground case are angry about the longtime relationship between Barack Obama and William Ayers, a leader of the domestic terrorist group who has admitted widespread bombings.

“It outrages me to think that a person would be seeking the presidency of the United States and was close to an individual like Bill Ayers,â€

roundabout, great observations. you may be right. why have conspiracy theories when the truth is right in front of our eyes! everything defied common sense then and everything defies common sense now. I predict here and now that the next Congressional and Presidential elections will be a dogfight unlike any ever seen in this country. I don't necessarily mean a dogfight just between politicians either! People are going to stand up like never before and those in power will pull out all the stops to stay in power. Get ready...

Originally Posted by roundabout

TexasBorn, I agree with your earlier statement, the paper trail will not see the light of day.

Question is why? Would the papers create toom much turmoil? Would the papers implicate persons or parties with some wrongdoing?

If hindsight is 20/20 then perhaps a look into the past could help to bring some light or heat to the matter.

Why did Florida move their open primaries up 1 full month? Why did'nt the Republican party investigate and vet Wonder Boy? Why did John McCain introduce into the mindset of Americans that he was going to run a clean campaign? No mudslinging? How is it possible that his campaign team did not investigate and look into Wonder Boys underwear drawer and get all of the dirt that they could have dug up on him? Since when did politics become so clean? How many congressional districts had been jerrymandered prior to the past election?

No need for conspiracy theories, the answers are all around. JMHO

Do we as Americans really want to go into the next election without looking at how the last one went so wrong? If we are looking for the same results then we should close our eyes and carry on JMHO

Concerning the papers, Americans need to turn up the heat. The Republican party should have some interest,....no?

When all else fails follow the money. Lots of that floating around now.

[quote="TexasBorn"]Highlander, still today I have trouble reading this, shaking my head and wondering how in hell we elected this kind of man to the highest office in the land. It just baffles me beyond words. Could it be that the fix was in and Obama was just a puppet of some other power? How else does one explain such insanity!?

[quote="HighlanderJuan"]This is the ex-FBI article linked in my earlier post:

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

Ex-FBI Agents Outraged at Obama-Ayers Ties

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:46 AM

By: Ronald Kessler Newsmax.com


Former FBI agents who worked the Weather Underground case are angry about the longtime relationship between Barack Obama and William Ayers, a leader of the domestic terrorist group who has admitted widespread bombings.

“It outrages me to think that a person would be seeking the presidency of the United States and was close to an individual like Bill Ayers,â€

Originally Posted by TexasBorn

Highlander, still today I have trouble reading this, shaking my head and wondering how in hell we elected this kind of man to the highest office in the land. It just baffles me beyond words. Could it be that the fix was in and Obama was just a puppet of some other power? How else does one explain such insanity!?

TexasBorn,

Among other things, I've been studying American history this summer, and I'm taking several courses this fall, including international finance, international banking, U.S. History prior to 1800, and People and Politics. Our country has problems I just don't have enough knowledge to help solve. But I'm getting there.

Part of my readings this summer have been by Thomas Woods, Judge Napolitano, Mark Levin, and I'm about ready to get into Kevin Gutzman and James Kilpatrick. The problems we see today of the federal government usurping state sovereignty and state powers were also actually huge concerns during the late eighteenth century.

It is my perception so far that our nation has been usurped by unelected powers that the people never see. Our own life has been so good, and we have allowed ourselves and our children to become so undereducated, that we have not watched out for our own country. I think as the Rev. James David Manning points out in his wild but poignant rants, that everybody in Washington knows exactly what has happened - Obama's election really was a conspiracy, and it really has happened.

Having said all of that, I think the communist coup we have just gone through is something that can be reversed, but responsibility for our return to a free republic rests with the states, not with the federal government.

Today, the power in our country has been shifted from the states to the federal government and out of our (We the People) control. We have onerous laws imposed on us by the feds that we have difficulty circumventing, and the Tenth Amendment folks are already talking about secession, something which WOULD spell the death of America.

I'm beginning to see things a bit differently. Inasmuch as the states can hold constitutional conventions to amend the U.S. Constitution (which I don't think needs to happen because there is nothing wrong with the Constitution), the states can also hold nullification conventions to undo federal laws imposed on the states.

And therein lies our solution. Instead of marching to Washington, we should be marching to our state capitals. We are a confederation of states that created the federal government - not the other way around.

We'll have control of Washington when we re-assert control of the feds from the state level. Remember Article 1, section 8, and the Tenth Amendment. And also remember we must practice eternal vigilance over our government or else it will get out of our control.

Make sense?

Excellent assessment HighlanderJuan. I too am concerned when it comes to the subject of a Constitutional Convention. Something I believe needs too be avoided. The mayhem that could occur is too great.

TexasBorn, I hope you get the job you are looking for.

highlander, makes sense to me. IMO, it remains to be seen whether the states have enough fortitude to wrest the power back to the state level. I am now clearly convinced that Obama and his cronies intend to tear down the foundations of our country and start over. This tear down includes states rights. We shouldn't kid ourselves, this has been in his plan since day one and he is working toward that plan as we speak. centralized power in washington is his ultimate goal.

Originally Posted by TexasBorn

highlander, makes sense to me. IMO, it remains to be seen whether the states have enough fortitude to wrest the power back to the state level. I am now clearly convinced that Obama and his cronies intend to tear down the foundations of our country and start over. This tear down includes states rights. We shouldn't kid ourselves, this has been in his plan since day one and he is working toward that plan as we speak. centralized power in washington is his ultimate goal.

TexasBorn,

A couple of things to remember (well actually a 'few').

1. Because a law is enacted doesn't mean it is good law. There are many federal laws in existence that violate the Constitution. Unconstitutional law is just that - unconstitutional. And if the law is unconstitutional, it is null and void on its face, and we don't have to abide by its conditions.

(I make this point with caution because, in government's eyes, ALL of its laws are enforceable, and if you don't conform to doing what government says you must do, you risk physical harm and the loss of your freedom and your property. But, hey, that's the same problems our Founding Fathers faced, so what's the big deal? If the Founders could figure how to do it and be successful, so can we. This understanding also explains why I believe the Oath Keepers are so important to our nation.)

2. We keep waiting for government to help us, when in reality, government isn't there for us - it's there to satisfy it's own needs - power and control. It will never be able to adequately help us except in matters defined in Article 1, Section 8. Everything else is up to us (there's that darned Tenth Amendment again - forcing us to grow up and be self sufficient).

3. Your state is your local government - you are the state! If your state doesn't do what you want it to do, it is your fault. When you change your attitude about government and when you force your state to conform to your will, it will conform. (Actually, if you're still a resident voter in Texas, I think your state, Texas, just about 'gets it,' and there may not be much more to do.)

4. The states are supposed to control the federal government (we're called "The United States of America" not the "United People of America." Watch the video entitled "Thomas Jefferson and the Principles of '98" on Google: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 9712731418 - excellent video.

I hope this is helpful.

Juan

Hey guys, this may have been mentioned and it might have slid by me, but I was on Dr. Pauls site doing some research when I came across this:

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489 I'm not a lawyer but I think it makes it illegal to uncover Obama's past!
Posted May 7th, 2009 by knarfxii

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489
http://www.fas.org/sgp/ob...

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 21, 2009
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13489
- - - - - - -
PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee.
(b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records Administration.
(c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207.
(d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270.
(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records.
(f) "Former President" refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created.
(g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch.
(h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal may be taken.
Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records. (a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
(b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice.
Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President. (a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.
(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.
(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.
(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.
Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President. (a) Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of this order that executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent President shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the former President's claim of privilege.
(b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of this section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a final court order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former Presidents of his determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of the Presidential records, unless a shorter time period is required in the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.
Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.
BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 21, 2009.

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/92168

Not always finding what is posted on this site is fully accurate, I looked into this further and found;

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/e9-1712.pdf

WHAT IS HE HIDING?

Cayla,

Interesting. It seems to protect

(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records.

So, I would ask:

1. Does this Executive Order protect a usurper to the presidency?

2. Does this order protect documentary materials NOT maintained by NARA?

I think not. And to answer your question, Cayla, I think he's merely trying to hide his fraudulent past from the public.

So we must now understand that the federal government is no longer our servant, and we might as well give up the idea that we are a free people, because we are not.

Not, that is, until we resume control over the feds via stronger state controls and the removal of all onerous federal and state legislation.

Freedom is the absence of legislation.

Juan