Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Got Served
American Thinker ^ | February 1, 2012 | Cindy Simpson

Posted on 02/01/2012 7:17:02 PM PST by Sallyven

[snip]...Jablonski remained true to his word -- neither he nor Obama showed up for the January 26 hearing. I noted last week that Obama was not scheduled to be anywhere near Atlanta on the date of the hearing, although I had wondered if still, perhaps, Georgia might be on his mind. According to reports in the blogosphere, the president's schedule on the morning of the 26th was open, and according to an unnamed source, Obama watched the live feed of the hearings.

Perhaps Obama, as well as the several mainstream media news outlets I spotted at the hearing, were merely watching in hopes that the "crazy birthers" would really do something...well, crazy. Or unlawful. In fact, though, it was the president himself and his defense team who were the ones defying the rule of law.

The mainstream media, in lockstep with Obama, reported nothing of the events, in a stunning blackout on a truly historic hearing -- one that discussed the eligibility of a sitting president to run for a second term. And more troubling was the fact that the media failed to acknowledge the even more sensational news -- that the president and his defense attorney snubbed an official subpoena.

Today, Attorney Van Irion, on behalf of his client, Georgia resident David Welden, filed a "Motion for Finding of Contempt" with Judge Malihi...

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Georgia
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012election; abovethelaw; areyoubeingserved; ballot; bho44; bhocorruption; bhofascism; birthcertificate; blog; bloggersandpersonal; braking; certifigate; constitution; contempt; contemptofcourt; corruption; democrats; election; election2012; elections; fraud; georgia; imom; impeach; lawless; liberalfascism; naturalborncitizen; naturalized; nobama; nobama2012; nonserviam; obama; scofflaw; snot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 651-693 next last
To: Kansas58
And you post “case law” which also does not address Natural Born Citizen directly, and such “case law” refers to Common Law which is now MOOT anyway.

Nonsense. The "common law" in this case is a verbatim match of law of nations:

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of [p680] parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class, there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.

Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.

This is from U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark. This is an exclusive, self-limiting definition of NBC, and the holding is affirmed as being based in part on citizen parents. Why did the court do this if not for how NBC is defined??

251 posted on 02/01/2012 11:29:21 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1; LucyT; thecodont; Fred Nerks; MHGinTN; Fantasywriter; GregNH; rxsid; Red Steel; ...

Wow. Very interesting. Both primary AND general, eh.

Pinging a few names that I can dredge out of my feeble grey matter.


252 posted on 02/01/2012 11:32:13 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Oops, I thought it was the judge’s ruling!!!


253 posted on 02/01/2012 11:35:43 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Sorry, naturalized didn’t exist before the birth of our nation! SHEEEESH

JC


254 posted on 02/01/2012 11:36:31 PM PST by cracker45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Nope, read my post again for comprehension! Literacy is your friend...

JC


255 posted on 02/01/2012 11:39:37 PM PST by cracker45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
kansas section-8

You type really well for a person with their arms restrained behind their back. Learned to use the tongue to type when Nurse Ratchet isn't looking?

40 cc’s of Thorazine, stat.

256 posted on 02/02/2012 12:09:45 AM PST by Electric Graffiti (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their Moonbats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

El Gato

Good to see you around.


257 posted on 02/02/2012 12:11:13 AM PST by Electric Graffiti (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their Moonbats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Wikipedia...lol


258 posted on 02/02/2012 12:13:08 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
Photobucket
259 posted on 02/02/2012 12:14:44 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
Photobucket
260 posted on 02/02/2012 12:25:11 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
Photobucket
261 posted on 02/02/2012 12:28:31 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Wow.


262 posted on 02/02/2012 12:35:50 AM PST by PA Engineer (Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58; LucyT; Brown Deer; DiogenesLamp; sourcery; STARWISE; rolling_stone; philman_36; ...
"Congress, by simple legislation, can deny Citizenship to 'Anchor Babies'"

That's right. Any form of citizenship that is provided for via statute enacted by men can be revoked or bestowed as the laws change. There is one type of citizenship however, that cannot be bestowed or revoked by statute, and that is natural born citizenship: A person born on US soil to parentS who are themselves citizens. They are citizens by virtue of Natural Law and such their citizenship status cannot be created or nullified by any legal contrivance of man. They just are.

In the words of Minor vs Happersett: If the intent (and it absolutely was) of the founders was to attempt to the greatest degree possible to mitigate the potential for divided loyalties in the person to be entrusted with the presidential levers of power, then a person with no presumed potential for divided loyalties at all by virtue of the US citizenship of both parents is obviously and logically to be superior in regard to natural born citizenship status than someone who has one or more parents holding foreign allegiance, no matter where the presumed citizen (there are doubts about these kind, according to Minor) is born.

Logic Fail- Ping. (Apologies to anyone I missed, and to anyone peeved that I Pinged them unsolicited. I just thought it funny that this hadn't been addressed more thoroughly)

263 posted on 02/02/2012 12:41:52 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: PA Engineer
Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket Photobucket
264 posted on 02/02/2012 12:46:00 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Sallyven

The mainstream media, in lockstep with Obama, reported nothing of the events, in a stunning blackout on a truly historic hearing — one that discussed the eligibility of a sitting president to run for a second term.  And more troubling was the fact that the media failed to acknowledge the even more sensational news — that the president and his defense attorney snubbed an official subpoena.


How can this even be happening? How can there be not one whistleblower at any of the media centers? Not one word.

How bad could it get? Could Obama slaughter kittens on video and still have no mention? Is there any negative thing he could do that would get a mention in the mainstream media?


265 posted on 02/02/2012 12:51:30 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome

Should’ve deleted “In the words of Minor vs Happersett”. Editing error. :(


266 posted on 02/02/2012 1:00:52 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
Crackpot nonsense.
267 posted on 02/02/2012 1:07:33 AM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: sourcery; Kansas58
Okay, so forget my Ping on the #55 comment.

Kansas58: What he said. So much better than I.

268 posted on 02/02/2012 1:11:32 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1; Berlin_Freeper; Hotlanta Mike; Silentgypsy; repubmom; HANG THE EXPENSE; Nepeta; ...

Obama shows contempt for judicial process

While awaiting Malihi’s ruling, Irion stated, ‘The world should be holding its breath.’

For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes and hereby reports to the Secretary of State that Plaintiffs’ challenges to the qualifications of Defendant Barack Obama should be sustained and upheld;

that Defendant Barack Obama is not entitled to appear on the primary or general election ballots in the State of Georgia as a candidate for the Office of the President of the United States; and that Defendant Barack Obama’s name should be withheld from the presidential ballot or, if the ballots have been printed, should be stricken from the presidential ballot.

Michael M. Malihi
Administrative Law Judge

269 posted on 02/02/2012 1:24:24 AM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Photobucket
270 posted on 02/02/2012 1:30:57 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58; philman_36
both
both
both

rrreeeaaallllllyyy???
271 posted on 02/02/2012 1:33:24 AM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

From Irion’s keyboard to God’s Inbox.


272 posted on 02/02/2012 1:38:52 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Mombasa Photobucket
273 posted on 02/02/2012 1:39:45 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

The Social Security card looks like it was signed by a child. Probably when she got her first job.


274 posted on 02/02/2012 2:02:27 AM PST by Plummz (pro-constitution, anti-corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer
Crackpot nonsense. Read the history, did you? Not quite ozone-worthy, perhaps. Nevertheless. . .


275 posted on 02/02/2012 3:05:41 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

“Congress defined citizenship.”

Congress has Constitutional authority to define the naturalization process. The Constitution, through the 14th Amendment, defines a citizen of the US.

A Natural born citizen must be native born and cannot be required to swear an Oath of Allegiance because allegiance is a natural or implied without reservation. Not all native born persons are Natural born citizens because some are born with dual allegiance or their allegiance to the US requires an affirmation before doubts are resolved.

Obama’s campaign made a big deal of Obama’s Kenyan citizenship obtained in 1963 expiring because he did nothing about it. In fact, Obama should have affirmatively renounced his Kenyan citizenship at the age of majority to secure his allegiance to the US.


276 posted on 02/02/2012 3:56:29 AM PST by SvenMagnussen (What would MacGyver do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1; Fred Nerks; LucyT
nice picture...


277 posted on 02/02/2012 4:06:03 AM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf


278 posted on 02/02/2012 4:11:28 AM PST by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

Bookmark


279 posted on 02/02/2012 4:28:09 AM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Jess Kitting

That is an ideal scenario.


280 posted on 02/02/2012 4:29:47 AM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: cracker45

Excellent argument.


281 posted on 02/02/2012 4:41:03 AM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

is Rubio qualified any more than Arnold Schwarzenegger?


282 posted on 02/02/2012 5:01:46 AM PST by SF_Redux (Sarah stands for accountablility and personal responsiblity, democrats can't live with that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

So theoretically, our Founding Fathers were not concerned that a British noble might groom a son who is born in the US to be President, right? So a duke might do his royal duty, raise a son in the US [such as his second son], and then prepare him to lead our nation. And our Founding Fathers had no fear whatsoever of that happening?


283 posted on 02/02/2012 5:16:24 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Uups, not “do his royal duty”, but in his Majesty’s service ...


284 posted on 02/02/2012 5:17:19 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Your post brings up another question, Why, when the first”birth certificate” was an admitted forgery, did the issue disappear with the presentation of a second, photocopy of another obviously forged document, and no one has YET seen the original? I do not believe for a minute that there is something on the original BC that might be “embarrassing to the president” as it was said. What could be so embarrassing that it warrants risk of impeachment and/or charges of treason?I believe there is something on the original document(if it exists) that disqualifies Zero from holding office. And if there is no “original” document that should also disqualify him, and make him guilty of falsifying records, as he has claimed the second BC as his? Just asking...


285 posted on 02/02/2012 5:26:06 AM PST by Quickgun (Second Amendment. The only one you can put your hands on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

I gave up last night. Some people simply refuse to understand despite a mountain of evidence against them.


286 posted on 02/02/2012 5:32:56 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

How is it that yo have all the answers, but are new to this discussion.

You could have settled this whole debate years ago. Why did you hold out on us?

Hey everyone, k58 says we are wasting our time here, let’s just drop it.


287 posted on 02/02/2012 5:49:53 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Sallyven; 2ndDivisionVet; afraidfortherepublic; Art in Idaho; Bigtigermike; bkopto; bushpilot1; ...
I especially like the motion by the plaintiff's attorney Mark Hatfield, who urges this judge to make a 'finding of fact' that Obama is NOT a natural born citizen!

http://www.art2superpac.com/georgiaballot.html

Hatfield's Findings of Fact Submitted
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2841352/posts ^ | Feb. 1, 2012 | Mark Hatfield


288 posted on 02/02/2012 6:01:00 AM PST by Future Useless Eater (Chicago politics = corrupted capitalism = takeover by COMMUNity-ISM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Only if she wasn’t a naturalized U.S. citizen at the time of your birth.


289 posted on 02/02/2012 6:12:51 AM PST by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Rubio was not a “natural born” citizen unless his parents had already become “naturalized” citizens before he was born. It will take a Constitutional Amendment to change that requirement.


290 posted on 02/02/2012 6:22:27 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MikeGranby
Candidates are not above the law, and people ought to have a mechanism to challenge eligibility.

Apparently Manchurian Candidates with the right amount of melanin can be above the law.
291 posted on 02/02/2012 6:23:32 AM PST by crosshairs (Liberalism is to truth, what east is to west.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

Does a person have to be a natural born citizen to be VP? If not then in the event of the POTUS being removed from office wouldn’t the VP be skipped over and it go to the SOTH?


292 posted on 02/02/2012 6:26:32 AM PST by rfreedom4u (Forced diversity causes dissent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

No person can serve as VP who is not qualified to be president. Words nearly verbatim from the Constitution.


293 posted on 02/02/2012 6:28:26 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: Sallyven; Future Useless Eater

I thought the judge was supposed to render his decision by Feb 1st?


294 posted on 02/02/2012 6:52:01 AM PST by nuconvert ( Khomeini promised change too // Hail, Chairman O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
You have NO case law that says otherwise.

You are the one who is not well researched.

If "natural born" doesn't mean anything different than "citizen", why is the term used? Bear in mind that the only other term used is "naturalized citizen". There is indeed some difference in these terms.

295 posted on 02/02/2012 6:53:00 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
NOBODY with any authority agrees with your interpretation.

you throw around the word authority as if it means anything...Obama has authority...Ruth Bader Ginsberg, has authority.

WE THE PEOPLE....are the only real authority...and let the bottom feeding lawyers and all the self serving politicians learn that...the easy way or the hard way.


296 posted on 02/02/2012 6:54:31 AM PST by Vaquero ("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
Your parents’ birth doesn’t matter. It’s YOU who matters.

You are not correct. This issue is all about "divided loyalties".

297 posted on 02/02/2012 6:55:12 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
Your parents’ birth doesn’t matter. It’s YOU who matters.

You are not correct. This issue is all about "divided loyalties".

298 posted on 02/02/2012 6:55:24 AM PST by GingisK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: All

Inotice how these kind of threads has finally been allowed to stay in Breaking News, what took so long


299 posted on 02/02/2012 7:00:56 AM PST by SF_Redux (Sarah stands for accountablility and personal responsiblity, democrats can't live with that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Sallyven
IMHO the plaintiffs' lawyers in this case missed some very damming pieces of evidence.

I would have introduced Senate resolution 555 in its entirety. Remember that that resolution was the sense of the Senate that a natural born citizen had to have an American Citizen Father and an American Citizen Mother at the time of his birth. It was signed by every Senator present at that time - Democrat and Republican including the junior Senator from Illinois one Barack H. Obama. While the resolution applied to John McCain it reflected the Consitutional opinions of the entire Senate.

So, if Obama agreed to the resolutions verbiage (he did sign it after all instead of voting present) he knew well before the Democratic National Convention that he didn't meet the requirements of that resolution - see his own written and published words in his autobiography “Dreams of my Father.”

IMHO these two pieces of evidence, that were uncontested, would cause EXTREME heartburn for the Democrats at multiple levels during the 2012, 2014, and 2016 elections.

300 posted on 02/02/2012 7:11:55 AM PST by Nip (TANSTAAFL and BOHICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 201-250251-300301-350 ... 651-693 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson