Skip to comments.Bring Back Birtherism? GOP Rep. Says Congress Should Revisit Questions About Obama’s ‘Validity’
Posted on 06/22/2013 1:58:39 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Appearing on TruNews talk radio this week, Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) agreed with host Rick Wiles that Congress ought to revisit questions about the validity of President Obamas birth certificate in light of the recent scandals involving the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Justice.
After Wiles and Rep. Duncan discussed their desire to pursue and deport illegal immigrants, rather than extend the possibility of citizenship to them, the host asked if the House has any intention to also pursue Barack Obamas phony identification papers.
At first, Duncan shied away from directly addressing the so-called birther concerns, simply adding that Americans had a chance to vote Obama out in November and, in his belief, regrettably didnt do so. Wiles then asked: If we know they are lying about all these other things, why not go back and say Well, maybe the first scandal was a lie too?
There you go, Duncan agreed. Im all with you. So lets go back and revisit some of these things because Americans have questions about not only the IRS scandal but also about the presidents validity.
Throughout Obamas presidency, various conspiracy theories have arisen about his birth certificates, including the belief that the long-form certificate publicly released in 2011 was a forgery using image-editing software. Though these so-called birther beliefs have been out of the news in recent months, they still seem to hold weight with some of the presidents political opponents.
Listen below, as clipped by RightWingWatch:
OMG! I’m agreeing with you - how did that happen?
I don’t think that it is possible to “revisit” an issue that has never been visited. Congress has never held a hearing on Barack Obama’s eligibility.
Obama announced his candidacy on February 10, 2007.
The House of Representatives did pass a non-binding resolution in the 111th Congress in 2009 which contained a “whereas” clause naming Hawaii as the birthplace of the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama [House Res. 593] but there was no debate or discussion.
It would be great if a House Committee Chair would agree to conduct an inquiry. Committee Chairs have congressional subpoena power akin to judges’ court orders and testifying witnesses are placed under oath.
It's a wondrous creation full of possibilities we live in.
As good a time as any. Sheriff Joe, paging Sheriff Joe.
The Alinskyite ridicule machine fires up.
Abercrombie Shocked At Failure To Discover Obama Birth Certificate
Revelations of close friend of Hawaii Governor contradict official claim that privacy laws prompted Abercrombie to abandon search
Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Well, they better HURRY UP!!
WHY the RUSH???
Just a few felony crimes that will be waived for ILLEGAL aliens under Immigration Bill S.744:
Falsely representing or knowingly using a Social Security Number obtained with false information
Falsely claiming citizenship on Form I-9
Knowingly altering a Social Security Card
Document fraud to prove eligibility for employment
Comment at site may say it all: Isnt Barack Obama subject to charges for all of these offenses? Maybe thats why the immigration bill is getting the ultra-fast track treatment; maybe evidence of his ineligibility is mounting toward levels which can no longer be ignored.
It isn’t like we have a whole lot of anything left to lose at this point....
The Messiah is gonna have protection in the Amnesty Bill for his OWN past Criminal Behavior, and will become a U.S. Citizen with it.
Duncan is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Management of the Committee on Homeland Security. As such he should be able to schedule them. So when are the hearings on Obama going to start?
OH no! I’m agreeing again. Stop it! ;)
Even if Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama had been birthed in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House Obama is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
Congress should force 0bama to step down while he is being investigated and before he is carted off to GITMO as a TREASONOUS usurper.
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. However the courts have ruled exactly the opposite of your personal opinion.
Rhodes v MacDonald, US District Court Judge Clay D. Land: A spurious claim questioning the presidents constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Courts placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, September 16, 2009.
Ankeny v Daniels, Indiana: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the United States are ‘natural born citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, November 12, 2009
Taitz v Obama (Quo Warranto) This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen, as is required by the Constitution. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.— Chief US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth, US District Court for the District of Columbia, April 14, 2010
Tisdale v Obama, US District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.: “It is well settled that those born within the United States are natural born citizens.”— Tisdale v Obama, US District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, January 23, 2012.
Farrar et. al., Welden, Swensson and Powell v Obama: For the purposes of this analysis, the Court considered that Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Ankeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary under O.C.G.A. under Section 21-2-5(b). February 3, 2012
Allen v Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiffs assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012
Purpura & Moran v Obama: New Jersey Administrative Law Judge Jeff S. Masin: No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers position that Mr. Obama is not a natural born Citizen due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here.
The petitioners legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a natural born Citizen regardless of the status of his father. April 10, 2012
Voeltz v Obama, Judge John C. Cooper, Leon County, Florida Circuit Court Judge: In addition, to the extent that the complaint alleges that President Obama is not a natural born citizen even though born int he United States, the Court is in agreement with other courts that have considered this issue, namely, that persons born within the borders of the United States are natural born citizens for Article II, Section 1 purpose, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.September 6, 2012
The above isn't a “conspiracy”. It is a **FACT**!