Posted on 09/16/2010 10:33:25 PM PDT by STARWISE
*snip*
Today’s statement relates specifically to the ongoing courts-martial of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin.
September 3, 2010 – Upon receiving word that LTC Lakin would be denied any and all access to discovery and mitigating evidence needed to provide for a legitimate defense, a White Paper was prepared and released by The United States Patriots Union and The United States Bar Association, advising the Lakin defense team to immediately adjust its defense strategy in accordance with established history and law concerning Mr. Barack Obama’s constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief.
In short, to drop the search for an insignificant birth certificate and focus on the right question at hand. A second White Paper was published last week.
We believe that there are only two potential outcomes of this courts-martial, and that both outcomes bring certain challenges. Our first priority must be to unite in defense of LTC Lakin in an effort to arrive at the best possible outcome for both Lakin and the nation.
*snip*
It is our opinion that the existing legal team representing LTC Lakin should be re-energized and reinforced immediately by a more experienced military legal team.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
You do understand this is a logical fallacy?? One set of circumstance is not dependent on the other.
You said: “Thus, if ‘two citizen parents’ was ACTUALLY a legitimate historical requirement for the Presidency, you’d think SOMEBODY would have pointed it out between February 2007 and November 2008. “
Does Congress count? Seems like, contrary to what Obama’s shill Claire McCaskill wanted, Congress passed a non-binding resolution saying McCain was a natural born citizen because he was born on US soil to 2 citizen parents.
Maybe they’re the rumor-mongers you’re looking for.
But he wasn't born on U.S. soil. Depending on who you believe he was born in Panama or the Canal Zone, one of the two.
Neither was Obama born in Hawaii, yet Congress passed a resolution recognizing Hawaii’s 50th anniversary, whereas Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug 4, 1961.
Accuracy in facts is not Congress’ strength.
My point is that their own resolution stated what they believed to be the requirements for natural born US citizens - born on US soil to US citizen parents.
I guess they’re pretty radical rumor-mongers.
And the Birther "two citizen parent" argument, as well as my claim that said argument is meritless, is testable in its own way. As I've pointed out, the "two citizen parents are required" argument didn't arise until November 2008. What things can be done to test whether it's a legitimate argument or not?
You could check to see whether there have been other Presidents or Vice Presidents who had non-citizen parents.
You could check to see whether there have been other Presidential candidates who had non-citizen parents, or parents with publicly unknown citizenship status.
You could consult with or poll some attorneys who specialize in Constitutional law, and ask them whether natural born citizenship requires two citizen parents.
You could poll Constitutional law professors at law schools and ask them the same question.
You could check old Constitutional law textbooks or law review articles, and see whether any actually state that natural born citizenship requires two citizen parents. Or whether the books make any reference to Vattel in their discussion of natural born citizenship.
And if you did those kinds of tests, what would you find?
Sorry, but no. The resolution simply doesn’t say that TWO citizen parents are an absolute requirement, even if you’re born on US soil.
And no one interpreted the resolution that way until after the election. For instance, here’s an entire FR thread about that resolution from early November 2008, just a couple of days after Leo had filed his papers but before he’d put them online:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2128039/posts
The entire text of the resolution is in the first post of the thread. See anybody in the 100+ posts afterward claiming that natural born citizenship necessarily requires TWO citizen parents?
“I know who was responsible for creating the rumor that Obama was secretly born in Kenya and that his mother snuck him back into Hawaii. I know who was responsible for creating the rumor that Obama is a secret Muslim. I know who’s responsible for various other smaller Birther rumors, like the claim that Obama was born specifically in Mombasa, or specifically at Coast Province General Hospital, or the claim that Maya Soetoro has a COLB, etc.”
Riiiiight.
I stopped reading right there. Why? Because you are FULL OF IT. Either Name yourself and your “Source” or STFU.
Sorry, but my BS meter has zero tolerance for sweeping claims of inside knowledge when it comes to the tens of millions of people who are on the internet.
This is a REAL issue.
It is the SAME issue faced by Chester Arthur, the 21st president of the United States.
HOW the information and the question came to be public knowledge is utterly irrelevant now.
What IS relevant is its simple reality and what that reality means.
Either the man posing as POTUS PROVES his legitimacy to the Office, whih he has NOT done, or he should be removed.
The document posted FOR him proves nothing. The COLB until it is ACCEPTED by a court of Law as being Authentic, or some other LEGAL body, then it is nothing other than a photo of a piece of paper on the internet.
If the Usurper is indeed legit, that should take a SINGLE phone call to the Hawaiian DOH to release his birth Documents. If he has nothing to hide, that can be done in about 10 Minutes.
Now otherwise, I am going to completely ignore you and the rest of your postings. You have nothing relevant to say unless you name yourself and your source. You have zero credibility.
Loren also seems to miss the fact that this issue was initially covered up by the resolution in the senate 511 which covered McCain’s arse. The issue wasn’t ever brought by McCain, because he has the same problem Obama does for a different reason. There is some question as to the territorial status of the canal zone and there is some issue with where McCain was born. Colon is way outside the canal zone.
But don’t bother Loren with facts, this person is a troll. This issue is becoming one where it is unavoidable for Obama. Its getting bigger over time, not smaller. It stands to reason there are going to be those on FR who are not the conservatives they have painted themselves to be. Certainly no one knows the motivations of all those who post here... With out a doubt, there are supporters of Obama who want to minimize this issue as much as possible.
It's not only disputable, it's dead wrong.
Vattel didn't define "natural born citizen" at all. What he did was comment on the various practices in European countries. And in this one respect, citizenship following the father, he was talking about continental countries and noted that the tradition in England was different. The US followed the English tradition.
Vattel, like many authors, has been cited in decisions. But Vattel, like other authors, doesn't define US law. Not all of those decisions were about citizenship, and some of them were dissenting (losing) opinions.
The Supreme Court's definition of "natural born citizen" does not rely on the citizenship of the parents.
OK, I’ll grant you that the resolution doesn’t say that being natural born requires a person to be born in the United States to 2 citizen parents.
It assumes that McCain is eligible because he was born on an American military base to two citizen parents.
It’s clearly an attempt to get around the requirement that a “natural born” person be born on American soil.
But look at their final “whereas”:
“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved,That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under “
They assumed in their other “whereas”-es that an American military base is good enough for the “child of the soil” requirement and say that he was born to American citizen parents.
That covers what they believed were 2 factors that go into the definition of “natural born” citizenship - place of birth and parental allegiance.
It’s right in there. If nobody latched onto that part it’s probably because it was a given, and because the blatant thing about that resolution is the attempt to write off the importance of birth place.
Ask most people now and they will tell you that eligibility depends on whether you were born in the US. This resolution says the exact opposite - that place doesn’t matter. Well, if place doesn’t matter, then what does, according to this resolution? The only other thing they mention is McCain being born to 2 American citizens. This resolution stakes the whole eligibility issue on having 2 citizen parents.
People objected to the “place doesn’t matter” argument - as they rightly should have. The issue of parents’ citizenship didn’t need to be addressed because that part was in line with history.
Sorry, but my BS meter has zero tolerance for sweeping claims of inside knowledge when it comes to the tens of millions of people who are on the internet.
What "inside knowledge"? People started rumors online. I figured out who started said rumors. There's no "source" per se.
The person who first started claiming Coast Province Medical Hospital was Phil Berg. That hospital's name first showed up in his Request for Admissions in his original case. Berg filed the Requests in September 2008, but didn't put them online. People online only started talking about Coast Province Hospital in October 2008, when Berg filed to have the Requests deemed admitted. Berg claims that he got the hospital's name from some random unidentified person in Kenya.
Mombasa owes its origin in the Birther mythos to Wayne Madsen, who reported that Republican secret agents in Kenya had found an Obama birth record in Mombasa. But Madsen also said that Obama was born in Hawaii, and that the record was just a Kenyan record of a foreign birth. In any case, the story never turned out to be true. No secret Republican agents, no secret Kenyan document. Phil Berg, once again, cited Madsen in his lawsuit in August 2008, and only after *that* did Birthers start claiming Mombasa was the specific city of birth.
The Maya COLB claim was created by discredited pseudo-expert TechDude in July 2008. In the comments at TexasDarlin's blog, IIRC (though it could've been the comments at Atlas Shrugs; I'd have to check to be sure).
The other two deductions I'm rather proud of, and they'll feature prominently in something I'm working on, so I'm not about to drop names in a FR thread just because you think I'm full of it. One I only know by his online pseudonym, but he's used that pseudonym extensively. (He also appears to be responsible for creating the rumor that Obama's brother and sister claimed to have witnessed Obama's birth.) The other also uses a pseudonym extensively, but I learned his real name, and have even exchanged a couple of emails with him.
If the Usurper is indeed legit, that should take a SINGLE phone call to the Hawaiian DOH to release his birth Documents.
Say, come to think of it, what ever happened to your efforts to request your own long-form birth records from Hawaii? How'd that work out for ya? Get it all with a single phone call?
I have received back the Return Reciept Requested post card off the registered mail I sent. At this time I have not gotten a response. That is not at all unusual for the HDOH. I received specific instructions regarding which form to send in and to include a specific letter to Dr. Onaka stating that I need a copy of my full long form, as all long form applications must be processed and authorized by him. I also sent in the amount for the copy I was instructed to, which was 10 dollars in the form of a money order.
I was told that the request can take 6 weeks once received by HDOH. The Post Card is stamped with the date Aug 12, 2010. This is my second request, the first was “lost”.
I will post when I receive my long form.
Anything else?
He didn't use the term natural born citizen, but he did define. What else would you call natural citizenship at birth, which is what he defined??
What he did was comment on the various practices in European countries.
He did more than just that. Obvioulsy, you're just here to spin and deflect.
And in this one respect, citizenship following the father, he was talking about continental countries and noted that the tradition in England was different. The US followed the English tradition.
This is, how did you say, 'dead wrong.' He didn't noted that England's 'tradition' was different. He did say that under English law, the children of aliens were naturalized at birth. The United States did not follow this 'tradition.' By law as originally written, the children of aliens could only be naturalized AFTER the father was naturalized.
But Vattel, like other authors, doesn't define US law.
The Supreme Court said natural born citizen is defined outside of the Constitution (hence outside of U.S. law). They called it common law, but the definition they used matches the same definition of natives and natural citizens as used by Vattel. That definition CLEARLY and INDISPUTABLY says the parents must be citizens.
So you would have us believe.
Accuracy in facts is not Congress’ strength.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.
My point is that their own resolution stated what they believed to be the requirements for natural born US citizens - born on US soil to US citizen parents.
But the non-binding resolution did not claim McCain was born on U.S. soil. It said he was born on a U.S. military base in the Canal Zone. That is not the same as U.S. soil.
Right. They said it doesn’t matter if he was born on US soil.
So what DOES matter for the definition of “natural born US citizen”, then, according to that resolution?
Contrary to what you said in your reply 99.
So what DOES matter for the definition of “natural born US citizen”, then, according to that resolution?
In McCain's circumstance, the deciding factor was that both his parents were U.S. citizens and they were temporarily outside the U.S. because of military obligations.
So that resolution affirms Congress’ understanding that both parents must be citizens.
What causation?? You assume timing relates to or causes incorrectness. It's a nonsense correlation.
And if you did those kinds of tests, what would you find?
That you like making up silly tests that have little to do with reality?? The Supreme Court gave a clear definition. Whether people understood or were aware of that Supreme Court definition in the months prior to November 2008 doesn't make it less accurate or applicable.
No, the resolution never makes that statement. It only recites the facts of McCain's birth, which happen to inlcude US citizen parents.
Under that particular circumstance, yes. Born overseas of two U.S. citizen parents makes one a natural born citizen.
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.