Posted on 01/26/2011 5:57:29 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
Exactly. All my dealings with them confirm that as well.
That’s why a legal investigation is necessary.
when
i think it was aloha ronnie
Thanks for that information. Fascinating.
It is possible for a state to pass a law which would require the “natural born citizen” issue to be ruled on by the courts. That is currently in the works in several state legislatures. So I do feel pretty confident that we will eventually get a ruling on that. Whether or not it will be based on the original intent of the Founders probably depends on the swing vote at SCOTUS. Which is scary.
The ability to forge documents is a growing concern, and given the tampering we already know about with Obama’s records (draft registration, passport, etc), it is something we need to take seriously with Obama. I agree with you that the procedures currently in place do nothing to require forensic analysis and without a requirement nobody in government is going to touch this issue.
That’s why I believe we need to get at least one state to pass a law that requires certified, non-manipulable transaction logs to be disclosed along with the birth and citizenship records.
The devil really is in the details, and I believe it was the prospect of such a law being introduced and passed that made Abercrombie balk in what I believe was a move to prepare the public to be shown a forged long-form BC for Obama - with the unveiling timed to embarrass “birthers” and convince state legislators that the eligibility issue is a crock that they don’t want to be associated with. Thus derailing the whole move for state eligibility laws.
I honestly believe that the only thing standing between the good people of America and a total, triumphant whitewash and blowing away of this issue is whether or not we can get ONE STATE to require transaction logs for birth and citizenship records submitted as proof of presidential eligibility.
And besides just requiring the candidate to swear that they’ve never been a citizen of another country we actually need to require the citizenship documentation. We need to require the candidate to give the SOS permission to do the investigation him/herself to see what records are held by the Department of State and INS, and to receive the transaction logs for those documents.
We already know that Obama’s passport file has been illegally accessed 3 times. Before any state SOS declares Obama to be Constitutionally eligible they need to know what was done those 3 times.
The inspector general for HHS reported on how easy it is to obtain genuine documents such as a birth certificate based on fraudulent documents such as a social security card, via passports, etc. We know there is something fishy with Obama’s SSN, passport file, and draft registration - and we know the HDOH has indirectly confirmed they have no legally-valid BC for Obama. To find out the real story, the IG of HHS recommends that states decide for themselves what documentation to require in order to not be snookered by fraud.
That is EXACTLY what needs to happen in these eligibility bills. We can’t do forensic analysis of everybody in the country, but the person who holds the nuclear football should at least get that level of scrutiny.
The bill I’m asking people to e-mail their state legislators and ask for is posted at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/final-short-form-eligibility-bill1.pdf
But to find all that out you’d have to have a legal investigation that could subpoena all those records. At this point nobody would ever do that unless they are forced to do so. And that is the rub. That is what we need to fix.
That could well be, which is a reason why we need not only the birth records but also the citizenship records - and not just based on what the candidate is willing to SAY exists, but on the SOS actually being able to get the records (including transaction logs for the records) from the Department of State, INS, etc - anybody who would have citizenship records.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but I really, really would like to see a state pass into law something very close to what is posted at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/final-short-form-eligibility-bill1.pdf . I believe it covers the bases as best we can, from all the different angles.
Here’s the list of R-controlled states which probably have the best shot at passing something like that, including the deadlines for bill introduction (and drafting takes extra time too so all these states need to be worked on ASAP). So PLEASE, if you live in any of these states, PRETTY PLEASE ask them to pass something like the bill above. C&P the text, whatever it takes.
Here’s what I’ve got for bill introduction deadlines for R-controlled states:
Alabama (to be determined)
Arizona 2/17
Florida 3/8
Georgia no deadline
Idaho 1/29
Indiana 1/15
Kansas 1/31
Maine Dec 17, 2010
Michigan no deadline
North Dakota 1/24 and 1/27
Ohio no deadline
Oklahoma 1/20
Pennsylvania no deadline
South Carolina to be determined
South Dakota 2/1
Tennessee 10th legislative day
Texas 3/12
Utah 2/3
Wisconsin no deadline
Wyoming 1/26
Ping. Do you have any insight on this information?
Thanks!
Thanks, RS. Pinged him.
Aloha Ronnie I think.... I can go check my posts...
At this point I am not going to discuss anything further with regard to whether Obama was born in Hawaii or not, because I don’t have time to chase down all of your objections, and it doesn’t really matter if he was born in the U.S. or outside the U.S. Either way in my opinion, he is ineligible because he is not a “natural born citizen”. That has been my belief since I first learned he was running for president and I started to read about him.
At the time of Obama’s birth the person he claims to be his father Kenyan and was a British subject from birth. This much was stated on at least one of Obama’s campaign related websites as well as other websites discussing his eligibility. There are multiple times this has been attested to by Obama himself, his wife, and his campaigns through the years.
Since his father was not a U.S. citizen at the time Obama was born, he does not have two parents who were U.S. citizens at the time of his birth and therefore is not a natural born citizen.
This interpretation was what was taught in schools for years prior to your birth, and is clearly the only correct interpretation of the “natural born citizen” clause if one takes the time to read the constitution and other related documents from the time period that this clause was written in my opinion.
So, it's all a matter of people having the will to do this guy in on legal Constitutional grounds rather than whistling past the graveyard. Some folks are already getting depressed over the idea that he'll get a second term, yet they're not ready to go after this guy to the degree required to keep him off the ballot in 2012. That's the sort of giving up that the majority have done with great regularity and it's why we're at the end of fifty years of creeping fascism.
WE NEED THAT TAPE!
I am a new-born birther, lol- yesterday, to be exact. And I’ll tell you why
You know, it wasn’t that I believed Obama... I never do!
BUT I found the idea of a President Biden unpalatable (intentionally chosen to aid Obama’s job security, imo)... and felt that focusing on the ballot box was the quickest and surest way to rescue this country from the grim Obammunist era. I do not believe what this country needs from Congress will be achieved with Obama in the WH, period.
But a disqualified Obama presidency has wider implication than just his removal from office: the entire election would be null and void... Biden removed too... then likely Bush re-installed until new elections could be held. All Obama-signed legislation and czars would be rendered illegitimate and powerless.
If some obscure court ruling could manage to keep Obama in office for the time-being, at least he wouldn’t be on the ballot in 2012, and would be politically crippled.
Sound good to me- due to dedicated special interest constituencies, Obama’s approval has only dipped below 40% once... no matter how he wrecks this country.
And he needs to GO
I’d like to see all his college records as well, including whether or not he applied as a U.S. citizen or a foreign student!
Beckwith argues that this procedure (ther adoption) is why BHO came back to HI in 1971, if I’m understanding correctly. Beckwith, correct me if I don’t have that right.
I wouldn’t describe my theory as an argument, but rather a “best guess” as to why Barak Obama showed up in Hawaii in December, 1971.
The fact is we don’t KNOW anything about Barack Obama until 1971, and we DON’T KNOW very much about Obama since then.
By the way, don’t you think if Obama’s COLB were genuine, the State of Hawaii would have spelled Obama’s alleged father’s name correctly?
A second important point is that we need to distinguish between a birth certificate argument and the issue of whether or not he was born anywhere in the US.
It has been apparent for some time; I believe the anonymous former employee who released copies of the documents in the Hawaii records file through the midwest lawyer two years ago is credible; there is no long form birth certificate to be had or found in Hawaii. He wasn't born there in August of 1961--and a birth file was established in the name of Barrack H. Obama II on August 8, 1961 without a birth certificate.
I will also say as I have elsewhere, that it appears to me as though the Smith Birth Certificate is a credible original record attesting to the birth of Obama II in Mombasa on August 4, 1961.
All of that said, this issue could become much trickier.
If you could get a legal proceeding in process in which the evidence includes the Smith Certificate, that certificate has a baby footprint on it. So at that point, likely the court orders Obama to produce a verifiable current print. If the current print matches, the game is over--the match proves both the Smith Certificate and the fact that Obama was born in Kenya and is not eligible to hold the office of President. The US Marshall gets the moving trucks--Joe is now Acting President.
But, if the print does not match, what are you left with?
It appears to me that there is a fair line of analysis that the current occupant of the White House was substituted into the identity of Obama II sometime in late 1970. I don't see him using the name until much much later--perhaps the mid 1980's (there is a single reference using the name Obama on one of the student notes however there is no credible evidence when that note appeared).
So if the print doesn't match, Obama then shrugs his shoulders and says all he knows is what his mother Stanley Ann told him; he is sure he was born in the US; here is his passport.
Now what do you say?
Even though you have state legislation mandating that the filing officer get affirmative proof of eligibility, a federal court might decide the Obama story is sufficient and order the state officer to accept the filing on the grounds of an equal protection argument.
So we need to be careful--this dance may not be over with resolution of the birth certificate argument.
It would merit the accumulation of some real funding to hire an investigator to look for real evidence of where he was in fact born before we get to the end of the process.
There’s a great 1980-era interview by Yuri Bezmenov, who was a KGB guy who defected to the US. He says the communists have 4 different stages of taking over a country. The first and longest stage is that of demoralization. It is the process of killing both the values and the will of the general public. It involves quietly taking over the foundations of the society with pro-communists, that the entire society is made up of people who either sympathize with communism or feel hopeless to fight everybody around them with all the powers-that-be against them.
Google Yuri Bezmenov and see if you can find that interview. I actually transcribed it. I might see if I can find that file. I’ve had to scrub my hard drive so many times I’m not sure if I can locate that file but I’ll try. That transcript would be a good thing to post, because it shows exactly where we are now, how we got here, and what the end of it all will be unless we pull our heads out of the sand.
Sorry, there's no way that is true. Either you have a faulty memory, or you ladies are lying. I don't know which.
No one, repeat, no one, prior to the Fall of 2008, claimed that natural born status required two citizen parents. Period.
Why did no know bring up the two-citizen parent requirement when Spiro Agnew was a vice presidential candidate? Or better yet, Michael Dukakis? Both men had at least one non-citizen parent.
Or better yet, how come not a single person raised the issue until AFTER Obama was elected? It was both well-known that he was running AND that his father wasn't a citizen. And yet, no one thought that might be a problem until after he was elected.
Sorry, ladies. Your story just doesn't pass the smell test.
Yes, and since vital records about births consist of birth birth certificates, that implies his birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii.
But now we’ve got Abercrombie saying the records he can find are a notation in the archives.
That is not what he said.
So we’ve got discrepancies in the official stories out of Hawaii’s government.
No we don't.
Not a bad analogy, though in his case there really isn't any danger of getting scratched, as birthers pose no real threat to him.
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.