A Message to the SCOTUS: Stop Avoiding the Eligibility Issue

Creating Orwellian Worldview ^ | 2/14/11 | Alaphiah

[Alaphiah123]

It is the 3,000 lb gorilla in the middle of American politics. Is Barry Hussein Soetoro eligible to be president of the United States of America? And if he isn’t, why is everyone who has a sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States allowing an illegitimate Usurper to continue his personal quest to undermine the fundamental principles of a Constitution-based federal republic form of government rather than protect the constitution, which is their sworn oath to do? (see story)

What is absolutely true and in the words of former President Clinton’s U.S. counter terrorism official Richard Clarke. Our government has failed us. Moreover, it is continuing to fail us on the must import constitutional question to come about in the history of the United States of America. Is Barry Hussein Soetoro Constitutionally qualified to be Commander-in-Chief of this nation?

[jamese777]

Obama Eligibility Appeals at the Supreme Court: Donofrio v Wells.

“Donofrio v. Wells” was a suit that attempted to keep Obama off the New Jersey ballot. Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick claimed Obama had dual nationality at birth, because of his Kansas-born mother and his Kenyan-born father, who was a British subject at the time of his son’s birth.

Supreme Court of the United States Docket No. 08A407
Title: Leo C. Donofrio, Applicant
v.
Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey Secretary of State

Docketed:
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Case Nos.: (AM-0153-08T2 at the New Jersey Appellate Division without a docket number)

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nov 3 2008 Application (08A407) for stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Nov 6 2008 Application (08A407) denied by Justice Souter.
Nov 14 2008 Application (08A407) refiled and submitted to Justice Thomas.
Nov 19 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008.
Nov 19 2008 Application (08A407) referred to the Court by Justice Thomas.
Nov 26 2008 Supplemental brief of applicant Leo C. Donofrio filed. (Distributed)
Dec 1 2008 Letter from applicant dated November 22, 2008, received.
Dec 8 2008 Application (08A407) denied by the Court.

[MinuteGal]

Did anyone catch O'Reilly tonight on the birther issue? He went absolutely nuts castigating any and all who are questioning Obama's constitutional right to be president. He went almost berserk, and I'm not exaggerating one bit.

He hysterically shouted over and over that the Usurper's eligibility should not be in question and that this issue has absolutely NOTHING to do with the well-being of our country.

This segment of his show was unbelievable, unreal, Orwellian.

Leni

[Forty-Niner]

“I’m really tired of being played. Every one of them swore the oath and pretended it meant something”

Me neither!

Whether they’ll admit it or not, I believe that most in the Government, politics and the media realize that Obama was/is ineligible to hold the Office of the President.

The left wants to ignore it, and the right doesn’t know what to do about it.... Where are those historical hero’s I have read about all my life....didn’t they make it to the 21st century?

[Forty-Niner]

What you said was spot on! Thanks.

[Forty-Niner]

“What if the SCOTUS says Obama is qualified to be president?”

There are no qualifications to become President only eligibility requirements.

Obam is not eligible to be President, and severs as President due to a huge historical error.

In time, I believe the that error will be revealed and prevented from future occurance.

[Forty-Niner]

100% correct!

[DaveTesla]

United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Declared Wong Kim Ark to be a citizen under the 14th amendment.

Never a natural born citizen.

The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the
United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or
subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject
to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although
but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord
Coke in Calvin's Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that
issue is a natural-born subject;” and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, “if
born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same
principle.” It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the
country in which he resides — seeing that, as said by Mr. Webster, when Secretary of State, in his Report to the
President on Thrasher's Case in 1851, and since repeated by this court.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html

[DaveTesla]

One of the framers (John Bingham) of the 14th amendment had this to say:

Center column 3rd paragraph down:

Source:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=071/llcg071.db&recNum=2
>! you have to turn to page 1291 !>

Bingham states: I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill],
which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the
jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language
of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen… . . – John Bingham, framer of the 14 amendment in the United States House on March 9, 1866”

Charles Pinckney
Signer of the United States Constitution, Governor of South
Carolina. Senator and a member of the House of Representatives.
“Therefore, we can say with confidence that a natural-born
citizen of the United States means those persons born
whose father the United States already has an established
jurisdiction over, i.e., born to father’s who are
themselves citizens of the United States.”

[rxsid]

Not only did Bingham state that in 1866 (after the Civil War), he stated it prior to that as well (during the Civil War):

"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

Those in Congress that were debating the issue of citizenship as related to the 14th Amendment...they ALL knew exactly who a "natural born Citizen" is. Born in the sovereign territory to 2 citizen parents.

[Beckwith]

Natural Born Citizen -- Evolution

[little jeremiah]

Placemark.

[LucyT]

So, ....

Are you Startraveler , or NS , back under another name? Sure looks like a retread/ SP/ pia.

.

[devattel]

LucyT

So, .... Are you Startraveler , or NS , back under another name? Sure looks like a retread/ SP/ pia.

I am sorry LucyT, but doing a blind ping to a large number of members is confusing unless you are specifically questioning someone in your post.

No, I am not anyone "back under another name", if you were indeed directing your question to me.

[mojitojoe]

Could be either, but my bets on this one:

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:startraveler/index?brevity=full;tab=comments

[LucyT]

A Star Traveler by any other name can be identified by their writing style.

Pwned!

[azishot]

The only thing missing are the cute, little smiley faces and the “LOL’s”!!

[devattel]

A Star Traveler by any other name can be identified by their writing style. Pwned!

Is this your typical welcome wagon response to new members of Free Republic? To insinuate someone is a "star traveler" (whatever that means) by one's "writing style" and shouting a hearty "Pwned"?

[null and void]

StarTraveler was a troll on the eligibility threads.

We're had lots of trolls on those threads. They waste huge amounts of bandwidth attempting to distract, deflect, discredit and destroy anyone who would dare question The Won's Constitutional eligibility.

Some were overt, some very subtle.

We're a little gun shy, if you really aren't a troll I'm sorry your welcome wasn't as warm as you would like. If you are a troll, go to Hell.

[devattel]

"We're a little gun shy, if you really aren't a troll I'm sorry your welcome wasn't as warm as you would like. If you are a troll, go to Hell."

This is perfectly understandable. I have spotted two so far on my short time here: Mr Rogers and Bruce Campbells Chin. Although they appear to be intelligent, they are personally afflicted by the issues surrounding eligibility and citizenship. That being said, one can learn from one's political attackers.

I would not have spent the last 10 years studying Emmerich de Vattel, Smith, and others to unlock the keys to some of our international issues we are facing now and waste my time here in such a manner. Issues such as immigration, interstate commerce, and citizenship are at the very heart of our current national debates, and they typically fall into the section of the U.S. Constitution which has the most cobwebs on it: Article I, Section 8, Item 9.

[pepperdog]

Your’s is a thoughtful post, raising issues I hadn’t considered. Thank you.