Recent WND Inquiries Appear To Have Established Obama’s Birth In Hawaii

naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com ^ | 06/09/2011 | Leo Donofrio

[rxsid]

"Recent WND Inquiries Appear To Have Established Obama’s Birth In Hawaii.

I don’t know how this slipped below my radar, but back on May 9, 2011, World Net Daily published an investigative report entitled, “Bombshell: U.S. government questioned Obama citizenship“, which – in my opinion – conclusively established that Obama was born in Hawaii. In that report, Aaron Klein revealed official documents stored in US immigration files which chronicle the troubles faced by Obama’s mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, when he petitioned the US Government for a visa extension.

The WND report correctly notes that US officials expressed an interest in determining whether Soetoro’s step-son, President Obama, was actually a US citizen. The US officials who were handling Soetoro’s Visa extension application made copious notes in the file and the official comments therein illustrate that these officials doubted some of Soetoro’s statements. So, they decided to investigate the relationships listed in his application.

Below is the text of the relevant portion of the WND report:

One critical exchange is dated August 21, 1967, from Sam Benson, an officer at the Southwest Immigration and Naturalization Service office in San Pedro, Calif.

Benson’s query stated, “There is nothing in the file to document the status of the spouse’s son. Please inquire into his citizenship and residence status and determine whether or not he is the applicant’s child within the meaning of Section 101(b)(1)(B) of the Act, who may suffer exceptional hardship within the meaning of Section 212(a).”

The reference is to the Immigration and Naturalization Act, which defined a “child” as an unmarried person under 21 years of age who, among other qualifiers, could be a “stepchild,” whether or not born out of wedlock, provided the child had not reached the “age of eighteen years at the time the marriage creating the status of stepchild occurred.”

A response to Benson’s inquiry came from one “W.L. Mix” of the central immigration office, who determined Obama was a U.S. citizen.

Mix replied: “Pursuant to inquiry from central office regarding the status of the applicants’ spouse’s child by a former marriage.”

“The person in question is a United States citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii, Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicant’s step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the child’s mother on March 5, 1965.”

The files do not state how the office determined Obama was born in Honolulu.

So here we see the US Government looking into an application for Visa extension by Soetoro. Further review of those documents reveal that the officials did not trust everything in Soetoro’s application. Therefore, the Government officials wanted to establish whether Obama Jr. was truly a US citizen. They made a direct inquiry on this very issue. And they concluded that Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Again, this was established by “W.L. Mix” of the central immigration office.

Having taken such an exhaustive look into Soetoro’s application, and especially considering the government’s examination of Obama’s citizenship, I don’t see how the government officials involved would have overlooked the fact that Stanley Ann Dunham would have been out of the US and far away in Kenya on the date W.L. Mix established as DOB for Obama – if Obama had been born in Kenya.

Furthermore, a report today by WND, “Documents show marriage of Obama’s parents a sham“, illustrates that a similar investigation as to Obama, Sr. was conducted when he was also applying for a Visa extension. Those official documents include a handwritten memo from the file, written by (presumed) INS official William Wood, which states that Obama Sr.’s son, “Barack Obama II”, was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961.

Moreover, in today’s WND article, Jerome Corsi concludes, as a result of reviewing all of the relevant INS documents, that if President Obama was born in Kenya, Dunham must have traveled there without Obama Sr., who was definitely in the US on August 4, 1961, according to these US Government records. This analysis by Corsi is correct. Obama Sr.’s presence in the US at the time of Obama’s birth is now sufficiently documented. This fact alone adds very heavy weight to President Obama having been born in the US.

I don’t see how two sets of US government officials, independently investigating the relationships between Soetoro and Dunham on one hand, and Obama Sr. and Dunham on the other, could both fail to reveal that Dunham would have been in Kenya at the time of Obama Jr.’s birth. The government officials would’ve had access to Dunham’s passport files. The contents thereof were relevant to the investigations since she was married to both men, and the marriages were relevant to immigration status, as was the issue of children.

Those who persist in accusing Obama of not being born in Hawaii do so in light of official government investigations, between 1961 and 1966, which established his birth, to the satisfaction of inquisitive government immigration officials, as having taken place on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.

As far as I’m concerned, the issue is settled with a massive presumption of authenticity. I do not see how the information published by WND regarding US immigration official W.L. Mix’s investigation into Obama’s US citizenship flew so far below the radar. That is the single most important fact I have come across that establishes Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

CLOSURE IS POSSIBLE WITH REGARD TO BC ISSUE.

For those who insist on keeping the birther circus alive and kickin’ (despite the info listed above), I believe there is a simple way to settle the issue once and for all. I have found two references to the fact that the US Government keeps passport “issuance” records for all passports issued. The most recent is from Congressional testimony on the House floor from March 10, 1998:

“In addition, the committee on conference is aware that on weekends there is no Departmental procedure or mechanism to access the passport issuance records maintained by the Consular Affairs Bureau. The result is that when a foreign law enforcement authority inquires about the status of a person or passport on the weekend, the State Department does not or cannot respond. This is a clear deficiency in border security procedures.” (See pg. 41/53 in the PDF counter.)

The second reference is to a US Government GAO report – written for the Secretary of State – that argued for the destruction of passport application materials. The destruction of such materials was the basis of more conspiracy theories as to Dunham’s various passport applications and renewals requested in a previous FOIA by Christopher Strunk.

Unfortunately, the FOIA request by Strunk, which has been well documented online, failed to request passport “issuance” records for Stanley Ann Dunham. Strunk only requested passport “application” materials. And the government’s reply to his FOIA request was specifically limited to passport “application” materials. Since Strunk didn’t specifically ask for passport “issuance” records, the government was not obligated to search for those records… but they do exist and they can be found.

The GAO report – which refers to passport issue cards – documents the destruction of passport application materials, but it notes that the Government retains all “old passport issue cards”:

“During numerous discussions with GSA about document retention periods, Department officials have presented many reasons for the continued storage of original passport applications. They have placed great emphasis in pointing out that old passport applications can be used to derive the citizenship of others…But other ways are just as reliable and effective… Should the Department need to verify if a parent was ever issued a passport, old passport issue cards have been microfilmed and can be referenced by the Department.“ (See pg. 44/70 in the PDF counter.)

Therefore, if Stanley Ann Dunham had been issued a passport prior to President Obama’s birth, there will be a passport issue card available with that information. If no such card exists, Dunham did not have a passport prior to August 4, 1961, and Obama could not have been born in Kenya. She would have needed a passport to be in Kenya.

It is my opinion that a proper FOIA request for passport issue cards (or copies thereof) will establish that Stanley Ann Dunham did not have a passport prior to August 4, 1961. Such a request must be SPECIFICALLY designed to eliminate all wiggle room. I suggest the following wording:

Please forward all passport issue cards and/or microfilm or microfiche copies, or any other copies thereof – or any other documents – which reference the issuance of any passport for Stanley Ann Dunham. To be perfectly clear in my FOIA request, please understand that I am NOT interested in passport application materials. Please limit your response and documents to passport issue cards or copies thereof – as well as any other documents – which the government possesses for Stanley Ann Dunham that refer to her being issued a US passport.

Any FOIA request should NOT ask for more than the passport issuance materials. I cannot stress enough how important it is that the FOIA be strictly limited as suggested above. Such a FOIA should end this conspiracy theory with authority and finality.

I should note that I have come across a certain rabid Obama eligibility supporter who alleges to have done a proper FOIA request as to passport issuance materials. I do not trust this source and I do not have access to the EXACT wording of the alleged FOIA request. Suffice to say that anyone who wants true closure on the place of birth issue should do a FOIA – strictly worded as I have suggested above – requesting passport issuance documents for Stanley Ann Dunham.

I nominate the folks at WND to take this on and make all aspects public since they are the main news resource for this issue. They are invited to take the suggested FOIA request as written above (in red) and to run with it.

The fourth estate has the power and responsibility to see this through. They should thoroughly document the exact wording of the FOIA request, and they should also document the stages of compliance by the government to such a request as is required by law. Definitive documentation regarding whether Stanley Ann Dunham held a passport prior to August 4, 1961 is readily available to the public.

The Government is required to respond to the EXACT request made. No mention of passport application materials should be forwarded by the government in response to a properly worded FOIA request for passport issuance cards (or other issuance documents). We know the cards/documents exist and that they are necessary to the government as is proved by the GAO report and Congressional testimony.

The GAO notes in their report from 1981 that while passport application materials may be destroyed, “passport issue cards” are kept. This is beyond dispute.

If no passport issuance documents can be found for Obama’s mother prior to his date of birth, then he could not have been born in Kenya.

I am not a person who needs to see anymore proof. I believe now and have always believed President Obama was born in Hawaii. But if you still have doubts, this line of inquiry is crucially necessary.

The BC issue and the birther circus surrounding it have served Obama well. Like Chester Arthur before him, the nation was thoroughly distracted by the place of birth faux conspiracy whilst the true legal question concerning his dual national status – despite place of birth – was obscured.

Everyone loves a big green juicy salacious conspiracy theory. That’s much more fun than a certified boring legal question, the answer to which was never in the hands of Obama, whereas the BC always was. He who controls the game, controls the outcome. (“Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?” – Johnny Rotten)

I am writing this to clear your attention spans for what will be the most authoritative and well documented analysis I have to offer on the dual national issue concerning Obama’s perpetual POTUS eligibility dilemma. I do not want the circus to obstruct the law. If you understand the importance of this post, you will pass it on far and wide so the attention of the nation can focus on the true Constitutional crisis.

Leo Donofrio, Esq."

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/recent-wnd-inquiries-appear-to-have-established-obamas-birth-in-hawaii/

[Yosemitest]

---

Let's examine

how Hawaii legally can issue bcs for those born out of state
and then hide this fact
by issuing a certificate stating BORN IN HAWAII OAHU HONOLULU"

I refer you to Birth Certificate Vs. Certification Of Live Birth.

We just did a story bringing to light how
the U.S. Army revoked the orders of a Major scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan
after he filed a lawsuit
claiming that the deployment would be illegal
due to the fact that Barack Obama has failed to produce a birth certificate,
therefore he has not proven his eligibility to be Commander-In-Chief.

To say that we started a firestorm would be putting it mildly.

We had our fair share of rational responses,
as well as the usual off-topic comments, accusations of being right-wing nuts, etc.

As well as a few that were too obscene to put into print.

It turns out that our theory
that the document presented by Obama appears to be homemade has some support,
in that it seems that there is a difference between a “Certification of Live Birth” as opposed to a “Certificate of Live Birth.”

Our friend Pamela at Atlas Shrugs also presents a compelling case
that the document presented as proof that Obama is a natural-born American citizen is indeed a forgery.

And for you Obamanites
who claim that there is no difference between a Certification of Live Birth and a Birth Certificate,
we, as well as the State of Hawaii, would have to disagree with you.

Pay close attention to the following Hawaiian legal statute:

“[§338-17.8]  Certificates for children born out of State.
(a)  Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child,
the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor,
provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health
that the legal parents of such individual
while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii
had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year
immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

(b)  Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health
in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. 
The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91
that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates
and to require any further information or proof of events
necessary for completion of a birth certificate.

(c)  The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91.
[L 1982, c 182, §1]”

Everybody get that?

As long as an adult can walk into Hawaii’s version of the Department of Records
and provide proof that they (the parents) are a legal resident of Hawaii,
the document is issued.

The child, on the other hand, could have been born in Hawaii, KENYA, or a back-alley in Budapest.
How much more proof do you disciples of the Messiah need
before you will admit
that there are legitimate reasons
to demand answers on this issue?

Of course the fact that
Obama may have been elected to our nation’s highest office in direct violation of the United States Constitution
is NOT something that would greatly trouble a dedicated Kool-Aid drinker.

But you STILL WON'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH that

Barack Hussein Obama II ...is ...
THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT IN CHIEF!!!

Here is some more information and links

and all of this without using the link to "the source of the "moderator-offending-video" by a group called The Council of Conservative Citizens.
This is NOT a Conservative group, do not be fooled by the name.
This group is a front group for a neo-Nazi group known as the National Alliance and is associated with Stormfront.

(But I don't see how those groups are MORE OFFENSIVE THAN the Marxists and Fascists in the White House.)

I have several witnesses, that have proven to me that Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Kenya.

First witness, Barack Hussein Obama II himself:

From the AP in 2004: Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate

Hmm…An AP story from 2004 entitled Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate has been discovered on archive.org by many sites (and twitter where I got this). Does this mean now that the AP is nothing but a bunch of birthers?

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations. ...

The above artice is also found at FreedomsPhoenix.com.
They have a great spoof Birth Certificate you just gotta' see.
Also view the video at Proof Obama Admits He Was Born In Kenya.


Second witnesses, his mother and father, indirectly through their divorce papers.

Ed Hale, aprivate investigator in Hawaii, has uncovered the divorce decree for Barack Obama’s father and mother, which indicates they had “one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya.”
But a later Update 1/1/2009,...
"In his 7:45pm Plains Radio broadcast, this last night, Ed Hale backed down from his prior assertion of having gained even uncertain information about the Barack Sr. / Stanley Ann divorce decree containing language referring to Barack Jr. as being born in Kenya. Instead, Hale referred to an apparently tricky recollection... of an ... referring to such a document's generally referring to the place of birth of the children of the divorced parents."

I believe that "indeterminate person" probably SAW the Obama Dunham Divorce Documents BEFORE Page 11 disappeared and viewed the Kenyan Birth Cerfiticate,
thereby telling Ed Hale

"the divorce decree for Barack Obama’s father and mother, indicates they had 'one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya.' ".

The Obama Dunham Divorce Documents are viewable at this location.
There's a great assumption of the time lime at at link.

See the whole Obama 1964 divorce on Scribd.com or as 13 individual images below (in proper order):







I immediately called the clerk in Hawaii and asked where the extra page was. She looked, and counted, and said that there must be some mistake in the records – she counted only 13 pages that are available for reprint. I pointed out to her that the page count she sent skipped from page 10 to page 12 – page 11 was missing. To that, she suggested that perhaps the pages were simply misnumbered before they where archived into the microfiche.

I accepted her answer, not thinking much about it at the time. Perhaps it was just a clerical error in the 1960s, when hand-filed paper records and IBM punch cards were how court documents were tracked and maintained.

I have since come to learn that Obama and his team of lawyers have been working to sanitize his records since he announced that he’d run for President circa November 2004. Now in the White House, he’s still ACTIVELY blocking subpoenas for such documents as his Cambridge and Occidental College records TODAY – the same type of documents promised to be made available during his campaign. Obama and his lawyers are exceedingly adept at exploiting loopholes in Hawaiian birth certificate law to keep Obama’s past hidden from the American people.

This missing page – page 11 – very likely is a copy of the original birth certificate, based upon the prima facie timeline of the 1964 divorce. The Kenya birth certificate was likely requested on Jan 23, 1964 by either Judge King (to award custody on the next trial date), or recommended to Ann Dunham by her attorney for the ex parte divorce, where only one parent was expected to be present.

The missing page, 11, should be chronologically-numbered as all other pages were in the original docket file, by the court clerk at the time. Starting at page 8, Exhibit A is placed where it would have occurred by date in the paperwork (and appeared on microfiche), even denoting an erased, yet barely-readable “8″ on both pages of the returned notification sent to Obama SR. The missing page, numbered as page 11, would likely be a page that would have been admitted to the divorce file sometime in mid- to late-February 1964 – almost as if it were an undocumented “Exhibit B”.

Here’s a very plausible timeline merging the 1964 Obama Divorce papers and new Kenya birth certificate:

Jan 20 (Mon) – divorce request is filed by Stanley Ann D. Obama

Jan 23 (Thur) – divorce orders for trial are given by Judge King at chambers

(note – if the judge, or Ann Dunham’s attorney, told her to order the Kenya birth certificate, it would have been mailed 10,000 miles away, to the “Coast Province” Registrar’s office of the “Republic of Kenya”, likely arriving around the first week of February 1964 to be processed)

Jan 28 (Tue) – Gail A. Watanabe, presumably an assistant of Ann Obama attorney George Kerr, mails the notification for trial to Obama SR (her affidavit is signed Feb 3 and filed)

Jan 30 (Thur) – via Air Mail, notification of trial arrives at Obama SR’s Cambridge, Mass, address. The 10-day “knock and nail” notification would have expired on Sun, Feb 9. Therefore, the next trial date would have been automatically set, per Judge King’s instructions, for the first Tuesday, 30 days later, on March 3

Feb 10 (Mon) – allowing for a 10-day “knock and nail” notification for trial, Obama SR’s trial notification would have been retrieved by the US Post Office on this date, to be mailed back (as events turned out – UNSIGNED by Obama SR) to Hawaii as an exhibit for trial

Feb 17 (Mon) – the Obama Kenya birth certificate is signed by the “Coast Province” Deputy Registrar, to be mailed back to Hawaii for receipt by Ann Obama and/or her attorney
(note: mail time would have ranged from a few days (Air Mail) to a couple of weeks (ship), arriving back in Hawaii in the last week of February to first week of March 3 (Tue). Based upon Judge King’s Jan 23 orders for the next trial date, “at 9:30 a.m. on the first Tuesday after thirty (30) days have elapsed from and after the date” that Obama SR would have been served with the notice of trial. That notification came back, unsigned, by Obama SR, so Ann’s attorneys surely requested, and received Default Judgment for the divorce in her favor for “grievous mental suffering”

Mar 5 (Thur) – trial takes place in favor of divorce in Hawaii, placing custody of Obama JR to his mother by default
(note: the trial was likely rescheduled 2 days after the automatically set date of Mar 3, possibly for the convenience of the judge and/or parties)

Mar 20 (Fri) – the divorce decree is signed by Judge King


In Hawaii, birth certificates are not Public Record. If the Kenya birth certificate was a part of the divorce decree, it may have been pulled out at the end of the trial, or more recently by a watchful archivist or attorneys wishing to remove unfavorable information about Obama.
To date, despite other honest attempts to refute the Kenya birth certificate, such as dealing with when the “Republic of Kenya” came into existence as a republic have been “un-bunked.” Dishonest alterations of the Kenya birth certificate have been maliciously created by sites such as Democratic Underground, designed to discredit the Kenya birth certificate – they’ve been un-bunked as well.

Having not actually seeing the Kenya birth certificate, and it’s chain of evidence, no intellectually-honest person can say if it’s real or not. By the same token, none of us have seen or touched the short-form “Certification of Live Birth” that has appeared on Obama’s “Fight the Smears” or FactCheck.org websites.

No one can confirm the chain of evidence of Obama’s “Certification of Live Birth” that has appeared online, which is the abbreviated-version of Obama’s true, 1961, original long-form(s) “Certificate of Live Birth” and associated vital statistics records. Even the Hawaii Department of Health directly refuses to verify Obama’s online COLBs.

Third witness, is Barack Hussein Obama II's grandmother,Sarah Hussein Obama:
View the video Barack Obama - Born in Kenya II at Youtube.com.

Did Obama's grandmother say he was born in Kenya?The Oct. 16, 2008, telephone interview was conducted by American Christian minister Ron McRae, who describes himself in his affidavit as an overseer of the Anabaptist Churches in North America and a "Presiding Elder on the African Presbytery."

McRae, who called from Detroit, says Sarah Obama was in a public setting with several hundred people listening to the telephone call on a speakerphone. The interpreter was Vitalis Akech Ogombe, the community chairman of Sarah Obama's village of Nyang'oma Kogelo in Western Kenya, 30 miles west of the Lake Victoria-city of Kisumu.

"In the ensuing public conversation, I asked Ms. Obama specifically,
'Were you present when your grandson was born in Kenya?'"
McRae testified in his sworn statement.
"This was asked to her in translation twice, and both times she replied, "Yes! Yes she was! She was present when Obama was born."

Watch and LISTEN to the video BARACK OBAMA - BORN IN KENYA - The Documentary - STUNNING!
and prove it to yourself.
Also watch Affidavit and Tape-Proof Obama Born in Kenya.

The fourth witness, Tim Adams,

"Barack Obama was definitely not born in Hawaii as the White House maintains, and that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Obama does not even exist in the Aloha State."

(It is now confirmed by Hawaii that Tim Adams did indeed work as a senior elections clerk in 2008)

Election official: I'd testify Obama not born in Hawaii

"The things I've said, I don't mind testifying in court," Tim Adams, the senior elections clerk for the city and county of Honolulu in the 2008 campaign, told WND in an exclusive interview.

"I was working there, and this is what it was. I'm not a lawyer, just a civil servant. I know what I know. I know what I was told by the hospitals and by my supervisors."

"There is no birth certificate," he said. "It's like an open secret. There isn't one. Everyone in the government there knows this."

"I had direct access to the Social Security database, the national crime computer, state driver's license information, international passport information, basically just about anything you can imagine to get someone's identity," Adams explained. "I could look up what bank your home mortgage was in. I was informed by my boss that we did not have a birth record [for Obama]."

At the time, there were conflicting reports that Obama had been born at the Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu, as well as the Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children across town. So Adams says his office checked with both facilities.

"They told us, 'We don't have a birth certificate for him,'" he said. "They told my supervisor, either by phone or by e-mail, neither one has a document that a doctor signed off on saying they were present at this man's birth."

To date, no Hawaiian hospital has provided documented confirmation Obama was born at its facility.

Adams, 45, stressed, "In my professional opinion, he definitely was not born in Hawaii. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that he was not born in Hawaii because there is no legal record of him being born there. If someone called and asked about it, I could not tell them that person was born in the state."

WND confirmed with Hawaiian officials that Adams was indeed working in their election offices during the last presidential election.

"His title was senior elections clerk in 2008," said Glen Takahashi, elections administrator for the city and county of Honolulu.

Adams oversaw a group of 50 to 60 employees and was responsible for verifying the identity of voters, especially absentee voters.

"If you're working in the civil service and you say this, you're done," Adams said. "Don't expect to have a good career, especially since the governor is on the other side. Embarassing them is not good for your career."

The Fifth witness, Michelle Obama.

Watch the video Michelle Obama Admits Kenya is Barack Hussein Obama's Home Country.
Watch the second video, Michelle Obama - Barack Is A Kenyan - Obama Birth Certificate.flv.

From Former Obama Supporters: "Michelle Obama in her own words admits that Barack’s home country is Kenya.
When you hear the MSM report that the Obama Birth Certificate issue is a non-issue and not valid to be debated,
they are telling us an outright lie.
The Constitution states plainly that a person must be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN to hold the office of POTUS.
When the MSM reports to the public that this is a non-issue or a settled issue
and the people that care about this are “Crazy Birthers” or “Flat Earthers”
they are simply trying to make a valid issue go away."

The Sixth Witness, Kenyan Ambassador Peter Ogego:

Watch Kenyan Ambassador Admits Obama Was Born In Kenya.

The Seventh Witness, James Orengo (the Kenyan Parliament Minister of Lands):

Watch Kenyan Parliament Minister Says Obama was Born in Kenya!!.

The Eighth Witness, Lucas Daniel Smith,

Watch and learn.
Barack H Obama Born in Kenya The REAL Birth Certificate AT LAST!.wmv

(Just click on them for the source information.)



And finally, an outstanding video to watch,
(Revised) Kenyan Parliament Minister Says Obama was Born in Kenya!!

Case CLOSED!!!

---

[little jeremiah]

Regarding the Kenyan Obama and Stanley Ann, there is no evidence that they were ever a “them” as in couple.

[little jeremiah]

David Reminck’s book, “The Bridge, The Life and Rise of Barack Obama”.

---

You mentioned this book before and posted a link to some pages of it. I want to know his sources. I couldn’t find them. Got any ideas? Do you have the book?

[TennesseeGirl]

Something else I wondered about. BO lived with his grandparents from 1971 until 1979(?). Did the grandparents have passports? Did they ever travel to see SA in Jakarta during all those years and visit with their grand-daughter? If so, did they have little 10, 11, 12 yr old Barack on their passports? We have been told gramps was a successful furniture salesman and grannie was a bank vice president. If money is no issue, why wouldn’t they take little Barack to visit his mom and half-sister? Where are those passports?

[TennesseeGirl]

No, I don’t have the book. Looked it up on Google books and found the pertinent parts. Sigh. Looks like I’m going to have to pick up the book at the library and actually read it. I’m curious about his sources, too. Although, in those paragraphs he alludes to Maxine Box and Neil Abercrombie. I was actually looking up something on Ruth Nidesand, but accidently typed “ann nidesand” at the time I ran across it. Did I give you the link before? If not: http://books.google.com/books?id=F6HAasv2v-4C&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=%22ann+nidesand%22&source=bl&ots=lyjZAKkxxj&sig=7eTSPU38BetHqNUm1ReYju1LjhA&hl=en&ei=7uzeTdqkDcmBgAeO7pn0Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=50&ved=0CPICEOgBMDE#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Yosemitest]

Evidence?

Where's the Birth Certificate? - (Autographed)(Hardcover)

Buy it and read it.

[Kleon]

I don't think people were concerned about Obama until he beat Hillary. Everyone thought Hillary would take him out. Why discuss him if he is (at the time) a non-issue?

Well, that's an interesting way of looking at it, but the fact remains that Hillary bowed out in early June.

Also, people don't seem to have a problem talking about the eligibility of Bobby Jindal, even though he hasn't even hinted at a run for the Presidency.

[little jeremiah]

Just a quick search told me all I need to know about this book. A few snips, and the author is an 0bama supporter. Why even read such tripe? You think an 0bama supporter is going to try to find the facts? sheesh!!! It’s like quoting from Ayers’ book Dreams for facts!

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7870975-the-bridge

This was an engaging look at Obama’s history that helped me fill in a few gaps that were unclear. In particular, the sections on Obama’s community organizing activities in Chicago, and his early family life were interesting and constructed with the deft sensibility of a journalist. Remnick certainly is an Obama supporter, but does an excellent job focusing on the symbolism of the “Yes we can” movement in relation to the ci...more

This was an excellent biography that revealed many different facets of the man who is our president. David Remnick’s research is comprehensive. He did not shy away from reporting what some of Obama’s detractors have to say, but clearly Obama has made more friends than enemies among the people he has met directly and/or befriended.

What I enjoyed most about this book was perspective. I’ve read Obama’s two books and I mostly enjoyed them.

I think if you are interested in the political process; if you long to understand our current president; if you wish to understand the Obama policies; if you want to know how it was possible to win the presidency when most people had never heard of him, then you should read David Remnick’s book about the man. David clearly lays out how Pres. Obama came to the notice of the American public: through strength of intellect, persistence, calmness under attack, determination to offer a new form of le...more

Overall superbly written, explains Obama’s intellectual development in depth, states the importance of race in his election and paradoxically the absence of race in most of his campaigning, which was mainly a decision made by his campaign managers. In a way this book fills in this gap and introduces race relations into the publics’ understanding of Obama.

http://www.amazon.com/Bridge-Life-Rise-Barack-Obama/product-reviews/1400043603/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_helpful?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Ideal for Obama fans, history buffs (especially the history of civil rights) and political junkies, The Bridge tells the story about how Barack Obama became the link from the past to the future.

David Remnick, the editor The New Yorker - HA HA HA HA!

[little jeremiah]

I think the research on FR is more complete. But thanks!

[TennesseeGirl]

Why even read such tripe?

Lol, everyone in entitled to their own methods of research. Me? I don't believe is being so myopic that you can't see the forest for the trees. In every lie that has been told about his birth and upbringing, there is a nugget of truth. When I look for a four leaf clover, I'll sit and look through ALL the clover. If one thread of blather from an Obama devotee leads to a larger truth, I'm willing to sift through the blather.

Let's suppose for a moment, the story of receiving food stamps in 1962/63 were true. There would have to be records. IF I were a journalist or a private investigator and able to research records in Hawaii or Washington, I would take the "story" of food stamps and follow that trail. We are all armchair quarterbacks on this thread. Who are you (or I) to question someone else's methods? You have your method; I have mine. Diogenes has his. Butterzillion has hers. LJ, is it really productive to have your firing squad stand in a 360 degree circle and fire? Critical thought is one thing; berating your own team is another.

[little jeremiah]

I’m questioning the author’s motive. Since he’s an obama fan, he’s not going to be looking for any truth that makes his idol look bad. So everything in there will be tainted, skewed, made up, partial, etc.

The problem is that people on FR and elsewhere have been looking for actual, real records for years and they are slim pickings indeed. They keep searching, though. The records have been locked, hidden, scrubbed, lied about etc by various gov entities so any source that is not backed up by either records or something slightly trustworthy, is IMO worthless.

You want to read it, fine, or quote from it as though it meant something, fine. I just wanted to make sure anyone reading the thread knew where the author is coming from and what kind of book it is: a puff piece by an 0bama supporter.

That’s not to say there may not be small bits of truth here and there. But when truth is mixed with and covered with deception, lies, inventions, and holes, it is very, very difficult to find the real stuff.

[butterdezillion]

What Leo is suggesting has already been done by both Dr Conspiracy and by Jeff Otherson - who have asked for the index cards showing passports issued to Stanley Ann Dunham or any of her married names. It’s been at least a year and a half; the Passport Office does not honor FOIA requests. I would think Leo, of all people, would have learned that by now.

Some of the documents that have showed up are very, very fishy. For instance, the age of Obama Sr is different on these records than on the other records we’ve seen for him. And Obama Sr does not claim BHO II as his son on these documents.

At the same time, every government agency that claims to have records on Obama has either covered up Obama’s lies or else outright forged documents for him - now including INS, which denied Pam Barnett access to Obama’s immigration file, which would not be necessary if Obama was a US citizen as claimed in this document (unless Obama relinquished US citizenship at some point in a legally-binding way). This makes clear that they know there is some screwy business and they are making sure to do CYA for Obama.

The only way we are ever going to get “closure” on the issue of Obama’s birth is by opening up the embedded transaction logs for all his alleged birth and citizenship records so we can see what genuine records, if any, actually exist for this guy, and what has been manipulated and forged, by whom, when, and why.

And the only way we’re going to get closure on the NBC issue is by a court ruling.

IOW, until we get a functioning law enforcement and judicial system, we just need to get used to being screwed, because that’s all that’s happening right now and all that ever will happen unless we rise up and INSIST LEGALLY that we the people have “standing” to hold our government accountable to the rule of law.

If America doesn’t care to rise up and do that, stick a fork in us; we’re dead.

[butterdezillion]

The GAO Report does NOT document the destruction of passport application records. Sigh. I’ve done this research; Leo apparently hasn’t. There is no record of that destruction ever happening. None of the required paperwork for such a destruction exists.

And IIRC the report itself concludes that since the Passport Office wouldn’t agree to their recommendations regarding retention periods, the best they could hope for would be for 10-year passports rather than 5-year passports, which would greatly reduce the paperwork. And THAT change actually did happen shortly thereafter.

I need to run, but there is much, much more on the passport situation posted at my blog at http://www.butterdezillion.wordpress.com . If you scroll down to the different colors of texts, there’s one section that is about “The Passport Mess”. There’s tons of information there.

Leo has been busy doing other stuff; it’s impossible to be up on everything, but this is something that I have researched extensively, and that alleged destruction of passport application records is contradicted by a multitude of legal sources - not the least of which is the fact that records which were supposedly destroyed during that time period were actually disclosed to another requester.

The Passport Office appears to have forged a “cable” and submitted it in a court of law.

And the judge in Strunk’s case ruled that it was a “reasonable search” for the Passport Office to search records from 1978 and later when looking for records for 1965 and earlier.

The Passport Office is badly, badly compromised, and I don’t appreciate Donofrio casting aspersions on the motives of people like myself who know what we’re talking about on this issue because we’ve researched it extensively and found nothing but stench, obfuscation, and contradictions.

I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it: the only way we will ever know what really happened with Obama is by looking at the embedded computer transaction logs to see what records, if any, are genuine and which have been either manipulated or outright manufactured. IIRC, some of Donofrio’s own researchers were involved in trying to figure out how we could access those embedded transaction logs. I wonder what they found out.

[David]

Now how in hell does the Fourteenth Amendment change the Vattel meaning of the "natural born Citizen" clause? If it does, the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment themselves had no clue as to what they were doing. The basic purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause was the farthest thing from changing presidential qualifications: it was to give newly freed black slaves and their descendants born in the USA unequivocal citizenship, in order to overturn the result of the asanine Dred Scott decision. * * * BTW, my guess is that same bunch of "Supreme Court lawyers" to which you refer are probably cheerleading the wacky arguments used by Big Brother to defend the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision in ObamaCare..

See this is a legal issue. I don't know whether you are a lawyer or not. I see this "Vattel" argument papered all over the Natural Born threads and I know that most of the people who are in love with it are not lawyers and have no idea how to make a judgment how it will come out and I have given up trying to explain to people how the real world decision making will work.

But my bottom line which is somewhere between 75% and 90% probability of success is that if this ever got to a decision in a courtroom, the judicial answer is almost certain to be that if he was born in the territory of the several states, he wins; if he was born outside the territory of the several states, he loses.

All this stuff about Vattel is just wonderful stuff and might go in a brief because you are correct on the legislative history of the Constitutional provision; but the Supreme Court of the United States is going to reject it as a basis for the decision.

Your side of the argument about the 14th Amendment is also very interesting. But again, the bottom line is pretty clear--people born in the US under US jurisdiction are citizens and there isn't any indication that their citizenship is restricted. The Constitution of the United States has simply been changed since it was adopted by the proper Amendment process--the rights of persons born in the US to citizenship have been modified. Nothing about any of your arguments implies that the modification would not extend to Natural Born Citizenship.

For example, do you think that the former slave, born in the US to two slave parents, non-citizens wherever they were born, which former slave got his citizenship under the 14th Amendment at the time of adoption of the amendment would not be a Natural Born Citizen? Clearly the Court would hold him eligible.

Nor, under circumstances where a person was born in the geographical territory of the several states, is there any doubt about the ability of the US to exercise jurisdiction. The arguments to the contrary are just wishful thinking.

I will admit that one reason I have been comfortable with this answer is that I was initially confident that he was in fact born outside the US. I am still fairly confident that is the case but I am less certain that can be proven as an affirmative proposition. So to prevail on that argument, you need to see the legal issue postured where Obama has the burden of proof on the question of where he was born. The state statutes that are pending, for the most part, should accomplish that.

Your emotional outburst about the Constitutional Bar is just that--and it doesn't profit you or me or any of the people here to act on a narrow legal issue based on our dislike of Obama or his policies. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal effort, maybe millions, has been wasted in legal proceedings that never had any chance of success because they were not properly prepared by lawyers who knew how to prepare them. All of that effort has had exactly the result I forecast in 2008.

As to your position on Obamacare, that is just a separate question with different considerations. You are correct, most of the establishment Constitutional bar pays lip service to the proposition that Obamacare is constitutional. But my own bet is that the Supreme Court will throw the entire bill out.

The tax bar is unanimous that the tax provision is unconstitutional because it is not a tax on income. There is no savings clause so that by itself might be enough to throw the entire bill out.

But the mandate pertains to a contract right (insurance) which cannot lawfully be sold in interstate commerce so it is very difficult to see the Interstate Commerce clause as a Constitutional source of the power to regulate.

And if both the tax provision and the mandate which are the core of the legislation are held unconstitutional, it seems likely to me that the bill will fall.

The Supreme Court politics of the issue were resolved at the State of the Union last year when he attempted to lecture the Court from the podium on the Citizen's United case. He isn't going to get a break from this Court.

[Yaelle]

I never, for one second, thought he was born in Kenya. There is no way a 17-year-old pregnant girl is going to go that far to deliver, and why would she? There is no evidence they were even still together at that time, plus he had a wife and kids in Africa, not something a teen in 1961 would want to be near.

However, since she was not seen in HI for the later part of pregnancy and since when he was newborn she appeared ONLY in Seattle, probably she went where all the Seattle knocked up high school girls went, where maybe some girls she had known went, with their “trouble,” to Canada, to one of Vancouver’s two big homes for unwed mothers. One was Catholic and the other was run by the Salvation Army, so I’d bet on the latter.

That would explain the need to fake the BCs and SSs.

[DiogenesLamp]

Regarding the Kenyan Obama and Stanley Ann, there is no evidence that they were ever a “them” as in couple.

Yes, I know. Which makes it all the less believable that she would have gone to Kenya with him. Even less so by herself.

[DiogenesLamp]

Something else I wondered about. BO lived with his grandparents from 1971 until 1979(?). Did the grandparents have passports? Did they ever travel to see SA in Jakarta during all those years and visit with their grand-daughter? If so, did they have little 10, 11, 12 yr old Barack on their passports? We have been told gramps was a successful furniture salesman and grannie was a bank vice president. If money is no issue, why wouldn’t they take little Barack to visit his mom and half-sister? Where are those passports?

I wondered about this as well. Perhaps Stanley and Madelyn's passport information could provide clues we don't already have. FOIA anyone?

[DiogenesLamp]

Also, people don't seem to have a problem talking about the eligibility of Bobby Jindal, even though he hasn't even hinted at a run for the Presidency.

That's because of Obama stirring the issue up. He might have glided through undetected otherwise.

[David]

"If the Founders’ original intent of the meaning of NBC is no longer valid because the political winds have shifted, then why be a stickler about born on the soil, either? In fact, every single jot and tittle of the Constitution is now up for grabs, by that argument. Which is exactly what leftists say. We either have a Constitution which is the foundation of the rule of law, or we don’t. If we sort of do and sort of don’t, that means It’s Over."

The legal issue is not a question of the validity of the original intent of the Founders nor is the problem that the "political winds" have shifted. The "original intent" of the founders was not and never has been controlling. What controls is the words of the document. The problem is that the Constitution has been amended. We now have different words on the issue at hand.

It did not have a provision regarding acquisition of citizenship at the time it was adopted--now it does. That provision is the 14th Amendment and there is nothing in the language of the 14th Amendment that restricts the quality of the citizenship confered on persons born in the geographical territory of the several states. Thus from a legal standpoint, the quality of the citizenship conferred is likely going to be the maximum possible. Simple as that.

Every jot and tittle of the Constitution is always up for graps in a judicial proceeding--arguments occur all the time about the meaning and application of the words.

And there is some merit to your complaint about deterioration of the foundation of the rule of law--when FDR was able to intimidate the Court into reversing the Constitutional limitation on the power of Congress at the "switch in time", we did in fact looses Constitutional protections.

Our goal should be the election of representatives to the legislative process that will return the Constitutional limitations as originalll provided for.

But to preserve the maximum amount of protection we still have, we need to be practical and make effective use of the legal process we do have. To date, that hasn't happened in the argument over Obama's eligibility to hold the office of President.

[little jeremiah]

Check this thread out if you have not.

There is actually little trustworthy evidence - none, really - that Stanley Ann is the the guy in the White House’s mother. So if a woman went to Kenya to have the son of the Kenyan Obama, it would not have been SA.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?page=448#448