Posted on 01/20/2012 10:57:39 AM PST by GregNH
Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012.
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
Yes it mentions their names but never says actually where the child was born. I still believe he was born elsewhere and the grandmother walked into a local Health Office and filled out the paperwork and that is how he was registered into the system. The physical address is meaningless.
“.who appeared on his (alleged) HI BC as a claimed father but NOT a LEGAL father...therefore NOT capable of transmitting UK dual citizenship under the BNA of 1948.”
There is one problem with that, if a name is listed on a birth certificate, that IS the father. Period. If a man books out on the woman, he will get chased down for Child support. In the cases where a man is listed who is NOT the father he will HAVE to pay child support, the state will come after him.
To get out of the legal obligation which was precipitated by having his name on the birth certificate, requires a court case and a DNA test.
Obama Sr. is on the BC, then he IS the legal father. Regardless of whether or not he is the actual biological father. That is just how it works.
Sticky, tangled web of deceit, isn't it?
Makes yer head hurt.
I’m going to re-post my previous comment since I didn’t include the additional FReepers you pinged.
I don’t subscribe to the theory that dual citizenship is the problem with Obama. The issue, as I see it, is the citizenship of Obama’s parents. He does not have two U.S. citizen parents. That’s different from Obama himself having dual citizenship.
Other countries’ citizenship laws do not negate U.S. citizenship laws. Each nation has the right to declare who are and are not its citizens.
If Germany declared my father, who was born in the U.S., a citizen because his grandfather was born in Germany and my father’s German citizenship passed to me at birth giving me dual citizenship, that wouldn’t change the fact that I was born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen parents and am a natural-born citizen.
Whether or the the BNA recognizes Obama and Dunham’s marriage is irrelevant. What matters is U.S. citizenship law, which according to Minor requires two U.S. citizen parents. Obama can be a U.S. citizen through Dunham and stateless through Senior but still not be a natural-born U.S. citizen. But I think we need a SCOTUS to verify that.
“The birth announcements stated that a child was born to Mr an Mrs Obama.”
Good point.
The bastard angle really doesn’t work. Examples:
1) My mother was a single woman who never married my father (Obama Sr.) but he is still listed on my birth certificate. He is LEGALLY my father. Therefore I am not a NBC
2) My mother was a single woman who doesn’t really know who the father was but Obama Sr. took LEGAL responsibility and is listed as my LEGAL father. I’m legally his son and therefore not a NBC.
3) My father is really an American citizen (ex. Frank Marshall Davis) so I am a NBC but my birth certificates are fakes.
I still don’t think he was even born in Hawaii.
Oh she signed the documents, that doesn’t mean she actually had it proven to her he was an NBC and qualified. She would not have wanted to do that because she knows he could not comply.
She most certainly signed the documents. She did so without KNOWING if he was eligible or not, she just did it.
Obama was born under the jurisdiction of Great Britain, not the USA. Because his father was a British transient. Obama got us citizenship because he was born here, he got British citizenship because he inherited it (has a right to it by blood) from his dad. Citizenship follows the father. Ergo, he was not born under the jurisdiction of the United States and why Obama admits the circumstances of his birth. He cannot HIDE it like Chester Arthur did!
Yeah, I understand the argument, but I disagree with it. Obama Sr. not being a U.S. citizen is what disqualifies Jr., IMO, not Obama’s British citizenship.
Obama cannot have U.S. citizenship at all if he wasn’t born under the jurisdiction of the U.S. because U.S. citizenship law has two components: blood and jurisdiction. If he was born in Hawaii as the evidence indicates, he is a U.S. citizen, just not a natural-born citizen.
Danae:”Obama Sr. is on the BC, then he IS the legal father. Regardless of whether or not he is the actual biological father. That is just how it works.”
Unless, of course, the original COLB does NOT list Obama Sr. as the father. Perhaps this is part of the charade - that Obama Sr. “adopted” Barack and hence was not his father at birth?? Maybe this is why Barack has hidden the original COLB?
Ummmmm, yeah, nobody I know is actually using the 14th amendment to explain why McCain would be a citizen while born to a parent in service to the United States. For those who follow Vattel, this fits under the natural law definition for those born in the Armies of the state. I don’t have a strong feeling about it. Otherwise, McCain is covered under statutory law, and doesn’t fit the Supreme Court definition of natural-born citizen ... except that that definition does appear to match the general Law of Nations definition.
It is my contention that the "divorce" was in fact a defacto "adoption". There are no pictures of Zero until he like 3 years old. Where ever he came from he ended up in his nannies arms at 3. They needed to get him legal custody so they fabricated a marriage to fabricate a divorce to obtain legal custody of a young boy that needed special up bringing.
The Supreme Court has never ruled on whether or not a person born abroad to two citizen parents is a natural-born citizen under the meaning of the Constitution. That’s why we need a ruling.
The documents in the link you posted aren't very compelling. There are no signatures from the parents or physician. The typefaces are all over the place. Smudges make it look like there's been some copying and pasting. Neither document appears to be original from 1936 (one is dated 1980) ... so it's not clear what the provenance is. They certainly don't outweigh McCain's mother and the newspaper listing that IS from 1936.
I believe that McCain is not an NBC. I can remember reading a very good post by someone from I believe Cornell Law and that, IIRC the title was “McCain; 4 miles and 11 months away from NBC status”, and I am paraphrasing. But the point was that he was born 4 miles from what might be considered “US territory” and 11 months from an act of congress that IIRC gave US citizenship to military parents for their children born abroad.
But even if the above is in question, the circumstances of Zero’s birth narrative do not meet any NBC definition that can be found.
We don’t need anything. McCain is not the issue.
That is just two ways to say the same thing. Because Obama Sr. was not an American, he passed his non-American citizenship to his son. So really they are two sides of the same coin. Can’t have one without the other. How goes the writing? Horrible when breaking news totally distracts ya isn’t it?? LOL
My understanding is that the bastard child of a legally single mom only has ONE legal parent and only ONE legal citizenship with no conflicting sovereignty, which was the explicit concern of John Jay expressed to George Washington.
Minor v. Happersett distinguishes NBCs from the children of foreigners and aliens, but I do not believe that this SCOTUS would consider Obama to be the ineligible, non-NBC legal child of alien foreigner BHO Sr because the marriage to SADO either didn't exist or was bigamous as supported by US government INS files.
Look at the time I'm posting this. Seems like you're way ahead of me in the "catching up" department! LOL! Thanks for the ping!
Yeah, this a put a wrench in my writing. I need to get back to it and let Leo, et al address this stuff. Smack me if I keep posting.
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.