JUDGE ORDERS OBAMA to APPEAR to Testify

Atlanta Admin Court ^ | 1/20/2012 | Judge Malihi

[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.

[PA-RIVER]

Hasn't Team Obama insinuated that it was an attempt at reconciliation?

Problem is, she was still married to Lolo. The whole story is one big stinking crock. Obams Sr. was there to assert his rights as a Kenyan citizen, and get his Kenyan boy out of Indonesia.

This is crack they don't want people to pry.

Some law office in Hawaii probably has a record of this.
Some office in Kenya may have a record of this. Rahm traveling to Kenya 2008 - 2009 was definitely a payoff.
Probably not a BC, but a court order and passport, maybe for Obama Sr. adding Jr.

Someone in Kenya is squeezing Obama. His cousin is president there. Maybe the cousin is getting a share. We send billions in foreign aid to Kenya. How much of that is cousin Odinga Whatever his name is, putting in his pocket?

[Seizethecarp]

“On the theory that I can credit BO’s supporters with more than one shared brain cell between them, perhaps I can ask whether some of them might scratch their heads over the sudden trumpeting of his illegitimacy as a campaign angle.”

Correct, but if they saw the write-up of the best selling book “The Other Barack” and saw the INS files showing that INS and Harvard conspired to expel Senior from the USA due to suspected bigamy and rampant sexual predation, this new narrative for Barry in 2012 would not be a surprise.

[aruanan]

For those that keep misquoting Minor..here it is again:

For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.

It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens"

Note the second sentence. The doubt was about whether someone who was born to aliens and foreigners within a jurisdiction was not, in fact, also an alien and foreigner, as had been taken for granted up until the point that "some authorities" had started to voice doubt.

Minor says that the court, for the purposes of the case, doesn't need to decide whether a child of a foreigner or alien born in a jurisdiction may be something other than a foreigner or alien, given that Minor was indisputably an America citizen because she was born in America to parents, both of whom were American citizens: "all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens."

[Hotlanta Mike]

The only thing that is gonna happen is there will be an excuse for the thugs to engage in looting Walmart, Sports Authority or the Apple stores.

Remember when OJ got convicted in civil court for murder after he was previously exonerated by a criminal court. Was there any rioting for the Juice? Many people are already so over Obama...good riddens.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I don’t know why you addressed that to me. I’m not a Paul fan. It doesn’t surprise me that he hasn’t addressed this. He’s a Congressman. He’s part of the system.

[DiogenesLamp]

“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.”

You and me both.

Me Three!

He got some kind of scrap of paper (Grandma submitted and Abercrombie referenced) that registered him into the system and they’ve been trying to build a birth certificate around for some time.

Exactly what I have been arguing for a long time. Does anyone remember Fuddy describing the document as "half written, half typed?"

That seems to me to be a very good description of an affidavit of "at home birth."

[Seizethecarp]

“There is a stature somewhere, I forget where at the moment, in which the government/s are permitted to assume the birth certification of the father’s name is legitimate whether or not the named birth father is false. The legal father does not need to be the biological father for the purposes of Hawaii’s birth certification and divorce proceedings. IIRC, the statutes are Hawaiian.”

Paternity for state law child support purposes (whether the father is on the BC or not) does not dictate paternity as “governed by the 1948 BNA” nor does HI paternity establish legal marriage if contradicted by the bigamy provisions of the Kenya marriage act, so HI cannot confer UK citizenship nor legal UK paternity on Barry.

That means that HI paternity law cannot make Barry a dual citizen of the US and UK. IMO that is the key constitutional issue distinguished in the Minor case, i.e NBCs vs "aliens or foreigners." A baby in US history back to the founders with only an unmarried US citizen mother has no legal father for citizenship purposes, neither US citizen father nor foreign father, IIRC. In recent years "the disabilities of bastardy" have been removed for all citizens...but SCOTUS has never ruled on how that effects NBC status in a case like Barry's.

[PA-RIVER]

Follow the money.

Where the phock is our foreign aid going to in Kenya?

Some reporter should be connecting the dots.

WE HAVE A KENYAN PRESIDENT SENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO HIS HIS KENYAN COUSIN IN KENYA. IS THIS ILLEGAL? I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY IT ISN'T.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Reginald Denny was one of the victims of those riots.

If there are riots that erupt, there will be victims. That is what is so sad. There will be people from Washington, Chicago and all over television that will be encouraging it.

Innocent Americans will be hurt because they are pawns of others.

Look how our president uses the OWS crowd. Politicians will use this to stir up strife between the people.

[DiogenesLamp]

I don’t think it’s hard to settle. Vattel is very compelling on the number of times it’s been cited for citizenship. Waite called it the “nomenclature” of which the founders were familiar. And the founders, in addition to rejecting common law, wrote a grandfather clause that bestowed honorary natural-born status on those who were NOT born in the United States but who came here to fight in the rebellion against Britain. It’s the rule that was going to make Alexander Hamilton eligible for office. They respected service to the country as the ultimate form of patriotism. Wasn’t there a French guy during the revolutionary war whose family was declared to be natural-born citizens in perpetuity (or something like that)?? As the Supreme Court said, the definiton for NBC is found OUTSIDE the Constitution, and it used the law of nations to define it. That same nomenclature would encompass McCain, IMO, but not George Romney.

Indeed there was.

And one from Virginia too, but not so generous.

[Theodore R.]

The truth will be known someday.

I don't believe the American people could accept the truth, for it would condemn themselves.

[Seizethecarp]

“If the idea of him being a bastard is to show that he has no other foreign influences, then this strategy fails immediately.”

If you look at the State Dept docs and the events at the time of WWII, dual citizens can be impressed into the military service of the other sovereign and compelled to war against the US. This is the basic concern that the founders had regarding their commander-in-chief not only that he have no personal allegiance to another sovereign but that no other sovereign have an enforceable claim in his allegiance under international law.

Yes, the founders wanted the president to have been infused with what it means to be an American from a father an residence, but today I do not think our SCOTUS would strip Barry of eligibility if he lacked a legal US citizen father but had no other legal citizenship to to being a legal bastard. In fact, I think this SCOTUS would leap at the opportunity to declare Barry to be an eligible US bastard, since they have been evading declaring him NBC for so long as an alleged dual citizen.

[Seizethecarp]

“She may have been single only as in any divorced mother is considered a single mother.”

For the NBC issue and the issue of whether he was governed by the 1948 BNA and became a UK subject at birth, it is the married status of the parents at birth, not subsequent divorce, that counts, IMO.

[Godebert]

"I don't believe the American people could accept the truth, for it would condemn themselves. "

AND every active duty member of the military serving the Usurper.

[Seizethecarp]

“The judge told him, ‘Son, you were common law married by legal definition. You lived together for five years before the common law statute was removed. BUT even if you weren’t common law married, this divorce just made you married. This divorce paper CREATED a marriage.’”

Your common law marriage was recognized under the law of a US state, so a divorce that your husband agreed to was an admission buy him that he was married.

In the case of BHO Sr. and Ann Dunham if their HI marriage was bigamous, then their “marriage” was a “nullity” (never existed) regardless of any divorce...a divorce that BHO Sr. did not contest nor reply to...so no affirmation by BHO Sr. there!

[Triple]

BS:

Why Wasn’t Ankeny v Daniels Appealed To The Supreme Court?
January 10, 2012 10:10:32 PM EST · 53 of 191
Triple to Triple
The money quote from Minor:

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their

Page 88 U. S. 168

parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens. The words “all children” are certainly as comprehensive, when used in this connection, as “all persons,” and if females are included in the last, they must be in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied. In fact, the whole argument of the plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea.
Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies

Why Wasn’t Ankeny v Daniels Appealed To The Supreme Court?
January 10, 2012 9:58:09 PM EST · 52 of 191
Triple to El Sordo

Nope, the case says that there is a class of citizen, the natural born citizen, that nobody doubts or contests their citizenship. These natural born citizens are persons born within the jurisdiction to 2 citizen parents. There are other people that have debatable or sometimes argued citizenship, but they don’t matter in minor v heppersett, because in this case the woman has NBC status.

No way around it.

You are either deliberately misleading in your analysis and reading of the case, or lacking the mental capacity to comment on it objectively.

Fogbow much?

[RummyChick]

You might want to read this...and the comments..

http://jonathanturley.org/2011/10/23/holdings-dicta-and-stare-decisis/

It’s dicta.

Clearly seen by this paragraph:

““The question is presented in this case, whether, since the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, a woman, who is a citizen of the United States and of the State of Missouri, is a voter in that State, notwithstanding the provision of the constitution and laws of the State, which confine the right of suffrage to men alone. We might, perhaps, decide the case upon other grounds, but this question is fairly made. From the opinion we find that it was the only one decided in the court below, and it is the only one which has been argued here.” Justice Waite”

[Hotlanta Mike]

Reginald Denny was one of the victims of those riots.

Those riots were after the cops, which were caught on video beating Rodney King when he was on the ground, were exonerated by a majority white jury.

I lived in SoCal at the time and those riots happened in one of the worst areas in LA (gang infested). One of my customers WEA (Warner) Manufacturing located in Commerce was less than a mile from the epicenter.

This issue will go to the Supreme Court...blacks gonna riot against the Supreme Court?

[RummyChick]

funny you should mention that case:

Court of Appeals of Indiana, Ankeny and Kruse, vs. Governor of the State of Indiana,

Thus, the Court left open the issue of whether a person who is born within the United States of alien parents is considered a natural born citizen.”
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

[DiogenesLamp]

It did not and I don’t understand why people here keep claiming it did.

I would like to point out something that edge919 put me on to the significance of.

In the Middle of a discussion on the 14th amendment, the court said:

"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens."

If you think about this, they are saying that the 14th amendment DOES NOT SAY who shall be "natural born citizens. But what DOES the 14th amendment say? It says anyone born here and subject to our jurisdiction is a "citizen."

I read this as an explicit rejection of the 14th amendment as defining the meaning of "natural born citizen." They are saying that 14th amendment citizenship is NOT THE SAME THING as "natural born citizenship."

Well, our opponents entire argument is that the 14th amendment declares anyone born here is a "natural born citizen." If the court explicitly says that it is NOT, (which I believe it does so above) then that leaves by default a requirement to prove "natural born citizen" status by a different method, of which [Jus Soli & Jus Sanguinus] is the only remaining possibility.