Posted on 02/05/2012 9:33:38 AM PST by jmaroneps37
Congress made eight different attempts to alter our U.S. Constitution concerning the Natural Born Citizenship Clause according to research by Carl Gallups proving they knew Barack Obama lacked presidential eligibility prior to the 2008 election!
If there was no problem for Obama why would these people do this? There had never been a question of Natural Born Citizenship in our lifetimes! Why fix what wasnt broken?
The youtube ..reveal a secret, closed door meeting was held with eight Supreme Court Justices just prior to the January 2009 Inauguration sent our other courts an unspoken message to dont go there. Plaintiff attorneys with cases were pending at the time were not allowed into this meeting! Only Justice Samuel Allito declined .
Gallups video, are the eight different attempts to amend our Constitution . Obamas eligibility questions: 1 On June 11, 2003: House Joint Resolution # 59, introduced by Rep. Vic Snyder (D-AR), failed to obtain a vote; it sought to allow non-natural born U.S. citizens, but who have been citizens of the U.S. for at least 35 years, to serve as President or Vice President.
8. On Feb. 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill, (D-MO) attempted to add language onto SB 2678, Children of the Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act, to again weaken the NBC clause.
Co-sponsors of the failed legislation were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama!. By the way, was not the John McCain eligibility hearing really a head fake to draw attention away from the Democrats elephant in the room?
This is (a) 100 times worse situation (than Watergate); this is a crime against the Constitution and all the people of the U.S. Obama is not who he says he is, says Charles Kerckner whose eligibility lawsuit was turned down by our Supreme Court.
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
“Congressional Legislation has frequently changed the requirements necessary, to obtain birthright citizenship.”
Correct. That’s why the following in Wong Kim Ark is FALSE.
“The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”
You, yourself, just admitted that DIFFERENT rules/laws were in force at various times.
Congress accepted the Electoral College results, based on their understanding of the law.
Is this what you think the Founders had in mind?
Where do you thin their allegiance lies....America?
Thanks for the Ping. Trying to “fix” something that wasn’t broken. . .
I received the YouTube link that's posted at the bottom of the Coach Is Right article in an email last night. After viewing it, I went to Thomas LOC to verify what they said and by golly, it was all there.
One thing that caught my eye, and ticked me off, was that DARRELL ISSA was a co-sponsor of the first attempt to make these changes (HJR59) in '03!
It ticks me off because it explains why the Fast & Furious hearings are dragging on and on. If he's covering for Obamarx, he sure doesn't want it to come out that Dear Leader is involved in F&F - maybe even ordered it to be set up.
Watching the video is something I recommend to anyone hasn't done it yet.
You have posted what you want the Constitution to mean.
You have not, in any way, posted what it does mean.
Oh goodie, another obot shows up to defend the won.
Say hi to trumandogz for me.
I’m going to light up this thread with the meaning of natural in NBC.
You think far too highly of yourself
Perhaps that is why NOBODY is following your lead?
I have already posted that the “Anchor Baby” problem can be cured by simple legislation, IMHO.
My opinion is shared, on that point, by Senator Jerry Moran.
I have already posted that the “Anchor Baby” problem can be cured by simple legislation, IMHO.
My opinion is shared, on that point, by Senator Jerry Moran.
I have already posted that the “Anchor Baby” problem can be cured by simple legislation, IMHO.
My opinion is shared, on that point, by Senator Jerry Moran.
You are in a very, very, very small minority in your views.
Yet, of course, ego prevails with some folks.
I’m not defending Obama, and I never have. If anything, I’m defending the Republicans who were wrongly accused in this thread of trying to protect Obama.
Ah, you don't realize how you just defeated your self.
Anchor baby legislation is an act of statute, Natural Born cannot be.
My opinion is shared, on that point, by Senator Jerry Moran.
Your opinion as it coincides with a Senator carries as much weight as Kennedy's car driving over a bridge with a certain secretary..
SCOTUS does NOT have sole power to interpret the Constitution.
This fact has been stated by my favored candidate, Newt Gingrich, on several occasions.
The Supreme Court gave THEMSELVES “power” they did not have the right or power to give themselves, exclusively.
I am far more of a “Constitutionalist” than you, since you seem to support Judicial Supremacy, which is a far greater threat to the Republic.
Every conservative elected official thinks your cause is hopeless and that your legal case is very weak, yet you attack ME for making this point in writing?
Get a grip and move on!
Hard to believe coming out of the revolutionary war, that the founders wanted the child of a british citizen to become president.
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.