Posted on 02/03/2009 1:14:11 AM PST by rxsid
Hit the link at post 8. It explains it all.
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
Top Ten Things That You Should Know About Barack H. Obama’s, (a/k/a Barry Soetoro) US Citizenship
Download Flysheet
For more data, see our downloads page.
Issue Reference
Issue
1. He may not be a Natural born citizen qualified to serve as President under Article II of the Constitution
He admits he was born to an American mother and a British subject, suggesting dual citizenship at best-1. If he was not born on U.S. soil, and his mother was a minor, she was ineligible to convey US citizenship-2. Under the British Nationality Act of 1948, he was born a British Citizen-3. His paternal grandmother claims to have attended his birth in Kenya-4. Kenya memorializes his place of birth-5.
Issue
2. He is a suspected illegal alien for two possible reasons
At age 3, his mother and father divorced. His mother remarried and his step-father enrolled him in school in Indonesia as “Barry Soetoro” -6.
Issue
2. He is a suspected illegal alien for two possible reasons
At age 10, after his mother’s second divorce-7, he reentered the US by casually and illegally assuming his birth name. Later still, he ran for and won elected office under his birth name without disclosing his legal name or his prior use of alternative names-8.
Issue
3. He took elected office and was admitted to the Illinois Bar under an alias
No record of any legal name change from ‘Barry Soetoro’ to ‘Barack Obama’ has ever been found.
Issue
4. He probably lost his citizenship.
An Indonesian citizen at age 6 -9, having been adopted by a national, he may be in the US illegally-10. USC §1481(a)(2) provides loss of nationality by Natural born citizens upon “taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state ... after having attained the age of eighteen years,” in violation of 8 U.S.C. §1401(a)(1). Indonesia did not allow for dual citizenship. If Obama got an Indonesian passport in 1981, when he was 20 years old, he effectively renounced any U.S. citizenship he may have had.
Issue
5. He is suspected of secretly holding a foreign passport.
When he traveled to Pakistan ‘in college’-11, Americans were not allowed into that country-12. If he traveled on an Indonesian passport in 1981 at age 20, he was and remains an Indonesian citizen.
Issue
6. He posted an illegitimate birth record to deflect questions and allegations.
The “Certification of Live Birth” shown on FightTheSmears.com is not a birth certificate, but an image of an abstract that was invalidated by alteration. As indicated on that same image, the blacked out certification number invalidates the document. Document analysis shows it to be a suspected forgery.
Issue
7. The Certification of Live Birth is a suspected forgery.
The border is one that is used in 2007 COLBs. As a security measure, Hawaii changes their borders every year. This is when the Obama campaign claims the certificate was obtained. However, the seal and signature stamp are from a 2008 COLB. As revealed by a process called edging, the Hawaiian seal and signature stamp on the back of the document are revealed to be from the wrong year. Document experts have analyzed other aspects and find forgery.
Issue
8. He refuses to release relevant records.
Since matters available in the public domain raise these issues, the burden rests on Obama/Soetoro to explain. He declines to release college applications, transcripts, his birth record, or addresses of where he has lived.
Issue
9. His selective service registration may be falsified.
A FOIA document shows a 2008 sequence number for a supposed 1980 registration, an incorrect date of signature, an obsolete postal stamp and other discrepancies. Did he register at age 18 like everyone else?-13
Issue
10. Not a single cause of action has been won by Obama on the merits.
All pending suits attempting to get Obama/Soetoro to produce simple documents have been dismissed on technical grounds such as the standing of the plaintiff. Therefore, the courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States have never ruled on the merits of his citizenship
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
The Circuit Courts of Appeals sit in (randomly-selected) panels of 3 judges. If a procedural motion is made (for example, someone wants more time to file their brief), one judge will rule on that motion, who will not necessarily be one of the 3 judges who will decide the case. If a motion relating to the "merits" of the case is made-- as, for example, here, where the FEC asked that Berg's appeal be thrown out-- the motion is decided by the same 3-judge panel that has been assigned to hear and decide the case.
Additionally, I note that there is nothing in the docket listed about any appearance for Appellee Obama? What is the significance of that in this case?
The FEC (Obama's co-defendant) has aked that the appeal be thrown out. If that motion is granted, Obama doesn't have to do anything. So he is waiting to see if he will need to file anything.
So quit knocking him already.
The smart money is on Berg, and for good reasons (which I cannot divulge at the moment). When all is said and done, his case will be the one that brings the House down.
And remember, you heard it here first.
Respectfully disagree. I haven’t said a thing to “knock Berg” just stated the facts. If he gets a case to SCOTUS 1st on the merits, bully 4 him! But the fact is Mr. Berg has been repeatedly bounced by SCOTUS and he can’t keep his website up.
FYI, Berg’s website has been down for weeks. Not a good omen 4 Mr. Berg.
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
Much thanks for the info. You cleared it up for me.
He shall henceforth and forevermore be known as Tom "Onan" Daschle.
My guess is a lower Federal court (Article III court)will rule somewhere that Barry needs to produce proof that he is eligible to serve as POTUS for some reason or another and the SCOTUS will just let the lower court ruling stand to protect its independence and the independence of the Presidency. Maybe it will be the Third Circuit challenge. maybe some other Federal court.
Oklahoma is looking better by the day!
bookmark
U R Wrong! As Justice Scalia said, “Gore v Bush” wasn’t even close.”
There is no comparison between We the People v Obama and Gore v Bush.
If as Justice Scalia is correct (and I certainly will not argue with a lawyer as smart as Scalia) and Gore v Bush “wasn’t even close,” then We the People v Obama is a nWe the People v Obama no brainer and BO loses BIG TIME before SCOTUS!
Thanks for the ping, Lucy.
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
While I am sure Orly would be somewhat flattered by a draft for her as Governor of California, I know she would just laugh as she frequently does in our conversations. She might not turn down a position of US Attorney in some administration other than bo’s.
What Orly really needs right now is the assistance of one paralegal who is accustomed to drafting ordinary discovery requests to SCOTUS in a case of original jurisdiction.
BillyBob et al know any paralegals like that?
http://defendourfreedoms.org/flysheet.html
U R Wrong! As Justice Scalia said, “Gore v Bush” wasn’t even close.”
There is no comparison between: We the People v Obama and Gore v Bush.
If as Justice Scalia is correct (and I certainly will not argue with a lawyer as smart as Scalia) and Gore v Bush “wasn’t even close,” then We the People v Obama is a no brainer and BO loses BIG TIME before SCOTUS!
Furthermore, We the People v Obama involves simple discovery, SCOTUS will have no problem ruling against Obama.
April,
SCOTUS has to take the case because constitutionally no other Court has jurisdiction over the soon to be filed case.
I agree it is a shamethat none of these cases has been decided on the merits. I think it will take just one.
With all the cases in the courts, do you think Obama can pitch a shutout, having none of the cases decided on the merits?
Why do you think he doesn’t just produce the vault copy bc and get this to end?
You try present a cheeky but logical persona, do you have logical answers to the above?
The public seems to think the SCOTUS has original jurisdiction here. It doesn't. It takes appeals from Article III courts.
If you could direct me to that part of Federal Civil Procedure that grants SCOTUS original jurisdiction in this matter you would be greatly helping the cause.
Thanks
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.