Posted on 05/20/2010 11:35:49 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
On May 12, the American Patriot Foundation announced that there will be an Article 32 military hearing that may reveal whether President Barack Obama is a native-born citizen of the United States. The hearing is set for June 11, after Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin refused to deploy to Afghanistan “because the president refuses — even in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary — to prove his eligibility under the Constitution to hold office.”
The American Patriot foundation operates the Safeguard Our Constitution website, which generated a great deal of support for the movement for Obama to provide documentation proving his eligibility to serve as President. Those involved in the movement have been dubbed “birthers”, a term that has generally been met with contempt by the mainstream media and Obama supporters.
However, Lakin’s staunch insistence that Obama is responsible for proving his eligibility has gained some notoriety, even prompting CNN to provide media attention to the movement on Anderson Cooper’s program. On the show, both Lakin and his attorney, Paul Rolf Jensen, presented a series of facts to legitimatize their concerns.
The “certification of live birth” found on the Internet, which purports to prove that Obama was born in Hawaii, has been dismissed as valid proof, as it is a “short-form” document, as opposed to the “long-form” document that lists the hospital and attending physician. “Short-form” documents are easily obtainable. In addition to Obama’s missing birth certificate, other documentation that has been concealed includes kindergarten, elementary, and secondary school records; college records; Harvard Law Review articles; passport; medical records; Illinois State Bar Association records; baptism records; and adoption records.
The constitutional language in question is tricky, as it states that the president of the United States must be a “natural born citizen,” though the term has been undefined. Some argue the term means that the president must be born in the United States to two parents that were also born in the United States. If that proves to be the case, Obama would be disqualified, since he has openly admitted that his father never was a U. S. citizen. However, much of the legal challenge of Obama’s eligibility rests upon the presumption that Obama was not even born in Hawaii, as he claims.
As a result of Lakin’s oppositional failure to report to duty, charges have been filed against him. According to Safeguard Our Constitution, the charges against Lakin are serious and can result in “years of hard labor in a penitentiary,” but Lakin refuses to rescind his demands, as he asserts that serving in a military operation under an ineligible president is illegal. It is Lakin’s hope that the charges against him will lead to the discovery of information to prove or disprove Obama’s legitimacy, which is his ultimate objective.
In the past, however, this has not proven to be the case. Attorney John Hemenway was threatened with sanctions by a federal judge when he attempted to challenge Obama’s presidency. Hemenway welcomed the threat, however, as he believed it would lead to a “discovery hearing,” which would necessitate the search for documentation proving Obama’s eligibility. At that point, the court rescinded its sanction threats.
Any deployment orders filed under Obama that were met by questions of his eligibility have been rescinded. World Net Daily columnist Vox Day writes that this behavior suggests “that the Pentagon generals are not entirely confident that they can demonstrate the legitimacy of their purported commander-in-chief.”
According to World Net Daily, “Obama’s actual response to those who question his eligibility to be president under the Constitution’s requirement that the U.S. president to be a ‘natural born citizen’ has been to dispatch both private and tax-funded attorneys to prevent anyone from gaining access to his documentation.”
Lakin joins the ranks of Army doctor Capt. Connie Rhodes and Army reservist Maj. Stefan Cook, both who have also questioned Obama’s legitimacy, but Lakin remains the first-active duty officer to raise issue.
Additionally, recent ABC polls reveal that tens of millions of Americans question Obama’s eligibility, including many who are in favor of Obama.
In addition to the controversy over Obama’s birth certificate, World Net Daily’s Jerome Corsi reports that “two independent investigations by two different investigators in two different states (using two different data sources) discovered that the Social Security number used by Barack Obama mysteriously coincides with Social Security numbers verified to have been issued by the state of Connecticut between 1977 and 1979, a full two years after Obama’s first, publicly-documented record of employment at a Hawaii Baskin-Robbins back in 1975.” If this is true, not only is President Obama guilty of illegally accepting the presidency, but of identity theft as well.
Joseph Farah, founder of the World Net Daily, has launched a full-fledged campaign questioning Obama’s presidential legitimacy. A petition has been circulated, generating 500,000 signatures from those demanding proof of Obama’s eligibility, while yard signs, bumper stickers, and billboards are popping up asking “Where’s the birth certificate?”
Oh please.
Will do.
:)
The Andrade Court was articulating an equity principle regarding the fact that an AG has a conflict of interest with people that they appointed which I believe can be applied directly to the conflict of interest that Obama has with the AG and US Attorney that he appointed.
In both cases, the same principle articulated in Andrade might apply with an qualified “interested person” as plaintiff/appellant:
“The above procedure is cumbersome and could easily operate to deprive a plaintiff with an otherwise legitimate claim of the opportunity to have his case heard. For instance, the Attorney General was responsible for appointing appellees Diegelman and Lauer to their jobs. Requiring appellants to convince the Attorney General to file a quo warranto action on their behalf in this case would effectively bar their access to court.”
Regarding Obama’s eligibility, so far “requiring all appellants to convince the Attorney General (or US Attorney) to file a quo warranto action” has effectively been a bar to their access to court.
A procedurally correct quo warranto with a proper “interested person” as plaintiff has not yet been filed in the correct district court in DC, so no one knows how successful such a case might be.
I suspect that Lakin is heading in that direction and also the Chrysler dealers. Let's just see how it plays out.
A procedurally correct quo warranto with a proper “interested person” as plaintiff has not yet been filed in the correct district court in DC, so no one knows how successful such a case might be.
I suspect that Lakin is heading in that direction and also the Chrysler dealers. Let’s just see how it plays out.
It will be interesting to see if Chief Judge Lamberth’s opinion that ONLY “an elected representative of the people” can qualify as an “interested person” is upheld by higher courts.
Perhaps Lamberth who is known as a conservative judge is hinting to future plaintiffs to get an elected federal official such as a Congressperson or a Senator to file a quo warranto suit or at least to enter a suit as a co-plaintiff????
Nice try Obot.
Go back to your Obama shrine and bow some more.
Do you know what is worse than a troll on FR?
A retarded troll on FR.
Go shove your pathetic, childish projecting where the sun don’t shine, EL GORDO!
Your anti-American ramblings will come back to haunt you one day. Bet on it.
Hopefully everyone here sees who and what you are.
Post all the baloney you want. I’m done responding to the village idiot.
I think most of the posters can see through your conservative facade to your totalitarian beliefs like those of your buddy Obama.
You’re so full of lying crap that it’s impossible that you believe your own spew.
“I think most of the posters can see through” [sic] *you* like crystal clear glass.
Your desperate attempt to turn the tables on actual conservatives by accusing them of exactly what you are and what you do is feeble, lame, and utterly transparent.
Since some of your buddies are using the same talking points the last few days, it’s obvious that Axelrod, Cass Sunstein or whatever his name is, or some other bossdude or bossgal is emailing out the memo of what to say and how.
It ain’t working, you’re fooling no one except maybe yourselves; if that.
One of us up the thread called him doing freshman class psychology and/or reversal psychology...something like that. It's laughable.
Gordo is like some village idiot, simpleton, Rumplestilskin type.
I just imagine him jumping around a campfire, with a dunce cap on his head, all the while thinking he is entertaining and enlightening the townsfolk.
But in reality everyone is pointing and laughing at the ignorant imbecile.
So you got your latest talking points from the DNC, I guess.
You Obots never cease to astound me.
Precisely. I think there may have been one or two idiots who tried this line of nonsense during GWB's term (arguing that he had stolen the 200 election and therefore was not legitimately CinC). They didn't get anywhere, either.
Irrelevant. If there was any legitimate reason to believe that Barack Hussein Obama was not eligible to be elected President, it was the responsibility of the electors to vote for somebody else who was eligible, and of the Congress to refuse to certify the result if the electors failed to do so. Neither of those things happened. End of discussion, so far as the Constitutional provisions for electing the President of the United States are concerned.
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.