Having read the memo linked, can someone explain to me how the explanation given differs from the truth? The only questionable item seems to be his refusal to show his long-form, but according the the memo, what he provided (COLB) legally suffices. Is there anything else? I’d like a better understanding if it can be summarized, thanks.
In Hawaii you cannot even secure a driver’s license with a COLB, let alone one that was photo-shoppped and put on the internet by Robert Gibbs to prove The One was born in Hawaii. Even Sun-Yat Sen, born in China, was provided a Hawaiian birth certificate.
Hussein did not provide his COLB. His flunkies photo-shoped one and posted it on the internet.
And you think, after all this controversy, all this legal expense, the fact that millions of Americans doubt that their president is a U.S. citizen, that refusing to release his long form is just an insignificant omission on Obama's part? Maybe he just forgot to do it?
The memorandum focuses on narrow legal issues in order to avoid the simple truth. If Obama was born outside the United States, he is not a U.S. citizen. His father was not American, and his 18 year old mother was one year too young to have conveyed her citizenship to her son if she gave birth outside the United States. If Obama is not a legal U.S. citizen, then he isn't a natural born citizen.
A COLB is second-rate documentation for proving Hawaiian birth. Had Obama long ago produced his long form birth certificate and any available hospital birth records, the controversy would have disappeared. He did not do it, and it is reasonable to assume that he had good reasons not to do it.
It may be true that Obama had no legal obligation to produce his long form or other records, but if so that would just show that current law is inadequate, it would not release Obama from his moral obligation to reveal the whole truth of the circumstances of his birth to the American public.
The CRS is misleading and skewed to protect Obama. And here are 3 reasons why.
The Constitution REQUIRES that a President and V. President MUST be a natural-born citizen.
Supreme Court rulings have defined natural-born citizen to be a person born of CITIZEN PARENTS.
See these rulings:
The Venus case just 30 years after the adoption of the Constitution by Justice Livingston is one. Justice Livingston
Lived DURING the Revolution, the WRITING and ADOPTION of the Constitution. He wrote the UNANIMOUS opinion
Of the Court. Also Chief Justice Marshall who fought in the Revolution, helped write and voted to adopt the Constitution was one of the Justices who agreed to this ruling.
The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 was decided in 1814 states:
The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of PARENTS who are CITIZENS.
Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 was decided in 1875
All children born in a country of PARENTS who were its CITIZENS became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. THESE WERE THE NATIVES OR NATURAL BORN CITIZENS
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 was decided in 1898
All children, born in a country of PARENTS who were its CITIZENS...THESE WERE THE NATIVES OR NATURAL BORN CITIZENS
I am not a lawyer but I can read plain English. And you can not get any clearer than that as to who natural-born citizens are. OBAMA IS INELIGIBLE and there are people in place that are aiding and abetting this fraud.