Posted on 12/31/2010 3:34:20 AM PST by RobinMasters
Video: Jeff Kuhner of the Washington Times: People around the White House and in democratic circles including senior top editors afraid to pursue Obama's Eligibility and records concealment.
Kuhner says the Media's abdicating their responsibility to pursue the truth and hold our politicians accountable. Kuhner goes on to say that All know there is something there, saying "where there's smoke, there's fire," and says the Controversy is gaining traction and momentum. This is an excellent interview with Jeff Kuhner.
Via MrTimotheus85; Steve Malzberg Interviews Jeff Kuhner - If The Truth Got Out About Obama There Would Be A Civil War.
(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...
Constitutionally (therefore legally!) there is an office of the president and a office of the vice president.
How we have morphed this into a single entity is constitutionally irrelevant. Now of you want to argue that Biden was a willing accomplice then ok, but that's a different discussion.
IMHO, the laws that have been proposed to this point would not change anything. They still leave it up to “somebody”/nobody to decide what documents are needed and what definition of “natural born citizen” to use, which defies the whole checks and balances system.
We have to have laws which say exactly what documents have to be submitted. We have to have laws which require the documents to be made public and a way for the public to contribute to the accountability so that corrupt bureaucrats CANNOT screw the American public.
Look at what happened in Hawaii. The Hawaii Elections Office, according to Brian Adams, knew all along that Hawaii has no valid birth certificate for Obama. So they knew there was a problem with his eligibility even if the most lax definition of “natural born” was used. They have no SOS so the Elections Office is the only verifying body they have. Even if the HI DOE were required to see all the documents and it could be absolutely proven that they knew Obama had no valid BC, the laws that have been proposed in other states to this point would leave the public with no way to force the DOE to keep Obama off the HI ballot.
There also would be no way to force the courts to rule on the definition of “natural born citizen” and thus no functional definition for an SOS to use even if he/she MEANT to be earnest.
I’ve posted a thread proposing a draft of a bill that could be proposed in the various states, which I believe addresses the legal snags and pitfalls that the Obama coup has revealed. I want to make a few changes, based on input I’ve received, and then I’ll repost it here.
At this point I don’t think we can count on Congress or the federal government AT ALL. But there is no way that Obama’s thugs can threaten the legislators in every state legislature without making their whole scheme of bribes and threats too well-known and greatly increasing the risk of the threatened people spilling the beans on him. If he has to threaten that many people it would be an open, all-out coup.
That’s why we need to - immediately - lean on our state legislatures to HOLD THAT LINE. We’ve made huge gains in the states, and that’s where the battle for America is going to play out.
I’m going to do some revising on what I had posted earlier and get back to you. I especially hope that those who have a different “bent” than mine on the eligibility issue look at what I’ve got and see if they think it addresses the vulnerabilities they feel most keenly right now.
Basically I want the laws that are passed to
1) require a process that eliminates from the ballot anybody whose documentation show them ineligible,
2) enable the people to hold bureaucrats LEGALLY accountable to deal honestly, and
3) to require the courts to decide eligibility issues according to the standards for evidence and law.
I’ll get back to you.
A lot of people know the truth. I’m hoping strongly that enough Rs in Congress have guts and put legal screws on the Dems, so that some Dems start squealing in fear. They won’t all want to go down with the ship. Some will want to testify in return for immunity.
We are in a heck of a fix, because no one ever dreamt we have to be taking these precautions!
Let me add one more possible scenario, even if improbable, given the people upon whom we would depend to enact it:
One or two State Governors, and Attorneys General decide to keep whatsisname off their states' ballots.
They are backed by their legislatures
This throws their decision into the courts: State Supreme court, then appeal to the SCOTUS.
No matter the decision, one side or the other would appeal.
Then, using the powers granted by the 25th Amendmendment, Congress finds him unfit, of course by then it would already be 2012. Whatsisname goes away and we have a working definition of "Natural Born citizen."
Caveat: this scenario fell into my hands when a beautiful, pink pig flew by my place and dropped it. And Happy New Year!
Mirror mirror on the wall
who's the most likely of all
To waste a vote on some Third Party,
Not me! I'm a freeper smarty
I think about it, But I don't want a shiner
delivered by a big tough guy Forty Niner!
I always back whomsoever wins the Republican Primary. Now, if you can convince Karl Rove to do it .....
I hope this formats correctly. Here’s a draft I propose for states:
Whereas the US Constitution states the requirements for Presidential eligibility and gives the federal judiciary the responsibility of interpreting and applying the Constitution but gives the individual states the responsibility of choosing Presidential electors resulting in a Constitutionally eligible President;
Whereas the only security clearance given to the Commander-in-Chief is the vote of the people, who do not individually have authority to demand documentation necessary for such a security clearance; and
Whereas the Congressional Research Service has concluded that “there is no specific federal agency or office that “vets” candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility prior to election. The mechanics of elections of federal officials within the several states are administered under state law.”
Therefore be it resolved that the name of a candidate for US President or Vice President may not be placed on a primary or general election ballot in this State unless and until the following steps have been completed and Constitutional eligibility is confirmed:
1. The prospective candidate must complete a sworn application stating their birth date, birth place, years of US residency, and the US citizenship status of each parent at the time of the prospective candidate’s birth.
2. The prospective candidate must submit evidence of the years of US residency.
3. The prospective candidate must sign a consent form for the Secretary of State to have access to ALL his/her birth documents from the Vital Records Office in his/her birth state, including any supplementary documentation and written and/or embedded transaction records for the birth record.
4. The prospective candidate must sign a consent form for the Secretary of State to have access to all citizenship records for the prospective candidate and his/her parents from the Department of State and INS.
5. The Secretary of State must procure all the records listed in 3 and 4, and directly on the application mark on a check-off list Yes or No for whether each of the following occurs:
a) An amended/altered or late birth certificate.
b) A birth certificate showing a birth date resulting in an age younger than 35 years as of the beginning of the Presidential term for which he/she desires to run.
c) A birth certificate showing a birth place outside the United States.
d) Insufficient proof of at least 14 years of US residency.
e) Citizenship records showing the candidate having citizenship in another country at any time.
f) Citizenship records showing one or more parent not having US citizenship at the time of the prospective candidate’s birth.
g) Transaction records showing amendments or filing dates that do not match what is stated on the birth certificate.
h) Checklist disputed within 30 days of public posting
6. After completing Step 5 the Secretary of State shall post on the State SOS website the application, the check-off list, and redacted copies of the documentation provided – the originals of which shall be made available for public inspection at the SOS office on request.
7. If, within 30 days of the online posting, any person files a written complaint with the Attorney General documenting reasons to dispute the veracity of the evidence presented or the way the list is checked off, the Attorney General must check Yes on item h: Check list disputed.
8. If after 30 days of the online posting every item on the check-off list is checked “No”, eligibility is confirmed and the name will be placed on the ballot if all other State ballot requirements are met.
9. If after 30 days of the online posting any item on the check-off list is checked “Yes”, then the candidate must be informed by certified mail that their name is not allowed to appear on the ballot and the State Attorney General must within 10 days file an expedited lawsuit in the State Court on behalf of the prospective candidate, with all documentation collected throughout the process submitted to the court. The public must be able to file amicus briefs either in support of or to refute the prospective candidate’s eligibility.
10. If all appeals at the State level and/or United States Supreme Court level are exhausted and the court has ruled that the person is eligible, eligibility is confirmed and the name will be placed on the ballot if all other requirements are met.
Be it further resolved that if, after Step 9, the court confirms that the prospective candidate is INELIGIBLE, the Attorney General must notify by certified mail the Chairman of each national political party. If a political party nominates the ineligible candidate anyway, the Attorney General must file contempt of court charges against the Chairman of that political party.
Happy New Year to you too, Kenny.
And with that post you summed up the scenario that my proposed eligibility bill would seek to create, to close up the problems of “standing” and the Constitution’s requirement that presidential elections be governed by the states but the Constitution be interpreted by the courts.
The scenario you mentioned seems to me, after all this time of trying to process the claims made by everybody, to be the only way the Constitutional requirements for the POTUS and VP can actually mean anything in practical terms.
Let me know what you think.
Excellent! Thank you for this draft. It seems to cover every point.
I was curious on the other thread regarding the language in the Georgia bill because I have yet to see a proposed eligibility bill which addresses this bogus issue of 2 citizen-parents required to be NBC. I know the Texas bill does not and it does not appears the Georgia bill does either. How would you propose the states address this issue? Oh, Thank you for the info and prompt reply.
That formatting is lousy. I’ve posted it (with one tweak) on my blog at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/proposed-eligibility-bill-2.pdf so people can see it with decent formatting.
I should say the SOS must be given access to CERTIFIED copies of all that stuff from the birth state’s DOH and from the State Department and INS.
The bill that I suggest we propose in our states would require the State AG to file contempt of court charges against the chairman of any political party which still nominates as their national candidate someone who has been found by the court to be ineligible.
A decently-formatted version of that proposal is at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/proposed-eligibility-bill-2.pdf Let me know any criticisms or suggestions you have, to make it the best it can possibly be.
I was just down in TX this past week to visit my in-laws. My kids felt conspicuous as Nebraskans in a state where our Huskers lost to both TU and A&M, but I tried to let them know that we are among friends when we’re in Texas, on things much more important than football.
Would there be any way for you to talk to Rep Berman and have him look at a longer proposed bill that would close a lot of loopholes that would still exist even if the shorter one he’s thinking of proposing was actually passed? The longer bill is posted at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/proposed-eligibility-bill-2.pdf .
State AG is the only level I can see actually doing something about this, but because the AG is usually an elected official this means it has to be somebody who isn’t afraid of the “name” that the press would give them after investigating Pelosi.
As long as the media can lie with impunity they will castrate almost every person who wants to get re-elected. We very seriously have to find a way to break the DC-press cabal. As long as we elect “conservatives” they go to DC and realize that if they want any political future they have to “get along with” the DC press corpse. (Yes, that spelling was deliberate) That is a cabal we have to break, just as surely as Al Capone and the mafia had to be broken by whatever means it took. Anybody we send to DC will very quickly be corrupted. Just the fumes from that place kill off any honest red blood cells a body has.
Team Obama and a couple of million dollars have completely shaped the dialogue on the question. Hawaii it is!
Let me add one more possible scenario, even if improbable, given the people upon whom we would depend to enact it:
One or two State Governors, and Attorneys General decide to keep whatsisname off their states’ ballots.
They are backed by their legislatures
This throws their decision into the courts: State Supreme court, then appeal to the SCOTUS.
No matter the decision, one side or the other would appeal.
Then, using the powers granted by the 25th Amendmendment, Congress finds him unfit, of course by then it would already be 2012. Whatsisname goes away and we have a working definition of “Natural Born citizen.”
Caveat: this scenario fell into my hands when a beautiful, pink pig flew by my place and dropped it. And Happy New Year!
Because the Federal Government has long (10 years) accepted a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth (COLB) for passport purposes, Obama can use a certified copy of his short form birth certificate to get on the ballot in every state in 2012. The short form COLB contains all the information necessary to determine eligibility to run for president except the 14 year residence in the US requirement. No birth certificate contains that last bit of required documentation.
The reason the new Democrat Governor of Hawaii is seeking to release Obama’s original long form is to have it ready for any state challenges in 2012. I predict it will be released by this coming February.
Yes, I do agree that State AG office is where the investigation should occur. The question to me is more of a financial issue. I would estimate that an investigation and prosecution of the BC issue will cost several million dollars. I know here in Texas we are facing a 20 billion dollar deficit and all departments have been ordered to cut 10% of their budget. The case will have to be brought in a state which can afford the expenditure and the AG can fade the heat from the press.
I suspect a lot of you have not read the info that was obtained through an FOIA request on Lolo.
It is quite interesting.
It appears he married Ann to stay in the country. He couldn’t remember what day he got married. Didn’t know her Dr’s name.
A Dr who had been an Assistant Chief of Staff in 1955 at a Maternity hospital wrote a letter in 1965 stating the Ann would suffer undue hardship if Lolo had to leave.
What is interesting to note, is that it appears someone pulled strings for Lolo to stay in the country and East-West was not happy about it ..neither was the Indonesian Government.
Who pulled the strings for Lolo to stay???
He had a paid off 1963 Corvair. He could have sold that to pay for her transportation to Indonesia. Supposedly an Uncle in Indonesia bought it and Lolo was paying him back. ...but through untraceable means. It was sent back by courier when people went from Hawaii to Indonesia.
I suspect a lot of you have not read the info that was obtained through an FOIA request on Lolo.
How is he relevant to Obama’s eligibility or lack thereor?
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.