Posted on 04/07/2013 7:40:14 AM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
That only applies if there was proof the child was born outside of the United States. The mother would have had to be 19 and Ann Dunham was four months shy of her 19th birthday. There is no age requirement for mothers giving birth within the US.
“Did she get him his own US passport? Didn’t he make a trip to Hawaii in December, 1969? Did he travel on his own?”
1. We don’t know.
2. It was in 1970 according to his narrative. His father arrives from Kenya the next month in January 1971.
3. That is what his narrative say’s.
Two pics of Barack Sr. either arriving at Hawaii airport or getting ready to leave.
http://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/barack-obama-sr-with-barack-obama-jr1.jpg
http://www.independentsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/barack-stanley.jpg
Is that when the picture of him and the other boy was taken. IIRC, that was at Christmas time and was taken in a school room (3rd grade?). Didn’t he also make trip to be interviewed by the Punahou School?
That’s naturalization...
Both pictures I posted above were at the Hawaiian Airport. You can see several airport employees in the background with white shirts on.
You ask “ Didn’t he also make trip to be interviewed by the Punahou School?”
When did this allegedly take place?
Just as a point of order I think most people take pictures at the airport when someone is leaving...
In his book on page 58, he says something about the previous summer coming to interview at Punahou. He and gramps took a tour of the campus - no mention of mom being there. Did he come to Hawaii by himself? On his own U.S. passport? The previous summer would have been 1970.
There appear to be Christmas decorations in those pics.
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
Oh, come on.
You're proposing that Barack Obama, at age 6, "convinced a US diplomatic or consular officer that he fully understood the nature and consequences of taking an oath renouncing his US citizenship" for all time?
Seriously. Whatever you're smoking, I want some.
Question I have is,
Did she use the “home birth”type b.c. to get him on her passport to begin with? Did they allow that for some period of time?
And did the rules change between then and 1968ish when she put him on the passport app then his name was lined out?
The problem with home birth is that on the verification sent to SoS Bennett, Dr. Onaka specifically verifies the hospital as Kapiolani. Regardless of what you think of the verifications, any explanation has to account for how that name got entered on the original BC on file at the DOH. How do the grandparents go in in 1961 and say are daughter just had a baby at Kapiolani? Or how does Obama go in there and say amend my BC to say I was born at Kapiolani? I don’t buy the theories that the DOH is in on it.
And we still have the question of
what was used by her to get him on her passport to begin with
and what she was trying to use later on for the renewal.
Yes it was around Dec Jan time frame. The guy at the key board next to the luggage belt behind indicates departure. If he was arriving it would be in baggage claim.
Sure! How you gonna stune someebody without a beeber?
“The problem with home birth is that on the verification sent to SoS Bennett, Dr. Onaka specifically verifies the hospital as Kapiolani. Regardless of what you think of the verifications, any explanation has to account for how that name got entered on the original BC on file at the DOH.”
Dr. Onaka has “verified” that the data in the WH pdf matches the vital records., but the WH pdf has been verified as a forgery by a forensic laboratory, according to Zullo.
HI authorities have never permitted examination of the original bound 1961 LFBCs or the original microfiche reel, but the Posse HAS forensic evidence “beyond any doubt” that the WH pdf is a forgery. So as of now it looks like probable cause for Arpaio and Zullo’s circumstantial case of a conspiracy by HI officials to aid and abet to felonious foisting of Barry’s bum BC on state and federal courts, the electors and congress.
“according to Zullo”
But we have not seen that lab reprot.
A day or so after the last press conference Zullo gave an interview to ABC15 in Phoenix.
He says that there is an article written by a guy named Bennett that was written about 10 years ago and that in the article Bennett verifies Vern Lee’s explanation of how certification numbers were put on BCs. At the 2:20 mark.
Only problem the article he is referring to was written in 1955 by Dr. Charles Bennett (he signed both Nordyke sister’s certified copies) and it does not mention how the numbers are added.
http://www.wnd.com/files/CHARLESBENNETT.pdf
Claims regarding administrative discrepancies in the pdf LFBC based on different manuals and procedures that may or may not have been used by HDOH in 1961 are in a separate category of evidence from verified proof of digital manipulation in the pdf file itself.
As Zullo points on in the interview this week, a disinformation campaign is being mounted by Obots to claim that if a few minor investigative errors can be found (such as the meaning of ‘9’ or what Bennett wrote about numbering) then the entire Posse investigation and verification of forgery can be disregarded as a “fraud.” This claim that invalidation of a nit invalidates the whole investigation is obviously false.
“He had to be 16 or older to de nationalize, and it had to be done at us consulate overseas. He was 16 in 1977, and in 1977 he was in high school in Hawaii.”
Not true. Anyone of any age can move out of the country and forfeit their U.S. Citizenship. You are referencing a formal renunciation of citizenship where the State Department dictates terms and conditions where the SoS will agree to issue a CLN. It’s policy and not law.
Obama expatriated by taking a foreign oath of allegiance to Indonesia during the naturalization process and by preponderance of the evidence establishing intent to relinquish U.S. Citizenship.
Look at his mother’s passport records. She clearly stated she planned to stay in Indonesia indefinitely. That establishes intent to forfeit U.S. Citizenship. When she amended her passport to exclude her son because he naturalized in a foreign state, that established the basis for issuing a CLN.
Again, you are citing a formal renouncement regulations. Obama renounced informally by taking an oath of foreign allegiance and stating, by application from his mother, he planned to stay in Indonesia indefinitely.
Expatriation by foreign naturaliztion
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-51349.html
In 1967, 68 the Soetoro’s only planned to return to the U.S for visits. Stanley Ann told the State Department she planned to stay in Indonesia indefinitely. She renewed her passport in Jan. 1971 and informed the State Department she was returning home (Indonesia).
Afroyim v. Rusk was decided by SCOTUS in 1967. Afroyim was refused a passport after he applied. The SCOTUS holding was that an expatriate could not be refused a passport for voting in foreign elections after a CLN had been issued. It did not say the State Department could not issue a CLN. SCOTUS did say, absent a formal renunciation by the expatriate, a expatriate could demand a passport renewal and the CLN must be withdrawn by the State Department.
Obama had the opportunity to demand his CLN be withdrawn until 6 months after his 18th birthday. He chose not to. He naturalized in 1983.
Exactly.
In fact, the one who needs it is the one seeking the office of President. If he/she cannot produce proof of being eligible to legally hold the office, Congress is instructed to name a replacement. This is in the U.S. Constitution under the Twentieth Amendment, Section Three.
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.
