Posted on 08/08/2009 9:20:49 PM PDT by MindBender26
Edited on 08/08/2009 9:33:42 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Jerone Corsi, Ph. D. is about to drop another bombshell, casting further doubt on the stories of President Obama's birth.
Dr. Corsi, whose doctorate is from Harvard, is an excellent researcher and investigative journalist. He was the driving force behind the Swift Boat veterans telling the truth about War Phony John Kerry. He is also the author of "Obamanation."
In his latest research, to be splashed on WND early next week, Dr. Corsi will reveal that he has documentary evidence that the mother of Barack Obama Jr., Ms Stanley A. Durham-Soetoro, began evening classes at the University of Washington in Seattle on August 19, 1961. This is just 15 days after she supposedly gave birth to President Obama in Hawaii.
We are expected to believe that in just15 days, she gave birth, stayed in the hospital for a few days, them packed her things and left her house in Hawaii, moved to Seattle, got established there, registered for, then began classed in Seattle, all the while caring for her newborn.
The new evidence also destroys another Obama legend-lie. According to the President’s autobiography, Obama Sr. and Durhan-Soetoro were supposedly deeply in love and made a happy home together in Hawaii, complete with their baby, until Obama Sr. had to move to Boston to attend Harvard and could not afford take Stanley and baby Barack with him.
According to Dr. Corsi’s new written evidence, Durham-Soetoro was in college classes, thousands of miles away from Hawaii and did not return to the islands until long Obama Sr. left for Harvard.
Dr. Corsi also reveals that a Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth requires no proof of any kind and could simply be issued on the sworn statement of one parent.
All of this simply adds to the fast growing uncertainty and suspicion over Obama’s supposed birth stories. Is August 4, 1961, his real birth date? Where was he really born? When he traveled to the Middle East in the 1990s, he did not have a US passport. What country issued him a passport, and why? Why won’t he release the one document that would answer all the questions?
It just gets deeper and deeper.
The State Party generally is delegated the power to pick the Electoral College members of that State.
They have a role.
That role has, true, been delegated to them by the candidates, in most cases.
Bob Dole had NO control over the Delegates that went to the San Diego Convention. True that was a Party function.
However, Dole also did NOT get to pick the Electoral College “electors” from Kansas.
(I helped do that!)
Well, maybe, but the law was differnent in 1936 than it was after 1952. Also citizenship is not enough, it must be natural born citizenship. The provisions of the law, which was passed by Congress under it's power to define a uniform rule of naturalization, can't redefine "natural born citizenship". However with both McCain's parents being citizens, and if he was, as he and his mother both claim, born on the Navy Base at Coco Solo, then that was on territory under complete US control, at the time, and thus he likely met the Natural Born citizen requirement. If however he was born in Colon Panama, then he was citizen due to the law, but perhaps not a natural born citizen.
Read your post again, Pal, you never said “get”.
Get it?
Under the 14th Amendment, as interpreted to date by courts, you were a citizen at birth.
Some argue there is a distinction between citizen at birth and natural born citizen, but such a distinction has never been recognized by US courts or administrative agencies.
I’m not saying such a distinction couldn’t exist, just that its existence has never been recognized and it seems highly unlikely to me that any court would recognize such a distinction given the literally explosive implications.
In fact, in one of the Supreme Court decisions that is relevant, one of the dissenters complained that the majority decision would mean a child of two Chinese coolies born in this country would be eligible to be president.
Since the majority overruled him, they implicitly agreed that this child of two foreign nationals (of unpopular race at the time) was indeed a natural-born citizen.
Will the US State department do?
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7 - Consular Affairs
7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a naturalborn citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
b. Section 1, Article II, of the Constitution states, in relevant part that “No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible for the Office of President;”
c. The Constitution does not define "natural born". The “Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization”, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, “...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”
d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.
Of course not, there is no such law or statute (same thing really). There cannot be, because Congress only has power over naturalization, per the US Constitution.
I had “Dual-Citizenship”, at best.
You did indeed, for the 14th amendment declares that you are citizen, having been born in the US, and were at birth. But it does not mention 'natural born'.
Did you parents eventually naturalize, not that it affects your status, become permanent resident aliens, assuming they were not at the tiem, or did they return back across the pond?
According to this website, Panama has birthright citizenship.
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/issues/birthright-citizenship/nations-observing-birthright-citizenship.html
If true, it means John McCain (born in a Panama hospital outside the Canal Zone) was born with dual US and Panamanian citizenship. Which is utterly irrelevant to his position under US law. He could be a citizen of 50 countries under their laws, and US law doesn't care. We don't recognize their citizenship rules as affecting the status of a US citizen.
You don't gain it automatically by adoption. See the link I gave above, it has a section on adoption as well, which states:
Adoption of an alien minor by an American does not confer U.S. citizenship on the child. Adoption, however, is one way in which a U.S. citizen father can legitimate his natural child born out of wedlock for purposes of transmitting citizenship
Yes, I was making a correction to my post. Sorry for not making that clear.
I said, if they were married, and you give me the rules for out of wedlock births. I looked all this stuff up nearly a year ago, and while I may have to find the citations again, I remember what I found. Not that I trust to the memory, I look it up again.
IIRC, I was responding to the assertion that if the mother is a citizen, then so is the baby, regardless of where born. That was an absolute statement, and I showed that in some casese, it's just not true. Doesn't have much to do with "natural born" however, per the State department link I provided in two posts above, plus a simple reading of the Constitution's delegation of powers to Congress.
But they can. However since they only have the power to define rules for naturalization, any methods they pass as a matter of statute law, necessarily define only naturalized citizenship. The Constitution, as made clear by the 10th amendment, declares that Congress only has those powers delegated to it, and is sometimes forbidden to exercise those powers in certain ways, such as to infringe upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But just because a power is not forbidden to Congress does not mean they have it. Even most states don't work that way anymore, although they once did.
Is that Corsi guy a 9/11 truther?
He admitted that? Doubt it.
If there is no hospital named, there should be an address or other description of where he was born. Someone has to sign as witness to the birth, in place of a doctor or midwife, someone like Grandma Toot.
If his step daddy actually adopted him in Indonesia is it’s unlikely that his his legal name in the US was ever Soetoro.
I think it’s more than likely they just put Soetoro on his school forms in the paternalistic Islamic society of Indonesia. That would technically be fraud.
Hard to know anything for sure without his records.
She got a B and three As in the four extension course she took in Autumn and Winter of 61-62 (two each quarter). (Extension as opposed to correspondence, means night and weekend classes, often taught by "adjunct" professors, or grad students).
She took "Modern Government" (the B), Anthropology, Intro to the Study of Man, Philosphy, Intro to Logic, and History, History of Africa South.
In the Spring term of '62 she took, "Chinese Civilization" and "History of Modern Philosophy". She seems to have gotten "B" in both of those, but they don't put the letter grade, rather the numerical "points", which I assume is the number of semester hours times the numerical grade, "15" in each case, which I think means a B for a 5 quarter hour course. Also in spring of '62, it looks like she signed up for English Political and Social History, but withdrew, passing)
I do not suppose that we will ever know much about him. I believe that all his records have been destroyed. (sanitized by pros)
While true, our laws do concern themselves with place of birth and citizenship of the parents, but only to the extent of US verses "other". (some slight complication for persons born in and as children of citizens of places like American Samoa. Saomans are US Nationals but not US Citizens.)
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.