D.C. radio talker WTNT to air 3 hour exposé on the Obama eligibility issue - TODAY (12-3pm Est)

http://www.freedom570am.com/ ^

[whatisthetruth]

Please join Phil Berg, Jeff Kuhner and others at 12pm Eastern to hear updates and events surrounding the Constitutional issues regarding Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama serving as the President of the United States.

Kuhner pre-show trailerhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7n_kSVRpBQ

[TexasVoter]

whatisthetruth wrote: So if Obama was actually born in Hawaii, would he still NOT qualify as a ‘Natural Born Citizen’? This is all so confusing.

Constitutional qualifications for US Representative, Senator, and POTUS are progressivly more restrictive, reflecting increasingly higher standards to countenance the investment of power of each of those stations.

US Rep. Qualifications are at Art. I, Sec. 2, para. 2:
"No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

US Senator qualifications are at Art. I, Sec. 3, para. 3:
"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."

POTUS qualifications appear at Art. II, Sec. 1, para. 5:
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Note that Senators' qualifications are more strict than those for Rep., and that POTUS qualifications are, appropriately, the strictest of all, requiring not just citizenship, but being a natural born citizen.

A natural born citizen is a citizen as conferred by natural law, by both blood and soil; born on US soil of parents both of whom are citizens. Any diminishment of those standards of natural law through any manmade law (e.g., equivocations about various circumstances, such as only one US citizern parent is permissiable as long as the child is born on US soil) is a violation of the Framers' intentions and a diminishment of the national security device purposefully included in the phrase, "natural born Citizen," which secures the greatest possible protections for the undivided loyalty of our singular Commander-in-Chief.

Proper Tea Party Attire:

[RaceBannon]

AUDIO OF SHOW

http://media.podcastingmanager.com/0/8/8/4/7/185470-174880/Media/kuhn%20ob%202_01_c.mp3

[EDINVA]

I believe in Elg the court held that Miss Elg was a citizen at birth, NOT a ‘natural born citizen.’

[EDINVA]

thanks, May31st.

American Dream, May31st has put up the link to the show podcast at post #268.

[Seizethecarp]

"I find it puzzling why any documentation posted on the web is summarily dismissed simply because it is on the internet especially in this case, when the BC is supported by an affidavit submitted to a Federal court! I fail to understand how posting documents on the internet automatically invalidates them. Would you consider the same documentation any more valid if it was presented in any other manner?"

Under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), to be admissible as evidence, a foreign BC must be authenticated by the foreign authorities of the country of origin, which is not yet the case with Lucas Smith's CPGH BC. So even though Smith's affidavit is in the court record, Judge Carter could not have considered it to be evidence.

In contrast, a short-form COLB from HI with seal and signature would be "self-authenticating" under the FRE under a hearsay exception, if it is not successfully contested, even though it is only a summary of an underlying document. No Obama HI COLB has ever been entered into evidence, to my knowledge.

[Seizethecarp]

"I do wonder what the “Communications Czar” has been up to though. My computer freezes up a lot - but only when I visit eligibility sites. I can’t tell you how many times my husband has had to wipe my hard drive and start over."

This has been happening to me, too, although not since I dumped McAfee (supposedly Obama supporting) and installed Microsoft Security Essentials (free).

I suspect that a trojan has been developed that "spanks" specifically targeted eligibility investigators by crashing their systems if they are getting too close to sensitive theories regarding BHO. But this punishment is used very sparingly to avoid widespread awareness on the web.

My hypothetical trojan would attack after I opened Donofrio's, Phil's or Taitz's blogs and seemed to be able to penetrate McAfee and my router firewall to corrupt my start-up files.

At the moment my only eligibility website related problem is that Phil's blog repeatedly closes on me after about a minute. I can't keep The Right Side of Life open.

[MrRobertPlant2009]

If he was born here, he is eligible.

Why are people telling their children this BS?

Sorry...son...you can be anything you want. Except President. Because daddy is trying to prove a point.

[Seizethecarp]

"I believe in Elg the court held that Miss Elg was a citizen at birth, NOT a ‘natural born citizen.’"

The Perkins v Elg Court affirmed the lower court declaration that Elg was NBC:

http://supreme.justia.com/us/307/325/case.html

"The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227, 57 S.Ct. 461, 81 L.Ed. 617, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States' (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants."

[EDINVA]

“If he was born here, he is eligible.”

Do you want to cite a SCOTUS decision that confirms your assertion? So far as I am aware, there has been no decision that says that being born in the US confers ‘natural born’ status on a child absent his parents’ US citizenship.

[whatisthetruth]

Wow, thanks for all the info and links, will be checking it out in depth, seems there's just so much confusion out there on this matter, all which benefits the Usurper-in-Chief, with a lot of varying opinion, naturalized vs. native born vs. natural born citizen vs. citizen and I doubt a large percentage of the voting public even knows what those terms mean.

So if one says a US citizen is not eligible to be Potus, well that sounds absurd, but if the requirement is only a natural born citizen is eligible, then you have to find out what's the difference.

The confusion is some sources are saying just to be born in the US automatically makes one a natural born citizen thus the term naturally born here. Then if you get past that argument, some sources say that it only takes one that's born in the US with at least one citizen parent to be natural born. So apparently that's not even the case. And then you got people saying it's much ado about nothing, he was born here so end of story. But even that's not the end of story because there's no proof of that.

Knowledge is power, but these days when there's such an orchestrated campaign to hide the truth about these things from the schools, the media, the legislatures, the Courts, it becomes ever more incumbent upon the individual citizen to take the time and effort to find out the truth on their own and then proceed from there. The more I learn the more mind-boggling it becomes realizing the magnitude of all the lies and deceit that abounds in our country and all the people who for whatever reason are fostering it and all the people who are susceptible to it.

[justiceseeker93]

Yes, RaceBannon, thanks for the courage to reveal that important story over the air waves.

[MrRobertPlant2009]

If you cite the decision that says otherwise.

[EDINVA]

You come to this site 2 weeks ago, post an unsubstantiated claim, and expect ME to educate you? I don’t think so.

[El Gato]

I believe in Elg the court held that Miss Elg was a citizen at birth, NOT a ‘natural born citizen.’

No, from the Supreme Court decision in PERKINS V. ELG, 307 U. S. 325 (1939):

Fifth. The cross-petition of Miss Elg, upon which certiorari was granted in No. 455, is addressed to the part of the decree below which dismissed the bill of complaint as against the Secretary of State. The dismissal was upon the ground that the court would not undertake by mandamus to compel the issuance of a passport or control by means of a declaratory judgment the discretion of the Secretary of State. But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg "solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship." The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U. S. 227), declared Miss Elg "to be a natural born citizen of the United States," and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport, but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship.

[BIOCHEMKY]

The Obama Timeline: 1961-2009

A downloadable free copy is available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/21026035/The-Obama-Timeline-1961-2009-the-Following-Timeline-Presents-the-Important

A bound paperback book form is available for purchase at
http://www.amazon.com/Obama-Timeline-Birth-Through-Office/dp/1440150737/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1265628768&sr=1-1

References
http://www.colony14.net/id136.html

[Kenny Bunk]

It's only indirectly important. The fact that Great Britain might, or might not, have considered junior to be a subject of the queen, doesn't matter, but the fact that BHO Senior was a British Subject and *not* a US Citizen, is absolutely the heart of the matter of Natural Born Citizen.

Bingo!

"Obama is president until he is impeached"
So your position is that someone not eligible to be President can *be* President?
Now that is an interesting position. Illogical, but interesting.

It is exactly that illogicality that is driving the intelligent half of the voters nuts. Unfortunately, history is rife with ineligible kings, cardinals, popes, etc. For purposes of institutional continuity, they are written off as "de facto," rather than "de jure," in the roles they scammed, or fought themselves into.

After they leave the post, or the planet, or are deposed, there is much scrambling to undo what they may have attempted ... what the impostors leave behind is turmoil and doubt.

Speaking of illogicality; the only way BHO, Jr. can now claim "Natural Born Citizen" status, is that if he tells us he lied about who is father was.

[Kenny Bunk]

In re: “If he was born here, he is eligible.”

This is exactly the scam BHO, Jr. is trying to pull.

I.E. "Native" = "Natural." He has spent millions to establish the theory, so it's no surprise that many accept it. Nowhere does Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. claim other than "Native Born Citizen" status.

On this very hallowed site, more than one freeper (of dubious provenance) has stated unequivocally, that the child of two illegal aliens is a "Natural Born Citizen."

[Dajjal]

Thanks for the audio link to Philip Berg on Roth’s show!

[whatisthetruth]

Thanks for the thanks, lol! It reminds me to tune in tonight, he should be back on again.

[rxsid]

"Minor v. Happersett - yes, it’s been mentioned on FR but not fully hashed out. I don’t see how, if this was decided by the SCOTUS then they did indeed give a definition of the term NBC.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/88/162/case.html"

Not only has it been discussed, but so too have other SCOTUS cases that have that exact definition that the framers (no doubt) used when they entered the NBC requirement without debate.

Attorney Apuzzo mentions these cases in the "Kerchner v Obama" & Congress case:

"THE VENUS, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J. concurring) (cites Vattel’s definition of Natural Born Citizen)
SHANKS V. DUPONT, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel)
MINOR V. HAPPERSETT, 88 U.S.162,167-168 ( 1875) (same definition without citing Vattel)
EX PARTE REYNOLDS, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel)
UNITED STATES V WARD, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D. Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel.)"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17519578/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-DOC-34-Plaintiffs-Brief-Opposing-Defendants-Motion-to-Dismiss

NBC in the Constitutional drafts:

June 18th, 1787 - Alexander Hamilton suggests that the requirement be added, as: "No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen_of_the_United_States

July 25, 1787 (~5 weeks later) - John Jay writes a letter to General Washington (president of the Constitutional Convention): "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." [the word born is underlined in Jay's letter.] http://rs6.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/hlaw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28fr00379%29%29:

September 2nd, 1787 George Washington pens a letter to John Jay. The last line reads: "I thank you for the hints contained in your letter"
http://www.consource.org/index.asp?bid=582&fid=600&documentid=71483

September 4th, 1787 (~6 weeks after Jay's letter and just 2 days after Washington wrote back to Jay) - The "Natural Born Citizen" requirement is now found in their drafts. Madison's notes of the Convention The proposal passed unanimously without debate.