Replies

For the record, isn't this the case (HOLLISTER v. SOETORO) in which the lower court judge stated this eligibility issue had been "vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America's vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama's two-year-campaign for the presidency?"

Isn't this the same judge who said the plaintiff said "[it has not been proven] that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president?"
Interesting that the judge would twist "Natural Born" citizen (which is what the plaintiff states in the lawsuit) to "Native-born American citizen which is NOT the requirement"

Isn't this the same case that the judge refused to sanction Atny Hemenway under rule 11 which would have given him (Hemenway) the all elusive "standing" in the court of appeals?

Oh yeah, that lower court decision!

For the record, isn’t this the case (HOLLISTER v. SOETORO) in which the lower court judge stated this eligibility issue had been “vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency?”
Isn’t this the same judge who said the plaintiff said “[it has not been proven] that Mr. Obama is a native-born American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be president?”
Interesting that the judge would twist “Natural Born” citizen (which is what the plaintiff states in the lawsuit) to “Native-born American citizen which is NOT the requirement”

Isn’t this the same case that the judge refused to sanction Atny Hemenway under rule 11 which would have given him (Hemenway) the all elusive “standing” in the court of appeals?

Oh yeah, that lower court decision!

Yes! That’s the very same lawsuit, “Hollister v Soetoro” in which the lower court’s DISMISSAL was UPHELD by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and the SANCTIONS imposed by the court of original jurisdiction on the plaintiff’s attorney for filing a FRIVOLOUS lawsuit were also AFFIRMED by the Appeals Court.

And now you know.....................the REST of the story!

Oh, and the terms “Natural Born Citizen,” “Native Born Citizen,” and “Citizen at Birth” have been used interchangeably by the courts including the US Supreme Court going back to the 19th century.
What you call “twisted” the courts call “synonimity.”
For example in “Luria v. United States,” 231 U. S. 9 (1913)
the Supreme Court of the United States implies the equivalence of “native born” with “natural born” when it used the former as the qualification for president:
“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency.” 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; 22 U. S. 827