Replies

IF ? that is true, how are they going to get around the fact the Obama SR name might be on it ? and that he daddy was not even a American citizen and was born in Kenya and was a British subject ? and if it shows another person another than Obama Sr. then they have committed fraud.

Obama wrote a book in 1995 called “Dreams From My Father” that is about his father’s birth and life in Kenya.
The way they’ll get around the Kenyan birth for Barack Obama Senior is by relying on the Indiana Court of Appeals decision in the Obama eligibility lawsuit Ankeny et. al v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels.
The court ruled that: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the boundaries of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
Since November 12, 2009 when this decision was handed down, no higher state or federal court has reversed its findings.

Obama wrote a book in 1995 called “Dreams From My Father” that is about his father’s birth and life in Kenya.

and in that book on page 26 he wrote: "I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school."

So why did he create a phony certification of birth, and spend millions to cover it up?

" Obama wrote a book in 1995 called “Dreams From My Father” that is about his father’s birth and life in Kenya. The way they’ll get around the Kenyan birth for Barack Obama Senior is by relying on the Indiana Court of Appeals decision in the Obama eligibility lawsuit Ankeny et. al v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels. The court ruled that: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the boundaries of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” Since November 12, 2009 when this decision was handed down, no higher state or federal court has reversed its findings."

Well then .. we should keep a very close eye and attention on their tricks and shenanigans.

The court ruled that: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the boundaries of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” Since November 12, 2009 when this decision was handed down, no higher state or federal court has reversed its findings.

Yup. Any other court would rule the same.