Posted on 10/20/2011 1:12:42 PM PDT by Danae
Someone was incredibly busy in June 2008 working on an illegal front invisible to the public; searching and altering Supreme Court Cases published at Justia.com which cite the only case in American history - Minor v. Happersett (1875) - to directly construe Article 2 Section 1's natural-born citizen clause in determining a citizenship issue as part of its holding and precedent. In this unanimous decision, the Supreme Court defined a "native or natural-born citizen" as a person born in the US to parents who were citizens; a definition which excludes from eligibility both Barack Obama and John McCain.
In June 2008 no one was discussing Minor v. Happersett 88 US 162 (1875) with regard to Obama. In fact, those who were discussing the then Senator’s citizenship status had focused instead on his birth in Hawaii in a attempt to prove the future president was not born in the United States despite publication of the Senator’s short form computer generated Birth Certificate. It would not be until October of 2008 that Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility would be questioned as to his status as a dual citizen at the time of his birth.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Too bad, because conservative talk radio won't touch it. They have been a firewall on this issue from the beginning. Who knows why.
:)
I will be posting any followups.
I am expecting more today. If not today, then tomorrow I would think.
Your flights of intellectual superiority are stunning.
The Senate resolved that McCain was eligible. That body would not contest a majority vote for him. If he received the majority vote, there was nothing you, nor any court, including Scotus could do to prevent a McCain Presidency. Sorry.
You could be right. Though in all honesty, they like everyone else would have searched this stuff too, and come up with nothing, thanks in part to Justia’s scrubbing.
Its sickening.
Anyway, with this information, they may indeed bring it to the top. I hope so, America CANNOT afford to ever have another unconstitutional POTUS. This one is has been horrible for America.
Discussion from July: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2742925/posts
Are you stalking me?? LOL
Thanks ElSordo! I have been working with him on this. BRILLIANT mind... absolutely brilliant.
“Because he had the same problem, at least in so far as he had to get some qualifier, he could NOT and in fact DID NOT challenge a man who was BLATANTLY not a Natural Born Citizen.”
Maybe that’s why the Powers That Be in the parties and media were so keen on him running this particular time? To assure an Obama win. If Obama’s eligibility had for some reason been brought up, the Dems could point to McCain being in the same boat, and the Republicans would have folded, because the looming chaos would have been bad for the country.
Well, it is known in press circles that the Obama campaign wanted to run against McCain more than say Romney. It would not surprise me that this had something to do with it. But I can’t say that with anything remotely close to certainty.
All I know for certain is that someone at Justia changed SCOTUS cases, and we have it documented. I know the founder is an Obama supporter. I know Justia is in Nancy Pelosi’s district... I know Nancy signed TWO certifications for Obama in Denver....
Gee, do you think Nancy knew? Umm hummm.
Great research, Danae, thanks.
No judge will remove a Presidential candidate from the ballot. Thank God.
>No. As I understand it he was born in another hospital in Panama City — not the military hospital. That was the whole problem.<
Not looking for a constitutional argument, but will state one thing. It has been pretty well established and seems rightly so that the founders would not have wanted to exclude NBC from a child who’s parents were serving the United States at the time in the form of service.
So even back in the day, should a child have been born overseas in a foreign land as long as both parents were citizens - it stands to reason that they would have brought the child up with allegiance to the USA.
that was the intent of the NBC clause. That parents have allegiance and raise the child to have the same.
If he was born in a tent in eastern mongolia - as long as the parents were both citizens and serving the USA in an official capacity, it stands to reason that the founders wouldn’t have cared.
NO, NO, NO. What is in 'doubt' is if they are CITIZENS, not natural born Citizens. The purpose of this passage is to acknowledge the issues of the infamous 14th Amendment - PERIOD.
The reason is it not necessary to solve is because Minor's citizenship was NOT based on the 14th Amendment. She was a citizen without the 14th Amendment. So the statement 'it is not necessary to solve these doubts.' means the judgment is simply not addressing the overly broad interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Why - because Minor WAS, BY DEFINITION IN THE RULING, a natural born Citizen.
What the ruling is saying is - "if you got your citizenship from the 14th Amendment you are specifically NOT a native or natural born Citizen." Native or natural born Citizen is specifically defined and specifically separated out from "anchor babies". THAT is what this passage is about. And that is why it specifically defines - legally - natural born Citizen.
Since Obama definitely belongs the class where 'there are doubts' by SCOTUS DEFINITION, he does not belong the class where there are no doubts - the class being that of native or natural born Citizen. And yes, the definition says 'parents' (PLURAL). Mommy alone does not get it done - BY SCOTUS DEFINITION.
Didn’t have any pop up on me!
You should install a pop-up blocker and ad blocker. They work wonderfully! :)
Danae,
Great article - this is huge, huge!
Well done, Danae! Excellent work!
LOL
Who said that was the job of a judge to begin with?
But you are wrong on that, Jusges HAVE removed candidates from the ballot for fraud. How is this not fraud?
http://troyrecord.com/articles/2011/10/14/news/doc4e9722f6ac593499002145.txt
Shoot, just run a quick search... http://www.bing.com/search?q=judge+removes+candidate+from+ballot&go=&qs=HS&sk=&pq=judge+re&sp=1&sc=8-8&form=QBLH
Definitely. Since she had to cover for the action - or rather inaction - of someone who definitely knew and knows.
That is Brian Schatz. Who would not sign a document attesting to Obama's eligibility - by Hawaiian law. So Nancy had to do the dirty deed. The locals would not do it. Even Abercrombie 'cant find the darn thing.'
Wouldn’t have cared and the Law are two different things.
Either the law is the law, or we have total chaos.
Absolutely correct. So few understand this very important point. When your father was aboroad in the service of the King, you were considered as born in-country. McCain was born to two American citizen parents, something Barry Soetoro cannot claim.
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.