What if ...? (He’s not a natural born citizen)

WND.com ^ | June 21, 2012 | Joseph Farah

[Perseverando]

Exclusive: Joseph Farah explains why he won't buckle on Obama eligibility issue

It’s clear Republicans in office and seeking office this year are not going to attack Barack Obama where he is most vulnerable – his very legitimacy to hold office under the Constitution as a “natural born citizen.”

He’s not a natural born citizen.

At least by his own admission, he was a dual citizen at birth. Of course, Obama is not known for telling the truth – or even the same lie.

Prior to presidential ambitions he apparently got in 2007, he and his literary surrogates boasted of his being “Kenyan-born.” I don’t know if that story was true or not. But it really doesn’t matter. It also doesn’t matter where he was born, but there is great suspicion and plenty of evidence to suggest he is lying with his new cover story about a Hawaiian birth.

But let’s suppose for a moment that the evidence of Obama’s ultimate election fraud becomes overwhelming after he leaves office in 2013, assuming he is defeated and has the decency to do what all past defeated presidents have done throughout American history.

What then?

What will it tell the American people about the enabling Republicans who were too afraid to challenge Obama when it really counted?

What will it mean for all of the legislation Obama signed during his four years in office?

What will it mean for the U.S. Supreme Court justices appointed for life terms by Obama?

What if the indisputable facts become widely known – or perhaps even proven in a court of law?

Will Republicans just go on with business as usual?

Will it change the course of American history?

Or will we still be in a position where we just can’t talk about matters of constitutional

[New Jersey Realist]

The courts have rejected Minor as precedent regarding this matter as has been discussed ad nauseam on many other threads here at FR. Haven’t you learned anything from Mr. Rogers? Frankly it is getting very tiresome. Many U.S. born citizens of alien parents were declared NBC in several SCOTUS rulings as well as elsewhere by notable authorities. Are they all part of the conspiracy as well? This paranoia has to stop!

[New Jersey Realist]

I hope you get better.

I would love nothing more than seeing obama tossed out in disgrace but I just can’t imagine there is not ONE behind the scenes person who would be willing to blow the whistle. That person would be a hero. Low level bureaucrats willing to lie just to keep their jobs seems far fetched. There are rewards out there and it could be done anonymously.

There cannot be THAT MANY dishonest people out there to protect this man. This includes college professors and staff at the schools obammy went to; clerks at State Department in passport records, draft registration clerks. There are SO many people that COULD reveal bammy to be a fraud but no one steps up.

[New Jersey Realist]

There is no applicable precedent in Minor.

The recent Arizona eligibility case denies your precedent wherein it states:

"Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President.

See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03(1898) (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV);

Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678,684-88 (Ind. App. 2010) (addressing the precise issue).

Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett ,88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”

Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/84531299/AZ-2012-03-07-Allen-v-Obama-C20121317-ORDER-Dismissing-Complaint

I'm no obammy fan, I absolutely detest the bastard, but with all due respect Chief, our efforts can be better spent deposing this guy while not sounding like a far right fringe lunatic.

[W. W. SMITH]

When you use printed material in a law library you will find that Minor v Happersett did establish precedent.

[New Jersey Realist]

I hardly think the judge in the Arizona case looked for precedents on the internet. Don’t all lawyers and judges have tons of books behind their desks?

[Yaelle]

I’ve come to the realization that the single greatest fear of birthers is that Obama just loses the election in 2012 because the economy is terrible.

There goes your whole hobby, nobody cares about the issue anymore, and it had nothing to do with Obama being removed from office.

---

You are being snide.

“birthers” and I am one have enough logic to see that clearly, a man with every citizenship paper problematic has citizenship issues, and as one starts researching, clearly the state of Hawaii is obfuscating, and so we want to know exactly what Obama is trying to hide, and what Hawaiian officials are trying to hide.

We don’t know what “it” s, but since it is evident there is a coverup, we want to know what is being covered.

[Yaelle]

Obama has not addressed the born-in-Kenya bio maintained by his literary agent for 16 years and the Kenya information could only have come from Obama. There’s no credible way to explain it otherwise.

---

Obama has not even ADDRESSED it!

He is acting arrogant as if CLEARLY THIS IS A TYPO AND BENEATH MY GREAT PRESIDENTIAL STATUS TO COMMENT UPON.

Um, he likes to joke about “crazy birthers” who think he was born in Kenya. Where WOULD they have ever gotten that idea, since he himself bragged about it (though I doubt it’s true) for 2 decades?

[Yaelle]

Your post is genius. Everyone read the Butter post I am responding to here.

I don’t know if Soros is our only enemy but whoever it is clearly has our President and thus country by the cojones.

I have faith in the American people. We are gullible and we still suck media breast, but one day someone will expose all this and we will be outraged and get beyond it and never trust so blindly with our politically correct rose glasses again. I only hope I live to see that day.

[Yaelle]

Your post is genius. Everyone read the Butter post I am responding to here.

I don’t know if Soros is our only enemy but whoever it is clearly has our President and thus country by the cojones.

I have faith in the American people. We are gullible and we still suck media breast, but one day someone will expose all this and we will be outraged and get beyond it and never trust so blindly with our politically correct rose glasses again. I only hope I live to see that day.

[W. W. SMITH]

That’s just it from reading their findings non of them looked it up themselves. They went with what they where given plus non of them used the facts.

[W. W. SMITH]

Go yourself to a law library. You will be suprised at what you find.

[New Jersey Realist]

Your claim that present day laws were trifled with in a vast conspiracy to protect Obama is baseless.

I just recently re-learned that the ultimate judge of any Presidential election is Congress when it assembles to count the electoral votes in January after the election. At that time constitutional qualification issues can be raised as well as election fraud, etc.

In 1916 Charles Evans Hughes, the governor of New York was the Republican candidate for President. He was born in New York, but at the time of his birth his father was a British subject, and this fact was known at the time of his candidacy. When the votes were counted no one raised his “dual citizenship” status. He did lose however to Woodrow Wilson.

In 1928 the Republican candidate for Vice-President was Senator Charles Curtis. He was born in the Kansas Territory to an American Citizen father and a non-citizen Native American Indian mother (she was a member of the Kaw tribe). This fact was well known (one of Curtis’ nicknames was “Indian Charlie”). Again, no objection was raised to his qualifications at the time the votes were counted, and he was elected Vice-President and would have become President if Herbert Hoover had died in office.

Of course, in January 2009, no objections were raised by any member of Congress to President Obama’s qualifications at the time the electoral votes were counted.

It would seem to me that if there was any merit whatsoever in any of the birther’s arguments, at least one member of Congress, in at least one of these three separate elections, would have brought up the point, don’t you think?

One final point. The following quote also came from Minor:

“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that ‘no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,’ and that Congress shall have power ‘to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.’Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”

Minor makes it very clear to anyone with a basic understanding of English that there are two classes or concepts of citizenship. 1) Citizens at birth and 2) citizens by choice. Citizens by choice cannot run for president.

[W. W. SMITH]

Minor makes it very clear to anyone with a basic understanding of English that there are two classes or concepts of citizenship. 1) Citizens at birth and 2) citizens by choice. Citizens by choice cannot run for president.

And that is why Minor sets precedent. If you are a citizen at birth then you are a natural born citizen with parents who are citizens. If one or both parents are not US citizens then you are a natural born citizen of the country of origin of your parents. If one parent is a US citizen and the other is not then there is dual citizenship of the child. All of those cases but the first is citizenship by law. Hence they are not natural born citizens.
I swore an oath, it is still operative.

[butterdezillion]

I’ve pointed out that the Hawaii people have been saying all along that Obama’s record is not legally valid. You just have to unpack what they said - and when “birthers” did so they were called crazy.

Alvin Onaka ended all the questions. It is very clear. He refused to verify as true any of the facts from Obama’s birth certificate.

Yet to this day you will find the media claiming Onaka said the exact opposite of what he said. Why is that? And why is it that nothing is oonsidered “credible” unless it’s said by people who couldn’t recognize the truth if it hit them in the head with a 2x4?

As to how many people covered for Obama - why would the passport office expose Obama when it was THEY who created a forged “cable” and presented it in court? Why would the draft registration office expose Obama when THEY forged a registration for him? Why would the HDOH expose Obama when THEY altered their 1960-64 birth index to cover for him and reassigned Virgina Sunahara’s bC# to him in order to cover for him?

These are precisely the reasons why this is not just some tee-hee side issue. We’re talking about government that is rotten to its absolute core, at the very most basic level of data entry right on up to the Chief Justice of the United States of America. I believe there’s much, much more to the story, about WHY these people covered for Obama - I believe the Soros treachery is much deeper than we may ever recover from - but the fact that it happened is beyond question.

[New Jersey Realist]

You just don't get it. Follow the small minority of kooks, that is your choice.

I cannot find ONE place ANYWHERE that says "citizen parents" are required to be NBC. Not ONE PLACE; and apparently neither can anyone else. Even Vattel said that the English have different rules when he described indegenes and that is their right. Our country is based on English law.

Madison himself said, "It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.”

Case closed as far as I am concerned. If you think you know better than Madison, then go for it Chief but that is not supporting the constitution in my opinion.

[x]

If you are a citizen at birth then you are a natural born citizen with parents who are citizens. If one or both parents are not US citizens then you are a natural born citizen of the country of origin of your parents.

Nice theory that has nothing to do with actual US laws ...

[thecodont]

If, however, Obama was born in Kenya (or rather British East Africa), and his father was, in fact, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., not as some have claimed Frank Marshall Davis, then he not only is not a natural born citizen under either standard, but unless he was secretly naturalized, he is not even a citizen of the United States, since the prevailing law at the time would not have allowed a parent under the age of 21 to transmit citizenship to a child born outside the U.S. when the other parent was a foreign national. (The specification for transmission of citizenship being the parent be resident in the U.S. for ten years, five of which were after the age of 16. Ann Dunham was 18 at the time of Obama’s birth.) Obama would be a British subject, or could have claimed Kenyan citizenship upon Kenyan independence, and/or a citizen of Indonesia based on his mother and step-father’s application on his behalf, but would not a U.S. citizen at all, were he, in fact born in British East Africa.

BO was a state representative in IL and a U.S. Senator from IL. Both offices require U.S. citizenship. How was BO able to prove eligibility for these offices (if indeed he did at all)?

Constitution of the State of Illinois: Article IV - The Legislature

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con4.htm

SECTION 2. LEGISLATIVE COMPOSITION
(a) One Senator shall be elected from each Legislative District. Immediately following each decennial redistricting, the General Assembly by law shall divide the Legislative Districts as equally as possible into three groups. Senators from one group shall be elected for terms of four years, four years and two years; Senators from the second group, for terms of four years, two years and four years; and Senators from the third group, for terms of two years, four years and four years. The Legislative Districts in each group shall be distributed substantially equally over the State.
[...]
(c) To be eligible to serve as a member of the General Assembly, a person must be a United States citizen, at least 21 years old, and for the two years preceding his election or appointment a resident of the district which he is to represent. In the general election following a redistricting, a candidate for the General Assembly may be elected from any district which contains a part of the district in which he resided at the time of the redistricting and reelected if a resident of the new district he represents for 18 months prior to reelection.

United States Constitution

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Article. I.

[…]

Section. 3.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

[…]

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.

(Emphasis added.)

[Diggity]

Rep didn’t pursue it because they didn’t want to run against Hillary and they didn’t they have two anchor babies of their own Jindal and Rubio who they want to take advantage off in the future.

[Diggity]

Rep didn’t pursue it because they didn’t want to run against Hillary and they have two anchor babies of their own in Jindal and Rubio who they want to take advantage off in the future.

Its all about power and control and the reps crave as badly as the dems.

[edge919]

You’re relying on a logical fallacy instead of actual Supreme Court precedence. A series and sum of Minor errors (pun intended) don’t make those errors correct. The Supreme Court cited Minor in Luria v. United States and NOT Wong Kim Ark as has been cited in error by Ankeny, which was then cited in error by some administrative law judges. At least 27 Supreme Court justices agreed on a definition of NBC that inherently precludes Obama from being constitutionally eligible for office. Rogers helped prove this for me, the idiot. A handful of administrative judges doesn’t outweigh that precedent. An no one said anything about a conspiracy or paranoia, so drop the strawman nonsense. For a self-declared “realist,” that is a bunch of fantasy.