Replies

“You still need to prove this for us what happened in 1983 and his SS# with creditable sources!!!”

Not true !!!

Obama is using the Privacy Act to ensure credible sources never see the light of day. It is against the law to post someone’s birth certificate or Certificate of Naturalization without their permission.

Obama gave the world his permission to view and republish the COLB Hawaii created for him when he obtained a copy of it and published it on his campaign website. Before Hawaii would provide him with a copy of the COLB, he had demonstrate a right to obtain a copy. A living person has a right to obtain a copy of vital record created for them by the State in which they were born.

Likewise, Obama has the right to obtain a copy of his Certificate of Naturalization issued in 1983 from DHS. First, he must prove he has a right to obtain a copy. A living person has the right to obtain a copy of the Certificate of Naturalization issued to them.

Due to the Privacy Act, interested third parties, like me and you, cannot obtain, possess or publish a copy of Obama’s Certificate of Naturalization without his expressed written permission or a subpoena from a Court of competent jurisdiction.

Challenging Obama’s eligibility in Court is a civil matter, unless your a prosecutor. In all civil matters, Court rules dictate the allegations made in the civil complaint are true until successfully defended by the defendant(s). So, a plaintiff in a civil suit can allege Obama is ineligible to be POTUS because he naturalized as a U.S. Citizen and the Court must proceed with the assumption this statement is true.

After a complaint and summons are served on the defendant(s), the defendant(s) must answer or respond. An answer must have a denial of all allegations because any allegation not denied remains to be true and will be ruled as a fact. A response is generally a motion to dismiss. A response, generally, does not affirm or deny allegations because the defendant wants the case dismiss without an answer. If the case is dismissed, the allegations are reduced to unfounded claims.

So, there you have it. Obama, OBOTS and ConcernedFreepers demand proof be provided before anything can proceed; meanwhile, Obama uses the Privacy Act to ensure no proof of his ineligibility sees the light of day. Ironically, proof before trail is not necessary to file a civil suit. Proof is obtained in the discovery process if the case survives a responsive pleading.

With the exception of the GA Ballot Challenge, no eligibility case has made it to discovery. In the GA Ballot Challenge, Obama ignored discovery requests and the plaintiffs chose not to accept a default judgement. Without verified, certified and authenticated proof of ineligibility, the judge ruled Obama was eligible. Unfortunately, the plaintiffs did not know the allegations in the complaint would have been found to be facts if a default judgment had been issued.