. . . . Check out # 147 - and # 148.
Thanks, David.
.
Posted on 01/02/2012 9:42:46 AM PST by SvenMagnussen
Las Vegas 1 January 2011 (sic). President Obama has(sic) had a dream run to the White House and hopes to remain there for another term. His chances of re election are diminished by his failure to convince Americans that he is entitled to the office he holds.
There are many Americans who are concerned that Barack Obama is not who and what he says he is. Veterans like Robert Laity are frustrated that media outlets have not pressured President Obama into releasing a real authenticated copy of his birth certificate. There appears little doubt that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii but many people believe that he is not entitled to hold his office as he is ineligible due to the status of his parents. The President's birth certificate would clear up that issue.
Robert Laity is a vocal American who is complaining to have Barack Obama charged with electoral fraud. The issue seems to be that the election authorities do not require a candidate to prove that he or she is entitled to seek an office. It is up to someone to prove that a candidate is not entitled to stand.
(Excerpt) Read more at international.to ...
.
Ping.
Check out # 80.
.
The race of the child is not shown on HI birth Certificates of that era, or now.
The race of the father and mother were shown. In the document released by the White House, his father's race is shown as "African", which is not a race. (many Arabs are africans, and they are caucasian, so are some South Africans and Rhodesians, having lived there for several generations.)
His mother's race is shown as caucasian, which is a race. Negro or negroid would have been the proper terms in 1961.
Not quite. If Romney's father was born of two US citizens, he very likely would still have been born a US citizen by statute. Perhaps a dual citizen. I don't think just being born in Mexico is enough to make one a Mexican citizen. It may not be like here. It wasn't like that here until the 14th amendment was passed.
Even though such persons born outside the US of US parent(s) are citizens by statue, they are technically naturalized at birth (because Congress was only given the power to provide for a uniform rule of naturalization) , but won't have any naturalization paperwork.. they may have other paperwork from the US embassy/consulate.
Mitt's grandfather was born in Utah, and thus was a citizen, that likely made his son, George, a US Citizen, even though born in Mexico, although one would have to check the laws in effect in 1907 when George was born.
The large "new" hospital was built after McCain was born, but that doesn't mean there wasn't some sort of medical facility. I'd be quiet suprised to find that there was not. Large ships had doctors and "sick bays" for goodness sake, so it's hard to imagine a shore station of much size not having a medical facility.
But babies need not be born in a hospital, and back before WW-II they often weren't. My mother was not and I don't think my mother-in-law was either. (Mom 1927, MiL 1929)
They can be born at home, or they can be born in the "dispensary", which was often a very small hospital. There was a doctor at the base at that time, and McCain's father was an officer, and his grandfather was an Admiral at the base. The doctor *would* have made a house call.
The large "new" hospital was built after McCain was born, but that doesn't mean there wasn't some sort of medical facility. I'd be quiet suprised to find that there was not. Large ships had doctors and "sick bays" for goodness sake, so it's hard to imagine a shore station of much size not having a medical facility.
But babies need not be born in a hospital, and back before WW-II they often weren't. My mother was not and I don't think my mother-in-law was either. (Mom 1927, MiL 1929)
They can be born at home, or they can be born in the "dispensary", which was often a very small hospital. There was a doctor at the base at that time, and McCain's father was an officer, and his grandfather was a senior officer at the base. The doctor *would* have made a house call.
Soebarkah was the name SAD Soetoro identified on her U.S. Passport renewal form after she moved to Indonesia. Barack Hussein Obama was marked through to indicate the applicant, SAD Soetoro, wanted him removed from her renewed U.S. passport.
As an Indonesian National, Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Soebarkah, was not entitled to a U.S. Passport or to be placed as a family member on a U.S. Citizen’s passport because only U.S. Citizens are entitled to a U.S. Passport.
"When was Barry living with Soebarkahs and what was his legal citizenship and custody status when he was doing so?" ---------------------------------------
You reply:
Soebarkah was the name SAD Soetoro identified on her U.S. Passport renewal form after she moved to Indonesia. Barack Hussein Obama was marked through to indicate the applicant, SAD Soetoro, wanted him removed from her renewed U.S. passport.
As an Indonesian National, Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Soebarkah, was not entitled to a U.S. Passport or to be placed as a family member on a U.S. Citizen’s passport because only U.S. Citizens are entitled to a U.S. Passport.
Not an answer. If you really had information, you would know the answer to that question. Doesn't look to me as though you do.
All this stuff you have posted about the legal effect of adoptions; citizenship revocation and annulments and the circumstances of intervention by Catholic Youth Services and the actual substance of custody is speculative at best--much of it doesn't fit with normal legal procedures of which I am aware.
Family courts exercise a lot of discretion and often fail to follow court rules so it isn't really clear what might have happened under various assumptions.
The goal in looking at this ought to be to develop a documentary legal record showing who his parents were; the date and place of his birth; and the circumstances of his citizenship status. An adoption proceeding record of the character you describe ought to do that. Disappointing if you do not have it.
In your #24 on this thread, you say: The HI DoH has several birth records for Obama on file.
1) Original Long Form BC with a “date accepted” Aug 8, 1961, sealed and archived by the Soetoro adoption
2) The Barry Soetoro COLB with a “date filed” Aug 8, 1961, sealed and archived by the annulment of the Soetoro adoption.
3) The Obama COLB with a “date filed” Aug 8, 1961 created after the Soetoro adoption was annulled and the BHO’s Sr. rights were restored as the birth father.
Obama’s ineligibility is due to the fact he used the naturalization process to restore his U.S. Citizenship after he turned 18. When his SSN was filed for it was filed by his legal guardian located in Connecticut. As a Permanent Resident Alien, Obama was entitled to obtain a SSN.
I do not know of any record that establishes your points one to three. From what I do know, I doubt that Hawaii Department of Health has any of those documents in the form described.
I also know of no record demonstrating that he used the naturalization process to get his citizenship restored rather than a nullification of a proceeding by which he would have lost citizenship if one exists.
However there is no authority supporting your legal conclusion that a naturalization proceeding under those circumstances would have the result you describe either--specifically, a person who was Natural Born in the US at birth would cease to be Natural Born because of the kind of modifications of his citizenship you describe. The Court might come down that way but in my opinion, that is not likely.
Finally, in your post this morning: Obama eligibility challenges to move forward in Georgia Wednesday, January 04, 2012 4:36:01 AM · 11 of 20 SvenMagnussen to F15Eagle, you say:
The case will be decided on the pleadings. Either a person born in the US with a foreign national parent is NBC or not. Plantiff has stipulated Obama was born in Hawaii on Aug 4, 1961.
If true, that is a really poor legal decision also. Zero was not born in Hawaii. There is a clear record that he was born in another state. There is no assurance that record is any more valid than the fraudulent record of Hawaii birth we have seen but the stipulation would avoid forcing Obama to proof on any of his record under circumstances where the overwhelming probability is that an appellate court will hold that a person born in the US is Natural Born for purposes of Article II no matter who his parents are.
“Not an answer. If you really had information, you would know the answer to that question. Doesn’t look to me as though you do.”
Unfortunately, if I post the evidence I have:
1) Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961
2) adopted by Lolo Soetoro in 1966, taken to Indonesia, issued a Certificate of Loss of Nationality by the U.S. Secretary of State
3) The Soetoro adoption was annulled in 1972 and new COLB was created by Court Order with a “date filed” Aug 8, 1961 and Barack Hussein Obama restored as the father
4) The Soetoro adoption restored BHO’s SR parental rights, but did not restore BHO’s II U.S. Citizenship.
5) Catholic Social Services had legal custody of BHO II from 1971 until he reached the age of majority.
6) BHO II traveled to Indonesia in 1981 to renew his Indonesian passport before traveling to Pakistan
7) BHO II was issued a Certificate of Naturalization in 1983
Then the Obots would have plenty of time to discredit it before the 2012 election. So, I’ll have to wait until October so it can be a surprise and I’ll be more famous than Dr. Orly Taitz. In October, start looking for me on Rush, Hannity (radio and TV), Mark Levin and CNN. Maybe ABC News? Wow!
. . . . Check out # 147 - and # 148.
Thanks, David.
.
Is that you, Editor Korir?
1. It relies on the intelligence of the US voter....DUH
2. It relies on Media that is not reliable.
3. There are legal actions in progress that your information would be valuable.
4. It's not about you and your fifteen minutes. It about saving the Constitution.
5. Having this information, it and your life may be in danger.
You leave us with a dilemma: Is the smoke we see from a smoking gun or are you just blowing it?
That a baby named BHO was born in another state in the US?
Nonsense. Here's the relevant section of the 1952 law, as published in 1952
Sec 349 ... a child may lose their US Citizenship upon application by a parent ... provided the child does not return to the U.S. and make an application to reinstate their U.S. Citizenship. In this instance, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality is signed and held in suspense until 6 months past the child’s age of majority.
The current law states a minor has until their 18th birthday to reinstate their U.S. Citizenship.
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-10428.html
Obama returned to the U.S. when he was 10 years old. The Soetoro adoption was annulled and his name was changed to Barack Hussein Obama II. Obama could have reinstated his U.S. Citizenship up to 6 months past his age of majority, but he made a choice not to do so. That is why we can never see his Occidental College transcripts. It would prove Obama was an Indonesian National past the age of 18.
Guidance that a parent cannot renounce the US citizenship of a minor is policy instituted in 2009 by the Obama Administration. It’s contrary to U.S. Law and several treaties the U.S. has with other nations.
“President Obama will have to deal with birthers”
The title is incorrect. Obama will have to deal with the constitutional requirements to qualify for the office.
Let’s see how good of a “constitutional” lawyer Oabama really is, as the obots all claimed that he was as a part-time lecturer at the Univ of Chicago and editor of the Harvard Law Review / snicker, snicker!
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-10428.html
Maybe you can show the part of your link that says what you claim it does. Try actually quoting the words instead of paraphrasing.
Only true in 1 instance from a client represented (Weldon ?) by Counsel Irion. A Plaintiff for Hatfield is after evidence (in his Opposition to Obama's MTD) that supports Obama was born in the US where he has not shown in any US court. And Taitz is also after Obama's "real" birth certificate if there is one or whatever "document" Hawaii really has on record.
It is a multifaceted argument by many plaintiffs that Obama does not meet the US Constitutional requirement to hold office.
Here are all the players and dockets listed on Judge Malihi's Denial of Motion To Dismiss from Obama:
“...What is he hiding?...”
My first thought is.....a LOT!
Only true in 1 instance from a client represented (Weldon ?) by Counsel Irion. A Plaintiff for Hatfield is after evidence (in his Opposition to Obama's MTD) that supports Obama was born in the US where he has not shown in any US court. And Taitz is also after Obama's "real" birth certificate if there is one or whatever "document" Hawaii really has on record.
It is a multifaceted argument by many plaintiffs that Obama does not meet the US Constitutional requirement to hold office.
Good work. Thank you for the copy.
It would seem wasteful to go to all the effort of getting an effective action going before a judge who is willing to look at the issue and then give away inquiry into what the true underlying facts are.
Many individuals on our side want to pursue the arguments based on parent citizenship with a quasi religious fervor--much like the Liberals were committed to the proposition that Goldwater was not eligible because Arizona had not been admitted as a state when he was born.
In our current system of Constitutional jurisprudence, those arguments are non-starters.
On the other hand I think there is a high degree of probability that it turns out that Zero was born in the United States--just not in Hawaii. The only real Hawaii birth record is the birth index. That index is irregular on its face and almost certainly has been tampered with.
Otherwise, the current governor has made a diligent inquiry for evidence of Hawaii birth without any success. Zero has produced at least three different birth documents which are fraudulent on their face.
It appears that there is a Hawaii birth file but the primary document is an irregular birth certificate/application for COLB apparently completed by Barack Obama Senior which sets forth a birth in Kenya, not Hawaii.
Likely also his father turns out to be the classic multi generational American our friends here think should be required.
If so, that and the birth in the United States dispenses with the Natural Born Argument.
The best evidence he was not born in the United States consists of a number of his own statements against interest--in direct one on one conversation; in speaking to coffee hour groups during the state legislative campaign; in other gatherings where he was heard by a number of people. He told all of them he was born in Kenya. There are a number of persuasive affidavits out there.
That evidence ought to be enough to put him to proving what his real record is.
At that point, if the record comes out as I expect, he will then be politically vulnerable to the charge that he is a complete fraud in just about every possible way which has in turn led him to policies that are contrary to our Constitutional and Free Enterprise foundation and the Judeo-Christian ethic which is the basis of our legal system.
How that ultimately plays out is uncertain however we can hope that the revulsion that results from disclosure of his true record and background will be sufficient to see him ejected from the office by the political establishment.
see 148
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.