Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch files for deportation of Barack Obama

Freedom Watch USA ^ | Oct 2, 2014 | Larry Klayman

[bitt]

“In sum, deportation proceedings should be immediately commenced, an investigation undertaken, a full evidentiary hearing held, and Barack Hussein Obama should be removed from the United States,” Klayman writes in his deportation petition.

The petition was sent to Thomas Homan of Enforcement Removal Operations at the Department of Homeland Security, Thomas Winkowksi of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Sarah Kendall of the Office of Fraud Detection and National Security at DHS.

Klayman explained it is based “on the grounds that he has falsified various birth and other documents with regard to obtaining a U.S. passport and other privileges as an alleged American citizen.”

“It is clear, based on a mountain of evidence as set forth in and attached to the petition, that the president and his agents have falsified documents, such as his birth certificate and Social Security number, to qualify for the privileges of American citizenship such that his citizenship, which is based on false pretenses, must be nullified,” Klayman said.

“As set forth in the petition, this includes but is not limited to the fraudulent production of a computer-generated facsimile of an official state of Hawaiian birth certificate. Even if a legitimate birth certificate exists, Obama’s repeated use of a clearly forged birth certificate is still a crime and in violation of the law,” he said...

[Major Matt Mason]

At this point, I would take my chances with Biden. Obama (and the people around him) is either incompetent or evil, and neither choice is good for this country. Obama will never be impeached, but maybe he can be forced to resign. Biden is a gaffmaster and a lefty more or less, but I don't think he hates this country like Obama does.

[LucyT]

Article, and # 60.

Thanks, Seizethecarp.

[LucianOfSamasota]

Isn’t impeachment required before a sitting President may face criminal charges?

[Publius]

Yes. It’s why the grand jury investigating Watergate related issues named Nixon as an unindicted co-conspirator instead of indicting him.

[InMemoriam]

The wild card that just hit me like a train is this:

This week, Obama threw the CIA under the bus, not the most adroit career move for a senior US politician. Hang on, kids...

[bitt]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=95-1853

I think not..

[bitt]

“and after all they did for him”.....

snort!

[TigersEye]

I recommend New Guinea. They don't have the power to
retaliate and the know how to deal with swollen heads.

[txhurl]

Me, too. You have to wonder what poison pills Jarrett and zero have planned for their arrest. Dangerous times when you even hear about US POTUS SS Detail problems and such.

[LucianOfSamasota]

But this was a civil suit, right?

The question is whether criminal charges may be pressed.

[Eagle Forgotten]

The petition is quite intense and holds a lot of information.

It also states as one of its points that Obama was NOT born in the USA.

Challenging Obama's birth isn't exactly a novel idea. Does the information in this petition include anything significant that hasn't already been brought out, to no effect?

[bitt]

oh, gotcha.

no idea.....

[353FMG]

“on the grounds that he has falsified various birth and other documents with regard to obtaining a U.S. passport and other privileges as an alleged American citizen.”

.
In that case you don’t deport him but throw his a$$ in the deepest dungeon and keep him there for the rest of his life for all the damage he has done to this country.

[matthew fuller]

I volunteer to help!

[Swordmaker]

Isn’t impeachment required before a sitting President may face criminal charges?

But can you impeach a person who holds an office fraudulently? If he was never qualified to hold the office, then he is not officially legitimately the President, having been elected under forged documents and false premises. Therefore, all appointments, all bills signed by his hand, treaties negotiated, etc., would, and should, be null and void.

[txhurl]

But can you impeach a person who holds an office fraudulently?

---

Of course, that’s why the Founders laid out how to impeach a President, regardless of how he got there.

Then you have to convince SCOTUS as to his illegitimacy to vacate every act he made as POSHITUS.

[bitt]

Article I, Section 3, paragraph 7 states,
“Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States: but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law.” (emphasis mine)

This section establishes that impeachment is the remedy to remove an individual from office only. Once the individual is removed, the individual is subject to indictment, trial and judgment under laws established for the criminal violations. So, once an official is impeached and found guilty or convicted, the official is then subject to criminal indictment. To be clear, filing suit against someone is different than criminal prosecution and different from impeachment.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/07/boehner-pushes-lawsuit-obama-law-tells-impeach/#8yap4UzpCr7fGMdg.99

[Ray76]

Eligibility is a legal requirement. Impeachment is political.

[Technical Editor]

It could be that deporting is a way of getting around either impeachment or criminal prosecution. Klayman obviously knows many things we don’t. If grounds exist for deporting someone, perhaps they are of greater importance to the people who determine who gets deported than whether the person happens to be the president.

[Swordmaker]

Actually, no, they didn't. The framers did not conceive of a usurper or an unqualified person being in the office. . . that is an act of Treason. They set out qualifications for the office. . . and assumed that no one who was not qualified would be elected. Obama is literally unconstitutionally occupying the office. He has created a Constitutional Crisis by his unqualified candidacy, running, and most certainly winning. He took the oath under false colors, using a false name, an alias.

Perhaps treason is not the right word. Perhaps espionage is the word.

Impeachment validates his "official" status in office, giving him trappings of official authority he should not have. . . and impeachment validates everything he has done while in office up until conviction of that impeachment. Only by annulling his presidency because he was NOT ever Constitutionally qualified to occupy the office for which he stood for election, can his actions be nullified. That is what legally should be done.