Posted on 09/22/2016 2:33:28 PM PDT by DOC44
Interesting. FOUR Simple questions from an attorney Here are 4 Simple questions from an attorney..... are there ANY logical answers? You be the judge...... Here's what I would like to know. If the TRUTH ever comes out and it is decided that Obama was never eligible to be president, what happens to all the laws he signed into being and all the executive orders? Should they all be null and void? Here are 4 Simple questions from a reputable attorney .... this should really get your "gray matter" to churning, even if you are an Obama fan. For all you "anti-Fox News" folks, none of this information came from Fox. All of it can be verified from legitimate sources (Wikipedia, the Kapiolani hospital website itself, and a good history book, as noted herein). It is very easy for someone to check out. 4 Simple Questions .... 1. Back in 1961 people of color were called 'Negroes.' So how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time ? 2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 and lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, right? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in "Kenya, East Africa." This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate" (check it below) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_%28http:/en.wikipedia..org/wiki/Kenya%29 3. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital". This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called "KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home," respectively. The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978? (CHECK IT BELOW) http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-children/about-us/default.aspx Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media? 4. Perhaps a clue comes from Obama's book on his father. He states how proud he is of his father fighting in WW II. I'm not a math genius, so I may need some help from you. Barack Obama's "birth certificate" says his father was 25 years old in 1961 when Obama was born. That should have put his father's date of birth approximately 1936 - if my math holds (Honest! I did that without a calculator!). Now we need a non-revised history book - one that hasn't been altered to satisfy the author's goals - to verify that WW II was basically between 1939 and 1945. Just how many 3 year olds fight in Wars? Even in the latest stages of WW II his father wouldn't have been more than 9 years old. Does that mean that Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes ? Very truly yours, RICHARD R. SILVERLIEB Attorney at Law 354 Eisenhower Parkway Livingston, NJ 07039 (https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-silverlieb-3145502a)
"A pen in the hand of this president is far more dangerous than a gun in the hands of 200 million law-abiding citizens. Send this to as many Patriots as you can! Ask your Republican friends in Washington D.C. If they have a backbone ... why in the hell can't they use it and get media coverage to explode this across our country? Impeachment in itself is not justice! We are talking orange jumpsuit & long prison sentences.
The Kenyanesian Usurpation was brought to you by BOTH parties.
The Constitution says natural born citizen.
That means one who is naturally an American because they couldn’t be anything else, born here of citizen parents.
Everyone in DC wanted that changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
The Senate passed a resolution declaring McCain a natural born citizen because he had TWO citizen parents, even though he was born in Panama.
Then Obama runs and wins based on just being born here, even though he told us on his website he was born a British subject.
So the standard went from born here of citizen parents to just TWO citizen parents to just being born here in one election cycle without amending the Constitution.
This was done intentionally because Rubio (no citizen parents), Cruz (foreign birth, one citizen parent), Jindal (no citizen parents), and Haley (no citizen parents) were all ineligible and the future of the GOP.
The truth of the Kenyanesian Usurpation will never see the light of day because they all cooperated in the violation of the Constitution.
(1) Has any mainstream media outlet or individual ever examined that "birth certificate" for its validity, that is, no evidence of forgery?
(2) If not, why not?
“Birtherism” is the greatest Alinsky ever perpetrated.
They have gotten the American people to reject one of the most valuable safeguards bequeathed to us by the founders.
The natural born citizen clause served us well until we ignored it.
Barry Soetoro/Barack Hussein Obama should be proof enough of the wisdom of the founders when they tried to prevent him from being President by requiring someone who could only be a US citizen and nothing else.
Born here of citizen parents.
Naturally a US citizen because there is no other possibility.
One cannot be anything else and also be a natural born citizen.
It does not matter if he was born in Hawaii if his father was a foreign national.
Children of foreign nationals inherit the nationality of their foreign national parent(s).
Natural born citizen means born here of citizen parents.
No other possible citizenship(s).
Only when one cannot be anything else can one be a natural born citizen.
No foreign birth.
No foreign parent(s)
No foreign citizenship(s)
No foreign influence on the Presidency is what John Jay stated in a letter to George Washington as the reason for insisting on a natural born citizen.
Obama told us he was born a British subject.
Who believes Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, Monroe, Madison, etc. would have found him to be a natural born citizen?
Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009, happened with the complete cooperation of both parties.
They want the Constitution changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
Confuse people about the clear meaning of a three word phrase and voila, every anchor baby and Winston Churchill is eligible.
The bench was the reason the GOP went along with the fig leaf resolution for McCain that was used by the Democrats as cover for Obama.
Jindal, Rubio, Haley and Cruz were all up and comers and the future of the party and ineligible.
The truth of the Kenyanesian Usurpation will never see the light of day because both parties cooperated in the violation of the Constitution
Well, history has a lot of twists and turns about what an NBC is. The Constitution doesn't define it and court cases have been few and not on point with Obama's or Cruz's case.
This is a situation where a federal court must take an INDIVIDUAL CASE or CONTROVERSY, like they're supposed to (Art III, Sec 2), and apply the best good-faith understanding of the original meaning and purpose of NBC to the case at hand.
And that decision applies ONLY to the case at hand or any other case with the same facts and questions of law. The Constitution never contemplated the Judicial Branch to make national law. The scope of a SCOTUS decision is constitutionally LIMITED to individual cases and controversies (id.).
Don't repeat this cr@p.
ML/NJ
Minor vs Happersett:
“it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Ping, dammit, ping.
and the USSC turned down several cases
Practically none of those claims is true.
Example: Obama is listed as “African-American” on the birth certificate.
Let’s assume they’re talking about the certificate released in 2007.
No, the baby’s race is not mentioned at all. The races of the father and mother are mentioned. The mother is “Caucasian” and the father is “African”. Indeed, there was no such thing as a racial designation of “African-American” in 1961.
The other things mentioned are not valid parts of the Birther argument, IMO.
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.