Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility Damage Control

The sad thing is that Barry doesn't even rise to that level of citizenship.

No lie. Those fact about US citizenship come straight from the US State Department, not from WND.

[link to naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com]

And yes, the law would allow a US citizen that you (and many others) call an "anchor baby" to one day be President.

Winston sank his arms to his sides and slowly refilled his lungs with air. His mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink. To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink. The instructress had called them to attention again. 'And now let's see which of us can touch our toes!' she said enthusiastically. 'Right over from the hips, please, comrades. One-two! One-two! ...' Winston loathed this exercise, which sent shooting pains all the way from his heels to his buttocks and often ended by bringing on another coughing fit. The half-pleasant quality
went out of his meditations. The past, he reflected, had not merely been altered, it had been actually destroyed. For how could you establish even the most obvious fact when there existed no record outside your own memory? He tried to remember in what year he had first heard mention of Big Brother.

9/11 was an inside job. Everybody knows it was bullshit. Same shit different lord.

The definition of Natural Born has been fought over for 150 years.

Congress did, before Obama was elected, try to get the natural-born clause removed... eight times during Obama's run up to election.

Congress really should make a distinction here. I personally feel some small measure of national loyalty would be gained by having US citizen parents. Enough for it to be worth it.

It's hard to believe we can have foreigners giving birth to our President... Obama... Romney.. fuckin weird.

And as I posted recently, Obama is quoted as saying only those with something to hide, have something to fear. Ironic he sealed his records.

And no, that's clearly debatable:


Review these 3 cases after reading the constitutions original intent by the founding fathers here:

[link to www.constitution.org]

Book 1 Chapter XIX
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
___________________________________________________________

[link to law2.umkc.edu]

MINOR v. HAPPERSETT
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
88 U.S. 162; 21 Wall. 162
OCTOBER, 1874, Term
[Unanimous decision of the Supreme Court holding that the Constitution of the United States
does not guarantee to women the right to vote in federal elections.]
_____________________________________________________________​________________________________________

[link to supreme.justia.com]

BOYD V. NEBRASKA EX REL. THAYER, 143 U. S. 135 (1892)
Case Preview
Full Text of Case
U.S. Supreme Court
Boyd v. Nebraska ex Rel. Thayer, 143 U.S. 135 (1892)
Boyd v. Nebraska ex Rel. Thayer
No. 1208
Argued December 8, 1891
Decided February 1, 1892
143 U.S. 135
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF NEBRASKA
_____________________________________________________________​_______________________________________

[link to supreme.justia.com]

POPE V. WILLIAMS, 193 U. S. 621 (1904)
Case Preview
Full Text of Case
U.S. Supreme Court
Pope v. Williams, 193 U.S. 621 (1904)
Pope v. Williams
No. 603
Argued March 8-9, 1904
Decided April 4, 1904
193 U.S. 621
_____________________________________________________________​______________________________________

Bullshit! Shill

*comment deleted by me*

I give up. Minor vs. Happerset was not overturned...it was disregarded and overruled. Overruled, in the case people keep citing as the Supreme Court removing the legal requirement/definition of Natural Born citizen, meant that the question of the definition of Natural Born didn't apply to that case.

I'm too tired to find the case. Perhaps some kind person who's been following this thread remembers the argument posted against Minor vs. Happerset and claiming it was overturned.

Last Edited by Eireann on 04/14/2012 08:44 PM

the point being...

who gives a rats ass if he's a citizen or not

the fact of the matter is this

if we aren't getting the straight up truth from these so called leaders

then what we're getting is the short end of a wickedly twisted stick

now I don't know about you

but that isn't my cup of tea

regardless

as for anybody who isn't clear and sure in that and in all regard

it's too late to worry, if you get my drift

they'll be singled out and fall by the way of the wayside

in great number I expect

most of soon.

if you wish to be one of them

keep it up, eh?

Those facts regarding US citizenship come straight from the US State Department. Not from WND, or "the original intent of the founding fathers," or the Federalist Papers, or some obscure and totally irrelevant case law.

people by this point are either clear on the difference between truth and lies

or they will be learning the hard way

in fact

just who was asked to supply documentation, that is the question

was it someone else or was it the man in question?

and who is then responsible for seeing it is done quickly and efficiently without bullshit and/or rhetoric?

the same individual, regardless

hence he's culpable for such and/or whatever innocuous documents are supplied by the peanut gallery on his behalf

capisce?

no ifs, ands or mutha fucking buts about it

between 1890-1929 millions of Europeans immigrated to the United States and you dipshits honestly believe that not one of their children born in the US would have been eligible to be president?

also, guess you never heard of a guy named Andrew Jackson.

Obama is not an American citisen, because he is a citizen of INDONESIA ... He was adopted by his mother's second husband, and Indonesia DOES NOT RECOGNIZE DUAL CITIZENSHIP ... in plain English that means, that his American citizenship as well as his British/Kenyan citizenship were relinquished in order for him to become a citizen of Indonesia

NOW DO YOU GET IT ????

has nothing to do about where he was born
has everything to do with the fact that he ISN'T AN AMERICAN !


it also has everything to do with the fact that he is probably the biggest liar the world ever experienced - and the fact that he had plenty of help doing it, is evident .


now, if you knew Obama wasn't an American - would you vote for him?

as far as I'm concerned the question of legitimacy by birth is now a moot point

after how many years of watching him do the south side shuffle and nary a thing to get this off the plate of the American people...?

come on now

he's clearly working against as opposed to for us

and THAT is and should EVER BE the bottom line.

he could BE a full blooded dyed in the wool citizen right now and I still wouldn't find him eligible by way of his moral compass if nothing else... and most definitely with reference to his actions

and anybody who can argue that is culpable in their own right by the same ass token

why anyone is arguing over apples and oranges when there is a lemon on trial is beyond me

I'm not a shill and not even an Obama supporter. I will be casting a write in vote for Ron Paul. But facts are facts and birthers are either stupid, crazy, or just very gullible. And I have a suspicion that either consciously or subconsciously, it is driven by racial prejudice and ignorance.

National Movement Launched To Impeach Obama
[link to theintelhub.com]
<snip>
A new national movement has been launched to impeach President Obama based around five core issues which clearly demonstrate how Obama has flagrantly violated the Constitution.

The campaign, backed by director, producer, actor and writer Sean Stone, is a follow-up to North Carolina Republican Walter Jones’ efforts to bring the administration to account for launching unconstitutional wars without the authorization of Congress. Jones’ recently introduced resolution states that such actions represent “an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”
<snip>


[link to www.youtube.com]

Every war since the end of WW2 has been unconstitutional and without congressional authorization, that's why they aren't technically wars. They are "operations" or "peacekeeping missions."

But, not really on the topic of the birth certificate.

would there have been a different outcome if it was tried in another state?

I beg your pardon? Irrelevant case law? The US Department of State answers to the US Constitution. The Federal Government does not supersede Constitutional or "irrelevant case law" as you put it.

[link to www.omni.to]

illuminiti image, sucked dry

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment; the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization, which includes citizenship.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

Anyone born inside the United States *
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

It was a process called "Naturalization". A paperwork formality where you renounced allegiance to your former homeland and pledged your allegiance to the United States.

From:

The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Natural Born Citizen
June 17, 1900

Note that this states “You and Your Wife” and that would be “Parents,” not the singular word “Parent.”

“J. Son.” – If you and your wife, who are native born citizens of the United States should visit Europe as tourists, and during your tour a male child should be born to you, he would NOT be eligible to the presidency of the United States, because he would not be “a natural born” citizen. He would, however, be a citizen of the United States, because made so by the law. This is the law (approved February 10, 1855):

“That persons heretofore born, or hereafter to be born, out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose fathers were or shall be at the time of their birth citizens of the United States, shall be deemed and considered and are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”

If the son born abroad should remain abroad, and never reside in the United States, his children would not be citizens of the United States.

[link to wtpotus.wordpress.com]

'Original U.S. nationality legislation of 1790, 1795, and 1802 limited naturalization eligibility to "free white persons"...'

The citation above, and the subsequent discussion at the below link, deals mostly with the ability for female immigrants to become Naturalized Citizens. Her children would be American Citizens but not eligible for the Presidency. Her grandchildren would be considered Natural Born and, thus, eligible for the PoTUS under the emerging immigration laws.

[link to www.archives.gov]

Case law, such as Minor vs. Happerset (1826), set the precedent for who was considered Natural Born. These precedents set by case law can not be disregarded as these are an ongoing discourse encouraged by our fore-fathers to further refine and define Constitutional Law.

Last Edited by Eireann on 04/14/2012 10:07 PM

So...if someone is born outside the US and one of their parents is a citizen who has lived in the US for at least 5 years and the other parent is a foreigner, they are still a natural born citizen.

But, since the State of Hawaii has certified that Obama is a citizen of Hawaii, that is all that matters legally.

Not according to US Case Law.

Thread: Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility Damage Control (Page 19)

I haven't seen this anywhere but here why isn't it being reported?

Because it's babbling birther bullshit.