I found myself pleasantly surprised yesterday when I discovered that a new suit questioning the natural born citizenship of Barack Obama and therefore his qualification to serve as President of the United States had been filed before the Superior Court of California. The suit was filed by Gary Kreep (good name for a lawyer) of the United States Justice Foundation on behalf of Alan Keyes, a presidential candidate on the American Independent Party ticket, as well as California electors, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson. Besides Obama, California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, Vice President Elect Joe Biden, and a list of 53 California electors were also named as defendants.
Although neither a lawyer or legal professional, it appears to me that the three plaintiffs in this particular case do actually have standing, something which Phillip Berg has had difficulty proving in his case filed before the Pennsylvania courts and now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. In hindsight, Mr. Berg probably should have found citizens with standing who he could have represented as council and filed on their behalf, therefore avoiding a pile of legal technicalities.
With cases pending in Hawaii, Ohio, Connecticut, Washington, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, this issue will apparently soon come to a head. Chicago lawyer Andy Martin has a hearing scheduled for November 18th to attempt to force the state of Hawaii to produce the vault copy of Obama's birth certificate, which would indicate the birth hospital, attending physician, and other details not present on the short form Certification of Live Birth posted on web sites such as factcheck.org. Mr. Martin should have a better than average chance of prevailing due to the pinpoint accuracy of details outlined in the suit and the fact that he most definitely avoided jurisdictional issues. Evidence obtained by Andy Martin in Hawaii may be brought forth in the California case as well as others so Mr. Martin's early efforts may prove to be the backbone of the entire movement.
In my opinion, the suit filed yesterday in California on behalf of Alan Keyes has the most potential for success. Alan Keyes and the two electors can prove both standing and proper jurisdiction. This case lacks the hearsay and unsubstantiated claims of the Berg case. I also feel that the attorney for the plaintiffs should focus more on the Indonesian connection rather than the 1961 vault copy of Obama's birth certificate. When Ann and Lolo Soetoro moved their family to Indonesia in 1967, Mr Soetoro enrolled young Barack in school under the name Barry Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen listing his religion as Islam. During that time, neither Indonesia or the United States recognized dual citizenship. Although Obama returned to the U.S. four years later, he travelled to Indonesia in 1981 to visit his mother utilizing an Indonesian passport according to his book, Dreams of My Father. He renewed his passport while in Jakarta and travelled on to Pakistan which at that time was on the U.S. do not travel list. Under Indonesian law, only citizens could obtain passports from that country.
Although neither a lawyer or legal professional, it appears to me that the three plaintiffs in this particular case do actually have standing, something which Phillip Berg has had difficulty proving in his case filed before the Pennsylvania courts and now in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. In hindsight, Mr. Berg probably should have found citizens with standing who he could have represented as council and filed on their behalf, therefore avoiding a pile of legal technicalities.
With cases pending in Hawaii, Ohio, Connecticut, Washington, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, this issue will apparently soon come to a head. Chicago lawyer Andy Martin has a hearing scheduled for November 18th to attempt to force the state of Hawaii to produce the vault copy of Obama's birth certificate, which would indicate the birth hospital, attending physician, and other details not present on the short form Certification of Live Birth posted on web sites such as factcheck.org. Mr. Martin should have a better than average chance of prevailing due to the pinpoint accuracy of details outlined in the suit and the fact that he most definitely avoided jurisdictional issues. Evidence obtained by Andy Martin in Hawaii may be brought forth in the California case as well as others so Mr. Martin's early efforts may prove to be the backbone of the entire movement.
In my opinion, the suit filed yesterday in California on behalf of Alan Keyes has the most potential for success. Alan Keyes and the two electors can prove both standing and proper jurisdiction. This case lacks the hearsay and unsubstantiated claims of the Berg case. I also feel that the attorney for the plaintiffs should focus more on the Indonesian connection rather than the 1961 vault copy of Obama's birth certificate. When Ann and Lolo Soetoro moved their family to Indonesia in 1967, Mr Soetoro enrolled young Barack in school under the name Barry Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen listing his religion as Islam. During that time, neither Indonesia or the United States recognized dual citizenship. Although Obama returned to the U.S. four years later, he travelled to Indonesia in 1981 to visit his mother utilizing an Indonesian passport according to his book, Dreams of My Father. He renewed his passport while in Jakarta and travelled on to Pakistan which at that time was on the U.S. do not travel list. Under Indonesian law, only citizens could obtain passports from that country.
The complicated questions that must be answered by any of these cases to set precedent are:
a) Is Obama a natural born U.S. citizen under laws in effect during 1961?
b) If Obama forfeited his citizenship while naturalized in Indonesia, does he somehow retain his natural born status or is he now a "naturalized" citizen rather than "natural born"?
c) Upon returning to the U.S., did Obama take the steps necessary to regain U.S. citizenship or is he now technically an illegal alien?
Due to many legal difficulties, this web can only be untangled by a competent court system with evidence presented by plaintiffs that can prove both standing and proper jurisdiction. Good luck, Mr. Keyes! May God bless you!
5 comments:
Unavoidable scenario: If SCOTUS disqualifies Obama BEFORE 1/20/09 inauguration, McCain is POTUS per remaining electoral college electors; if SCOTUS disqualifies Obama after 1/20/09 inauguration, Hillary likely becomes POTUS per vote of Dem controlled House of Rep. Either way, is clear Obama will NOT be or remain POTUS.
Who’s Your Daddy ???
Please don’t take me wrong on this subject. I definitely want to be sure that Senator Barack Hussein Obama is in fact a natural born citizen of the United States or not. That is the only issue here.
If he was born in the British East African Protectorate of Kenya and his mother came back to Hawaii as soon as she could so as to register his birth in Hawaii, why would she have admitted that his place of birth was Kenya.
She recognized the benefit of being a United States citizen, not because she thought he would become President some day, but just because it’s better to a citizen of the United States than a citizen of Kenya.
So what we really need are the birth records from Kenya and the archives from the British East African Protectorate of Kenya, which I believe are located in London England. Those records, if they actually exist will show Senator Barack Hussein Obama as being born in Kenya and therefore not eligible to become POTUS.
This could open up a whole new can of worms for Senator Barack Hussein Obama since there is apparently no record of him becoming a naturalized citizen. He would then be considered an illegal alien and subject to deportation.
If we could determine whether or not Stanley Ann Dunham Obama even held a passport in 1961, that could give us clue as to which course of action we should pursue. If she did not have a passport, then she never went to Kenya in 1961.
“Passport records dated after March 31, 1925, remain in the custody of the Department of State, Passport Services. These records normally consist of applications for U. S. passports and supporting evidence of U. S citizenship, and are protected by the Privacy Act. Passport records do not include evidence of travel such as entrance/exit stamps, visas, residence permits, etc., since this information is entered into the passport book after issuance.”
So that brings us to the question of why is Senator Barack Hussein Obama so adamant about not releasing his actual vault birth certificate. There must be something that would have caused him great harm prior to the election, and would have stopped him from becoming elected.
What could that little piece of information be?
Could it be that his father, as listed on the actual birth records, is not Barack Hussein Obama Sr.? Could it be that another man is actually his father?
That would have been embarrassing before the election, but not a game changer.
However, what if the name listed is El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, formerly known as Malcolm Little, aka Malcolm X ? Or how about the Radical Communist Frank Marshall Davis ?
If either of these two men are indicated as the father on the actual birth certificate, and he was born in Hawaii, then he is eligible to be POTUS.
However if this information had come out prior to the election, or prior to the primaries, we would have a different President Elect right now, possibly Hillary Clinton.
So what happens now? If any of the lawsuits are successful and Senator Barack Hussein Obama is required to produce his actual birth certificate for inspection, a deal will be made. A private meeting between the Supreme Court Justices, an independent forensic inspector, Senator Barack Hussein Obama, and his attorneys will review the document and certify that he is in fact a natural born citizen of the United States. No further information will be released and “We the People” will be forever kept in the dark.
We will have a president who got elected on a lie, using 650 million dollars of questionable origins, and who has a background of shady acquaintances.
God help us and God help the USA.
Interesting FAQ at the Electoral College website, likely just a coincidence:)
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/questions.html
Obama could also face a challenge at the Senate and House in front of the President of the Senate aka Cheney.
Correct:
An objection can be made on Jan 6, 2009 when congress meets in a joint session.
Don't be fooled by web sites that ask you to petition congress or contact electors directly.
This is a waste of time. Congress will hear from the voter in their district. Contacting
individual electors also is a waste of time. I have seen to many of these sites to believe it could only be that these site owners don't understand Congress is the only body that can object to electors and Obama during the joint session on Jan 6, 2009.
The dems would lead you to believe you can contact an elector and change thier vote. This is a waste of time as the electors for Obama are pledged to vote for him and will. Congress though can object to any elector and Obama's qualifications for President on Jan 6,2009
SO if you want to make a difference you can. Contact your senator and congressman and demand they object to Obama's qualification as president because he is not a natural born citizen or possibly a dual citizen.
You must do this before Jan 6, 2009 or it will be too late. Mr Berg's lawsuit could force the dems to vote for the top 3 electorial vote winners if he exposes the Obama fraud. This would mean the dems would have to vote Mccain in as president!
After Jan 6, 2009 Obama will be confirmed if no objection is raised. The dems will have a majority as of Jan 4, 2009 and if the truth comes out about Obama they will
never impeach him. It could be a Constitutional crisis then!
After Jan 6, 2009 it will be too late!
Under federal law an objection to a state's electoral votes may be made to the President of the Senate during Congress's counting of electoral votes in January. The objection must be made in writing and signed by at least one Senator and one member of the House of Representatives. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives debate the objection separately. Debate is limited to two hours. After the debate, both the Senate and the House of Representatives rejoin and both must agree to reject the votes.
Copies of the court filing, along with further information concerning developments in this case, will be made available at http://www.AIPNEWS.com, or can be obtained by contacting AIP national chairman Tom Hoefling.
Post a Comment