Welcome President-Elect Donald J. Trump- Please help us Make America Great Again!
Helping to restore our Constitutional Republic
Is the man who calls himself Barack Hussein Obama ineligible to hold the office of U.S. President? Should he be removed? Should he be prevented from running again?
We have been told by multiple politicians, media people and "pundits" that there is no chance that anything at all will come of the Obama Presidential eligibility challenges ….
- Because there is already a birth certificate (hokum: the long form submission is a proven fraud))
- Becuase he's considered "natural born" (Not according to Minor vs Happersett ruling)
- Because he's already in office (so was Nixon)
- Because no one has "standing" to sue him (right so far, per courts)
- Because the media and pols don't WANT to talk about it (starting to change)
- Because it would be too risky to "change horses" in mid stream (you don't think what is happening under Obama is already HIGHLY risky?)
- Because the eligibility law is obsolete-- (Really? Why?)
- Because the charges are “racist?” (Really? Why is it “racist” to go after an incompetent, arrogant, inexperienced, likely ineligible Marxist usurper, who is laying waste to the US Constitution and our beloved nation?)
"Eligibility?" What's that all about?
The founders placed a Presidential eligibility clause in the Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5:
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
While they did not specify what a natural born citizen is in this section, other references to citizenship in the document and in other correspondence make it clear that they viewed a natural born citizen as someone born in the USA of two citzen parents. Vattels' Law of Nations is a prime reference they used, which supports this. The Minor vs. Happersett case ruling, in 1875, established a legal precedent upholding that definition of a natural born citizen. Recent discussion by opponents attempts to conflate and make it equivalent to native born, or naturalized citizenship, which are not the same at alL.
Why did the founders bother to establish this requirement? Because they believed that an undivided loyalty to the US, which native birth and citizen parents helped to ensure, was very important for the most powerful executive, in the highest office in the land. The results of not ensuring this have become readily apparent since January 20, 2009. Now, we need to fix the nightmare problem of an ineligible usurper in the White House.
What has been done?
interviewed outside of Federal District Court, Santa Ana, CA, after a contentious hearing in front of Judge David Carter on the Barnett vs Obama case, on 10-5-09. A DOJ team of attorneys was doing Obama's dirty work, on your dime.
So far, Congress, courts, electoral college, state legislators, Attorneys-General, Secretaries of State, Sheriffs, prosecutors, DoD, MSM, FBI and even the Electoral College, have failed to act, although several state bills are in process and HR1503 was introduced. Over a hundred lawsuits were filed. Several promising court cases have been dismissed in the face of strong evidence, citing “standing” (no one has the right to claim harm by Obama’s illegal election and harmful actions ) and “jurisdiction,” (not my job, man!). An outstanding military officer has been jailed, careers sidetracked and deployment orders rescinded, to avoid facing the truth. Multiple citizens’ grand juries have indicted “Obama.” This is beyond absurd, folks. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona- Maricopa County- is now conducting a "Cold Case Posse" investigation!
Recent events, such as:
- The unjust conviction, incarceration, discharge, stripping of pension and disgrace by an Army kangaroo court martial of LTC Terry Lakin
- Refusal to hear two Supreme Court eligibility suits, assisted by Kagan, who formerly handled Obama's eligibility suits as Solicitor General. Both Kagan and Sotomayer were handpicked by Obama and unethically refused to recuse themselves from these deliberations.
- Inept posturing by new HI Gov. Abercrombie, news conferences where he vowed to show proof of Obama's HI birth, which he has repeatedly failed to do, amid vague mumbled excuses and dissembling.
- Sworn testimony by a former HI records official that the birth certificate and corroborating hospital records never existed.
- New interest because of statements and investigations by Donald Trump (which Rep.Darrel Issa failed to do). Switch of positions by Russ Limbaugh, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin and millions of Americans
- Electrifying Orly Taitz CNN interview
- Revelations of Hawaii election law fraud to get Obama on the Hawaii (and other) ballots
- New interest in Obama Social Security fraud allegations
- May 2 9th District Court of Appeals hearing, in Pasadena, CA, of Barnett, Keyes at al, vs Obama- still no ruling
- Revelations of Hawaii election law fraud to get Obama on the Hawaii (and other) ballots
- Release of purported "Long Form Birth Certificate" (digital image only) 4-27-11
- Release of "birth certificate" digital image by Obama declared a forgery by dozens of document experts
- Filing of FBI criminal complaint on above. No action so far.
- Filing of demand for actual HI birth certificate- refused, Attorney and document experts going to Hawakii 8-8-11, now 10/11.
- E-Verify check fail in 8/11.
- Judge authorized discovery for Taitz suit on Obama Social Security number. Case was dismissed and is now under a motion for reconsideration.
- SupremeCourt dismissed appeal of The case is Keyes v. Bowen, 10-1351. Presidential candidate Alan Keyes wanted the certification of Obama's victory halted in California until there was documented proof by a state official that he was eligible to be president. The Supreme Court of California threw out the lawsuit.
- Dismissal of Taitz v Astrue Social Security case. Now under motion for reconsideration.
- Refusal of subpoena of Hawaii birth certificate, dismissal of case challenging that. Another hearing scheduled November , 2011.
… Have served to attract much more attention to an enormous Constitutional issue and threat to our republic that powerful forces want to just go away.
Regardless of where he was born, Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Soebarkah (I’ve included all of his most commonly known names) may still not be eligible because:
- His father was a foreigner
- His putative mother wasn’t old enough, nor had sufficient contiguous residence to confer citizenship
- The possible adoption by Soetoro might mean that Obama was an Indonesian citizen
- Obama may not even be his legal name
- He may have claimed foreign student scholarships
- He appears to have at least 16 fraudulent Social Security numbers, including 042-68-4425
- He failed an E-Verify check in 8/11
- It is likely that his draft registration was forged
- May not even be who he says he is
Whether or not we can have his election nullified, there may be a case for impeaching him and there is a strong possibility that we can get him off the next ballot, or convince the Democrats that it is in no one’s interest to renominate such a huge liability on the ticket. In the meantime, we can help destroy his credibility, if he’s not already doing enough on his own, and help bring his evil agenda to a near standstill.
Whether or not you believe Obama is ineligible, there is more than enough doubt to justify clearing the air, via some type of public hearings that will ferret out the facts, via subpoenas legal discovery and testimony and rulings on the facts and interpretations of the Constitution and the law as they apply to them.
- State legislative action on eligibility requirements
- Secretary of State or Attorneys-General actions
- Criminal charges and prosecution
- State court action
- Federal court action
- Electoral College challenge
- Intensified media debate
- DoD nullification of LTC Lakin conviction
- Citizen protests, grand juries, petitions, interview, contact legislators
- Remove judges who refused to act
- Remove legislators who refused to act
- Write web sites blogs, emails, comments, tell friends, family, church, associates
- Pressure officials to act
- Nominate candidates who will act
- Donate to groups taking action
Will you sign up for any of that?
Please comment on the various cases, issues, actions, events, techniques and ways to pursue them. As a lot of the evidence is there, but we need support to authorize investigations and lawsuits that will have real teeth to compel legal discovery, testimony, action, as well as alerting millions to demand action from our non-performing, so-called “leaders.”
"We are not "Birthers," we are Obama Eligibility Challengers
-- Our opponents are "Deniers."
Barnett, Drake, Keyes, et al vs. Obama Appeal hearing was May 2, Pasadena, CA
ALABAMA SUPREME COURT DECIDES OBAMA ELIGIBILITY CASE
Though he ended up in the minority, one prominent judge’s dissenting opinion in a recent case is sure to earn him some support among those who question the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.
The Alabama Supreme Court recently ruled that the state does not hold a legal obligation to vet a presidential candidate before including him or her on a ballot. Representing the majority in the 7 to 2 decision, Justice Mike Bolin responded to the plaintiff’s assertion that Alabama’s secretary of state should inherently have the authority to confirm a candidate’s legal standing to run.
He called the post “a non-judicial office without subpoena power or investigative authority or the personnel necessary to undertake a duty to investigate a non-resident candidate’s qualifications, even if such a duty could properly be implied.”
The high court’s chief justice, however, took a decidedly different position. Roy Moore, in his dissentingopinion, not only upheld the opinion that the secretary of state should vet presidential candidates; he also indicated that Obama’s background was worthy of such an investigation
The complaint alleged that the Secretary of State failed to perform a constitutional duty to verify the eligibility of all presidential candidates appearing on the ballot in the 2012 general election,” he wrote. Moore went on to conclude that, even though the election was held, the issue at hand was not rendered moot as the secretary argued.
The issues brought up prior to the recent election, after all, could easily be concerns in future races.
In a lengthy section of his opinion, titled “Challenges to the Qualifications of the President-Elect,” he concludes that Congress has the authority to determine a presidential candidate’s constitutional qualifications. Moore later writes, however, that a “state law that required birth certificates from presidential candidates as a precondition to placement on the ballot would likely pass muster under federal preemption law.”
In the end, he asserted, the U.S. Constitution is the standard to which the secretary of state should hold any candidate.
By serving as “an executive officer of the State of Alabama,” he wrote, the secretary “has an affirmative legal duty to recognize and support the United States Constitution as the supreme law of the land.”
Though his comments were couched in language that would apply to any potential candidate, he offered other instances of politicians seeking the nation’s highest office who failed to meet constitutional standards
These cases address situations in which allegedly ineligible presidential candidates have sought judicial relief from the decisions of state election officials excluding them from the ballot because they were underage,” he wrote. The current case, he continued, “seeks inverse relief” by requiring “the Secretary of State to investigate for ineligibility candidates she has already certified for the presidential-election ballot and to screen all such candidates for eligibility in the future.”
Even though Bolin’s opinion confirmed that “logically the Secretary of State, being the chief elections official of the state, should be vested with such a duty,” he found that there is insufficient legal standing on which to make such a claim.
Though this ruling might seem to be a win for Obama and his supporters, the existence of the case is a testament to resonating outrage over the current president’s perceived illegitimacy. Moore’s dissenting opinion only gives these Americans more hope that our government might once again challenge corruption – especially at the highest and most critical levels
"Shrimpton, who faces a Nov. 10 trial, also appears in a 2008 video that began re-circulating earlier this year on the Internet in which he claims to have been privy to shocking intelligence information on Obama's origins. Shrimpton contends to this day that the CIA collected DNA from then Senator Obama and a grandparent establishes that Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama's biological mother. He intends to subpoena from the CIA and British Intelligence any records either agency may have on Obama's DNA."
I wonder what hard evidence, he has, if any, and how long he would live if he did. Establishment may be content to paint him as a harmless old "conspiracy theorist" and let him twist in the wind.
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Quinn
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 6:42 PM
Subject: TRANSPARENCY-BARACK OBAMA'S BEST-KEPT SECRET-PART 9
To America June 3,2014
Transparency-Barack Obama's best-kept secret-part 9
"The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are
those with something to hide".-Barack Obama-to Newsday, Aug.22,2010
With the above words Barack Obama both identified and indicted himself. Lies and deception dominate his every action or response whenever the issue of his presidential eligibility arises. Examples below will confirm.
In 2008, he allowed a fraudulent, ineligible Hawaiian "Certification of live birth"(COLB) with approx. thirteen bits of information, to be posted on the Daily Kos website as proof of his Presidential eligibility while aware, as a former Constitutional teacher, that only a long-form "Certificate of Live Birth" of approx.forty-one bits of information, was valid for one seeking the Presidency. Data missing from Obama's COLB included the birth hospital name,attending physician and birth witnesses-important information necessary to help determine Presidential eligibility. Also, his birth certificate number was blacked out, ignoring the COLB's warning"ANY ALTERATION INVALIDATES THIS CERTIFICATE".Obama deliberately lied in claiming that his COLB was a true copy of an eligible birth certificate, a document supposedly resting in the Hawaiian Health Dept. files,for if
true it meant both copies were ineligible for Presidential aspirants. Obama continued his deception until April,of 2011, deceiving a Nation he had sworn to serve. We are talking treason! This was a deliberate conspiracy designed to transform our Country by usurping our Constitution, starting with Obama's false documents to conceal his ineligibility. In 2009, he also publically displayed a letter he had sent to Kapiolani Medical Center in Hawaii, stating that he was born there. How considerate-now even the Hospital would know
When Hawaiian State Senator Sam Slom asked the Hospital's chief officer, Martha Steward, if Obama's claim was true she only confirmed that a copy of Obama's above letter (not a birth certificate) hangs in their office, away from public view. Also,of note, the Hospital has no public monument to Obama's birth. Imagine, the "supposed" first African-American President of our Nation claims a birth hospital yet cannot get that hospital to substantiate his claim. I'm surprised the Att'y General, Eric Holder, hasn't declared the Hospital a racist institution for not so doing! Also, some Obama family members claimed he was born in Hawaii's Queens Medical Center. In reality, a damning fact stands out. Not one Hawaiian hospital will claim being Obama's place of birth. I repeat-not one! So much for Obama's vetting, as touted by his defenders.
Due to increasing challenges to Obama's eligibility, Hawaiian Gov.Neil Abercrombie stated that he personally knew the Obama family, was certain of his eligibility and would prove it with a copy of the Health Dept.certificate. Weeks later, he admitted(graciously) that nothing could be found to confirm O'bama's eligibility. Only an obscure file with some birth names, including that of a barack obama. No "Certificate of Live Birth" or even a "Certification of Live Birth", the document which Obama claimed matched his Daily Kos posting. How could the Daily Kos post a copy of a document which the Health Dept.couldn't find? Answer: Only by creating a fraudulent COLB. By citing the Daily Kos connection Obama became open to rebuttals. The Governor's fruitless search contradicted another lie of Obama's, namely that he had provided proof of his eligibility. While America requested a legitimate birth certificate Obama was waving what he knew to be a fraudulent COLB in their faces.
Since 2010,States sought legislation for future elections, including a requirement that only a "Certificate of Live Birth" would be acceptable for Presidential aspirants, incumbent or otherwise. Obama realized his COLB would not survive close scrutiny, leaving him one avenue of deception....create another fraudulent document,this time a long-form "Certificate of Live Birth" and claim the Health Dept.recently found it.In April, of 2011, lo and behold, Obama said the Health Dept had "found" it, a document previously unmentioned, unseen,unknown and unused ,and sent it to him, which he then put on a Government website and proclaimed to the Country as proof of eligibility, as he had done with his fraudulent COLB. Obama's deception recognizes no limitations. He knew that if he allowed his newly-found "Certificate of Live Birth" to be examined by experts this new forgery would have been exposed. How so? Remember, in 2009, he claimed his COLB ON the Daily Kos matched an Hawaiian Health Dept. copy, never mentioning nor offering a valid long-form "Certificate of Live Birth" which, if existing, could have saved him and America millions in lawsuits and possibly confirmed his eligibility. How could a Health Dept.copy of Obama's COLB disappear and, years later,a long-form "Certificate of Live Birth" be found in its place? Since this 2011 "find" was also branded a fake by experts there was but one conclusion-If a Hospital copy truly existed and matched Obama's copy that wouldmake both copies fraudulent. If, on the other hand, no hospital copy was found, as the Governor said,how could Obama, in 2011, obtain a copy of another non-existant document. He must consider us dumb. Is there any wonder why Obama spent millions in legal expenses to prevent disclosure of anything which would expose his deception; why he refused(in writing) to honor a Georgia subpoena demanding that he produce a valid birth certificate; why he ignored letters from U.S.Army Lt.Col.Terry Lakin who simply asked for proof that Obama was lawfully serving as President under the Second Article of the Constitution, which required proof of natural-born citizenship of anyone seeking the Presidency. Obama completely ignored the Colonel's letters and his 18 years of faithful service to our Country. Obama maintained complete silence while being fully aware that, for requesting the truth before continuing to serve under Obama's command, Colonel Lakin was subjected to a military trial and received a dishonorable discharge, loss of pay and benefits and imprisonment. Also, the presiding judge at his trial refused to allow any testimony which may "embarrass the President".(the Judge's words). Perish the thought that a Presidential imposter should be embarrassed by someone who is defending our Constitution and the oath of office. If this logic was used to defend General Benedict Arnold against being "embarrassed" by testimony showing that he was plotting revolution against the American colonists during the Revolutionary War (by surrendering West Point to the British) we might still be saying "God Save The King (or Queen) to this day.
When Obama claimed the Hawaiian Health Dept. had "found" his long-form birth certificate in 2011, retired General Colin Powell couldn't wait to tell South Carolina Univ..graduates that "he particularly enjoyed when Pres.Obama took out his birth certificate copy and blew away Donald Trump and all the "birthers". What an uninformed and irresponsible remark. What Obama "took out" was his fraudulent 2011 Certificate. For those who may not be aware Gen.Powell's reference to "blowing away" Donald Trump was because Mr Trump had offered Obama five million dollars (in writing) which Obama could use for any Cause, in return for providing a valid birth certificate copy for expert scrutiny. As with Col.Lakin, Obama never responded to Mr.Trump. General Powell "gushed" over Obama's 2011 document, when, in fact, this document was promptly declared fraudulent by expert after expert. This is why General Powell subsequently refused an offer by "Birthers Summit" of $15,000 to allow them three hours to challenge Obama's claim and then hear the General's reply. It appears that even Obama's close friends, including General Powell,were kept in the dark re Obama's eligibility....or perhaps they weren't. To bring this particular anecdote up to date, Mr.Trump recently raised his offer to $50,000,000(fifty million dollars) under the same conditions and, again,Obama would not even respond to the offer.
Another example(of many) of Obama's deceitfulness was how he evaded a Long Island reporters question to him in 2009, asking why he doesn't simply subject his"Certification of Live Birth"(COLB) to examination by experts since he repeatedly referred everyone to the Daily Kos copy to justify his eligibility. His reply to the reporter was "Am I expected to wear my birth certificate on my forehead?" Imagine....he refers all to what he knows is a fraudulent,ineligibile document rather than producing a valid one.! Sadly, Obama's deceptiveness comes to him as naturally as breathing.
A QUESTION WHICH ANSWERS ITSELF
If a valid Hawaiian Birth Certificate copy had really existed, as Obama claimed in 2011, why, over the last six years, has no Democrat asked him to release it and put this issue at rest? The answer: because they are all fearful of not only what the vault may contain, but, of what it may not contain. Either result would be devastating to the Democratic Party! I feel that Obama doesn't believe he's "transparent" but actually "Heir Apparent".
Wake up,and, more importantly, stand up America
to be concluded email@example.com
bcc;All recipients on my e-mail list, who are free to pass on to others, if they so wish
Fact is that Obama has usurped the Presidency, by fraud, during time of war. Obama has never been the bona-fides President. That alone makes Obama a spy under U.S. Law, a capital offense. Obama is America's second usurper. The first was Chester Arthur. Except those founders who were grandfathered in, all subsequent bona-fide Presidents, were born in the United States of Parents who were BOTH American citizens themselves. See: Minor v Happersett, SCOTUS (1875).
On the other hand, neither Arthur's or Obama's parents were both Americans and these two usurpers were never qualified as "Natural-Born" citizens. Obama and Arthur are both usurpers and frauds. In light of the insidious fact that now, BOTH parties are now proffering constitutionally disqualified candidates to run in 2016,such as Rubio and Cruz and even Jindal,neither of whom meet the affirmed definition of an NBC, "We the People" MUST ACT to stifle this flagrant disregard for our Constitution and hold our officials accountable. On May 15,2014 I filed criminal charges against Obama in the District of Columbia for Usurpation of the Presidency, by fraud, during time of war. Obama's usurpation of the Presidency during war time is a capital offense and makes Obama a spy and a traitor.
Good NBC info:
Constitutional Scholar Dr. Edwin Vieira has said that it would NOT be the appropriate action to subject a Usurper to Impeachment since a usurper is NOT actually IN the office from which his/her removal is sought. Indeed, Impeachment oof Obama would lend validation to a Presidency that he has never actually had. The proper course of action, as I have been personally advised by a U.S. District Court Magistrate from the Western District of New York, Leslie Foschio, is to "File a charge with Local law enforcement IN D.C." That would be the proper venue since any crime of usurpation of the Presidency [Impersonation of a Public Official under the D.C. Code] would occur IN D.C. at the time the Usurper falsely swear his/her oath of office. I currently have filed such a complaint with the D.C. Police which they rejected on a pretext and continue to ignore to this day. The U.S. Attorney in D.C. is also an Obama contributor. This,seemingly, a violation of the Hatch Act. There is precedent for the D.C Police arresting a President let alone, an imposter. The D.C. Police once arrested sitting President U.S. Grant for speeding through the streets of D.C.