Skip to comments.Ed Hale got the divorcee decree of Dunham vs Obama Sr.
Posted on 01/02/2009 1:16:10 PM PST by patriot08
Ed Hale of Plains Radio has secured a copy of the Dunham/Obama divorce decree as promised. He has registered this at the courthouse and has turned the document over to lawyers who are reported to be happy and enthused over the contents.
This is the first page. This is all that can be divulged at this time as those who have seen the decree are sworn to silence. You may hear information about it tonight on Ed's plainsradio show.
Well, it wasn’t you!
And besides, since when does a timeframe determine who is trolling or not?
I know for certain there are a few that have been members a long time here that are also major Libtards.
It’s obvious who is and isn’t .. even across “Blogsphere”, the same method is used.
Yeah, it sure backfired for the left. Now they're stuck with the House the Senate AND the White House. Poor suckers! /s
Attorney is talking about the implications of a Kenyan birth certificate ...
1952 Nationality Act controlled Obama’s birth. Stanley Ann must have been in US five years before Obama was born. She was three months short of that so Obama doesn’t get automatic US citizenship, he would have to become naturalized ...
Evidently, the discovery is how Stanley Ann listed her legal name at the time:
Stanley Ann D. Obama
It seems that an aias used by Ann Dunham is what lead to this port and the BC.
If he is not releasing the name of the port then he probally is not actually releasing the alias name either. It is probaly in the missing pages.
You said — “In Star’s defense, I don’t think she is trying to do that. But she rather believes that it doesn’t matter, that we should ignore the truth because looking for it is “distracting” to making sure this doesn’t happen again. She thinks we should just ignore the Constitutional requirement, this time, in favor of making sure they observed next time.”
Ummm..., with a friend like that, who needs enemies... :-)
I think I’ll be the one who can say what I’m trying to do, thank you. You may or may not choose to believe me — but at least, I’ll be the one who lets you know what my intentions are and what I’m trying to do.
#1 — don’t believe it really matters — not correct..., you don’t seem to differentiate between what is *desired* versus *what is*. There is a difference. I know what is desired — I did not vote for Obama, I did not desire Obama. Now, that’s a desire. Does it matter? Yes, it matters. Now, that’s the desire and wish and intention part — but — we’ve got a *big problem* with something called *reality* — Hey! “reality check” here... Does anyone see the handwriting on the wall? Nope...
Now, if you would distinguish reality from wishes and desires and “what ought to be” — then you could easily figure out what I’m saying.
#2 — ignore the truth, huh? Now, that’s a big LOL.. If there is anyone ignoring the truth — they’re the ones who are “ignoring the truth of reality”... get it? There is such a thing as “truth” — and you see it happening in front of your face, when you walk out the door. That’s a “truth” that is outside of yourself and outside of your desires and outside of your idealogy and outside of your political persuasions.
Now, we know the *truth* of what the Constitution says — but — no one seems to *know* the truth of what Obama’s birth certificate says. So, when you don’t know the truth — the motto around here seems to be “go with the speculation” and *proclaim* that as the *truth*... Nope... that won’t work, and it sure won’t work in the real world and with courts and documentary evidence requirements.
#3 — distracting? — ummm..., practice chewing gum and walking at the same time... then you’ll do better in that category... :-)
#4 — ignore the Constitution, nope. So far even Obama has not ignored the Constitution. He says he meets the qualifications. So, tell me -— “How is Obama ignoring the Constitution?” when he says he’s qualified. Oh..., I see, you don’t believe him and so on that speculation — you’re going to remove someone from being President. My, my..., it’s a good thing our whole country doesn’t run on that type of thinking...
You know..., it’s just like this Ed Hale program, the Chief Editor Korir (who is back at it again...) and so many other avenues and trails that everyone is going down. Just deliver the document and present it in court and be done with it. Simple. Don’t accuse, don’t guess, don’t speculate — just prove it. It’s not that hard... “or is it?”
On to your next item — “What I would ask is: What happens if you get your wish, many states require proof of eligibility before a candidate can be put on the ballot and then in 2012, it turns out Obama was not eligible. He’d have served for 4 years. What happens to every law signs, every order he gives and every appointment he makes. All illegitimate, since they were done by someone not eligible to the Office.”
What happens... oh..., just about the same thing that’s going to happen with all that I see going on here — Obama is going to be President. That’s about it in a nutshell.
Oh, and we’ve had another guy who was supposedly born in Canada, but it was *questionable* (just like in this Obama qualifications issue; i.e., “it couldn’t be proven absolutely”) and we’re still just as good with our Constitution now as we were before. He didn’t cause any harm (from *that issue* alone). Chester A. Arthur, the 21st President — was said to have been born in Canada. Now, let me ask you — are his Presidential orders, laws and other paperwork and treaties invalid?? I don’t think so...
And then, lastly you said — “I’d just as soon avoid that kind of nightmare, if we can. If we can’t, or even if we can, we can still work on getting those state level proof of eligibility laws put in place. It’s not an either/or situation. IMHO, of course.”
In terms of the “Qualifications issue” (alone, not on politics) — what problems did we have that were a nightmare with Chester A. Arthur, being born in Canada? If you tell me about the nightmare from that administration in regards to the Qualifications issue — then I’ll get a better idea of the nightmare that we’ll have in comparison to his. Remember, “history” is a pretty good indicator of what will happen again.
All right - missing pages....that could be it
Part of the pie is better than no pie. ;o)
I am willing to suspend judgement and see how this plays out. Ed’s confidence level is rather high, and seems genuine.
VERY INTERESTING POINT by the lawyer.
The document is invalid simply from having the Certificate Number blacked out.
Bottom of Certification says “Any altercation of this document makes it invalid”.
The claim that the original B.C. is at a U.S. port of entry seems dubious at best. Ann would have had to go through immigration upon arrival with a baby and the proof that she had registered the birth at the nearest U.S. embassy to where the birth occurred, but she would have kept the B.C, and been given U.S. immigration paperwork. Any child born abroad could tell you that!
Attorney is refuting the authenticity of the Certification of Live Birth that was posted on FightTheSmears.com ...
he has got to be talking about Ann’s second divorce from Lolo
They were supposed to have traced it through an alias that Stanley Ann Dunham used
Timeframe + stupid comments + plus accusing others of being trolls = projection.
So, what’s yer DU screenname?
You’ve accused a bunch of long time Freepers of being DU troll sleeper agents.
So, put up or shut up.
This better be good. The Viking Kitties are in the bullpen.
You said — “America was warned about this ba$tard and did not heed the warning.”
And that’s what makes me think that Obama is God’s judgement upon America for its sins. You want to get rid of Obama? Well... get America to repent of her sins. That will probably carry a lot of weight with God. The Bible says that God forgives upon repentance.
Can’t get America to repent? Well..., look for Obama in office...
“Yeah, it sure backfired for the left. Now they’re stuck with the House the Senate AND the White House. Poor suckers! /s “
It seems to me that we probably have some FReeper who is a lawyer who could tell us the type of information that might be on the missing pages. It jumps from 7 to 12, and the 12th page is just a summation of the decree. Could 8-11 have more information or details on why the divorce was petitioned?
1986 modification to 1952 Nationality Act decreases time limit that Stanley Ann had to reside in the US from five years to two years, which would make her 16. However, there is not retroactivity that applies to Stanley Ann. Therefore the critical question becomes was he born on foreign soil or US soil ... if he was born on foreign soil, then he is not eligible ...
Okay listening to attorney and he just affirmed that if Obama was born on foreign soil - HE IS NOT EVEN A CITIZEN let alone natural born.
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.