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.
Somebody (or a lot of somebodys) will be watching that POE for just such an occurrence.
Ping to summary and interesting (short) comments at links shown in #845:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2157797/posts?page=845#845
You can be sure that Obama spent hours reviewing video tapes of Malcom X in order to duplicate his vocal patterns and mannerisms. Obama sounds like X, not the other way around. In fact, Obama is a poor imitation. X was actually eloquent. Obama is uh, uh, uh, uh, uh -— let me clear -— an empty suit.
I agree.
Well, help us out! Where is the key and why do we have to play Sherlock Holmes for it?
Yeah, I’m with you, it sure would be easier for everyone if Obama would remove the justifiable cloud over his head by releasing the documents proving he was born in the US.
You said — “So then you are ducking my question:”
Saying I don’t know how many Supreme Court cases is not ducking your question — it’s answering it directly and truthfully... LOL..
—
And then you said — “You are trying to make it seem that if Arthur got away with being a fraud and that there is no apparent harm that was done that then we all can rest easy knowing that in this case it will be exactly the same. It is no going to be exactly the same though.”
It does seem very clear that Arthur got away with fraud, no question about it. Or..., at least that was the allegation (or was it the truth?). Well, anyway... he got away with fraud...
I didn’t say that no apparent harm was done — I was wondering what was the harm that was done. Perhaps someone can outline that harm for me, so I would know. That would be a good indicator of what is going to happen here. Please, let me know the harm...
I’m not saying rest easy — but there is one thing to say — the Constitution *still* has the same provisions for the requirements for the Office of President of the United States — even though President Arthur was not qualified.
I think that would allay some people’s fears that the Constitutional requirements would somehow disappear...
>how many pieces of legislation were invalidated during Chester A. Arthur’s term in office, because he was not a legitimate President?<
And what does that prove? I say nothing.
The historical case of Arthur does not prove that there is no harm in ignoring the requirements of the Constitution for eligibility.
These are much different times and this case may have already gotten hotter than the case against Arthur ever did (not sure but would venture that it has).
If you go to factcheck.org it states his father Obama Sr. was a Kenyan citizen and Obama also admits he was born under dual citizenship.
So the Obama Dunham divorce certificate does not bring anything new in the equation.
The Mormons or http://familysearch.org is the worst source for recent additions! When I began searching this back in July I went there and the info they had for the Dunhams seemed somewhat “hinky”. I noticed the name who had submitted the info and googled his name. It turned out to be an architect in Chicago so I asked my Mormon neighbor who could submit info for their website and she told me anyone could. The only info I trust which I find there is when the link goes to something like the SSDeath index.
Who is John Galt?
Saying I don’t know how many Supreme Court cases is not ducking your question — it’s answering it directly and truthfully... LOL..”
Sorry but I hadnt caught up to that answer yet, I was still on you last response.
There are 326 ports of entry in the US and Ed Hale’s not going to tell us at which one he found the registered birth certificate.
Who the Hale is Ed?
Someone pointed out that he sounded like this character called Bugs who called in to the Art Bell show claiming to have shot Bigfoot.
And by God, I’d swear it was the same person. Listen and tell me what you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOBggD7iiFY&mode=related&search
The People didn't vote for Arthur -- they voted for Garfield.
When Arthur ran on his on right, he didn't even win the primary. That should answer your questions.
-PJ
You said — “And what does that prove? I say nothing.”
Well, then I guess you don’t want to know the answer to that question. However, I would still like to know the answer to that question of how many pieces of legislation was invalidated during Chester A. Arthur’s term in office. That would give me some indication from history as to what we’ll be facing...
—
And then you said — “The historical case of Arthur does not prove that there is no harm in ignoring the requirements of the Constitution for eligibility.”
Well, I would like to know from history, what effect it had on the Constitutional provisions for President of the United States and if the present-day qualifications were changed by that episode of Arthur not being qualified. That’s something that I would like to know... Has it changed from that time?
—
And finally you said — “These are much different times and this case may have already gotten hotter than the case against Arthur ever did (not sure but would venture that it has).”
It sure is “hot” in certain quarters — but it’s certainly a total “non-starter” in other quarters. I guess it depends on what place you’re looking at it from...
Thanks for the ping unspun. No way can I read through all that so I’ll wait for the facts to be posted here on the thread.
And it seems,that it's going to be in both cases, that no one is going to come up with proof.
Doubters of Chester Arthur at his time and place are long gone, of course. As to the present case, they are going to hang on like a wire haired terrier clamped onto someones posterior. I am with 'em.
Hope you have a sense of humour.
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.