Posted on 01/25/2009 8:32:35 PM PST by FreeAtlanta
bump
That would be fine.
I just don’t think those are the only flags on the play.
It's not only a question whether he's a natural born citizen, it's a question of identity.
You mean, under which name the oath was taken? Which AKA, which alias?
I watched the Inauguration live and thought it was very interesting how BO was caught off-guard when CJ Roberts said "I, Barack Hussein Obama do solemnly swear." It's like BO wasn't expecting to hear that name in full from someone else and it threw off his rhythm.
Not really interested in flaming people . . .
I am interested in flaming off the wall traitorous ideas, perspectives,
nonsense.
If HUSSEIN was applying for a Federal job instead of elected, he would have to present an original BC from the state with raised seal.
No BC, no job
“That would be fine.
I just don’t think those are the only flags on the play.”
Philip J. Berg demanded that the courts verify Obama’s original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Berg’s latest appeal, requesting an injunction to stop the Electoral College from selecting the 44th president, was dismissed by Federal District Court R. Barclay Surrick.
Berg then appealed to the US Supreme Court and after being introduced in conference for a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari by Justice David Souter of the U.S. Supreme Court, Berg’s Petition was denied without comment by the court.
Berg resubmitted his Petition for a Writ of Certiorari and it was taken on by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. On December 17th it was denied by Kennedy.
Berg resubmitted his Petition for a Writ of Certiorari for a third time. On January 12th it was denied prior to judgement for a third time by the US Supreme Court.
Berg also petitioned the US Supreme Court for a Stay of the Certification of the Electoral College Vote. His application for a stay was denied by Justice Scalia on January 21st.
Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public’s support. However the 55 California Electors did vote on December 15th and Certification of the Electoral College vote occurred on January 6th.
The California Supreme Court denied this case on December 5th, 2008.
The case was submitted to the US Supreme Court for a Petition for Writ of Certiorari which was denied by Justice Kennedy on December 17th, 2008.
This case was resubmitted to the Supreme Court through Chief Justice John Roberts and will be distributed for conference of January 23rd, 2009.
Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.
In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.
In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injuction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
In Texas, Jody Brockhausen of Round Rock, who runs the Web site, obamaverifybirthplace.com, wrote in her lawsuit that the Texas Secretary of State’s Office should decertify Obama’s name from the state’s 2008 election ballot unless it receives documents proving that Obama was born in Hawaii. Williamson County district judge Bert Carnes dismissed the case arguing that Brockhausen did not have standing.
With this statement you prove yourself to be an ignoramus of the lowest degree.
The State of Hawaii most certainly DOES issue Certificates of Live Birth (as opposed to the BS CERTIFICATIONS of Live Birth) to anyone who is entitled to one, such as the named individual or an immediate family member. I have two of them in my posession for my kids. Moreover, the Hawaiian Lands Commission, a branch of the Hawaii government, does not itself accept the BS CERTIFICATION as allegedly produced on the web by the usurper.
Yes.
Unfortunately, that is NOT the document produced by the usurper. If only he had produced a Certificate of Licve Birth, the furore would stop. Perhaps.
BTW, aren't you the ignoramus who has already displayed his complete unfamiliarity with Hawaii law and practice?
While it can, such would not be necessary to get a DL, there is no "natural born citizen" requirement to get a DL, and the DL does not say *where* one was born. I doubt they even look at the "where". And once you get one, you don't have to submit the BC for subsequent ones. Who would have cared 30 or so years ago, where one "Barack H. Obama" was born when he got his first DL.
At minimum it was an image that was altered, thus making it invalid, as stated on the document itself.
(2) Obama’s C.O.L.B. says that he was born at 7:24 PM on Friday, August 4, 1961 in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu, in the state of Hawaii.
The image we have been shown says that.
(3) Obama’s birth was registered with the state of Hawaii on August 8, 1961, four days after his birth.
Or so it says on the image posted.
(4) Every short form Certificate of Live Birth issued in Hawaii is guaranteed by the state to have the exact same information on it as the original long form, vault copy certification. It says that right on the Certification.
It does? I don't see that statement. Besides, there is information on the long form birth certificate that is not on the Certification, such as parents place of birth.
(5) The State of Hawaii law states that the short form Certification of Live Birth is “prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceding.”
But it can't certify was is not on it. And the document also says that any alterations invalid it, doesn't it?
(6) There is no law in any state, no law in the federal code and nothing in the US Constitution that differentiates between a short form Certification and a long form Certification as valid proof of where a person was born and when they were born
The US State Department will not accept a short form certificate from some states, or from any state if the time between the birth and the registration date is more than a year. In those cases they insist on the long form. Why? Because the short form is much more subject to being altered, and they want to check the reason for the late filing, because a late filing is also more apt to be fraudulent.
It's also Constitutionally impossible for someone not a Natural Born Citizen to hold the office of President. Yet, as far as I can tell, no one has checked to see if BHO is a NBC. The cases have all been thrown out on standing or other technical issues, or for no stated reason. No state official, nor any federal one, has taken it upon themselves to even check it out.
That turns out to be wrong. The state itself requires a long form certificate for purposes of the Hawaii Lands program, and the US State department does likewise under certain conditions.
The long form just takes longer to get, because someone has to drag out the file and xerox it, and then stamp the copy with the state seal.
From the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands site
Primary Documents
The primary documents used to show you are of age and a qualified native Hawaiian are:
* A certified copy of Certificate of Birth;
* A certified copy of Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,
including testimonies; or
* A certified copy of Certificate of Delayed Birth.
You will need the certified birth certificates for:
* Yourself
* Your biological father; and
* Your biological mother
The state Department of Health, (DOH), Vital Records Section, records documents by island and district (geographically) and by the date of the event (chronologically).
If your biological parents' documents don't clearly prove that you have at least 50 percent Hawaiian ancestry, you will also need certified birth certificates for:
* Your biological father's parents; and
* Your biological mother's parents.
In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.
Please note that DOH no longer offers same day service. If you plan on picking up your certified DOH document(s), you should allow at least 10 working days for DOH to process your request(s), OR four to six weeks if you want your certified certificate(s) mailed to you.
So they will issue one. And they'll issue one for other purposes as well. Nice talking point, but it's wrong.
Perhaps it would help you to get a better grasp of the facts. These might help.
http://sites.google.com/site/obamabirth/Home
http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/Dear-Fellow-Americans
Be certain to read the 2nd half of this article that speaks of the consequences of an ineligible “usurper” (NOT president)in the White house.
If Obama was never legally president he cannot be impeached, he must be removed by the authorities.
And in which amendment to the Constitution is that process outlined?
I did not realize that Obama was claiming to be a “native” Hawaiian and applied for the Home Lands Program.
Please read the following article in it’s entirety to better understand. The following is a small portion...
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm
“Seventh, if Obama does become an usurper posturing as “the President,” Congress cannot even impeach him because, not being the actual President, he cannot be “removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see Article II, Section 4). In that case, some other public officials would have to arrest him—with physical force, if he would not go along quietly—in order to prevent him from continuing his imposture. Obviously, this could possibly lead to armed conflicts within the General Government itself, or among the States and the people.”
Thank you for posting your concerns, it has lead to a lively debate.
It looks as if you have a lot of company.
I believe what you have posted is someone’s opinion of what would happen and not an actual procedure as proscribed by the Constitution.
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.