Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is this really it? (re: possible Obama's Kenyan B.C. - Attny Taitz) Click on the link
orlytaitzesq.com ^ | 8/2/2009 | rxsid

Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid

Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]

Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.

Barry's Kenyan B.C.??

Special Motion for leave

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: armedcitizen; article2section1; awgeez; banglist; barackhusseinobama; barackobama; bc; betrayed; bfrcolbtwawlol; bho; bho44; birthcertificate; birther; birthers; birthplace; ccw; certifigate; citizenship; colb; conman; democratssuck; devilspawn; dreams; dreamscopyright; dreamsfrommyfather; enoughofthiscrap; fauxbama; fraud; greatpretender; hailtothekenyan; hawaii; hoax; honolulu; honoluluflimflam; hopespringseternal; hussein; imom; indonesia; kenya; kenyabelieveit; kenyaman; kenyan; keyes; lgfequalsdailykos; lgfhateschristians; lgfracist; lucyhazfootball; m0mbasa; marxistusurper; mas; muslim; naturalborn; nbc; obama; obamanoncitizenissue; obroma; ods; orly; orlytaitz; orlytaitzpatriot; philberg; polarik; potusbogus; prezzot; repository1; rkba; rosemarysbaby; stalinistusurper; suckers; taitz; texasdarlin; thekenyan; thistimeforsure; tinfoilhat; unpresident; usurper; vips; zulu666
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 7,251-7,3007,301-7,3507,351-7,400 ... 11,801-11,823 next last
To: Technical Editor

I totally understand your point of view and frustration.


7,301 posted on 08/06/2009 8:49:52 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7207 | View Replies]

To: rxsid

Excellent point:

How can the citizen of one country be governed by another country even while that citizen is in another country?


7,302 posted on 08/06/2009 8:51:18 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7210 | View Replies]

Comment #7,303 Removed by Moderator

To: April Lexington

The entire US Congress ought to be pinging on why a military offcier who challenges the POTUS citizenship gets a “Get of Afghanistan free” card from the White House.

And then gets professionally ruined in his civilian life by WH threats to his employer.

Just another day in the US of A?


7,304 posted on 08/06/2009 8:55:44 AM PDT by silverleaf (If you can't be a good example, at least don't be a horrible lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7271 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

My understanding is that the hospital was not actually on the base, but was under contract to the Navy.
McCain’s eligibility is very questionable


7,305 posted on 08/06/2009 8:57:23 AM PDT by Author2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7228 | View Replies]

To: BP2

I am speaking as a lawyer with 40 years of experience and who tried hundreds of divorces.

A couple of points.

1. I have never seen a court require the filing of a birth certificate in a divorce except where the defendant/father/husband denies in his answer that he is the father. Since Obama Sr. did not file an answer, the averment in Ann’s petition that Sr. was the father of Jr. is taken as admitted by default.

2. You did not mention the case’s docket entries. If a birth certificate had been filed separately, there would be an entry in the court docket identifying what was filed (i.e. a birth certificate) and the date it was filed.

3. If the document showing up on the Internet is a jpeg copy of the document filed in the divorce court, there are two problems: (a) There are no staple holes at the top from where it was stapled to a blue binder, which was required by all courts. (b) Depending on the way it was processed and mailed there would be no folds or 3 folds on the document. Under no circumstances would there be all those multiple irregular folds as shown.

You people are grasping at straws. You convoluted reasoning reminds me of a bowl of spaghetti, all twisted together in a pile.

I believe that you birthers want him out of the White House by any means whatsoever, legal or illegal. I have seen lies, forged documents, intentional misinterpretations of the law, attempts to intimidate judges and government officials, the advocacy of the violent overthrow of the government (this is treason punishable by death, remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg).

You Birthers are a disgrace to America.


7,306 posted on 08/06/2009 8:57:25 AM PDT by Cymraeg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6799 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg
I have seen lies, forged documents, intentional misinterpretations of the law, attempts to intimidate judges and government officials, the advocacy of the violent overthrow of the government (this is treason punishable by death, remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg).

and that was before Obama-soetero even became President.

7,307 posted on 08/06/2009 8:58:48 AM PDT by silverleaf (If you can't be a good example, at least don't be a horrible lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg

“You Birthers are a disgrace to America.”

I’m an American and I think Obama is a disgrace to America for not settling this issue long ago.

A lawyer with 40 years experienc talking about what is disgraceful. Amazing times.


7,308 posted on 08/06/2009 8:59:50 AM PDT by stevestras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: BP2; LucyT
Regarding BP2's post #7170 on the "Is this really it?" thread and facts set out there regarding the Susan Blake interview; and the end note regarding the Orly/Farrah birth certificate.

We identified the anomalies in the Susan Blake conversation specified by the researcher (set out in BP2's post) where we suggested some of the same conclusions he and BP2 reach and this is to emphasize a couple of the points and suggest one other obvious factual inference they don't reach.

There are a handful of factual disconnects in Susan's statements.

August of 1961 is clearly the wrong date for the excuse that Stanley Ann is going to Boston to set up a joint residence with Obama Sr.

I view the diaper changing story as both a factually accurate story as to the occurrence and clearly inaccurate as to the timing relationship with his birth.

The fact that the August 1961 time frame is so clearly wrong for the excuse in my view leads to another fact--Stanley Ann didn't tell Susan why she was there or where she was in fact coming from (redating the event from late August to early August per the analysis below is conclusive that she was not "coming from" Hawaii if the birth certificate date of August 4 for the birth is correct which I believe that it is).

Like the other researcher, I view the factual disconnects as both adding credibility and confirming my view that Susan had been prompted before the interview but also that the preparation was done in a somewhat hasty or incomplete manner.

If the preparation had been better, she would have had a better fairy tale for the reason for the visit; and she would have been told not to tell the story about the diaper changing.

The diaper changing was a step too far. It has an absolute ring of truth. But it too is just one step in excess. Women who are slow know how to change diapers in 48 hours. Stanley Ann was neither slow nor stupid--someone else may have changed diapers for her in Kenya but she was a lot closer to the birth date than three or four weeks. Had to be.

There is also a statement in the early version of the video interview which got removed at some point which indicates that the baby is the wrong color to be three weeks old at the time of the visit. I am not sophisticated enough to recount exactly how that works but some of the experts view that as conclusive of a much earlier date for the visit.

I have taken it as pretty close to a fact (although not evidence per se) that the Susan Blake visit occurred within three days of the birth at the outside.

I have suspected that Susan's point that the visit had occurred in late August was a factual invention in part because of her demeanor reflected in the live video interview--she knew the visit happened earlier but she also knew she shouldn't place it too close to August 4 because the person who prepped her told her not to.

And would also speculate that she didn't tell the person doing the prep the diaper story because the story in fact tells too much.

The fact that Susan hung up when she realized that the interviewer was on the other side coupled with her understanding of at least some part of the Natural Born Citizen rules, both confirms the fact that she was prepped and that she didn't really know all the facts about the trip which was interrupted by the visit.

I have a couple of other legal editorial thoughts on BP2's post. Is BP2 a lawyer? I have read several BP2 posts the last few days and all are really excellent (I do recognize that people who aren't lawyers can also do really excellent analysis).

Unless there is a scientific defect identified by laboratory analysis or some other patent deficiency in the Orly birth certificate, it is prima facia legal evidence that the birth occurred in Kenya on August 4.

What that means is that if this argument gets down to a legal contest in a court of law where the controlling issue is his place of birth, the opposing forces will need to prove by real evidence, that the birth certificate does not accurately report his birth data. I doubt they can do that.

I recognize the legal deficiencies in his Natural Born Citizen position even if he had been born in Hawaii--the two parent argument; the alternate citizenship argument; his personal representations that he was not a US Citizen. But my view, having been involved in many lawsuits over issues like this and watched them play out is that in the current political setting in the US, if Obama can prove factually that he was born in Hawaii, he is likely to win. I tend to ignore that possibility because I have known for some time that he was born in Kenya and my experience also is that the facts ultimately tend to crawl out.

I wouldn't predict how the end game is likely to play out here. And it may well play out over an even longer period than I expect--but the end of the day answer is that a strong majority of the American People will recognize that he is not President and at about the same time will also recognize how bad the policies he supports are for the Country.

7,309 posted on 08/06/2009 9:00:43 AM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7170 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

LOL!!!

I believe Juan Williams would take exception to your colorful remarks since he too was born in Colon. : )

I certainly agree with you though.

Especially today, Colon is a God-awful filthy, dangerous seaport city.

I certainly wouldn’t ask anybody to hold my wallet.

P.S.

Yes, that *&^head and an A*&Hole was born in Colon.


7,310 posted on 08/06/2009 9:04:24 AM PDT by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7299 | View Replies]

To: April Lexington

Resolved Question

Is it true that on page 59 of the health care bill, the govt. will have direct access to your checking account?

I keep hearing this and reading this in numerous places. Does anyone else know anything about this?

If this is true, it’s despicable. Who in their right mind would support this provision in the bill? I don’t care if you’re a liberal or a conservative, NO ONE should support the government having direct access to your checking account. This is all a bad dream.

http://www.barnesville.com/archives/1048…;
http://www.littlegreenfootballs2.com/200…;
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/15730
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat…;
http://politics.randomplayground.net/200…;

* 1 day ago

##########

Additional Details
To Bash: The fact checking website you quoted from doesn’t deny it at all.

1 day ago

###########

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
You bet it is. Not only that but until they got their hand caught in the cookie jar. They did have a message in the cash for clunkers web site, that when the car company checked in, there was a box that the car company was suppose to check stating that this was now the computer of the government. When it was exposed, the government took that wording out.

It said: logged onto the CARS system, your computer is considered a federal computer system and it is property of the United States government.

In other words, car companies were giving the government, police agencies, dot, or other government agencies to obtain information from the files in the computer anytime they wanted. OMG, how about the 4th amendment!!!

here are some of the highlights:

This is on page 425 of the bill, every 5 years senior have to go on through a counseling session on how to end your life, through nutrition, drugs or other means. So say goodbye to your parents.
,
Pg 58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access 2 individuals finances & a
National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your banks accts
for elect. funds transfer

Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from indiv. taxes.
(Americans will pay)

Page 16 and 17 tell you cannot keep your existing health care.

PG 85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will
ration your Healthcare
Source(s):
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWs12ccbOiE - 117k

* 1 day ago

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090804211250AAuWXsN

~~~~~~~~~~~

Must KILL Yahoo to have this on their site.


7,311 posted on 08/06/2009 9:09:57 AM PDT by STARWISE (The Art & Science Institute of Chicago Politics NE Div: now open at the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7271 | View Replies]

To: GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
Juan Williams was as well? Too bad. I like him even though I think of him as a conflicted but genuinely nice man.

Not a political opportunist like Sarah's Old Man.

7,312 posted on 08/06/2009 9:11:09 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7310 | View Replies]

To: GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)

What is up with your handle? It sounds funny when I say it loud.

Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)


7,313 posted on 08/06/2009 9:12:20 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7310 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; David; little jeremiah
I inadvertantly neglected to ping you to Post 7924.

Thanks.

I agree with your assessment that NBC equals born in the country of citizen parents.

I'm a bit puzzled, David has since been consistently in the same camp. I think. Or maybe I'm just fried?

Shoulda read the link more throughly before I posted it in any event.

I guess I owe you an apology for the snotty tone in post #7,147, if nothing else...

7,314 posted on 08/06/2009 9:21:35 AM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 197 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7297 | View Replies]

To: Cheburashka

I support here is a quote from majority opinion of the Supreme Court in US v Wong Ark Kin 169 US 649 (1898)

“The interpretation of the constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history.” 124 U.S. 478
“All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural- born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England.”
“The (14th) amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born within the territory of the United States of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Coke, 6a, ‘strong enough to make a natural subject, for, if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject-”


7,315 posted on 08/06/2009 9:23:24 AM PDT by Cymraeg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6775 | View Replies]

To: perchprism

WND is today claiming that the KBC may be a forgery.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106135

This gets more interesting every day. Perhaps this is the BC used by Obama to enter college as a foreign student as is claimed in the CA lawsuit. That would explain why his college records are sealed. Obama may be a forger in addition to being a usurper.


7,316 posted on 08/06/2009 9:23:24 AM PDT by The Viceroy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Forgive me, please.

I did not mean to make Juan Williams into a mean and deranged person like McCain just because he was born in Colon too. I can see where I was misunderstood though.

I have the greatest respect and admiration for Juan Williams.

Also, his father was a boxing coach, so I suggest nobody get into a fistfight with Juan.

Again, I am sorry for any misunderstanding. And again, I have the greatest respect for him.

P.S.

The seeming conflict may be because his son, Antonio, is a conservative.


7,317 posted on 08/06/2009 9:24:26 AM PDT by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7312 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg

Wow! a real divorce lawyer, right here on FReeRepublic.

Hot dayum.


7,318 posted on 08/06/2009 9:27:23 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: null and void

No problem!

Often long posts do not get read thoroughly.


7,319 posted on 08/06/2009 9:29:33 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7314 | View Replies]

To: PeaceBeWithYou
Consider it similar to Gore trying to claim 'there is no controlling leag authority.' TE is working its little fingers off trying to establish the notion that there is no authority which has established the actual requirements for President. We have others--like Star Traveler--who seek to establish the same notion, just insisting at a different shrillness level.

BTW, when the 14th A was written, it 'statutized' ALL slaves/prior slaves in America and the next generation of their children born on U.S. soil would then be natural born if both aprents were so statutized and the child born on U.S. soil. Rewriting the Pre4sidentail eligibilty requirement was thertefore not necessary, as your sound logic so determined.

7,320 posted on 08/06/2009 9:32:15 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7221 | View Replies]

Comment #7,321 Removed by Moderator

To: editor-surveyor

Thanks; I do agree with your points. IMO 0bama is ineligible in several ways.


7,322 posted on 08/06/2009 9:34:48 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7294 | View Replies]

To: David
"I wouldn't predict how the end game is likely to play out here. And it may well play out over an even longer period than I expect--but the end of the day answer is that a strong majority of the American People will recognize that he is not President and at about the same time will also recognize how bad the policies he supports are for the Country."

From your lips to god's ears!

7,323 posted on 08/06/2009 9:36:20 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7309 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyX

“... the Constitution’s natural born citizen is a person who has a natural born allegiance only to the United States of America.” The single most unassailable point, the one which the liar’s army must try to obfuscate! Thanks for stating it so succinctly.


7,324 posted on 08/06/2009 9:36:24 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7224 | View Replies]

To: David; BP2

Good analysis. Thank you.

Just want your opinion in this ... judge King granted the Divorce Decree in Hawaii as posted by BP2, exhibit page 1 to 14, with page 11 missing. Surely, a divorce court must be satisfied that the couple was indeed legally married in the first place.

Then, is it possible that missing page 11 contains a copy of the original Marriage Certificate of Stanley Ann and O Sr. and not Barry’s Kenyan Birth Certificate ?


7,325 posted on 08/06/2009 9:37:55 AM PDT by m4629 (politically incorrect, and proud of it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7309 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg; BP2

Cymraeg has a fairly recent signup date and this on his profile page:

“An old foggy liberal!”

Cymraeg - what about 0bama’s crimes? You don’t care about them?


7,326 posted on 08/06/2009 9:38:43 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg
"An old foggy liberal!" Welcome to FR.

I appreciate your openness.

3. If the document showing up on the Internet is a jpeg copy of the document filed in the divorce court, there are two problems: (a) There are no staple holes at the top from where it was stapled to a blue binder, which was required by all courts.

There has been some discussion about the staple holes, they are there.

(b) Depending on the way it was processed and mailed there would be no folds or 3 folds on the document. Under no circumstances would there be all those multiple irregular folds as shown.

True for the way Americans process documents. There have also been discussions of what common practice in The Empire was, and the folds are consistent with that, and with the air mail sized envelopes of the era.

I believe that you birthers want him out of the White House by any means whatsoever, legal or illegal. I have seen lies, forged documents, intentional misinterpretations of the law, attempts to intimidate judges and government officials, the advocacy of the violent overthrow of the government (this is treason punishable by death, remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg).

I believe that you after-birthers (Ommaculate Conceptionists?) want him to stay in the White House by any means whatsoever, legal or illegal. I have seen lies, forged documents, intentional misinterpretations of the law, attempts to intimidate judges and government officials, the advocacy of the violent overthrow of the government (this is treason punishable by death, remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg).

I've also seen scores of documents vanish from the internet some within hours of being cited here on FR. Someone in the 0bama camp is frantically trying to send every legitimate document 'down the memory hole'. This started fairly early with google 'disappearing' over half a million hits on 'obama birth certificate' image searches in min July 2008.

Rather than call each other names, let's wait and see where the paperwork trail leads. My money's on foreign born. Yours is on legitimate American. Time will tell.

7,327 posted on 08/06/2009 9:41:56 AM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 197 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
You wrote: "The parent is a citizen of another country and under that country's Jurisdiction. That makes the baby a citizen of the country their parents are citizens of." ** My understanding is quite the opposite. If you are located in the United States, you are subject to its laws. You are under its jurisdiction. You disobey its laws, and you go to jail. It is my understanding that the Supreme Court has ruled on the meaning of the phrase regarding jurisdiction. You also wrote: "You can only be NBC if both parents are citizens of the US and subject to the jurisdiction of the US." ** Says who? And where? We are all looking for that?
7,328 posted on 08/06/2009 9:42:18 AM PDT by Technical Editor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7296 | View Replies]

To: The Viceroy

Here we go again! (rolling my eyes at WND)


7,329 posted on 08/06/2009 9:42:25 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7316 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg

We really need some left-wing noobie troll to come here bearing false facts and telling us who is a disgrace.

Your entire life and ideology is a disgrace to all who love freedom.


7,330 posted on 08/06/2009 9:42:43 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7306 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg; BP2

You are a lawyer? let’s see your credentials, if that is the basis behind your argument. In other words, you are more smaterer than us’ns.

I see two holes punched at the top of the documents you are referring to. This makes it easy to store in a binder as well as flip through the pages or add documents to the file. You don’t see them?

I don’t see any folds. What documents are you referring to?

http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG003.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG004.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG005.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG006.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG007.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG008.JPG
http://www.plainsradio.com/obama1/IMAG009.JPG


7,331 posted on 08/06/2009 9:43:47 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7303 | View Replies]

To: GatĂșn(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
I think the apology is due you. My post may not have said clearly that I like Juan Williams. I don't think he is deranged or mean, in any way. He is always the nicest guy and I suspect when the camera is off a little more emotional than we see. I like his opinions because they come with not pretense and no qualifiers.

My feeling is his opinions are owned 100% by him and he expresses them even in opposition to the rest of a round table but does so with certitude and conviction.

just a nice guy.

What's up with your handle? I get the Gatún part but not the rest.

7,332 posted on 08/06/2009 9:49:35 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7317 | View Replies]

To: Technical Editor; Vendome
"If you are located in the United States, you are subject to its laws."

That is not what the ammendment means, and you know it. It means having entered the country in accordance with its laws, and not being immune therefrom.

Illegals are subject to prosecution if apprehended, but are not here under our laws in any way.

7,333 posted on 08/06/2009 9:53:12 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7328 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg

Leftists are not only a disgrace but are ruining the country and the entire world.


7,334 posted on 08/06/2009 9:53:22 AM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7306 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; LucyT; null and void; little jeremiah; politicalmerc
[From David] "So far you haven’t said anything particularly convincing—I remain of the understanding that the natural born subject law which dates back to the 12th Century was the historical origin of the concept."

[From Surveyor] "Natural Born citizen" isn't even a subject addressed in common law. Common law addressed the birth of a 'subject' to alien parents, but that would not be relevent, since a subject could not become a monarch. Here is a discussion of the use in the constitution, and the origin of the term.

Well from my last post, I would say (in jest) to editor-surveyor that I have represented a bunch of surveyors and engineers over the years and it is clear from his post that he, unlike BP2, is not a lawyer. But I don't really mean that as a personal insult--and I don't want to discourage productive thought; there is some merit in what he is saying which also leads to another legal argument that has received wide circulation (on Texas Darlin's site among other places).

The Law of Nations is an important work and is gaining some importance with the judicial doctrine seeking to expand the class of legal reference to which the courts would look as a basis for developing US law--I don't agree with the view on which that doctrine is based but on the other hand wouldn't hesitate to cite the reference if it supported my client's position.

But it isn't really dispositive of anything here. The Common Law doctrine of "natural born subject" precedes the work by hundreds of years. The author's comment that "[m]any have said that de Vattel’s Law of Nations . . . . " is speculative and argumentative. It's probably fair to believe that most of the participants in the drafting of the Constitution were familiar with the document and that it had some influence. But who and how much is just unsupported speculation.

I view the line of thought that "editor-surveyor" advances here based on the work as particularly misleading in the Obama setting. The Two Parent argument is just ducky--but I can tell you with a fair degree of assurance, that if it came out that Obama was born in Hawaii (he wasn't), he is going to win no matter what else you prove--even if you prove his father was a Russian bear imported from Siberia.

I believe, although I haven't looked specifically at the legal issue, that one would probably find common law support for the (Two Parent) argument also. What does the king do with the person who is born to the wife of a visiting dignitary from another king? How about the prince that is born to the Queen while she is visiting her parents in the realm where her father is king? Probably weren't common occurrences but I assume Blackstone or some other historical author will have thought if it.

But the most important point to draw from this discussion pertains to our legal system. The engineer surveyor mindset tends to view these legal questions like mathematical calculations of the line location--they aren't.

The current Orly birth certificate may be the best evidence at the moment, but if any reasonable trier of fact looked at the entire record of information available here, even including the Hawaii COLB which I believe the Hawaii authorities have now repudiated, the trier of fact could come to no other conclusion but that he was born in Kenya. That has been true for a long time. It was true when he ran for the Senate. But it didn't make any legal difference.

And proving facts today that show him to be ineligible does not get him out of office either. At the moment, Orly has a good judge in Santa Ana--but it appears that her proceeding may be a little defective; it may be an argument that can't be decided on these pleadings until after he is out of office.

Maybe Orly gets over the problem; maybe she doesn't. A lot depends on what the judge says.

"We are going to decide this on the merits"? When? What relief? Subject to what kind of appeal? Judges say lots of stuff they are later forced to eat. Life goes on.

At present, the most important forum is not the legal forum, it is the public political forum. That is why the Opposing Forces (the "OF") are exerting so much effort to shut down Lou Dobbs and others who are making this a mainstream issue. The legal forum is important to that question because one of the OF arguments is that this has been looked at by the courts which throw it out. So it's good if Orly can do no more than keep her judge from kicking the case out.

But when and if the American people discover that he has been lying to them all this time; that he was really born in Kenya; that he was really not born in Hawaii; there will be consequences. At that point, the legal system will be involved.

7,335 posted on 08/06/2009 9:55:21 AM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7103 | View Replies]

To: David; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; BP2; MeekOneGOP; ...

Thank you, David.

Pinging to #7,309.

-

Also check out other news:

Today’s GLOBE magazine has a front-page article on Obama’s fake birth certificate, but it features Pam Geller and TechDude’s bogus analysis. There’s a paragraph about Polarik who “confirms” TechDude’s forgery findings “who also claims that Obama’s birth certificate was made from Patricia Decosta’s,” referring to Polarik’s July 27, 2008 posting.

(no link provided)

-

Obama birth doc update: Kenya sources weigh in
Comparison with similar certificates suggests fakery, WND probe reveals

NEW YORK – The Kenyan birth document released by California attorney Orly Taitz is probably not authentic, according to WND’s investigative operatives in Africa, though officials in Nairobi do not rule out the possibility President Obama may indeed have been born in their country.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106135


7,336 posted on 08/06/2009 9:56:18 AM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7309 | View Replies]

To: David

“I have taken it as pretty close to a fact (although not evidence per se) that the Susan Blake visit occurred within three days of the birth at the outside.”

I don’t know what you are basing this on—maybe just the dirty diaper—but when I had a baby in 1967 the birth was on the 7th of the month and we didn’t go home till the 13th and that was the usual time to spend in the hospital. So based on that if you add on travel time I think it would have to have been in the 2nd week at the least. That also fits into the University registration on the 19th. Her mother’s friend that she was staying with could have been giving her a lot of assistance to get settled. I think the story Susan gave about what they were talking about is bunk. I can’t believe that you can remember real conversations that happened 47 years ago. You can remember perhaps having a conversation but exactly what it was really challenges credulity. Of course there probably are exceptions like if they are tied to some really personal life-changing decision but I think they are pretty rare.


7,337 posted on 08/06/2009 9:58:27 AM PDT by Albertafriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7309 | View Replies]

To: Author2

McCain’s eligibility is very questionable
______________________________________________

Where do you sit on the eligiblity of Obama ???

McCain had 2 US citizen parents...

Obama has admitted that his father was Kenyan only visiting here on a student visa...

What if Obama was not born on US soil ???


7,338 posted on 08/06/2009 9:59:31 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7305 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Consider, perhaps, that ‘a subject’ can be a slave without being ‘a citizen’.

Well if we are going to continue this.

I haven't really thought about it but I suspect that if we looked at the common law question, we would find that there wasn't anybody who was a citizen and not a subject.

The concept of "citizenship" dates back to Roman law where there was a clear distinction between Roman citizens and others. After 476, I don't think you had much of that in Western Europe or England.

You had whatever rights the king said you had and he could (at least until Magna Charta), cut you off without cause or notice.

Subjects, depending on who they were, probably had rights against slaves or lower level subjects for that matter; but they were still subjects of the state.

7,339 posted on 08/06/2009 10:01:59 AM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7063 | View Replies]

To: Technical Editor

You wrote: "The parent is a citizen of another country and under that country's Jurisdiction. That makes the baby a citizen of the country their parents are citizens of." **

 

You wrote:

My understanding is quite the opposite. If you are located in the United States, you are subject to its laws. You are under its jurisdiction. You disobey its laws, and you go to jail.

 

That is true for any one “who is in the United States” under citizens and visitors alike.  However, let’s try this example:

 

You are a citizen of Great Britain and you are in the U.S. under a work visa.  You take a vacation to the Bahamas and on a whim travel to Cuba.  The U.S. has laws against travel and trade for American citizens but, Great Britain does not.  You are therefore in no jeopardy of prosecution as has no jurisdiction over you.  Same goes if they wanted to begin conscription.  You would not be conscripted as you are not a citizen.

 

If you are not a citizen then you cannot confer U.S. citizenship status to your children.  Much like a diplomat, who is here from China, has a child in Lexington Hospital on the Upper East side of New York.  That child would be a citizen of China.  The United States and China would acknowledge and recognize as such.

 

Here is another example I wrote a while back:

 

American Citizenship cannot be conferred upon a baby whose parents are citizens of another country.

 

Think of this way. Mom and Dad, from say, Paris, France come to Disneyland in Los Angeles. While they are here, on vacation, the very pregnant, French Mom goes into labor.

 

Well the smart thing to do is get to a hospital. So they do, cuz they are smart (they are French after all).

 

So while the smart, French, pregnant woman is in the hospital she gives birth. We can say it is a boy for the purpose of this discussion.

 

Anyway, out pops this kid, thing, with ten fingers and ten toes. Perfect. Except now the vacation is over and the newly minted French Mom and Dad have to go home. They live in the Montmartre District of Paris and can't wait to get home and have their baby blessed and baptized, at a little church called Sacré Coeur.

 

This beautiful white church is just a couple of blocks up from them and sits on a hill overlooking Paris. It will be a beautiful, momentous and joyous occasion.

 

So they leave the next day on board a British Airways flight, so the French Mom can lay down on a bed for the overnight flight and be comfortable.

 

The French Mom and French Dad, arrive at de Gaulle International and the immigration and customs people, of France, ask for the passport of the French Mom and French Dad.

 

They ask if the French Mom and French Dad have anything to declare and ....

 

So what nationality is the child?


7,340 posted on 08/06/2009 10:02:30 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7328 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor; Technical Editor
"If you are located in the United States, you are subject to its laws."
 
I didn't write that nor have I ever written anything like it.  What are you talking about?

7,341 posted on 08/06/2009 10:05:55 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7333 | View Replies]

To: null and void

I used the word hospital, but as even you must note, the base had a ‘clinic’ repeatedly updraged over the deacdes and quite capable of treating even surgical needs. Play gotcha with someone else, old FRiend.


7,342 posted on 08/06/2009 10:06:21 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7293 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg; Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; BP2; MeekOneGOP; ...

I am speaking as a lawyer with 40 years of experience and who tried hundreds of divorces.

LOL. Answering barackobama.com’s call to rally the troops, I see. He does needs all he can get, as it seems he's having a HARD time motivating his base.

Come on ... no law degree is necessary for this ... use your imagination ... put yourself back to early-1964, and pretend you're Judge King in the courtroom:

— three-year-old Obama JR wasn't probably present in the court room of the CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, now defunct. Ann Dunman, his mother, may have shown a picture to the judge. Or Obama JR may have been present, and the judge saw the child — who knows?

— the man who Ann claimed was the father, Obama SR, wasn't a participating father. The likelihood of him flying nearly 5,000 miles to Hawaii to protest the divorce, or ask for custody, was surely seen as very remote. Sure enough, he didn't even respond to the notification back in Boston — a no-show.

— Marriage Certificate? ALL modern searches by private investigators have NOT revealed it. It may exist, but it's not even searchable on Hawaiian document databases. The judge may not have asked to see that anyway — which is not necessary per se to award custody. Blood is thicker than water, anyway ... but someone has to get custody of the child, biologically-proven parents, relatives or the state of Hawaii ...

— there's no DNA testing in the 1960s.

— child smuggling DID take place in the 60s, as did child abduction.

And here's Ann, a lily-white 21-year-old woman from Kansas, asking for custody of a “mulatto” mixed-race baby that she claims to be hers. To put it in context: Black people only made up 0.8 percent of the Hawaiian population in 1960 and 1970. It's not racist to point this out — it's fact from the US Census and a reality of that racially-charged era — it would have been noticed.

So Judge King was likely curious, if not suspicious — most responsible judges, looking past the sobbing wife and her pin-stripped attorney, would be pondering "what's really going on here? Her husband is pursuing a doctorate in economics at Harvard, and yet she wants no child support or alimony ... hmmm."

He's not going to deny her a divorce as she claims "grievous mental suffering." BUT how's Judge King going to award custody — off of Ann's good word? I don't think so ... he'd turn to prima facie. I can hear his words now:

I'm going to ask for the mother to provide a copy of the birth certificate at our next hearing in March (1964). So ordered.”
Here’s the HAWAI‘I FAMILY COURT RULES for some reference on this:
http://www.state.hi.us/jud/ctrules/hfcr.htm

And keep in mind that Hawaiian law in the 1960s, especially in this old Circuit Court that dates back to when Hawaii had a King, didn't have such firm laws in place as we have today.

Everything wasn't codified as it is today. Judges had more discretion in those years shortly after statehood — and Judge King, who went on to be a Senior Judge at the US District Court in District of Hawaii — would have been irresponsible to NOT have exercised that discretion in such a situation.

Please take your "You people are grasping at straws" rhetoric elsewhere. If you weren't truly concerned about Mr. Obama's NBC status, you wouldn't be wasting your time conversing with people labeled by the Left as "crazy conspiracy nuts". LOL

7,343 posted on 08/06/2009 10:06:39 AM PDT by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7306 | View Replies]

To: Technical Editor

Sorry about the formatting. Don’t know why it came out that way, with double spacing.


7,344 posted on 08/06/2009 10:07:02 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7340 | View Replies]

To: The Viceroy
Welcome to Free Republic...YESTERDAY.

What motivated you to join our discussion group?
7,345 posted on 08/06/2009 10:09:40 AM PDT by CaptSkip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7316 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

If he has webbed digits, he’s a frog?


7,346 posted on 08/06/2009 10:10:08 AM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 197 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7340 | View Replies]

To: David

There is also a statement in the early version of the video interview which got removed at some point which indicates that the baby is the wrong color to be three weeks old at the time of the visit.
_________________________________________________

What is that from ???

The photo of Obama as a baby lying on his tum with his head up ???

He would have to be about 3 months old at least in that pic

3 WEEK old babies dont usually do that...

Oh, silly me...

Obama is not usual....

He was born walking andf talking and organized his Kenyan community before he got his first diaper...

Never mind...


7,347 posted on 08/06/2009 10:10:13 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7309 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
Bwahahahaha ... so apropos!
7,348 posted on 08/06/2009 10:10:42 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7299 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

“My feeling is his opinions are owned 100% by him and he expresses them even in opposition to the rest of a round table but does so with certitude and conviction.”

Yes, That is my opinion too.

What a wonderful person.

“What’s up with your handle? I get the Gatún part but not the rest.”

My handle has been going loopy/crazy for over a year. At that time I mentioned it to a monitor for help, but nothing. Could it be on this end? Maybe it is a Panamanian thing.


7,349 posted on 08/06/2009 10:13:25 AM PDT by Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7332 | View Replies]

To: Cymraeg

Had to make that dump twice? ... Forget to wipe yourself after the first dump, n00b?


7,350 posted on 08/06/2009 10:15:31 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7306 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 7,251-7,3007,301-7,3507,351-7,400 ... 11,801-11,823 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson