Skip to comments.Obama Birth Story Unraveling - Mother In Univ Class In Seattle 15 Days After Obama Supposedly Born!
Posted on 08/08/2009 9:20:49 PM PDT by MindBender26Edited on 08/08/2009 9:33:42 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Jerone Corsi, Ph. D. is about to drop another bombshell, casting further doubt on the stories of President Obama's birth.
Dr. Corsi, whose doctorate is from Harvard, is an excellent researcher and investigative journalist. He was the driving force behind the Swift Boat veterans telling the truth about War Phony John Kerry. He is also the author of "Obamanation."
In his latest research, to be splashed on WND early next week, Dr. Corsi will reveal that he has documentary evidence that the mother of Barack Obama Jr., Ms Stanley A. Durham-Soetoro, began evening classes at the University of Washington in Seattle on August 19, 1961. This is just 15 days after she supposedly gave birth to President Obama in Hawaii.
We are expected to believe that in just15 days, she gave birth, stayed in the hospital for a few days, them packed her things and left her house in Hawaii, moved to Seattle, got established there, registered for, then began classed in Seattle, all the while caring for her newborn.
The new evidence also destroys another Obama legend-lie. According to the Presidents autobiography, Obama Sr. and Durhan-Soetoro were supposedly deeply in love and made a happy home together in Hawaii, complete with their baby, until Obama Sr. had to move to Boston to attend Harvard and could not afford take Stanley and baby Barack with him.
According to Dr. Corsis new written evidence, Durham-Soetoro was in college classes, thousands of miles away from Hawaii and did not return to the islands until long Obama Sr. left for Harvard.
Dr. Corsi also reveals that a Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth requires no proof of any kind and could simply be issued on the sworn statement of one parent.
All of this simply adds to the fast growing uncertainty and suspicion over Obamas supposed birth stories. Is August 4, 1961, his real birth date? Where was he really born? When he traveled to the Middle East in the 1990s, he did not have a US passport. What country issued him a passport, and why? Why wont he release the one document that would answer all the questions?
It just gets deeper and deeper.
There’s no major contradiction in the use of those three names. UW would have her indexed under both names, since her HS and UH transcripts were under those names.
Her use of the name “Anna Obama” in phone records was probably aimed at avoiding her HS friends — remember, none of them were aware she was still in town until 1962, and the two she visited on Mercer Island in late August 1961 say they never knew she was attending UW back then.
As far as the racial real estate restrictions, it’s obvious that by 1961 that neighborhood was in decline, judging by how the house she was living in had been subdivided into apartments rented by college students. The restrictions might have been on the books, but it’s doubtful they were enforced. Besides, Stanley Ann was white. The landlord needn’t know, or care, what color the infant was, if he/she even knew there was a child living there. Landlords who rent to college students tend not to be very picky, as long as the rent is paid and the tenants don’t set the place on fire.
The moment I saw this unknown fool(obumo) have his ghost written book “The Audacity of a Dope” on the market, I new he was the left’s chosen one for (Disaster USA).
I agree, this was all side-stepped to allow for this marxist takeover. The reality, it is a battle between the haves and the have nots. Marxist elitist vs American Patrioits.
Our Senate and House have sold us out for thier on interests.
They should all be held accountable for the fraud perpetuated on the American People.
April I believe that is when the “Worm Will Turn” for America.
Cowards in the house and senate sit back and do nothing for us Real Americans.
We need to vote in working Americans to the house and senate and preclude these wealthy silver spooned elitist.
Phrase of the day,”Let’s all go out and buy another gun to perturb another marxist liberal.”
There is a great embedded answer in your reply/question.
When dealing with the President of the United States, there should be no questions about his eligibility.
In this case, there are serious questions.... and a refusal to provide answers.
IIRC, those same folks looked into John McCain’s files, as well.
It's a lot more plausible than packing up everything and traveling from Kenya to Seattle in the same amount of time.
No, of course not. Otherwise they wouldn't be stuck with egg on their face every other day. I'm amazed it took you this long to figure it out.
Autumn quarter here starts in the last week of September. Bambi was born on August 4th. That gives mama Obama about a month and a half from the time of his birth to move to Seattle and attend classes.
I don't see why anyone would find that implausible.
Yup. The old-timers I've talked to here tell me Capitol Hill was pretty much a mixed-race slum by the mid-1960's,
It didn't start to turn around until the 1980's.
"Could be because, there is no legal defintion of "Natural Born Citizen"."
For the sake of argument lets say that's true. Then my point is valid. I was disputing a birther claim that two citizen parents are in fact required. That there is no such legal definition falsifies that claim.
Wonder if you ever got a reply on what this document might have been about?
Some sort of agreement or memo signed in Moscow this last July 2009 by Hussy Junior and the Russkie President
Interesting as that is a copy of that document that was released to the media by the White House
It is not as if they do not have SpellCheck for wordprocessing forms and documents or enough staff to review and edit or correct rough drafts
The WH would not be so stupid as to just type and print and skip checking for errors on international documents could they?
Thank you. I didn’t see any replies on the threads so wondered.
Not sure how to follow up on that document
Sure is strange.....
Maybe a lot of Googling?? ‘Obama signed Russian documents’, etc.
I remember someone writing you, “got a source for that, I need it”. “Thanks in advance”. LOL
I believe Meek may have written that to my
I may pass it on to a few who have some staff that can research it if it looks like something
Odd for Barack to be on that and for Barack to be on an alleged COLB
It is beyond my area
I remember seeing talk about Barak being used before, even recently. Has to have been on the COLB threads.
And none that supports it either. There is however considerable historical evidence supporting the "child of citizens" notion, and even some legal support, in Perkins vs. Elg 307, 307 U.S. 325 Ms. Elg was declared, by the DC circuit, to be a "natural born" citizen. This was supported by the Supreme Court, even though only her citizenship was at issue. Both her parents were naturalized citizens *at the time of her birth*, which was in the US. Of course that doesn't prove that if she'd only had one citizen parent, that they wouldn't have done the same. (I've not been able to find the DC Circuit's ruling, and am going on the citation to it in the Supreme Court's ruling, they may have expounded further on the matter)
One major historical support for the "child of citizens" requirement for natural born status comes from one of the authors of the 14th amendment.
I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen; but, sir, I may be allowed to say further, that I deny that the Congress of the United States ever had the power or color of power to say that any man born within the jurisdiction of the United States, and not owing a foreign allegiance, is not and shall not be a citizen of the United States.
John A. Bingham, (R-Ohio) US Congressman, Architect of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, March 9, 1866.
This statement is documented in Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866), Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes (1866), Cf. U.S. Const. XIVth Amend.
Notice that the first part says "of parents not owing allegience", while the second says "any man born within the jurisdiction of the United States, and not owing a foreign allegience". So in the first case it is the parents that must not have foreign alliegience, in the second the "man" himself. The first part describes "natural born" citizens, as used in the Constitution, the second "citizens".