Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: donmeaker; Beckwith

All Ineligible

All three of the 2008 presidential candidates, Obama (aka Soetoro), McCain, and Calero were not eligible under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution to serve as Commander-in-Chief.

Just like a residential purchase of a home is void if fraud in the inducement (where one party conceals a material fact that if people knew about it ahead of time, they would not enter into a residential purchase of a home), the same thing has occurred with the primaries and presidential election on November 4, 2008.

Because these three candidates (Obama (aka Soetoro), McCain, and Calero) were ineligible under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the 2008 presidential election and its results should be voided.

Regardless of what game of charades people in the mainstream media and people within our federal government are trying to pull. That is a legal fact that can not be disputed.

Obama has only one US citizen parent. His father was British subject and a Citizen of Kenya — as was Obama.

McCain was not born in the mainland US. John Sidney McCain III was born at the Colon Hospital, located at Avenida Melendez and 2nd Street, Manzanillo Island, City of Colon, Republic of Panama.

The time of birth on the birth certificate issued by Panama Railroad Company (which owned the Colon Hospital) was 5:25 PM and the day and date of birth was Saturday, August 29, 1936.

Calero was not born in the mainland US. He was born in Nicaragua.

***

Democrats Try To Change The Rules

On February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).

Bill S. 2678 attempted to change article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States with reference to the requirements of being a “natural born citizen” and hence; the entitlement to run for President of the United States.

This bill met the same fate that similar attempts to change the Constitution have in the past. Attempts such as The Natural Born Citizen Act were known to have failed and the text scrubbed from the internet, with only a shadow-cached copy left, that only the most curious public can find.

Sen. McCaskill, her co-sponsors, fellow colleagues and legal counsel, contend that the Constitution is ambiguous in article II, section 1 and requires clarification. But does it?

***

Senate Judicial Committee Chairman Says Obama Not Eligible — And Obama Agrees

On April 10, 2008, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was a ‘natural born Citizen,’ as specified in the Constitution and eligible to run for president.

Sen. McCaskill knew Obama was not a U.S. Citizen, that’s why she introduced this bill — dressing it up to look like it was in Sen. John McCain’s cause.

It was during the bill’s hearing that Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement:

“Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen,” said Leahy. “I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate.”

At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President.

“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied.

“That is mine, too,” said Leahy.

What’s interesting here is that Sen. Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary, confirms that a “natural born” citizen is the child of American citizen parents.

Parents — that’s two. That’s BOTH parents.

Every time the words, “citizen” and “parent,” are used by Sen. Leahy and Sec. Chertoff, the plural case, “citizens” and “parents,” is used. The plural case is the operative case.

It is Sen. Leahy’s opinion — his own recorded words, in a formal Senate Resolution and on his U. S. Senate website — that Barack Obama is not a “natural born” citizen, and therefore not eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief, regardless of his birthplace.

Obama had one American parent —singular — his mother. His father was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain.

Obama, himself, “at birth,” was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain — he says so on his own campaign website. This fact introduces the concept of “divided loyalties,” — the reason the founders created the eligibility requirement in the first place — a fact that further underlines Obama’s ineligibility.

The source of this information is Sen. Leahy’s own website. The webpage contains a statement about the resolution; the resolution, itself; the Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.); and an excerpt of Sec. Chertoff’s testimony.

The plural word “parents” is used four times. When used to identify the parents, the word “citizens” is used five times. That’s nine times that Sen. Leahy, on his own website describes the eligibility requirement. There is NO PLACE in any of these four documents where the singular case of “parent” or “citizen” is used.

The real purpose of this bill was to change article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States with reference to the requirements of being a “natural born citizen” by the Democratic Party leadership — paving the way for an Obama run.

Both Leahy and Chertoff avoid addressing the “in the US mainland” (jus solis) element of the eligibility requirement and focus solely on parentage (Jus sanguinis) in making their arguments and by doing so bring focus to the fundamental reason Obama is not qualified. He had one American parent and one foreign parent. Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen — no matter where he was born.

Obama is a co-signer of this resolution. So, I guess he too agrees that one needs two American parents to be eligible for POTUS — except he doesn’t care — after all, he’s the Obamamessiah. Rules don’t apply to him.

***

35 Or 36

Since the 1870s, assorted Congress critters have attempted to define or redefine “natural born” citizen status nearly 30 times!

There were five attempts to re-define “natural born” citizen status since 2001 — that’s six attempts, if you include Sen. Leahy’s Resolution for McCain in March 2008.

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm


42 posted on 01/07/2010 10:29:41 PM PST by STARWISE (.They (LIBS-STILL) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war- Richard Miniter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: STARWISE

Well, somebody should have made it clear..maybe if they did, we would be dealing with HIM now.

I honestly think someone should fix this and make it absolutely clear...so we dont ever have to go thru this again.

If they want to judge it by the parents..or by the child plus the parents..or just by the child. They should pick something, so there is an absolute law on who can be president and who cant.


46 posted on 01/07/2010 10:49:51 PM PST by New Yawk Minute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
Well put STARWISE. The more deeply one pursues the definition and motivation for the additional requirement beyond native or citizen, that of having two citizen parents, the less doubt there is. France was a jus sanguinis - parentally-passed citizenship - country at the time of the revolution. The Alexander Morse Treatise on Citizenship is exhaustive on the history of natural law, the law of the Continent, or Roman law, as it was called by some. What the founders required was very consistent with the law of nations and thus with Vattel’s Law of Nations, and Alexander Hamilton said exactly that. English Common Law was arbitrary. A nation of laws needed an immutable foundation, not alterable by the legislature or “The King”. That is made clear in Vattel, but far from a new concept. Vattel cites Cicero.

One approach to learning about our foundations is to read Wolf and Pufendorf and Leibniz, precursors of Vattel. Another is to read the extensive discussions of citizenship in supreme court cases (some lower courts pay little attention to precedent, such as the Indiana Supreme Court in their recent decision which rewrites the History around Chester Arthur).

Legal scholars have spent volumes on citizenship since The Revolution: Alexander Morse, Piggot, Collins, Kent, Story, Desty. Then there are the last ten years. I did not realize there had been five attempts to redefine Article II since 2001. I knew of Orren Hatch, who subsequently forgot his understanding of what it was he tried to change in 2003. Do you include statutes, which cannot, of course, amend The Constitution? What are some other attempt to alter Article II Sect 1?

Being lazy, I usually depend upon a citation in the Herlihy Paper wherein she cites 24 attempts to amend the definition of natural born citizen. She, of course, in her 26 pages, doesn't mention Marshall, or Happersett, or Waite, or Venus, or Hamilton, or Jay, or Washington, but makes the advent of globalism the reason we need to admit children of aliens to the restricted class of presidential qualities.

Has someone preserved the “shadow-cached” bills which have been scrubbed? I, for example, saved the Herlihy Chicago-Kent Law Review article, noting that it was so obviously aimed at supporting an Obama run that it might be useful. Of course it disappeared from the Internet. It must still be on paper in law libraries, so it appears the Obama team is just buying time; until what? Do they expect to have replaced the 1st Amendment? Perhaps.

49 posted on 01/08/2010 12:12:39 AM PST by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
The Obama ineligibility case proves one thing for absolute certainty, the Democrats ignore the Constitution when it suits them. They will do this every time they have a fascist agenda which they are instituting, evey time they have a lie which serves their agenda. And there are several posters at FR who serve this agenda every time this ineligibility issue comes up on a thread ... and these same servants of the big lie are protected at FR, sadly.

You have focused upon the essence of the issue of Barry Soetoro's ineligibilty. Watch as these stealth servants of the democrfat lie now work to change the issue to anything but the fact that even Leahy and his henchfools confirmed 'parents' of a natural born citizen must be American citizens at the child's birth.

65 posted on 01/08/2010 7:22:02 AM PST by MHGinTN (Obots, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE
“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Leahy. What’s interesting here is that Sen. Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary, confirms that a “natural born” citizen is the child of American citizen parents. Parents — that’s two. That’s BOTH parents.

HUSSEIN WAS SITTING AT THE SAME TABLE WITH THEM AND AGREED WITH THE DEFINITION!!! /caps off

79 posted on 01/08/2010 9:57:59 AM PST by bgill (The framers of the US Constitution established an entire federal government in 18 pages.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE; donmeaker; Beckwith

And then you have this short statement:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJ6iLuyCAx0


80 posted on 01/08/2010 10:16:35 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

To: STARWISE

I don’t doubt that Congress has addressed this, but I don’t think that the SCOTUS has.


87 posted on 01/09/2010 7:59:32 PM PST by donmeaker (Invicto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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