Posted on 03/30/2011 6:11:28 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/34968
(excerpt)
Allegedly Pelosi issued two different certifications verifying the eligibility of Barack Obama for the Presidency, which were both prepared on the same day and notarized by the same individual.
The Certification of Nomination sent to the state of Hawaii mentioned the Constitutional requirement:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 through 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.. ”
The Certification of Nomination sent to the other 49 states did not mention the Constitutional requirement:
“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively.. ”
If this is true, it would appear that in Pelosi’s view, the Constitutional requirements for Presidential eligibility are optional in 49 out of 50 states or it could simply be a legal safety hatch for any future unpleasantness.
One might hypothesize that Hawaii, knowing that there could be a potential Constitutional problem, demanded legal cover.
One wonders, in such a scenario, if any of the other 49 state Democratic National Committee organizations knew about the different Certifications of Nomination?
Perhaps Nancy had to submit the Certifications, so we could then learn what was in them.
Maybe - and I’m just spit-balling here - maybe Nancy had a responsibility as a Congressional representative and according to her oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Or is the oath optional too?
All of the above is, of course, speculation because only a crazy racist would detect any incongruities when two different Certifications of Nomination are used.
So, how did we get to where we are today?
Despite all that has been written, the real theme of the 2008 Presidential race was wishful thinking.
Nobody believed that Hillary Clinton would lose the Presidential primary to Barack Obama. Republicans hoped that McCain could somehow pull off a miraculous come-from-behind victory.
This is not the first time I have heard of this.
I call her “Pelosio”....
Pelosi should be indicted for fraud and perjury, then frog-marched in an orange suit into federal prison.
Here is a live link guys:
Pelosi, why the two Certifications of Nomination?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/34968
This is true.
It’s been well documented.
Right these are the same arguments but being made by Donald Trump. Don’t know if that will make a difference, but if it makes more people read,realize and become aware of how much trouble the Democratic party & Nancy Pelosi went through to avoid revealing Obama’s birth certificate and altering forms in preperation for Obama’s run, maybe it will create a stir!
I think that is the most telling moment.
Just curious. Why would Pelosi send out the certification? Who sent the cert on McCain? Is the responsibility defined somewhere (i.e. “the highest elected official of the party”)? I would think it would come from the party chairs....
bump for the donald...
Can anyone put the 2 images on this thread - to make it easy for the good guys?
TIA
Of course many of us know about the other “curiosities” that make this matter murky, until Obama proves he is a natural born citizen:
* Obama’s furtive meeting with SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts several days before his inauguration in 2009, a very unconventional act, amid multiple lawsuits that were furiously being filed with the SCOTUS at the time.
* SCOTUS Justice Thomas’ comment, during a congressional hearing, that “we’re avoiding discussion about [Presidential eligibility].”
* The law review article of 2007, written by a young lawyer at the law firm whose partner was on Obama’s election committee, which decried the “natural born” requirement of the Constitution. Why bring up that obscure point out of the blue?
* Obama spending millions to fight lawsuits in court rather than just producing the dang document and putting all questions to rest.
Other questions:
* When Obama’s mother [an addle-brained idiot who did not like her own country] married her second foreigner, the Indonesian, and moved to Indonesia, did she renounce her son’s citizenship and get him an Indonesian passport?
* Did her marriage to BHO Sr make her son a British/Kenyan citizen first, because she was not yet 19? Was her marriage to BHO Sr even legal because he had a wife already back in Kenya?
My sense is that the SCOTUS is waiting for a lawsuit with standing to come before them. I expect that Roberts and Obama’s meeting was polite and cautious and that, if anything, Obama would have verbally just assured Roberts that he was fully eligible.
I for one am glad that “the Donald” is doing this. The media is afraid of big celebrities who address controversial issues — they can bludgeon Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann — but they seem to defer to the Donald Trumps and Arnold Schwarzeneggers of the world.
Nothing to see here, literally. The DNC certifications for Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000 were handled the same way and writen with the exact same language right down to a typographical error.
Why?
why leave out constituional wording?
When? When has the left ever cared about the Constitution?
Yes, but these two versions say different things.
That is the issue.
“The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not one,” he wrote. “One of those documents had complete legal language, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama.
“The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, and the one used by the DNC to elect Barack Obama president,” he wrote.
WND contacted the Democratic National Committee multiple times over three days to request an explanation of the two images, including whether one might be a forgery. A spokeswoman in the press office confirmed, “We are aware of it,” but declined to elaborate.
“In most states,” Williams writes, “it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false.”
Read more: 49 of 50 states never saw certification of eligibility? http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=111286#ixzz1I5iVYWLF
Read more: Eye-popper: Is Nancy Pelosi in on eligibility cover-up? http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=109363#ixzz1I5i3zSqu
The reason being is that the Democratic Party of Hawaii (DPH), specifically Brian Schatz (now the Lt. Gov of Hawaii) refused to affirm that BHO II met the constitutional requirements to hold office as was required by Hawaii state election statutes.
Someone needs to get Brian Schatz on record why he deviated from the prescribed statutes in 2008.
Nobody believed McCain was going to pull a miracle out of his buttocks and many, like me, were perfectly willing to sit at home and help foist the current Dummy in Chief on American and the world, if only to teach them a lesson about their ludicrous Utopian ideas.
Without Sarah, Mubarak would have won in a landslide so lop sided and epic he would have had a mandate giving him even more power to do what he wants.
Next year we will take back the Senate and hopefully the Presidency. At that point if they don’t immediately, on day 1, swiftly and decidedly roll back mush of this idiocy, I will drop out of voting all together and never look back.
If there was, would an announcement in the local newspaper be sufficient? Would a short form BC with limited information be accepted? Would a document shown to be a forgery be allowed? Would we farm this job out to FactCheck.org?
How about a long form official BIRTH “CERTIFICATE”. Along with proof that both of your parents were U.S. citizens at the time of your birth? (like copies of their birth certificates or naturalization records). Not too difficult.
Hawaii legally requires the Constitutional language. The other states didn’t. It’s not the issue you’re making it. Nothing was done for Obama that wasn’t done for Kerry and Gore.
The Hawaii Democrat Party is the one who changed their certification for Obama not the national DNC.
Tell him, butter.
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.