Skip to comments.Expert: Obama doc is 'proof' – of fraud
Posted on 06/07/2011 6:45:09 PM PDT by conservativegramma
Typeface analysis shows images come from different machines
The online image of a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" was trumpeted by the White House when it was released on April 27 as "proof positive" that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
Now an expert in typefaces and typography says it sure was "proof," but not of what the White House would have wanted.
Paul Irey, a retired professional typographer with 50 years experience in his business, has says an analysis of the typefaces used in the Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate that the White House released on April 27 reveals it absolutely to be a forgery.
"My analysis proves beyond a doubt that it would be impossible for the different letters that appear in the Obama birth certificate to have been typed by one typewriter," Irey told WND.
"Typewriters in 1961 could not change the size and shape of a letter on the fly like that," he said. "This document is definitely a forgery."
Irey acknowledges that an IBM Selectric typewriter could have produced different typefaces in a given document, but only if the Selectric ball was changed every time a different typeface letter was struck which would be unlikely to have been done to produce the word "Student," for example, that had two different styles of the lower case "t."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
And he is correct, you don't get a different typeface unless you change the ball everytime. Tedious business. And no one would have done that in a govt office typing out bc's. Nobody. And yet, that's what had to be done if you believe the LFBC is genuine.
In any case, yet ANOTHER expert weighing in on proof of forgery now going beyond layering and OCR, or kerning. You'd have to be an idiot to believe this thing is genuine. JMO.
Too many have called it a fake for it to be genuine.
Even if Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama had been birthed in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House Obama is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
It no longer matters.
There will be no Buckhead moment.
Give it up — fake or not the issue no longer has any political value.
Granny, I couldn’t agree with you more, but it appears this story is dead. Not one media outlet wants to touch this with a ten foot pole. Too bad, think of the fireworks if Limbaugh or one of the bigs tore into this.
I actually own an old Selectric. Never used it, found it after we moved into this house. Wonder if it is worth anything, maybe as an exhibit in some museum.
>>Even if Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama had been birthed in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House Obama is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. <<
That makes no sense at all and flies in the face of 200+ years of jurisprudence.
Trump is the only one who had proven he can move this story forward; I hope he doesn’t give up on it.
The other issue on the released BC is “kerning”. Letters imprinted by typewriters have a set space per letter. The space occupied is uniform resulting in words that do not look very neat. Draw a vertical line between the letters, it will not touch any part of a letter to the left of the line or part of a letter to the right of the line. Word processors allow letters to shift to form neat words. Same situation except a vertical line drawn between two letters can result in the line touching some part of both letters. Result of this word processing feature creates neat words with letters reasonably spaced apart and pleasing for the eye to see. This is called kerning. Obama’s BC has kerning amongst some of its printed letters, a feature that cannot be produced by typewriters of the 1950’s/60’s and only by computer word processing.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Emmerich De Vattel, (1714-1767,) Law of Nations, 1758, § 212, "Of the citizens and naturals."
well, i’d like to say it’s nice to see you saying something besides that you think Sarah won’t run...
but, instead, i will ask, why you think there is NO political value, in multiple experts testifying that the President has lied to the American People, and given them a forged document.
...the Weiner affair, about something that is NOT criminal, shows that people DO care about character and integrity.
also, most Americans are curious by nature. once the KNOW the LFBC is forged, they will get curious about what EXACTLY he is covering up so hard he would FORGE a document.
Good article. I hope it helps the cause but so far Mr. corsi and others have not delivered when it counts. I think his book is good. We need to expose this BO ASAP. Timing is everything and he is on the ropes now with staff leaving and economy tanking. A bombshell would put hyim over the edge. How bout that Kenya BC showing up soon?
Oh Lord, not that again.
It isn’t instantiated into the USC and I, for one, won’t be bound by ex-judicio opinions.
That is saying that only 2nd generation Americans, and born on US Soil, are “Natural Born Citizens.”
Any child born in the USA is a “Natural Born Citizen” irrespective of the parental heritage.
That is what the REAL law says, not an opinion of some dude with no standing in U.S. Court said 300 years ago.
Running that argument is legally pointless.
I agree. The President’s birth certificate is a fake. Sad that nothing can be trusted from our top political leader. And sad that a majority of journalists cannot be trusted to expose injustice. I take comfort knowing that good people will be honest, just and welcomed into the “cives sanctorum” and “the heavenly city” (Ephesians 2:19).
>>”The other issue on the released BC is kerning. <<
There shall be no Buckhead moment.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines a Natural Born Citizen in 1789
In defining an Article II natural born Citizen, it is important to find any authority from the Founding period who may inform us how the Founders and Framers themselves defined the clause. Who else but a highly respected historian from the Founding period itself would be highly persuasive in telling us how the Founders and Framers defined a natural born Citizen. Such an important person is David Ramsay, who in 1789 wrote, A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen (1789), a very important and influential essay on defining a natural born Citizen.
David Ramsay (April 2, 1749 to May 8, 1815) was an American physician, patriot, and historian from South Carolina and a delegate from that state to the Continental Congress in 1782-1783 and 1785-1786. He was the Acting President of the United States in Congress Assembled. He was one of the American Revolutions first major historians. A contemporary of Washington, Ramsay writes with the knowledge and insights one acquires only by being personally involved in the events of the Founding period. In 1785 he published History of the Revolution of South Carolina (two volumes), in 1789 History of the American Revolution (two volumes), in 1807 a Life of Washington, and in 1809 a History of South Carolina (two volumes). Ramsay was a major intellectual figure in the early republic, known and respected in America and abroad for his medical and historical writings, especially for The History of the American Revolution (1789) Arthur H. Shaffer, Between Two Worlds: David Ramsay and the Politics of Slavery, J.S.Hist., Vol. L, No. 2 (May 1984). During the progress of the Revolution, Doctor Ramsay collected materials for its history, and his great impartiality, his fine memory, and his acquaintance with many of the actors in the contest, eminently qualified him for the task .
www.famousamericans.net/davidramsay. In 1965 Professor Page Smith of the University of California at Los Angeles published an extensive study of Ramsay's History of the American Revolution in which he stressed the advantage that Ramsay had because of being involved in the events of which he wrote and the wisdom he exercised in taking advantage of this opportunity. The generosity of mind and spirit which marks his pages, his critical sense, his balanced judgment and compassion,'' Professor Smith concluded, are gifts that were uniquely his own and that clearly entitle him to an honorable position in the front rank of American historians.
In his 1789 article, Ramsay first explained who the original citizens were and then defined the natural born citizens as the children born in the country to citizen parents. He said concerning the children born after the declaration of independence, [c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens . Id. at 6. He added that citizenship by inheritance belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the declaration of independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring . Id. at 7. He continued that citizenship as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776 . Id. at 6.
Here we have direct and convincing evidence of how a very influential Founder defined a natural born citizen. Given his position of influence and especially given that he was a highly respected historian, Ramsay would have had the contacts with other influential Founders and Framers and would have known how they too defined natural born Citizen. Ramsay, being of the Founding generation and being intimately involved in the events of the time would have known how the Founders and Framers defined a natural born Citizen and he told us that definition was one where the child was born in the country of citizen parents. In giving us this definition, it is clear that Ramsay did not follow the English common law but rather natural law, the law of nations, and Emer de Vattel, who also defined a natural-born citizen the same as did Ramsay in his highly acclaimed and influential, The Law of Nations, Or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns, Section 212 (1758 French) (1759 English). We can reasonably assume that the other Founders and Framers would have defined a natural born Citizen the same way the Ramsay did, for being a meticulous historian he would have gotten his definition from the general consensus that existed at the time.
Ramsays article and explication are further evidence of the influence that Vattel had on the Founders in how they defined the new national citizenship. This article by Ramsay is one of the most important pieces of evidence recently found (provided to us by an anonymous source) which provides direct evidence on how the Founders and Framers defined a natural born Citizen and that there is little doubt that they defined one as a child born in the country to citizen parents. This time-honored definition of a "natural born Citizen" has been confirmed by subsequent United States Supreme Court and lower court cases such as The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814) (Marshall, C.J., concurring and dissenting for other reasons, cites Vattel and provides his definition of natural born citizens); Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) (Justice Daniels concurring took out of Vattels definition the reference to fathers and father and replaced it with parents and person, respectively); Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830) (same definition without citing Vattel); Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 21 L.Ed. 394, 16 Wall. 36 (1872) (in explaining the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment clause, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, said that the clause was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884) (the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the domain of that government, or the children born within the United States, of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations are not citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment because they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States); Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (same definition without citing Vattel); Ex parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402 (same definition and cites Vattel); United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890) (same definition and cites Vattel); U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (quoted from the same definition of natural born Citizen as did Minor v. Happersett); Rep. John Bingham (in the House on March 9, 1866, in commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1866 which was the precursor to the Fourteenth 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. . . . John A. Bingham, (R-Ohio) US Congressman, March 9, 1866 Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866), Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes (1866)).
The two-citizen-parent requirement would have followed from the common law that provided that a woman upon marriage took the citizenship of her husband. In other words, the Framers required both (1) birth on United States soil (or its equivalent) and (2) birth to two United States citizen parents as necessary conditions of being granted that special status which under our Constitution only the President and Commander in Chief of the Military (and also the Vice President under the Twelfth Amendment) must have at the time of his or her birth. Given the necessary conditions that must be satisfied to be granted the status, all "natural born Citizens" are "Citizens of the United States" but not all "Citizens of the United States" are "natural born Citizens." It was only through both parents being citizens that the child was born with unity of citizenship and allegiance to the United States which the Framers required the President and Commander in Chief to have.
Obama fails to meet this natural born Citizen eligibility test because when he was born in 1961 (wherever that may be), he was not born to a United States citizen mother and father. At his birth, his mother was a United States citizen. But under the British Nationality Act 1948, his father, who was born in the British colony of Kenya, was born a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (CUKC) which by descent made Obama himself a CUKC. Prior to Obamas birth, Obamas father neither intended to nor did he become a United States citizen. Being temporarily in the United States only for purpose of study and with the intent to return to Kenya, his father did not intend to nor did he even become a legal resident or immigrant to the United States.
Obama may be a plain born citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment or a Congressional Act (if he was born in Hawaii). But as we can see from David Ramsays clear presentation, citizenship as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776 . Id. at 6. Hence, Obama is not an Article II "natural born Citizen," for upon Obama's birth his father was a British subject and Obama himself by descent was also the same. Hence, Obama was born subject to a foreign power. Obama lacks the birth status of natural sole and absolute allegiance and loyalty to the United States which only the President and Commander in Chief of the Military and Vice President must have at the time of birth. Being born subject to a foreign power, he lacks Unity of Citizenship and Allegiance to the United States from the time of birth which assures that required degree of natural sole and absolute birth allegiance and loyalty to the United States, a trait that is constitutionally indispensable in a President and Commander in Chief of the Military. Like a naturalized citizen, who despite taking an oath later in life to having sole allegiance to the United States cannot be President because of being born subject to a foreign power, Obama too cannot be President.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
April 2, 2010
“Give it up fake or not the issue no longer has any political value.”
Short run, perhaps. Long term, if a fraud, the legal consequences are profound.
respectfully, i think there are others in addition to the “kearning” you mention.
why do some words curve less than others?
how can signatures be in different resolutions on the same document, unless one of them was pasted on?
and boxes that are identical down to the pixel?
why do other documents show the security paper background as they are supposed to, but this one LFBC doesn’t?
In the United States House on March 9, 1866
commenting upon Section 1992 of the Civil Rights Act, said that the Act was
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.
Rep. Bingham said parents. He did not say one parent or a mother or father.
>>well, id like to say its nice to see you saying something besides that you think Sarah wont run...<<
That is a prediction. Despite reactions it should be devoid of any emotion.
>>but, instead, i will ask, why you think there is NO political value, in multiple experts testifying that the President has lied to the American People, and given them a forged document.<<
Because the term is over 1/2 over and most Americans have turned their back on the issue. They either shrug or just think that the latest set of “birthers” are nuttier than Aunt Jane’s Holiday Super Nut Cake.
We asked for the COLB, there is a cghain of custody that suggests that if it is fake it had a heck of a lot of help and there is no proof that barry the zero was born anywhere else.
Than I guess the Constitution no longer has any political value and we should give that one up too??
Thanks, I'll pass. You go crawl under your hole, and I'll keep fighting for the constitution.
Yup, and only a matter of time before Obama goes down.
"To prove his point, Irey used as a source document the Xerox copy of the Obama birth certificate the White House press staff handed to the press assembled in the White House pressroom on April 27, as seen in Exhibit 1:
The story will only die if we let it. I think the Constitution is worth fighting for don’t you?
Or, in fact, in Hawaii there could well be direct imports from the Japanese gray market ~ my impression, though, was that one Royal was in the mix of the various devices used to create the various parts of the image over a period of time.
TO WIT: Not all of it was typed at the same time, and some of it is simply rubber stamped.
>>Rep. Bingham said parents. He did not say one parent or a mother or father.<<
1) Commentary isn’t Law
2) You make a difference without a distinction
3) I gather you renew your statement (unsupported by any known law) that only second generation Americans are “Natural Born Citizens?”
4) “In the United States House on March 9, 1866
commenting upon Section 1992 of the Civil Rights Act,”
Huh? I assume this is a typo but I can’t determine what the comment date was or what was being commented upon.
I'm betting Baby Daddy's race is ARAB! Not Negro.
Wonder if you can still get the ribbons? We used to have an IBM Executive. Nice typewriter. Only bad thing was different letters were different spaces so if you made an error you had to know how many spaces to back up for which letters.
The Principal framer (John Bingham) of the 14th amendment
and in particular the CITIZENSHIP clause had this to say
during a debate on the house floor regarding the 14th
Center column 3rd paragraph down:
>! you have to turn to page 1291 !>
Bingham states: I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill],
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 . . John Bingham, framer of the 14 amendment in the United States House on March 9, 1866
Signer of the United States Constitution, Governor of South
Carolina. Senator and a member of the House of Representatives.
Therefore, we can say with confidence that a natural-born
citizen of the United States means those persons born
whose father the United States already has an established
jurisdiction over, i.e., born to fathers who are
themselves citizens of the United States.
Hmm...you got me thinking, did they use IBM Executives? I’m not sure if kerning is the right word, but perhaps. I don’t know when those typewriters were made....
All very nice.
But not law.
We are a nation of laws, not men. We are bound by the law, even the ones we don’t completely like.
And, I ask again that you are saying that only 2nd generation Americans can be “natural born citizens?”
So if Hitler knocked up a teenager that berfed in the USA, then took him back to Germany, and raised him to be a good widdle Nazi, then replanted him, he SHOULD BE PRESIDENT?
Do you see the reason for BOTH PARENTS BEING CITIZENS YET?
Please inquire at your local gas pump for further PROOF!
And if it is fake, then this nation has been lost. We are governed by shadowy cabals of powerful and untouchable mystery men.
The same attention should be given to the 1 digits in the serial number. The rightmost 1 digit does not have the downward hooking serif of those to its left. It’s kind of obvious it’s a different font.
I’m familiar with Royal thank you, used them too.
As to the rest of your post as a pre-computer age typist, secretary and clerk....BS.
You did not put a form aside and work on it at a later date on a different typewriter in the same office. Once you put a form into the typwriter you finished it. Difficult to get the lines even and lined up otherwise, tedious business, and a headache to boot. No secretary/clerk/typist worth her salt would have done this. NOONE. You might not have finished all the forms in your stack on the same day....but you definitely would NEVER have stopped in the MIDDLE of one, then moved it to another typewriter, even IF there were another brand of typewriter in the same office. That is so much bunk I’m doubled over laughing.
The rubber stamp - okay - but its not the rubber stamp parts of the LFBC that in dispute here. Try again.
The number of suspicious features in this document is truly amazing - this is probably the fifth or sixth different problem with it I’ve seen discussed on FR.
In this instance, though, I think the author would have a stronger case if he’d done a similar analysis on an authentic birth certificate of that time as a control (the BC of those twins born about the same time?). He’s the expert, but I would be happier with evidence that at least some of those discrepancies aren’t just an artifact of the xeroxing process.
That is correct.
>>Hmm...you got me thinking, did they use IBM Executives? Im not sure if kerning is the right word, but perhaps. I dont know when those typewriters were made....<<
Kerning was proportional spacing — you could get kerned typeballs (oh how I miss the IBM typewriter’s ability to almost anticipate your next keystroke). But the auto-erase (a separate “white-out” ribbon could get it wrong. That is why we kept good old White-out” on hand anyways)...
I will never never never never forget how Limbaugh and the other yappers IGNORED this issue.
SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! on them!
S 61 Bill 1866 was the bill that became the 14th admendment.
The Civil Rights Act
Courtesy of Library of Congress, Law Library
return to main documents page
The fourteenth amendment granted blacks the privileges of citizenship, but instituted no means by which to ensure the protection of their rights. With violence against blacks escalating and black codes appearing across the South, the federal government recognized the need for a bill to defend the rights of blacks. The first Civil Rights Act was passed in 1866.
39th Congress, 1st Session.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
MARCH 13, 1866
Ordered, That the bill (S. 61) “to protect all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and furnish the means of their vindication, — be printed, together with the amendments of the House of Representatives thereto, and that the same be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.”
To protect all persons in the United States in their civil rights, and furnish the means of their vindication.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That any person who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall subject, or cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of any State or Territory to the deprivation of any right secured or protected by this act, or to different punishment, pains, or penalties on account of such person having at any time been held in a condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, or by reason of his color or race, than is prescribed for the punishment of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the discretion of the court.
Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That the district courts of the United States, within their respective districts, shall have, exclusively of the courts of the several States, cognizance of all crimes and offences committed against the provisions of this act, and also, concurrently with the circuit courts of the United States, of all causes, civil and criminal, affecting persons who are denied or cannot enforce in the courts or judicial tribunals of the State or locality where they may be any of the rights secured to them by the first section of this act; and if any suit or prosecution, civil or criminal, has been or shall be commenced in any State court, against any such person, for any cause whatsoever, or against any officer, civil or military, or other person, for any arrest or imprisonment, trespasses, or wrongs done or committed by virtue or under color of authority derived from this act or the act establishing a Bureau for the relief of Freedmen and Refugees, and all acts amendatory thereof, or for refusing to do any act upon the ground that it would be inconsistent with this act, such defendant shall have the right to remove such cause for trial to the proper district or circuit court in the manner prescribed by the “Act relating to habeas corpus and regulating judicial proceedings in certain cases,” approved March three, eighteen hundred and sixty-three, and all acts amendatory thereof. The jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters hereby conferred on the district and circuit courts of the United States shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect; but in all cases where such laws are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offences against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of the cause, civil or criminal, is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern said courts in the trial and disposition of such cause, and, if of a criminal nature, in the infliction of punishment on the party found guilty.
Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the district attorneys, marshals, and deputy marshals of the United States, the commissioners appointed by the circuit and territorial courts of the United States, with powers of arresting, imprisoning, or bailing offenders against the laws of the United States, the officers and agents of the Freedmen’s Bureau, and every other officer who may be specially empowered by the President of the United States, shall be, and they are hereby, specially authorized and required, at the expense of the United States, to institute proceedings against all and every person who shall violate the provisions of this act, and cause him or them to be arrested and imprisoned, or bailed, as the case may be, for trial before such court of the United States or territorial court as by this act has cognizance of the offence. And with a view to affording reasonable protection to all persons in their constitutional rights of equality before the law, without distinction of race or color, or previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, and to the prompt discharge of the duties of this act, it shall be the duty of the circuit courts of the United States and the superior courts of the Territories of the United States, from time to time, to increase the number of commissioners, so as to afford a speedy and convenient means for the arrest and examination of persons charged with a violation of this act; and such commissioners are hereby authorized and required to exercise and discharge all the powers and duties conferred on them by this act, and the same duties with regard to offences created by this act, as they are authorized by law to exercise with regard to other offences against the laws of the United States.
Sec. 5. And be it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of all marshals and deputy marshals to obey and execute all warrants and precepts issued under the provisions of this act, when to them directed; and should any marshal or deputy marshal refuse to receive such warrant or other process when tendered, or to use all proper means diligently to execute the same, he shall, on conviction thereof, be fined in the sum of one thousand dollars, to the use of the person upon whom the accused is alleged to have committed the offense. And the better to enable the said commissioners to execute their duties faithfully and efficiently, in conformity with the Constitution of the United States and the requirements of this act, they are hereby authorized and empowered, within their counties respectively, to appoint, in writing, under their hands, any one or more suitable persons, from time to time, to execute all such warrants and other process as may be issued by them in the lawful performance of their respective duties; and the persons so appointed to execute any warrant or process as aforesaid shall have authority to summon and call to their aid the bystanders or posse comitatus of the proper county, or such portion of the land or naval forces of the United States, or of the militia, as may be necessary to the performance of the duty with which they are charged, and to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the Constitution which prohibits slavery, in conformity with the provisions of this act; and said warrants shall run and be executed by said officers anywhere in the State or Territory within which they are issued.
Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That any person who shall knowingly and willfully obstruct, hinder, or prevent any officer, or other person charged with the execution of any warrant or process issued under the provisions of this act, or any person or persons lawfully assisting him or them, from arresting any person for whose apprehension such warrant or process may have been issued, or shall rescue or attempt to rescue such person from the custody of the officer, other person or persons, or those lawfully assisting as aforesaid, when so arrested pursuant to the authority herein given and declared, or shall aid, abet, or assist any person so arrested as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to escape from the custody of the officer or other person legally authorized as aforesaid, or shall harbor or conceal any person for whose arrest a warrant or process shall have been issued as aforesaid, so as to prevent his discovery and arrest after notice or knowledge of the fact that a warrant has been issued for the apprehension of such person, shall, for either of said offences, be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six months, by indictment and conviction before the district court of the United States for the district in which said offense may have been committed, or before the proper court of criminal jurisdiction, if committed within any one of the organized Territories of the United States.
Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, That the district attorneys, the marshals, their deputies, and the clerks of the said district and territorial courts shall be paid for their services the like fees as may be allowed to them for similar services in other cases; and in all cases where the proceedings are before a commissioner, he shall be entitled to a fee of ten dollars in full for his services in each case, inclusive of all services incident to such arrest and examination. The person or persons authorized to execute the process to be issued by such commissioners for the arrest of offenders against the provisions of this act shall be entitled to a fee of five dollars for each person he or they may arrest and take before any such commissioner as aforesaid, with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by such commissioner for such other additional services as may be necessarily performed by him or them, such as attending at the examination, keeping the prisoner in custody, and providing him with food and lodging during his detention, and until the final determination of such commissioner, and in general for performing such other duties as may be required in the premises; such fees to be made up in conformity with the fees usually charged by the officers of the courts of justice within the proper district or county, as near as may be practicable, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States on the certificate of the judge of the district within which the arrest is made, and to be recoverable from the defendant as part of the judgment in case of conviction.
Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, that whenever the President of the United States shall have reason to believe that offences have been or are likely to be committed against the provisions of this act within any judicial district, it shall be lawful for him, in his discretion, to direct the judge, marshal, and district attorney of such district to attend at such place within the district, and for such time as he may designate, for the purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial of persons charged with a violation of this act; and it shall be the duty of every judge or other officer, when any such requisition shall be received by him, to attend at the place and for the time therein designated.
Sec. 9. And be it further enacted, that it shall be lawful for the President of the United States, or such person as he may empower for that purpose, to employ such part of the land or naval forces of the United States, or of the militia, as shall be necessary to prevent the violation and enforce the due execution of this act.
Sec. 10. And be it further enacted, That upon all questions of law arising in any cause under the provisions of this act a final appeal may be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Still matters in the "right or wrong" world.
>>Than I guess the Constitution no longer has any political value and we should give that one up too??<<
Non sequiturs don’t really advance the ball either.
Yeah, worth fighting for and then some. But people like you and me can’t get it done, we need a mouthpiece with a loud mouth. I like Corsi, but he is viewed as a kook.
I wanted to believe it was real at first, fought hard to debunk the distractions everybody was coming up with, then I saw the scientific evidence and knew. We are just screwed here, it’ll take more than you and me to make people care about this obvious bit of fakery.
Xeroxing is not going to cause differences in size of typeface or slanting. Sorry, but that’s just fact. Let alone the myriads of other problems other experts have brought out.
The non sequitur is in your court since you are the one ignoring facts and all.
“Give it up fake or not the issue no longer has any political value.”
Yea, that old say about honesty in government is meaningless...after all, there’s no political value in it.
People like you make me sick.
Not to mention he's committed this fraud releasing the forgery because he thinks you're stupid.
Well don’t try to call them and get them to talk about it. They’ll hang up on you. Levin’s crew hung up on me twice, none of them will touch it. Still can’t understand why.
Mark is all about the Constitution, but he won’t even give this issue 15 seconds. As an attorney and a bigwig in the Landmark Legal Foundation, I think he could make a difference. But nope, won’t even consider bringing this up. He’s still one of my faves, but has dropped a notch or two in my eyes over his stubborn refusal to investigate this.
>> That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in every State and Territory in the United States, to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.<<
That is pretty doggone clear. “Not subject to foreign power” is clearly meant to mean diplomats from other countries present in the USA at the time of birth.
It is a tortured interpretation (and also extra-legal) to suggest that only 2nd generation Americans are citizens. It isn’t the law, it isn’t the practice, it isn’t reasonable.
That’s why we keep working at it, drip, drip, drip. Never give up. If we do, we may as well just throw everything in and consign ourselves to the gulag. JMO.
>>The non sequitur is in your court since you are the one ignoring facts and all.<<
Since you misinterpret the term I can’t really address your post.
1. It is backed up with facts and dates and not feelings
2. It has an explanation of the meanings of words and phrases when they were used and put into print/writing
3. The integrity and the authority of the people you are quoting is superior.