Skip to comments.Arizona deputies in Hawaii seeking Obama birth certificate
Posted on 05/22/2012 7:56:20 AM PDT by Brown Deer
Two men who identified themselves as being from the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Phoenix went to the Hawaii Department of Health Monday morning requesting verification of President Barack Obama's birth certificate, said a state spokeswoman.
A Hawaii deputy attorney general gave the men information concerning the legal requirements to obtain such a document; the requirements are posted on the Health Department's website. The two men then left the office, Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo said.
The two men showed Maricopa County Sheriff's Office badges and identified themselves as Michael Zullo and Brian Mackiewcz, Okubo said. They are "authorized by the Sheriff of Maricopa County, who is conducting an official investigation," a spokesman for the sheriff's office said in an email.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been researching Obama's residency status using a volunteer cold-case "posse," but now has employed a taxpayer-funded deputy, The Arizona Republic reported Monday.
Zullo is a volunteer, the Republic reported, but Okubo said that Mackiewicz presented a business card showing he is with the Threats Management Unit of the sheriff's office.
Arapaio's birth certificate investigation comes as the U.S. Justice Department is suing his office for alleged civil rights violations, including discrimination against Hispanics.
Separately, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett, who says he is not a "birther," said in a radio interview Thursday that Obama's Arizona ballot status is in question unless Hawaii responds positively to his request under a Hawaii law regarding confirmation of birth certificates.
Hawaii Department of Attorney General spokesman Josh Wisch said Monday the department has been in touch with Bennett since Friday and that he would need to provide legal authority showing his office is "a governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency's or organization's activities."
Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. Birthers contend Obama was not born in the United States and thus not eligible to be president. The state released a copy of Obama's long-form birth certificate last year, but the release did not satisfy many birthers.
Bennett, a Republican who is reportedly considering a run for governor in Arizona, said Friday he assumes he'll get the confirmation he requested in March from Hawaii officials.
“Zullo is a volunteer, the Republic reported, but Okubo said that Mackiewicz presented a business card showing he is with the Threats Management Unit of the sheriff’s office.”
The “Threats Management Unit” carries full weight of the government. Even Okubo recognizes the seriousness.
Indonesian Go Home!
Thank you Hollywood,Unions,and all nitwit liberals for putting a foreign born enemy of the USA in the White House.
It would appear that Arpaio is executing an operation separate from the SAG.
As someone else has said, that one of the deputies was in full paid employment of the MSO, the seriousness of the request was evident.
I have to wonder whether Mankiewicz started out by saying, “We’re here too investigate a possible fraud.”?
Look for some more “surprise” resignations and retirements in HI gummint
The deceased previous owner of the SS# passed in HI. Granny lifted his number from bank records.
Yes, if they go to the correct country and city therein. He was not born in Hawaii, so the Hawaiian officials are lying and complicit in this criminality. That’s whhy they fight tooth and nail to not have to ‘releasae’ what they do not legitimately have.
I searched Article 2 Section 1 very carefully, word for word but I didn’t find “unless both parents were as well born in the United States.” Where exactly is that? Please enlighten me.
You have quantified this in an exceptionally well written post. I wonder if the Maricopa County investigators are able to articulate the case as well as you have. If they are in agreeance with you and tbey can take action based on the Hawaii investigation, then the case would seem compelling enough to warrant congressional hearings in the House. Possible impeachment before Charlotte in September? The plot thickens...
No, birthers contend barry, or whatever his name is, is not a NBC and therefore not qualified to be president. As far as where he was really born, we still have no idea.
Smells of Soros work.
Your sign on date is 2008 issue. You’ve been here, apparently, ong enough to have seen the lengthy discussions on the wording and the meaning of Natural Born Citizen, so we know you are not really seeking to be enlighhtened, you just want to agitate, like little barry bastard community organizer commie. Your kneepads give you away, drone.
As a “Proofer”, I contend Obama is not eligible to be President because his father is/was not a US Citizen and therefore Obama is not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, as per the Constitution.
As well, I believe Obama is a fraud and should show proof as to WHO HE IS, and why he has spent millions hiding his background, medical, professional (law prof) and school records.
Obama was ALLEGEDLY born in Honolulu
These news agencies need to start covering their rears like they do with every crime that occurs. I am so sick of them carrying Obama's water for something that HAS NOT BEEN proven.
The statement about the state releasing the BC is a bold faced lie. They are either ignorant of that fact or are flat out lying. Obama release something that experts have said is a forgery.
I think Dog going have more time on his hands
His show just got cancel
I think Dog going have more time on his hands
His show just got cancel
A solid, no nonsense, arrest them & jail them AG is just what this country needs. The bunch in Gitmo would commit suicide in fright.
I am of the opinion that the Sec of State should require all candidates to fill out a form that requires full legal name and SSN, an attached original long form birth certificate (same kind as required to get a passport) and swear that all information above is true and in accordance with state and federal law.
Failure to provide the same will make the candidate inneligible to be placed on the ballot in November.
So I heard...
They will not find it. They are looking in the wrong place. Didn’t anybody hear what his grandmother said, that she was there in Kenya and watched him being born?
If, as they say, the state released that LFBC, then the state should be indicted on forgery charges.
Wasn’t there a guy who claimed to have worked for the Hawaii state government in the vital statistics department and learned that a BC of any kind does not exist for Barry?
Zullo is presumably investigating document fraud. But why is Bennett asking the Hawaii DOH for anything? It is not Bennett’s job to beg third parties for documentation of eligibility, but Obama’s to produce it. No satisfactory info, no ballot access.
He should announce that ALL candidates who wish to be on the Presidential ballot in Arizona must provide satisfactory documentation to convince him that they are Constitutionally qualified to serve. He should send the same message in certified letters to each entity that applies for such ballot access. Because of compelling evidence of fraud, and Obama’s 1991 “born in Kenya” pamphlet (there is no possible explanation of why he would not have seen this document), vetting O’s credentials will require access to any and all original birth certifications, registrations, adoption records, and any related documents, document modifications, applications, hand-written notes, bound record books, indices, microfilm, etc., related in any way to the person currently called Barack Hussein Obama, II (or Jr.).
Probably couldn’t get a legal SS# cause he didn’t have a legal BC..... Oh what tangled webs he weaves!
“The Threats Management Unit carries full weight of the government.”
What exactly IS the Threats Management Unit? What do they do?
Nowhere on this forum, nor any other intelligent forum discussing this issue, has it been posited by any person with knowledge of this issue that in order to be NBC, your parents must be born in America.
second line; "Abstact of the record on file"
I saw somewhere that that statement isn't in the other BCs from that time period. Someone put it in to Cover Their butt.
your parents just have to be American citizens at the time of your birth. obviously obamas baby daddy wasn’t
Where in the ____________have you been? It’s been posted at regular intervals since before the election of 2008.
Get with the program or get lost.
I don’t recall the actual wording on the letter from Zer0 to the HI officials granting them permission to release his BC to a lawyer who was going to “visit” HI, (instead of spending $20.00 to send it FedEx insured), but IIRC, wasn’t the stated purpose on that letter to show it to the public.
Seems to me that Zer0 has already given the permission to allow HI to release it to Bennett and others.
An abstract of a deed is not ownership of property. Enough said.
You’re looking in the wrong place for a definitive answer to your question. The US Constitution is not written as some kind of law with attached descriptions of phrases.
Quit being lazy and look up Vattel, Law of Nations, 1758. Then search for the accepted description of what a natural born citizen actually is.
You must be new. We’ve been over this a million times
Start paying attention.
The County Sheriff:The Ultimate Check & Balance
When the United States of America was founded the framers spent arduous hours devising a Constitution that would protect future generations from tyranny and government criminality. A system of checks and balances was established to keep all government, especially at the federal level, from becoming too powerful and abusive.
The Bill of Rights was promulgated to augment the limitations previously placed against the government, to further insure that government would stay in its proper domain.
So, what happens when government does not obey its own constitution? What punishment is meted out to politicians who vote for and pass unconstitutional laws? What happens if they appoint unlawful bureaucracies or allow their agents to violate the rights of the American citizen? The answer to these questions is both astounding and lamentable; NOTHING!
Now the question becomes even greater; who will stop criminal and out-of-control government from killing, abusing, violating, robbing, and destroying its own people? Yes, believe it or not, there is an answer to this one. The duty to stop such criminality lies with the county sheriff. The question needs to be posed to each and every sheriff of these United States; will you stand against tyranny?
The office of sheriff has a long and noble history. It dates back over a thousand years and originated in England. The sheriff is the only elected law enforcement official in America. He is the last line of defense for his citizens. He is the people’s protector. He is the keeper of the peace, he is the guardian of liberty and the protector of rights. A vast majority of sheriffs will agree with all of this until they are asked to apply these principles of protection to federal criminals. Their backpeddling and excuses will be more plentiful than radar tickets and louder than sirens at doughnut time. Most of the unbelievers, who themselves have taken a solemn oath to “uphold and defend” the U S Constitution, will passionately and even apologetically exclaim that they have no authority or jurisdiction to tell federal agents to do anything, let alone stop them from victimizing local citizens. The truth and stark reality is that it’s just the opposite; the sheriff has ultimate authority and law enforcement power within his jurisdiction. He is to protect and defend his citizens from all enemies, both “foreign and domestic.”
Of course, there are those who will maintain that the feds have not and will not commit crimes against law-abiding citizens in this country, the IRS notwithstanding. For the sake of argument, let’s just pretend that the government did nothing wrong at the Branch Davidian church in Waco or at Ruby Ridge, Idaho when citizens were killed. Those incidents have been debated and will be forever. However, the immutable truth about both tragedies remains that if the local sheriff had remained in charge of both incidents, not one person would have died, including federal agents, and the law would
still have been enforced.
Despite the frequency or the severity of government abuses, if they were to happen in your county, would your sheriff intervene? Well, don’t look now, but they are already occurring and some sheriffs have indeed taken very courageous stands against the feds coming in to their counties to “enforce” their laws. Cattle, lands, homes, bank accounts, cash, and even children have been seized and prisons filled all in the name of federal enforcement of EPA rules, The Endangered Species Act, IRS rules, (of which there are over 10 million pages) Forest Service and Dept. of the Interior technicalities and the list goes on and on. The sheriff of NYE County, Nevada stopped federal agents from seizing a rancher’s cattle and even threatened to arrest the feds if they proceeded against his orders. Sheriffs in Wyoming have told the agents of all federal bureaus to check with them before serving any papers, making any arrests, or confiscating any property. Why? because they are doing their jobs that’s why! It’s just another way to provide checks and balances that ultimately protect and help citizens.
Criminality within the IRS has been well documented. Hearings about such crimes were held before congress in 1998. IRS employees testified of hundreds of crimes being committed against law-abiding citizens. Congress did nothing about it. They were too busy checking Monica Lewinsky’s dress. The point remains, if any abuse occurs in your county by federal officials; does your sheriff have the guts and the authority to protect and defend you? Does that question not sound redundant? Is he not bound by oath to do just that?
Yes, he has the right and the duty to do so. In Mack/Printz v USA, the U S Supreme Court declared that the states or their political subdivisions, “are not subject to federal direction.” The issue of federal authority is defined even further in this most powerful Tenth Amendment decision. The two sheriffs who brought the suit objected to being forced into federal service without compensation pursuant to some misguided provisions of the Brady Bill. The sheriffs sued the USA (Clinton adm.) and won a major landmark case in favor of States’ Rights and local autonomy. In this ruling by the Supreme Court, some amazing principles were exposed regarding the lack of power and authority the federal government actually has. In fact, this is exactly the issue addressed by the court when Justice Scalia opined for the majority stating, “...the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discreet, enumerated ones.”
Scalia then quotes the basis of the sheriffs’ suit in quoting the Tenth Amendment which affirms the limited powers doctrine, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” To clarify this point, we need to understand that the powers and jurisdiction granted to the federal government are few, precise, and expressly defined. The feds have their assignments within constitutional boundaries and the states have theirs, as well. Scalia also mentions this, “It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of dual sovereignty” and that the states retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty.” Scalia even goes so far as to detail who is responsible to keep the federal government in their proper place, if or when they
decide to go beyond their allotted authority. In doing so he quotes James Madison, considered to be the father of our Constitution, “The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority [federal government] than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” (The Federalist # 39) Thus, the federal government has no more authority to compel the states or the counties to do anything, no more so than the Prime Minister of Canada has.
But what happens when the inevitable occurs; when the feds get too abusive and attempt to control every facet of our lives? The Mack/Printz decision answers this also. “This separation of the two spheres is one of the constitution’s structural protections of liberty. Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the federal government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.” To quote Madison again Scalia writes, “Hence, a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (The Federalist # 51) So the state governments are actually and literally charged with controlling the federal government. To do so is “one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty.” (Emphasis added)
Yes, it is regrettable that a sheriff would be put in this position. The governor and the state legislature should be preventing federal invasions into the states and counties way before the sheriff, but if it comes to the sheriff, then he must take a firm stand. James Madison also said, “We can safely rely on the disposition of state legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.” So when the state legislatures go along to get along and are bought off by political cronyism or the disbursement of federal funds, then the sheriff becomes the ultimate check and balance.
It is time for the sworn protectors of liberty, the sheriffs of these United States of America, to walk tall and defend us from all enemies; foreign and domestic. When sheriffs are put in the quandary of choosing between enforcing statutes from vapid politicians or keeping their oaths of office, the path and choice is clear, “I solemnly swear or affirm, that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Yelp...which would fall in line as a “registration of birth”
Legal weasel words that leave a gap big enough to drive a Greyhound through...
“Threats Management Unit”
“What do they do?”
Hopefully get a court order from an Arizona Judge to produce the original LFBC to Zullo and Mackiewcz to aid investigation of Fraud in Arizona.
If they didn't create or doctor it, then why not just have Hawaii post the copy on their website?
Honestly, I think Soros, Putin, and a lot of other international powers have the real one from Kenya or proof at least that Barry wasn't born in Hawaii, so Hawaiian officials are doing everything it can not to get caught putting out fake document or saying things they can be jailed for. They know the real proof exists, otherwise, they and one of the hospitals would proudly claim Berry and put out whatever documents they needed to to put this to bed.
OK, you may be right; such an opinion may have been posted here, but certainly not by any person with knowledge of the issue.
Do you contend that, in order for me to “get with the program”, I have to accept the premise that only those persons whose parents were born in the USA can be NBCs?
Parents (that’s plural) need to be American citizens at the tiem of the person in questions birth, naturalized, or natural born, but American citizens. There are sub categories of naturalized but ‘of the one where both parents are citizens and the child is born on American soil, there have never been any doubts.’ [Paraphrasing the man responsible for framing the fourteenth amendment]
Rumpswab. Yeah, you. What are you 14? The accepted definition for NBC and other “terms” used by the framers is found in Vattel>Law of Nations>1758.
How did that public education work out for you? Spend much time learning anything besides how to look stupid?
This might be weird, but doesn’t Jack Lord bear a resemblance to Romney (maybe it’s the hair) and then if you squint, Danno is a little like W.... Just sayin’
I thought I read somewhere that they (Sheriff Joe’s group) have a signed affidavit by someone who was an employee of the department responsible for vital records in HI stating that he was told there is NO birth certificate. He was getting a lot of interest/requests and when he asked officials about it, he was told they did not have one. Wish I could remember where I read about this.
Most who subscribe to Leo Donofrio’s analysis of the legal etymology of “natural-born citizen” believe that one’s parents must be citizens, native or naturalized, in order to be a natural-born citizen oneself.
There is no historical or legal basis, of which I am aware, for the claim that one’s parents must be natural-born themselves.
Just FYI - Bennett is the AZ Secretary of State not the Attorney General.
Thank you; you get what I was saying.
It’s in this thread numerous times. When you’ve finished reading it will send you the Long thread.