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

Skip to comments.

Maricopa County Cold Case Posse Facebook Page Will Live-Stream Final Obama Birth Certificate
The Post & Email ^ | Dec 14, 2016 | Sharon Rondeau

Posted on 12/14/2016 10:36:44 AM PST by JimGlove

Phoenix, Arizona – Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio will hold a press conference this Thursday, December 15th at 4pm MST at the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Training Center to provide an update and a final conclusion to the Barack Obama Birth Certificate investigation.

This event will be closed but publicly streamed for all to view. If interested, please feel free to re-share this post on your own timeline.

You can tune into the live stream by visiting the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office Official FaceBook page at the following link:

https://www.facebook.com/Maricopa-County-Sheriffs-Office-147344832098401/

Thank you, Cold Case Posse Administration ~

(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: arpaio; bc; birth; birthcertificate; certifigate; dunham; kenya; lol; nairobi; naturalborncitizen; nostalgia; obama; soebarkah; soetoro; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 next last
To: taxcontrol
In the US, what is the highest law?

The Constitution of course.

The order of law is.
1) Constitution
2) Federal Law
3) State Law
4) Local ordinances
5) Natural law
The top 4 are forms of Positive law, Natural law is, law that exists without need of any Positive law.

Let me ask you a couple questions.
1) Your wife is pregnant, and you go to visit some country in Asia, and while there, she gives birth. Is your child a citizen of that country?
2) A couple, who are citizens of that same Asian country, comes to visit the US, the wife is pregnant, and gives birth in the US. Is their child a citizen of the country in which they came?
3) The same couple, stays in the country in which they are citizens, and the wife gives birth there. Is the child a citizen of that Asian country?

The answers to 1, and 2, if you are being honest with yourself, is that there is no way to know. You would need to know the naturalization laws of that country. But the answer to #3 IS know. The answer is YES, the child is a citizen of that country, because it is a citizen via Natural law, ergo a Natural Born citizen


To be a citizen via Natural law, you must be a citizen without need of any Positive law, please tell me the Positive law that grants Citizenship, to a person born in the US, to US Citizen parents? It doesn't exist, because it is not needed.
141 posted on 12/15/2016 6:59:30 AM PST by MMaschin (The difference between strategy and tactics!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

This is a novel narrative, FW! Kudos. I haven’t seen it suggested that Madelyn Dunham also went to Kenya. MD would also have a motive to park SAD out of the way with her problematic baby for that era.

SAD was a rebellious teenager and having gone the rails entirely with BHO SR. and refused to give up the child to the Salvation Army, perhaps the lure of a romantic life in the new nation of Kenya might appeal to her? BHO Sr. might have greatly embellished his standing there, being such a great liar!


142 posted on 12/15/2016 7:02:21 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: MMaschin

So when the Constitution speaks, it is the highest authority and trumps all others, including the unwritten so called natural law. I would point out that natural law is INFERIOR to the Constitution. When the Constitution speaks, natural law has no weight.

Article 1 Section 8 clause 4 enumerates Congress with all powers regarding the rules of naturalization and citizenship. That includes:

- when naturalization occurs (after one’s birth)
- who needs to be naturalized
- who does not need to be naturalized (citizen at birth, i.e. naturally born a citizen)
- the conditions by which a person qualifies for citizen ship such as birth on US soil (14th amendment) and any other conditions Congress desires.

With regards to your questions - other countries are sovereign in their own right and can grant citizenship how they so please. However, their laws have no impact on US laws with regards to US citizenship.


143 posted on 12/15/2016 7:10:12 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

To be clear, Seize, I don’t believe either Stanley Ann or her mother went to Kenya. I was only pointing out the impracticality of positing that the foreign arrival to HI—whose identity Obama’s enablers have done their best to hide—was either SA or her mother arriving from Kenya.

If it had been SA, then why burden herself and her family with the additional expense of flying almost immediately from Hawaii to WA state? Why not just stay in HI, and continue her education at the university where she started? What would she have gained by dragging the baby to WA, only to take two courses and then go to the expense of returning to HI?

If the foreign arrival was the mother, coming from Kenya, then why wouldn’t she have brought SA with her? And again, why wouldn’t SA have remained in HI, once she got there?

Plus, as has been mentioned, there’s the fact that no one in Kenya has ever claimed to know where, and how, SA lived during her pregnancy. Had she spent that time in Kenya, someone would have stepped forward with details by mow. The house/hut she lived in would probably be a shrine.

The only narrative that covers all the bases—and does so perfectly—is an under-the-radar stay in a home for unwed mothers in Canada. That explains the black hole in SA’S time line, and also accounts for her sudden, brief transfer to the University of WA. It all fits.


144 posted on 12/15/2016 7:27:27 AM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter

mow = now


145 posted on 12/15/2016 7:28:47 AM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: JimGlove

When will the records at Occidental College and Columbia be unsealed so the public see how he is registered and all the background data??


146 posted on 12/15/2016 7:35:23 AM PST by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
The Supreme Court has made clear that Citizens can be either 'by birth', or 'by naturalization'. Notice they said 'by birth' NOT 'at birth' - by the act of being born, not at the time of birth.

Naturalization is not a process that occurs to grant citizenship after birth, it's the process of granting citizenship by statute.

In the below cited case, a woman claimed that the ratification of the 14th amendment, made her a Citizen, and that with Citizenship, she should be granted suffrage. The court ruled that voting, was not a right of Citizenship, and that she was not a naturalized Citizen of the 14th Amendment, because she was already a Natural Born Citizen, by the facts of her being born in the US, to two US Citizen parents.

United States Supreme Court
MINOR v. HAPPERSETT, (1874)

Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that 'no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,' and that Congress shall have power 'to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.' Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

147 posted on 12/15/2016 7:50:54 AM PST by MMaschin (The difference between strategy and tactics!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: MMaschin

It’s unbelievable that anyone is still having to argue the wisdom of the Framers , in excluding persons with divided loyalty at birth, from the WH. Who among us, having watched Obama do his dead level best, for eight interminable years, to destroy this country, can A, argue that Natural Born Citizen means, a person with dual citizenship at birth, and B, that placing people with divided loyalties in the WH is 1, what the Framers intended, and 2, a good thing?

SMH.


148 posted on 12/15/2016 8:03:20 AM PST by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Internet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: MMaschin

And Congress, acting under it’s authority enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 reflects this in current law. USC Title 8 Section 1101 which covers definitions sets up the same binary operation by establishing that naturalization only occurs after birth.

Further, USC Title 8 Section 1401 establishes the criteria one must me to be born a citizen. Those that do not meet these qualifications are not citizens at birth and must be naturalized, again, after their birth. Reflexively, those that meet the conditions are; by the conditions of their birth, they are then “by birth” citizens of the United States naturally without any need for naturalization.


149 posted on 12/15/2016 8:19:32 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: MMaschin

Every time plaintiffs tried to use Minor v Happersett in Obama eligibility challenges they were shot down. Here’s one example: Allen v Obama, Arizona Superior Court Judge Richard E. Gordon: “Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”—Pima County Superior Court, Tuscon, Arizona, March 7, 2012


150 posted on 12/15/2016 11:10:27 AM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Can anyone watch it live on FB? Will it be on youtube too, anyone know?


151 posted on 12/15/2016 2:03:54 PM PST by little jeremiah (Half the truth is often a great lie. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Another source:

http://www.abc15.com/live?_ga=1.221060696.1752987442.1481767872

152 posted on 12/15/2016 2:56:28 PM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

abc15 is live now


153 posted on 12/15/2016 2:58:35 PM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

The birth certificate of Johanna Ah Nee was the source document for the digital creation of the Obama birth certificate.


154 posted on 12/15/2016 3:51:05 PM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry
Fantastic information. I sure hope this is completely investigated on a Federal level.
155 posted on 12/15/2016 4:08:10 PM PST by liberalh8ter (The only difference between flash mob 'urban yutes' and U.S. politicians is the hoodies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

Sheriff Joe’s message to Congress is if you can hold hearings on under inflated footballs, why can’t you on this matter.
156 posted on 12/15/2016 4:08:28 PM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

Does anyone have a clue how they knew Johanna Ah Nee’s was used? Can’t possibly have been a simple twist of fate, plus it can’t have been the only source document.


157 posted on 12/15/2016 5:04:53 PM PST by little jeremiah (Half the truth is often a great lie. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
“How did Zullo know about the Ah Nee certificate and its possible use in forging the Obama document?”

Unsealed Doug Vogt Formerly Sealed Affidavit filed at U.S. Supreme Court Names Obama BC Forger & Co-Conspirators

https://www.scribd.com/document/223611615/Unsealed-Doug-Vogt-Formerly-Sealed-Affidavit-filed-at-U-S-Supreme-Court-Names-Obama-BC-Forger-Co-Conspirators

seems the Ah’Nee woman was wrongly accused, but the affidavit answers your question

61 posted on 12/15/2016, 6:46:07 PM by Fred Nerks (FAIR DINKUM)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3505153/posts?q=1&;page=51

158 posted on 12/15/2016 5:11:45 PM PST by Elderberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

Thank you!


159 posted on 12/15/2016 5:33:36 PM PST by little jeremiah (Half the truth is often a great lie. B. Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

“...1963 after she changed her name with Social Security from Stanley Ann Dunham to Ann Dunham Obama...”

In 1961 she was 19, in 1963 she was 21.

If someone is 21 or over, it takes a court order to do a name change.

If under 21, one could go with their parents and file at the county records; no court paperwork (my mom did that, when she was under 21).

I wonder what supporting documents Stanley Ann used, when she went to court to do the name change.

I’m looking for that soc sec form someone posted, showing the name change.


160 posted on 12/16/2016 7:37:20 AM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57, returning after lurking since 2000)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-165 next last

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.

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