Malpractice of the Legislative and Executive Branches Requires Judicial Branch Review

I just watched the joint session of Congress certify the Electoral College vote for President and Vice-President of the United States.

Note that the Vice-President of the United States is also President of the Senate and that you heard this:

Mr. President,

The certificate of the electoral vote of the state of Hawaii seems to be regular in form and authentic. And it appears therefrom that Barack Obama of the state of Illinois received 4 votes for President and Joe Biden of the state of Delaware received 4 votes for Vice-President.

But you did not hear this:

Mr. President,

The birth certificate from the state of Hawaii seems to be regular in form and authentic. And it appears therefrom that Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Hawaii.

Of course, being born on U.S. soil is only one of three necessary conditions to be a natural born citizen (the other two being U.S. citizenship of both father and mother), but we just witnessed 539 individuals (438 Representatives, 100 Senators, and 1 Vice-President) fail to uphold their sworn oath of office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

The Constitution clearly states that:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;
 

Those 539 individuals, 538 from the Legislative branch and 1 from the Executive branch, did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to support and defend the Constitutional requirement that Barack Hussein Obama II and Joseph Robinette “Joe” Biden, Jr. be natural born Citizens of the United States.

It is implicit in the 20th amendment that the President and Vice-President must have their qualifications checked:

if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Those 539 elected officials, from both the Legislative and Executive Branches, are guilty of malpractice and dereliction of duty.  This requires Judicial Branch Review. 

The Supreme Court of the United States will be dicussing two lawsuits in conference over the next three Fridays: January 9, 16, and 23.

I pray, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, that the Supreme Court supports and defends the Constitution of the United States and does the following:

1) Verifies the birth location of Barack Hussein Obama II as shown on his original vault birth certificate

2) Verifies the multiple citizenships of Barack Hussein Obama II (British, Kenyan, Indonesian, US?)

3) Rules on the definition of “natural born citizen” as originally intended by those who wrote the “natural born citizen” requirement into the Constitution (men who knew well the definition of that term in The Law of Nations).

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Presidential Eligibility. Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to Malpractice of the Legislative and Executive Branches Requires Judicial Branch Review

  1. matt says:

    COWARDS!!! All of them!

  2. Ryan says:

    Pill,doesn’t the fact that 539 ELECTED people, all of whom have at least some knowledge of the constitution, and all of whom have sworn top up hold the principles of same, have not raised any concerns about Mr Obama’s eligibility make you think for a minute that you may be wrong?

    You are asking them to turn the country upside down by challenging the president-elect by invoking something that the founders of the country did not even clarify when writing the constitution. In order to make your case about this requirement, you have had to make the assumption that the founders meant something that they failed to write down.

    Every elected official disagrees with you. That should tell you something. It is the will of the majority of Americans that this man be their leader.

    Do you ever step back, and consider the fact that you may be wrong? Do you ever read thoughtfully, the comments of those that offer an opinion that differs from yours?

  3. Jax says:

    No, he doesn’t. Not having to listen to anyone’s ideas but your own is one of the major perks of being disconnected from reality.

  4. Ryan,

    I know, from talking to staff of Senators and Representatives, that these members of Congress “outsourced” the birth verification to Annenberg Political Fact Check (FactCheck.org). That is indefensible. Annenberg made at least two very important misstatements, and Obama has prior connections to Annenberg.

    Absolutely no one verified that Obama’s original birth certificate states that he was born in Hawaii.

    That is a very dangerous precedent for our country.

    You say:

    It is the will of the majority of Americans that this man be their leader.

    That may be true, but our nation is a Republic (Rule of Law), not a Democracy (Rule of Majority Vote). It wouldn’t matter if Obama got 100% of the popular vote… if he does not meet the Constitutional requirements to hold the office, then he cannot hold that office.

  5. Jax says:

    You realize that it is possible for a country to be a republic and a democracy at the same time, right? I’m pretty sure Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson would be a bit surprised to find out we’re not a democracy any more.

  6. Jax says:

    You’re not even embarrassed that you’re linking to yourself any more, are you?

    We are a republic. We are also a democracy. The two are not mutually exclusive.

  7. Jax,

    I link to my prior posts so that I don’t have to retype everything I’ve already said before. If you don’t like it, go away.

    Show me where in the Constitution it says that the President is to be determined by national popular vote.

    As originally ratified, the only portion of our federal government that was explicitly to be democratically elected was the House of Representatives.

    So yes, a portion of our Republic was to be deterimined by Democratic elections. But that does not turn our Republic into a Democracy. What rules is not the popular vote. What rules is not a King or a dictator. What rules is the Rule of Law.

    And if any portion of our Constitution is treated as if it doesn’t have to be supported, defended, and enforced, then any other portion can be ignored as well. Today the “natural born citizen” requirement was ignored. Tomorrow it could be the First Amendment. Or the Second Amendment. Or any of the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.

    If any portion of our Constitution is not supported, defended, and enforced, then we risk losing it all.

  8. Ryan says:

    Pill, nothing was outsourced. The information provided by factcheck satisfied their doubts, if they had any. Conservative bloggers who are completely against Obama, and think he is the devil incarnate have been satisfied with the information.

    Oh, and the United States is democracy, for all intents and purposes. The fact that there is a proxy between the voter, and the decision makers is actually something that makes the democracy more efficient, and better able to act on the will of the voters.

    Your comment that the US is not a democracy is like saying that modern locomotives do not run on diesel, since electric engines actually drive the wheels. It is the diesel, however, that generates the electricty, and therefore, provides the power.

  9. Ryan says:

    “Tomorrow it could be the First Amendment”

    Where were you when Bush was using the Constitution on a small roll in his bathroom, and ignoring the dissents from government officials. By your rules, the Army should have invaded the White House.

  10. Thomas Paine says:

    instead of claiming Obama is not a citizen, present the evidence of his birth certificate from another nation, or how he got a social security number… making accusations based on nothing makes you look foolish.

  11. Thomas,

    Try using that approach when you’ve been offered a job at a company, and you have to prove your citizenship before you can start.

    “Hey prospective employer, instead of asking me to prove my citizenahip, why don’t you present the evidence of my birth certificate from another nation, or how I got a social security number… if you don’t, you look foolish.”

    I don’t think you’d be allowed to start in that position.

    It’s not a matter of innocent until proven guilty. It’s a matter of ineligible until proven eligible. The burden of proof is on Obama. He has yet to show his original birth certificate to ANYONE.

  12. Ryan,

    “Pill, nothing was outsourced. The information provided by factcheck satisfied their doubts, if they had any.”

    I.E, they never looked at original birth certificate, and allowed a third party with prior connections to Obama to “verify” not Obama’s original birth certificate, but a hardcopy forged COLB.

    There has been absolutely no statement from the Hawaiian officials to confirm that the COLB produced at the Obama campaign offices in Chicago is authentic.

    So yes, the Congress outsourced the verification process and blindly accepted a third party’s “verification” of the forgery.

  13. Ryan says:

    Pill, you are really pissing me off.

    The COLB is not forged – it was determined to be authentic by a court of law in Virginia, and has been in the public domain for MONTHS. Forgery is NOT LEGAL, and since numerous Hawaiian officials and staff – who have access to this document – have not come forward with a charge of forgery (and don’t even think about saying the records are sealed – the Hawaiian official stated that it is not sealed).

    I really don’t get you – you are completely blind.

  14. Ryan says:

    Sorry, submitted before I was finished.

    You really are blind. I actually really enjoy speaking with other people with different viewpoints than my own, and having a good debate about it. I think it’s the best way to learn and grow, and start to understand one another.

    Speaking with you is really difficult. You make an argument based on vague assumptions, and then when challenged, you back it up with one of your earlier blog posts that was also based on a vague assumption.

    I’m sure your church teaches you that everyone who does not praise Jesus and vote Republican is actually speaking with the tongue of Satan, but please realize that there are other viewpoints in the world, and those viewpoints are backed up by thoughtful, compassionate people who are not trying to destroy America.

  15. Ted says:

    Obama can’t be POTUS.

    Since no congressman and senator objected on 1/8/09 to Congress’ count and certification of the electoral vote which would have turned resolution of Obama’s eligibility issue over to Congress, rendering moot both the Berg and Lightfoot cases, Berg finally does achieve standing on the issue of actual harm, to be addressed at the 1/9/09 SCOTUS Conference on Writ of Certiorari. Obama’s failure to submit evidence of his constitutional qualification for the 1/9/09 conference will mean he cannot thereafter challenge Berg’s request to enjoin the 1/8/09 Congressional electoral count and certification, albeit retroactive, scheduled for SCOTUS conference 1/16/09. Moreover, Chief Justice Roberts has scheduled a full Court conference on the Lightfoot case 1/23/09 in the event there needs to be a Constitutionally mandated action, the Inauguration itself, to enjoin retroactively.

    Checkmate! (WHERE IS THE NEWS MEDIA?)

  16. John says:

    Ryan,
    did you read the ruling by the court of law in Virginia? Or did you just read a misleading headline?

    The Virginia court made the same inaccurate claim in its ruling that so many congressmen have made in letters to constituents, a claim that we all know, by the ordinary connotation, denotation, semantics, context, pragmatics, and plain meaning of the words in our own native language, English, (the words in Virginia, in the letters, and in Hawaii), is NOT a true statement, to wit: [the Hawaiian caretaker of offical Hawaiian birth records said that he (guess who?) was born in Hawaii] (paraphrased).

    No, the Hawaiian official did not say that, we all know that the Hawaiian official did not say that, and it is just as dishonest for the Virginia court to claim that such a statement was made when it was not made as it has been for the congressmen to say that such a statement was made when it was not made.

    It is likewise dishonest for you to repeat, yet again, this same lie.

    –John

  17. John says:

    Ryan,
    I covered only one of the necessary points I intended to, and, like, you, submitted prematurely.

    The Virginia court also falsely stated that the Hawaiian officals had verified the COLB as genuine. But anyone who has been closely following this story knows also for the same reasons I stated above, that such a statement about the COLB is not true.

    In fact, a very clever intellectual sleight of hand has been performed here. Someone sent a Hawaiian who works in the office issuing COLBs (IIUC) an EMAIL of the online image and asked if that was a real Hawaiian COLB and the COLB office employee replied that it appears to be or it is, yes, a real COLB or BC or whatever (meaning that the FORM, STYLE, and APPEARANCE of the thing LOOK, AT FIRST SUPERFICIAL GLANCE, THE WAY ANY COLB OUGHT TO LOOK.

    That is ALL that the person in Hawaii was saying, and all that the person reasonably COULD say under the circumstances. The person was NOT saying that the data on the image was being confirmed against data on record in Hawaii, and the person did not have any paper document in hand to feel and examine closely.

    (It is worth mentioning at this point that IF there even WERE a REAL, PAPER COLB behind the online image with the dirt speck from the scanner glass, that those in possession of it could simply put it on another scanner and make another copy of it for us and put that image online, too. That has not been done, and will never be done, because by this point in time it is quite clear that there never was any paper document from which this image was made that could be simply put on a scanner again and re-scanned. The image was made in a photoshop sort of way, and any “copy” of it would have to be made the same way–from thin air–and it would not “match” the “original” in that case, exposing the fraud more conclusively than it has thus far already been.)

    A flimsy nothing of importance is all that was being acknowledged by the Hawaiian in the COLB office, and to blow that up into some kind of proof that Hawaii has “verified” the COLB and repeat this very, very plainly devious and (given the context and implications) damaging lie, has no doubt been a willful, malicious deception on at least some occasions, even if it may also be that many of those who keep repeating this lie do not know that it is A LIE.

    –John

  18. John says:

    Ted Said:

    “Obama can’t be POTUS.

    Since no congressman and senator objected on 1/8/09 to Congress’ count and certification of the electoral vote which would have turned resolution of Obama’s eligibility issue over to Congress, rendering moot both the Berg and Lightfoot cases, Berg finally does achieve standing on the issue of actual harm, to be addressed at the 1/9/09 SCOTUS Conference on Writ of Certiorari. Obama’s failure to submit evidence of his constitutional qualification for the 1/9/09 conference will mean he cannot thereafter challenge Berg’s request to enjoin the 1/8/09 Congressional electoral count and certification, albeit retroactive, scheduled for SCOTUS conference 1/16/09. Moreover, Chief Justice Roberts has scheduled a full Court conference on the Lightfoot case 1/23/09 in the event there needs to be a Constitutionally mandated action, the Inauguration itself, to enjoin retroactively.

    Checkmate! (WHERE IS THE NEWS MEDIA?)”

    Bump.

  19. Jax says:

    Ugh. This was entertaining for a while, but now… John, if someone just e-mailed a random Hawaiian official a digital copy of the COLB and everything worked out just as you said it did, don’t you think the Hawaiian state government would, I don’t know, make a statement of retraction, or say that they were being misrepresented? This is kind of a high profile thing that’s going on here. That’s not “clever intellectual sleight of hand.” That’s the dumbest plan I’ve ever heard.

    I will finish with this: John, Ted… everything you are saying is incorrect, and absolutely none of this will work out as you have predicted. I know this, because my friends on the far left went through all the same junk in 2000, and I told them the same thing then. Obama is getting sworn into office on January 20th. Please get used to this idea so your heads don’t explode on the day.

  20. Ryan says:

    John,

    You know what? You may actually be right about something. There may not actually be an original paper copy of the COLB. I bet there isn’t. The certificate of live birth is something that is, routinely, generated by the government offices as an official government issued birth record. If a person shows up in person to get it, it would be printed out and handed to the person. If it was an urgent document to be sent across the country – it is reasonable to expect that document to be sent digitally. If that is the case, and the document was to be posted online – photoshop is the most common piece of software to use to make it presentable on the web, or in an email.

    On the other hand, if the document was sent by courier, it would have been scanned, and manipulated by photoshop for the web. Photoshop is not just used for faking documents. It is used for rotating, resizing, sharpening, de-skewing, and adjusting contrast. Any, or all of the things could have been done to the file.

    The document itself is a damn piece of paper. What is important is what that paper represents, and the fact is that the document is in the public. None of the NUMEROUS officials with access to government records have disputed it – publicly or privately.

    You are dead wrong about the Virginia court ruling. You make it sound like some desk clerk verified the document over the phone. The issuing authority sent an affidavit to the court! This is not something done lightly. The ruling states:

    “The affidavit of the State Health Director states that the information on the CLOB is identical to the information on the “vault” copy of the birth certificate, and that both documents establish that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu.”

    Were they lying about that?

    Your theory now depends on a conspiracy involving the highest officials from both political parties, the ENTIRE senate, congress, everyone who has access to Hawaiian birth records, the hospital and health department in Honolulu, the newspapers in Hawaii perhaps, everyone in Obama’s family, and any friends or acquaintances of his parents at the time of his birth, the Clintons, several supreme court judges, many lower court judges, Dick Cheney, and George Bush.

  21. Ryan,

    You claim that I am blind.

    To the contrary, I have eyes to see very clearly:

    1) The State of Hawaii has never released Obama’s original birth certificate

    2) According to the only statement made by the Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, only two people have seen Obama’s orginal birth certificate, and they make no claims about his birth location. Parse the statement for what it does and doesn’t say. If Obama was born somewhere other than Honolulu, Hawaii, this “conspiracy” only has to consist of those two officials (the Director of Health and the Registrar of Vital Statistics) along with a small number of Obama campaign people who made the forgery, and a biased “Mainstream” media. The members of Congress don’t have to be in on the conspiracy; they just didn’t have the backbone to request to see the original birth certificate because they were afraid to be called “racist”. They didn’t want to accept their Constitutional responsibility to ensure the candidate qualifies to hold the office. Rather than upholding their Oath of office, they passed the buck and “outsourced” that responsibility to an unaccountable third party.

    3) There has NEVER been a statement or affidavit of the Hawaii State Health Director stating that “the information on the COLB is identical to the information on the “vault” copy of the birth certificate, and that both documents establish that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu.” If you are right and I am wrong, then post a link to said statement or affidavit. It is a HOAX.

    4) The government officials that DO boldly proclaim “Mr. Obama, is a son of the soil of this country”, “the son of this soil, Barrack Hussein Obama”, and “we are the home of the President-elect of the USA” are NOT in Hawaii… they are in KENYA.

    5) The Law of Nations was a standard part of the law school curriculum when our country was founded. The Law of Nations has influenced Supreme Court rulings from the beginning of our country to the Heller decision less than a year ago. The Law of Nations defines “natural born citizen” as “those born in the country, of parents who are citizens”. By that definition, any one of thre things disqualifies someone from being a natural born citizen:
    a) Born outside the country
    b) Born to a father who was not a citizen at the child’s birth
    c) Born to a mother who was not a citizen at the child’s birth

    6) I see very clearly that there has been no certified authentic Barack Hussein Obama II orginal birth certificate made publicly available to prove that he was indeed born in the USA.

    7) I see very clearly that it is an undisputed fact that the father of Barack Hussein Obama II was a British citizen who conferred British citizenship upon Barack Hussein Obama II at birth (by the principles of natural law, The Law of Nations, and The British Nationality Act of 1948).

  22. cajunpatriot says:

    This is all quite interesting, but when you step back for just a moment and realize that BHO has hired three law firms and spent close to 1M to NOT show his original vault certificate, don’t you at least wonder why? If there’s nothing to hide, then why is he so intent on hiding it? I think there were many folks who thought nothing of this until he started hiring lawyers to keep from showing a document that most people need to even get a passport.

    And when you add that to the LONG list of other documents we aren’t allowed to see (we all know them), it really does seem quite bizarre. Everyone here is arguing over one issue, when there are so many more that are equally disturbing and, as yet, unanswered. Like his father’s British nationality, for example. WHY ALL THE SECRETS???

    Maybe the SCOTUS will finally address the NBC issue; if they choose not to, it’s only going to get worse.

  23. cajunpatriot,

    All very true. Anyone with eyes to see can clearly see that Obama has tried to block access to any records from his past. And at the same time he has the audacity to promise Transparency.

    I suspect that Obama was registered as an “International student” (Indonesian citizen) in college. It sure would be nice to see those records.

    It’s likely to get worse no matter what because no matter what the Supreme Court does, there are going to be people who will be very angry. If the Court finds that Obama does not qualify as a natural born citizen, many of his supporters will think the Presidency was “stolen” from him. If the Court repeats their previous behavior, refusing to take action and not providing any explanation of why, then patriots of all political persuasions, who expect our Constitution to be supported and defended, will think that our Republic has been “stolen” from us.

    I really don’t see how the Supreme Court can remain silent on this issue.

    They need to rule on the definition of “natural born citizen”.

    If that definition requires parents to be citizens at the child’s birth, then Obama is clearly not qualified to hold the office of President of the United States.

    If that definition does not require parents to be citizens at the child’s birth, but does require birth on U.S. soil, then the court needs to confirm that Obama’s original vault birth certificate, on record in Hawaii, proves that he was born on U.S. soil.

    In Obama clears both of those legal hurdles, the court also needs to rule on whether or not Obama ever lost his U.S. citizenship in favor of citizenship in another country. Which country’s passport did Obama use to travel to Pakistan in 1981, when he was over the age of 18? If Obama lost his U.S. citizenship then he lost any claim to “natural born citizen”. He would be, at this point, either an illegal alien or at best a “naturalized” citizen.

    In order for Barack Hussein Obama II to be qualified to hold the office of President of the United States, as a “natural born citizen”, the court must find that:
    1) BHOII was born on U.S. soil
    2) Father’s and son’s British citizenship doesn’t matter
    3) BHOII never relinquished U.S. citizenship

    This has the makings of a Constitutional crisis, and Soetoro/Obama has no one but himself to blame.

  24. cajunpatriot says:

    Pill, very well stated. It’s all right there!

    Here’s the thing: IF (and it’s a really BIG if) the court finds all those things to be true, I will accept his presidency. Unlike the BDS-types who were unbelievably vile to Bush for the past 8 years (and some still are). I am very fearful of the consequences of an Obama presidency, but I would accept it under those circumstances.

    The haters can’t believe that we would do such a thing, because they were incapable of it with Bush. And I suppose there would be fringe who would never accept it, but both sides have those.

    And Jax, I know the papers buried this news on page 23 or something, but Bush actually DID win when they recounted the votes. Go figure. I hope you told your friends the facts, and not just that the issues they raised ‘wouldn’t work out.’

    The media, of course, preferred to play victim and continued to perpetuate the lie that Bush ‘stole’ the election. Good news doesn’t really sell, and if they’re about anything, they’re about selling, even if they have a really poor product (witness their financial woes and dropping subscriptions).

  25. cajunpatriot,

    I agree with your last comment 100%.

  26. Jax says:

    Red,

    What a shock.

    cajun,

    2 things I’d like you to source for me, if you would, just because I’d like to know where you’re getting your information. First, I’ve heard this giant number that Obama has supposedly spent on his crack legal team to kill this lawsuit. It started out at $100,000, then went to $500,000, and now you’re saying a million. As far as I’ve seen, Obama hasn’t hired one new lawyer, or even had to have one of the lawyers he has on retainer (all politicians have them, don’t freak out) appear in court yet. I suppose if you’re counting up the cost of keeping lawyers on retainer, it might add up to some money, but I’d really like to see where you’re getting your numbers.

    By the way, pick any one of those documents that you’re asking to see for Obama and pull the same document up on George W. for me, would you? Just because apparently everyone else is so free and clear with their personal information.

    Second thing I’d appreciate a source on is the recount. No, I didn’t tell me friends about a final recount, because as far as I could tell, none took place. Who did it and under what conditions?

    And cajun, if bad news sells papers, then the media should erect a statue to George W. Bush waving a giant neon cowboy hat in the middle of the Reflecting Pool. Some of us didn’t dislike him because we were raving anti-Republicans (hell, I voted for Reagan in ’84), some of us disliked him because he was a smirking, arrogant blowhard who talked to us like we were three-year-olds while the country went down the tubes.

  27. It appears that the first of two conference dates for Berg’s case (today and next Friday) has NOT resulted in “CERTIORARI GRANTED”.

    Three cases did have “CERTIORARI GRANTED”, but Berg’s was not one of them.

    As of this writing, there is no change in Berg’s case, and it will come before the court in conference again next Friday.

  28. John says:

    Ryan said:


    “The affidavit of the State Health Director states that the information on the CLOB is identical to the information on the “vault” copy of the birth certificate, and that both documents establish that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu.”

    Were they lying about that?

    Yes, Ryan, that is precisely my point. You are smart enough to have figured that out.

    I don’t know if they were deliberately lying, I am in no position to say about that, but the statement the court made is a lie that is predicated, just as I explained, on a misleading interpretation of the meaning of a statement that does not sum to the statement made by the Va. court,

    Yes, Ryan, yes. That is exactly what I am saying.

    –John

  29. Ryan says:

    Well John, since the court lied, an appeal of the decision should be pretty much a no-brainer, and I’m sure a reversal of the decision is pending.

    We’ll just wait for that to happen. Should be any day now.

    You guys are seriously bat-shit crazy. I know I won’t change your minds – no mount of proof could do that. The only reason I post is to offer some opposition and some semblance of reality to others who may be reading this.

  30. John and Ryan,

    This “Va. court” stuff is a HOAX. It doesn’t exist. It’s an internet rumor. If I’m wrong, provide a link to any legitimate primary source info about it.

    Obama never produced any document that was certified genuine by the State of Hawaii. All that was produced was a .JPG forgery, then later a hardcopy of that forgery (made to look as authentic as possible) that was only “verified” by Annenberg Political Fact Check and no one else. Obama has past connections to Annenberg (he chaired the Chicago Annenberg Challenge), and Annenberg made two very significant misstatements of fact.

    Dr. Fukino in Hawaii NEVER said that the Obama-produced Certification of Live Birth (COLB) was genuine.

    Dr. Fukino in Hawaii NEVER said that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Dr. Fukino’s statement was immediately followed by an Associated Press story which also made very significant misstatements of fact.

    Dr. Fukino didn’t have to lie in her statement. Everything she said was factually true, without saying a thing about Obama’s birth location or the “authenticity” of the forged COLB. The job of lying about those two things (Obama’s birth location and the “authenticity” of the forged COLB) was passed off to the completely unaccountable Associated Press.

    If you don’t believe the media distributes lies in order to sway public opinion, see this recent CNN example.

  31. Ryan

    You said:

    Well John, since the court lied, an appeal of the decision should be pretty much a no-brainer, and I’m sure a reversal of the decision is pending.

    We’ll just wait for that to happen. Should be any day now.

    No, the case never existed.
    You don’t appeal a case that never existed.

    You guys are seriously bat-shit crazy. I know I won’t change your minds – no mount of proof could do that. The only reason I post is to offer some opposition and some semblance of reality to others who may be reading this.

    B.S.!

    I’ve already made it clear what needs to be done to end the “natural born citizen” controversy surrounding Barack Hussein Obama II.

    In order for Barack Hussein Obama II to be qualified to hold the office of President of the United States, as a “natural born citizen”, the court must find that:
    1) BHOII was born on U.S. soil
    2) Father’s and son’s British citizenship doesn’t matter
    3) BHOII never relinquished U.S. citizenship

    #1 could have been easily resolved by BHOII agreeing to let Dr. Fukino release his original birth certificate.

    Imagine you have been offered a job, but you must first prove that you are a U.S. citizen. Millions of Americans have produced their original birth certificate for such purposes, for jobs that are far less significant than President of the United States.

    Could you get away with claiming that a third party, which is politically connected to you, had verified your forged COLB, so you don’t have to produce your genuine birth certificate?

    Could you get away with claiming that your birth had been announced in a newspaper, so you don’t have to produce your genuine birth certificate?

    Could you get away with claiming that an Associated Press article had said you were born in America, so you don’t have to produce your genuine birth certificate?

    The answer is “No” to all three questions, yet that is exactly what Obama just got away with when the Congress and Vice-President certified the Electoral College vote without ever looking at Obama’s original birth certificate.

    Of course the birth certificate is just one of three issues (the others being his British/Kenyan/Indonesian citizenships and whether or not he ever relinquished U.S. citizenship). But the amount of subterfuge and lack of transparency surrounding the birth certificate issue alone reflect very poorly on Obama. He has not proven that he qualifies to hold the Office of President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of all of our Armed Forces.

    This is a big deal. It is a significant Constitutional crisis – one of the most significant ones our country has ever faced.

  32. John says:

    Ryan said:

    “Well John, since the court lied, an appeal of the decision should be pretty much a no-brainer, and I’m sure a reversal of the decision is pending.

    We’ll just wait for that to happen. Should be any day now.”

    Well Ryan, the members of that court are welcome to attempt to sue me for libel, if they think they have a case. But I would caution them to consider some common-sense reality:

    If there were any hard evidence for their statement, then there would be a document that they have seen and the rest of the world has not seen.

    If such a document existed, the apologists for the Phony One would have been waving it in front of our faces ever since the court’s ruling was made a matter of public record, and the document would be in the public record.

    Ergo, there is no such document, and the only basis for the court’s statement is the information that we all have, just as I said.

    I stand by my statement. Again, if the judges on that Virginia court wish to sue me for libel, they are welcome to try.

    –John

  33. John says:

    You really ought to look closely at this, everyone, because this is as rich as it gets:
    Ryan said:
    ”[quote]You know what? You may actually be right about something. There may not actually be an original paper copy of the COLB. I bet there isn’t. The certificate of live birth is something that is, routinely, generated by the government offices as an official government issued birth record. If a person shows up in person to get it, it would be printed out and handed to the person. If it was an urgent document to be sent across the country – it is reasonable to expect that document to be sent digitally. If that is the case, and the document was to be posted online – photoshop is the most common piece of software to use to make it presentable on the web, or in an email.
    On the other hand, if the document was sent by courier, it would have been scanned, and manipulated by photoshop for the web. Photoshop is not just used for faking documents. It is used for rotating, resizing, sharpening, de-skewing, and adjusting contrast. Any, or all of the things could have been done to the file.
    The document itself is a damn piece of paper.[endquote]”

    Yes, Ryan, the fact certainly is that in any case [a real] document [must be] a piece of paper.

    You might recall (but it wouldn’t surprise me if you didn’t by the time you got to the fourth or fifth line, even if you made it clear in your first line that you were responding to my point by agreeing) that my point was that there was no paper COLA because if the Phony One had such a paper copy of this COLA he could easily re-scan it on another scanner, and post the new image. That has not been done and will never be done because there is no such paper COLA.

    Now let’s look at the foam-around-the-mouth remainder of that blather. Because that has to be the biggest load of nonsense I have thus far yet read from one of the Phony One’s close-your-eyes-and-name-your-own-definition-of-hope-and-change sycophant apologists.

    >”it is reasonable to expect that document to be sent digitally …”

    Huh?

    >”On the other hand, if the document was sent by courier, it would have been scanned, and manipulated by photoshop for the web. ”

    What are you talking about? I thought you just agreed with me that there was no paper copy of the COLA. What exactly are you trying to say (I mean, obscure) here?

    >”Photoshop is not just used for faking documents….”

    Why are you refuting what was never said? I never said that using photoshop on the scan proved it’s a forgery. Are you trying to distract someone from the point that I actually AM making? I’m saying that there is no real independent confirmation of the existence of an original paper COLA, none. Not even the simplest and easiest “second-opinion” that the Phony One could give the doubtful by simply scanning the original paper COLA a second time on a different scanner and posting that new image online. My point is that such a second scan can never be done because there is no paper COLA because the image that was posted online is a composite fraud.

    Who are you trying to fool, the half-educated, semi-literate buffoons who would take an online image as certified proof of authenticity? Surely you are not trying to convince anyone with half a dose of reason, a teaspoon of critical thinking, or a dollop of common-sense!

    Genius, the reason that a state goes to the trouble to impress a birth certificate with a date stamp and a raised seal is to make it trustworthy as an authentic document from an official state office.

    Sending such a document in an email would be worse than pointless as anything printed from a JPG file in some other place is completely useless as proof of anything. This, by the way, is the very simple point that many have been trying to make for six months.

    What do you take everyone for, stupider than people who agree with you? (Rhetorical question, answer only if idiot.)

    A person would have to be incapable of reading their own grade school diploma to believe something as stupid as what you have suggested.

    Again, there is no hard copy of this particular COLA available because there never was any hard copy of this COLA. This image is a composite image made from a variety of sources, and there will never be another scan of the supposed “original” COLA, which would be falling-over-backward simple to do if the Phony One had an original COLA. There will never be another scan because there is no “original” paper COLA to scan, and scanning a printout of the composite image would convincingly put the lie to it. The fact that the Phony One is unwilling even to simply put the supposed COLA on another scanner and show us a different scan of the same hypothetical paper document hypothetically impressed with a raised seal before it left the Hawaiian government office is convincing testimony to the fact that there is no such paper original COLA and never has been.

    For you to even suggest that such COLAs are routinely sent to recipients as digital images from the government office where they are produced is for you to be scraping the bottom of the rabidly-maniacal-raving-with-absurdity barrel with such a fanatic desperation that you’ve succeeded at nothing better than having worn a hole that we can all plainly see through.

    This kind of desperation to sustain a fraud utterly belies that smug, well-rehearsed “innocence” to which the Phony One’s apologists pretend with such overblown fanfare, a role they have studied till it became a career, studied to the point that it now unmistakably spotlights the extreme fanaticism of their attempt to gloss over this glaring, obvious, out-in-plain-sight, OOOOPS!

    This utterly absurd, nonsensical desperation of theirs is only the latest loud and convincing proof that the real extremists in this controversy are not those who question the validity of that phony image, but those who keep trying to defend it with nonsense and to direct everyone’s attention somewhere else, most frequently, in their signature lazy-man’s way, by mindlessly lobbing topic-changing defamatory insults because, though superficially plausible to the shallow and easily distracted, the polished and well-rehearsed but provably ridiculous justifications in their little handbook are in such limited supply. Of course this is only to be expected among those whose mental capacity is so severely limited to begin with that they can so easily be convinced that there might be profit in a lie.

  34. Ryan says:

    John, Thanks for posting your reply in multiple threads.

    No, I don’t think that the government is sending digital images of Birth Certificates around. I was trying to point out the fact that the document itself is not what is important. The certificate of live birth started as a digital document. Do you think it was typeset, and printed as a one-off on a press? It’s a digital printout based on a database record – which, originally, is based on the vault copy of the original paper birth certificate. If my birth certificate is lost in a fire in the vault in which it was kept, does that mean I was no longer born in the hospital where my mother gave birth to me? Obama does not need to send certified vault copies of his birth certificate to your house for your examination – I’m not even sure that would be enough for you.

    You have nothing but internet rumors, and phony experts to back up anything you said. Nothing at all. No court is not on your side – no constitutional expert is on your side, and the citizens of the country are not on your side.

    It’s time to work on another conspiracy theory, ’cause you can stick a fork in this one. It’s done.

  35. John says:

    Ryan,

    You (all of you apologists for the lie that we are all still being asked to believe long after we have made it abundantly clear that we do not believe you) and your repeated attempts to wave away this legitimate question with a mountain of increasingly ridiculous justifications amount convincingly to nothing more than a very, very desperate attempt to bury a very big lie under a mountain of additional lies, wearing us out until we no longer have the temerity to ask the question. I tell you this: that will never happen. Either I will get an answer to this question that I can believe or I will die before I stop asking this question. I promise you that.

    Until the whole country is satisfied that we have seen an official copy of the original vault birth certificate, and reliably authentic copies of the school records and other relevant documents, this case will remain open in our minds regardless of however frantically you and others like you keep waving your arms and claiming “Nothing to see, here, folks, just move along!”

    Until this apparent lie is proven to have been not a lie, then I will consider it to have been and to therefore continue to be … a lie.

    And if it truly were not a lie, then people like you would have no interest in convincing people like me that it is pointless for me to doubt it.

    This simplest way to put this to rest is to let the country look at the vault birth certificate and other documentation. Instead, we have a swarm of apologists like Ryan and Jax applying what they imagine to be the kind of peer pressure that apparently works in their own little circles by spewing insults at those who do not believe them and telling us that only foolish and unimportant people would not just simply believe them.

    It’s very much the old case of “Who are you going to believe, anyway, us or your own eyes?”

    I will believe my own eyes, Ryan, however much you make fun of me.

    So now, tell me once again, why is it that the vault birth certificate is not necessary because I should just believe someone like you?

    –John

  36. Frin says:

    John,

    You say “Until the whole country is satisfied that we have seen an official copy of the original vault birth certificate, and reliably authentic copies of the school records and other relevant documents, this case will remain open in our minds regardless of however frantically you and others like you keep waving your arms and claiming “Nothing to see, here, folks, just move along!””

    Your side has produced no reliable evidence to support your argument, it has had no court rule in your favour, and has had no person of reasonable public standing support it. In fact, people that would normally jump on any chance to bring down a Democrat (e.g Michelle Malkin, the whole of the Fox Network) don’t want to touch it.

    would suggest that, for all intents and purposes, the whole country is satisfied that Obama meets the requirements to be President. You really are on the fringes.

  37. Frin,

    You say, “Your side has produced no reliable evidence to support your argument”.

    The burden of proof is not on “our side”.

    The burden of proof is on Soetoro/Obama.

    This is not a criminal case of “innocent until proven guilty”.

    This is a constitutional eligibility question, and the candidate is “ineligible until proven eligible”.

    Question: How many government officials have seen Obama’s original birth certificate?

    Answer: Two.

    Question: How many Hawaiian government officials have verified that Obama was born in Hawaii?

    Answer: NONE.

    Question: How many Hawaiian government officials have verified that the Certification of Live Birth produced by the Obama campaign is authentic?

    Answer: NONE.

    The only people who have “verified” that the Certification of Live Birth produced by the Obama campaign is authentic are those at an organization which is politically connected to Obama (Annenberg Political Fact Check), and which made two significant misstatements (a.k.a. lies).

    Yet our Congress and Vice-President failed to uphold the Constitution and “outsourced” the verification of Obama’s birth documentation to this Obama-connected third-party group.

  38. Ryan says:

    Pill,

    For the last time. Since the Hawaiian officials have not said that the document is fake, it is in FACT authentic. It is the duty of the officials to point out fraud, just as much as it is their duty to tell the truth. If you think they are hiding the truth about the document in the public, then their word really means nothing anyway.

    And why do you keep calling him Soetoro/Obama? That’s really childish.

    John,

    I don’t expect you to believe me. I have not seen Obama’s birth certificate. I just think that your arguments are without merit, and I have every right to say that. You have not put forward any meaningful arguments, and have not provided any proof.

    The burden of proof was certainly on Mr. Obama to provide proof of citizenship. Now that he has done that to the satisfaction of election officials, the current government, the senate, the house, the courts, and the overwhelming majority of the American people, the burden of proof shifts. This is a done deal for all intents and purposes. The burden of proof is now on those that wish to prove his ineligibility, and so it seams, those few people are empty handed.

  39. Frin says:

    Mr Pill,

    Can you please point me to a reliable source of good standing who has verified that the COLB is a fake?

    Can you please give me a rational reason as to why Republican Hawaiian government officials would knowingly withhold the fact that Obama’s birth certificate, which they have seen, states that he was not born in Hawaii?

    And as indicated by Ryan, Obama has satisified those government officials that are required to confirm his suitability. It is now the responsibility of those people putting forward the law suits to provide hard evidence of his ineligibility. Would you say that the evidence they have provided so far is rock solid?

  40. The Associated Press lied and reported, “State officials say there’s no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.”

    Find a quote from any Hawaiian state official who ever said, “There’s no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.”

    They never said that.

    Question: How many government officials have seen Obama’s original birth certificate?

    Answer: Two. Health Department Director Chiyome Fukino and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka. I have not seen any evidence to indicate that Fukino and Onaka are Republicans, not Democrats. While Governor Lingle is a Republican, she has NOT seen the original birth certificate.

    Question: How many Hawaiian government officials have verified that Obama was born in Hawaii?

    Answer: NONE.

    Question: How many Hawaiian government officials have verified that the Certification of Live Birth produced by the Obama campaign is authentic?

    Answer: NONE.

    The only people who have “verified” that the Certification of Live Birth produced by the Obama campaign is authentic are those at an organization which is politically connected to Obama (Annenberg Political Fact Check), and which made two significant misstatements (a.k.a. lies).

    Yet our Congress and Vice-President failed to uphold the Constitution and “outsourced” the verification of Obama’s birth documentation to this Obama-connected third-party group.

    Dr. Fukino says state law bars release of a birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest in it. Can you honestly say that the American people don’t have a tangible interest in seeing the original birth certificate of a man who wants to be President and Commander in Chief?

    This man was known as “Barry Soetoro” in Indonesia. The Soetoro divorce papers include him (as a child over 18), indicating that Barry was adopted by Lolo, and that his legal last name became Soetoro. Unless he changed his name back after the divorce, his last name is still Soetoro! It is not “childish” to call him Soetoro/Obama. It is childish for Barry to promise that he would be “open, transparent, and accountable” and then refuse to be good for his word.

    Oh,
    Be
    A
    Man,
    Already!

    Be a man and release the original vault birth certificate, the same document that the State of Hawaii itself requires for the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. The Certification of Live Birth is not good enough for them, as it is not good enough to prove Hawaiian birth! There is information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, and since Hawaii issued Certifications to people born outside of Hawaii, only the Certificate is good enough to prove Hawaiian birth.

    Obama has yet to produce a document that the State of Hawaii verifies as authentic. The only document he produced came from the same source as “Haye I.B Ahphorgerie“.

    Our Congress had a Constitutional responsibility to verify an authentic original birth certificate document from the State of Hawaii. They shirked that responsibility and “outsourced” it to an Obama-connected third-party.

  41. Frin says:

    Mr Pill,

    The divorce papers state: “The parties have 1 children below age 18 and 1 chidren above 18 but still dependent on the parties for education”.

    Obama was over 18, but still dependant on his mother for education expenses. His mother was, obviously, a party to the divorce. Therefore the divorce papers do not provide any evidence to support a claim that Obama was adopted by his stepfather.

  42. He was clearly listed as “Barry Soetoro, Indonesian citizen” at his school in Jakarta. That is a stong indication that he was adopted.

    Also, it is my understanding that only children “of the marriage” are included in the divorce papers. If he had not been adopted, he would not be listed in the papers.

    What country’s passport did he use to travel to Pakistan in 1981, and under what name?

    Did he travel with an Indonesian passport, under the name of Barry Soetoro, as an adult?

    It’s time for him to be “open, transparent, and accountable“.

  43. Frin says:

    Mr Pill,

    The school record from Jakarta also indicated that his place of birth was Honolulu – yet you won’t believe that piece of information until you see his vault birth certificate. Why do you then take that school record as absolute evidence that he was adopted?

    It is my understanding that the divorce papers list children of the parties, which may or may not be children of both parties.

    Can you point to any documents, evidence or facts to support your allegation that Obama traveled on anything other than a US passport? To me, this seems to be one of the weaker elements of your concerns, given that it appears to have arisen from nothing more than speculation on the Internet. If you have anything more substantial than that, I would be interested in seeing it.

  44. The burden of proof is on Obama, not me.

    He is uneligible until proven eligible.

    He has done nothing but play a shell game to this point.

    Document A is his original birth certificate. That document, plus a ruling by the supreme court on the definition of “natural born citizen”, are required to conclusively end this debate.

    Document B is the Certification of Live Birth.

    Document A exists, and has been seen by two Hawaiian officials who disclosed absolutely nothing about the birthplace.

    Document B first appeared on DailyKos, and was later produced in hardcopy by the Obama campaign, but only shown to a controlled audience with possible ties to Obama (Annenberg Political Fact Check).

    Document B has never been authenticated by the State of Hawaii or any other government agency.

    Document B is insufficient to prove Hawaiian birth to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

    Obama has relied on mistakements/lies by Annenberg and the Associated Press to make people believe the following:
    1) The false belief that Document B was really Document A
    2) The false belief that Document B was declared genuine
    3) The false belief that Hawaiian officials said “there is no doubt Obama was born in Hawaii”.
    4) The false belief that Document B is sufficient to prove Obama is a natural born citizen.

    I repeat:

    The burden of proof is on Obama, not me.

    He is uneligible until proven eligible.

  45. Frin says:

    Mr Pill,

    I’ve addressed the questions you have asked me – why did you not address those that I’ve asked you, specifically why you place importance on the school records when they contradict your argument, and whether you have anything other than internet rumor to go in with respect to him traveling on a non-US passport to Indonesia.

    You are drawing a long bow to suggest that FactCheck is biased towards Obama. FactCheck.org is funded by The Annenberg Foundation, which spends a large amount of money funding a variety of public interest organisations, including the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Obama sat on the board of as a Senator. The surviving member of the couple that founded The Annenberg Foundation (Leonore Annenberg) endorsed John McCain.

    As for the burden of proof being on Obama – it isn’t. He has proven his eligiblity to those that required it. As such, the burden of proof now lies on those challenging his eligbility in court. And as yet, none of those cases have even gotten through the door.

  46. Ryan says:

    Mr Pill,

    You expect Obama to answer your questions, why do you not answer ours?

    You admit that the Hawaiian officials have seen the original birth certificate. The fact that it exists at all should prove a US birth, but even if it doesn’t, that would mean that those officials are a party to a fraud. A really big fraud. Even though other government officials have not seen the document, they certainly have access to it – as do numerous other officials. The statement did say that the document is being handled in the same manner as any other birth certificate – so it is not sealed as you state.

  47. Frin,

    “The school records”

    Clearly not an official government record, but it reflects what Barry’s mother and step-father wanted people to believe was true (whehter it is true or not). Yes, it lists his birthplace as Hawaii, his name as Barry Soetoro, his citizenship as Indonesian, and his religion as Islam. You seem to want to accept the first (birthplace) but disregard the other three (name, citizenship, and religion). If we accept all four, then Obama has lied about things other than his birthplace. And, even if Obama was born in Hawaii, that still does not make him a “natural born citizen” by the meaning of that phrase in 1787. Regardless of birth location, he was born a British citizen. That is not in dispute. “Fight the Smears” even admits Obama’s British citizenship at birth.

    “internet rumor to go in with respect to him traveling on a non-US passport to Indonesia”

    No, not Indonesia, Pakistan. Obama admitted less than a year ago that he had traveled to Pakistan in 1981. He was over the age of 18 at that time, so it matters which nation’s citizenship he travelled under as an adult. U.S. Citizens were not allowed to travel to Pakistan in 1981, so which nation’s passport did he use to go to Pakistan?

    “The Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Obama sat on the board of as a Senator.”

    He didn’t just sit on the board, he was the chairman of the board…the only executive experience he ever had before running for President, and many believe that William Ayers (who also sat on that board) helped Obama get that position. So widow Leonore Annenberg endorsed John McCain…so what? There are many foundations that were started by wealthy Republicans, only to have those foundations taken over by socialists later. Do you really think Leonore Annenberg picked Bill Ayers and Barack Obama to serve on the board of the Chicago Annenberg challenge? I don’t. Other people run the foundation, and Leonore’s endorsement of McCain is not relevant to this question of the Annenberg – Obama connection.

    “As for the burden of proof being on Obama – it isn’t. He has proven his eligiblity to those that required it.”

    Per the 20th Amendment, there is a Constitutional responsibility to check the qualifications of Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates. Obama did not prove his eligibility to Congress. Instead, Congress refused to perform their Constitutional duty to check Obama’s qualifications. That is the whole point of this post.

  48. Ryan,

    Do I suspect that Fukino and Onaka are “a party to a really big fraud”?

    Yes, I do.

    They have not corrected any of the misstatements made by Annenberg and the Associated Press.

    You claim that “other government officials have not seen the document, they certainly have access to it”. Well, not according to Dr. Fukino… she said:

    State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

    I think every citizen of the United States has a “tangible interest” in the original birth certificate. But Dr. Fukino thinks that only she and Onaka are allowed to see it.

    The fact that Obama refuses to be a man of his word and be “open, transparent, and accountable” about this vital record and pratically every record from his past (for example, his college records, which could very well show him as an Indonesian international student) prove that he cannot be trusted.

  49. Frin says:

    Mr Pill,

    With respect to the school records – you are the one that wants to use that as evidence, not me. I was merely pointing out in the inconsistencies in the document. The Indonesian school record is certainly not what most people have based their assessment of his birthplace on.

    I’ve got no problems with you questioning the meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen”. I personally think the lack of formal definition of that phrase is the one area where your side *might* have an argument. All the other various other issues such as what passports he traveled on, whether he was born in Kenya etc are so nebulous and built on rumor I think they hinder your case, rather than advance it.

    I don’t doubt that Obama visited Pakistan – he did admit it. However, you then go on to say that “US citizens were not allowed to travel to Pakistan in 1981”. Do you have any evidence of such a ban? There is a New York Times travel article of June 14 1981 detailing a visit to Pakistan by one of their writers – which talks about a free 30 day tourist visa which is necessary for Americans to travel to Pakistan. See http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE2DA1338F937A25755C0A967948260&sec=travel&spon=&pagewanted=5 for the article.

    My point re The Annenberg Foundation was that just because FactCheck.org and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge were both funded by the Annenberg Foundation does not mean there is any sort of connection between the two. As you point out, just because Leonore Annenberg supported McCain doesn’t mean that her whole organisation supported McCain. The same logic then applies – just because The Annenberg Foundation funded an organisation that Obama was involved in, doesn’t mean that every funded organisation of the Foundation supported Obama.

    How do you know that Obama did not prove eligibility to Congress? How do you know that Congress didn’t do their job? Is it merely because you don’t agree with the outcome?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s