Category Archives: Barry Soetoro

Pastor James Manning, Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement, Bold and Fresh, Glenn Beck Bill O’ Reilly show, Westbury NY, Saudis bought Fox, US Constitution, News blackout

We have known for over a year that Bill O’Reilly has ignored and insulted the Obama eligibility movement. Recently Glenn Beck insulted average Americans who question Obama’s eligibility and adher to the US Constitution.

From the Conservative Monster, January 23, 2010.

“Pastor Manning – Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement”

“Tonight was the “Bold and Fresh” Glenn Beck/Bill O’ Reilly show in Westbury, NY. Thousands of their loyal fans showed up and they were greeted by an enthusiastic crowd from Pastor Manning’s church as they entered the parking lot. The Fox fans were met with leaflets and church songs, it was quite a site to see. There were about 50-60 people, but their spirit was strong.

There should have been 5,000 people protesting tonight, but too many people are brainwashed by Fox News and the Tea Party movement that the Obama eligibility issue is a non-issue. I have heard so many excuses and I am not buying any of them. This issue is bigger than Watergate and that is why there is a news blackout on the entire issue on all networks.

I almost did not make this protest due to sheer exhaustion, but I knew that I had no choice to make it to Westbury, NY. Why? Because the people need to be informed of this ‘news’ that is being blacked out by all networks and print in the media. If I did not report about this protest, it would have gone unreported. I was the ONLY journalist there covering this protest.

I want everyone to know that I do like Fox and Beck, but not as much as I used to like them. Beck’s Jan. 4th attack on the American people (many of them his fans) that dared to ask Obama for evidence that he is a natural born citizen was not only betrayal, it was suspicious. 

Many of the Fox fans did not even know why we were out there protesting. One of them shouted “Communism does not work.” I approached him and I told him “We are here because Beck and O’ Reilly are part of a news blackout on the Obama eligibility issue and we want that blackout lifted.” I explained other details briefly and in under 30 seconds the gentleman said “Wow, that is interesting indeed.””

“Glenn Beck, Bill O’ Reilly, countless others in the media and both political party’s need to be held accountable if any violence breaks out when Obama is removed from office. I allege that THEY knowingly covered up this issue prior to the election to protect Obama and they betrayed this nation in the process.
FYI – Fox news was attacking Congressman Deal today on the show Cashin’ in. He is the only one in congress with the guts to send Obama a letter asking that he release his birth and school records to the public.”

Read more:

http://theconservativemonster.com/

Pastor Manning – Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement

Does this explain why Fox ignores or insults those questioning Obama’s eligibility?

Kerchner v Obama & Congress, US 3rd Circuit Appeal, Appellant’s Opening Brief, Filed 19 Jan 2010, Update January 20, 2010

From Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Commander USNR (Retired), lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama & Congress, January 20, 2010.

For Immediate Release – 19 January 2010

Kerchner v Obama & Congress – U.S. 3rd Circuit Appeal – Appellant’s Opening Brief – Filed 19 Jan 2010

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/01/kerchner-v-obama-appeal-appellants.html

Attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed the Appellant’s Opening Brief in the Kerchner et al v Obama et al lawsuit Appeal. The Brief was filed with the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA on 19 Jan 2010. See this link to download a copy and read it:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/25461132/

Attorney Apuzzo will comment on this action more in the next few days in his legal blog at:  http://puzo1.blogspot.com/  However, please feel free to contact Atty Apuzzo with any immediate questions at the contact addresses listed in the afore listed blog site.

We look forward to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals reviewing this matter and ordering a trial on the merits as to the Article II Constitutional eligibility of Obama to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief of the military.

We say Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” of the USA and thus is not eligible to serve in the Oval Office. Obama is a Usurper and must be removed to preserve the integrity and fundamental law of our Constitution and our Republic.

“We the People” will be heard on this matter! As the People in Massachusetts have demonstrated, “We the People” are the Sovereigns in this country and the Constitution is the fundamental law of our nation, not Obama or Congress. We will not be silenced.  The chair Obama sits in in the Oval Office is not his throne. It is the People’s seat too.  And Obama despite all his obfuscations to date must prove to Constitutional standards that he is eligible to sit in that seat.

This is not going to go away until Obama stops hiding ALL his hidden and sealed early life documents and provides original copies of them to a controlling legal authority and reveals his true legal identity from the time he was born until the time he ran for President. Obama at birth was born British and a dual-citizen. He holds and has held multiple citizenships during his life-time. He’s a Citizenship chameleon as the moment and time in his life suited him and he is not a “natural born Citizen” with singular and sole allegiance and Citizenship at birth to the USA as is required per the Constitution per the intent of our founders and the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” to Constitutional standards.

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Glenn Beck, Birthers, Obama eligibility, AKA, Email, Birth certificate, Obama college records, Beck insults Americans, Glenn Beck Radio Show, Fox, Natural born citizen, US Constitution, Certification of Live Birth, American citizens idiots?

Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of Americans

 

Glenn Beck, you are a lucky man. We have been trying to figure out for over a year why you have avoided touching the Obama eligibility issues. It is now widely believed that the Saudi ownership of a large part of Fox is the main reason. If it were not for your being popular and consistently revealing the truth about Obama and his associates, you would be toast. Your recent insults of average, hard working, concerned Americans was unacceptable. We are giving you a chance to wake up and apologize.
The following is an email recently sent to Glenn Beck. It is well written and well documented.

“A question of integrity
 
January 12, 2010
 
The following e-mail was sent to Glenn Beck on January 8, 2010.
 
Dear Mr Beck,
 
A colleague forwarded to me the following e-mail, received from you:
 
From: Glenn Beck
To: Listener
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:19 PM
Subject: Glenn returns fired up, ready to go
 
“Birthers Birthing

Just like the notorious ‘seminar callers’ Rush talks about, there is a new type of seminar caller out there trying to get on talk radio: the birther. Sure, there are plenty of idiots out there who actually think Barack Obama was not born in the United States and this is a way to get him impeached. But most reasonable people don’t believe that. It’s so ridiculous that it’s actually a good distraction for Obama, because it’s an easy win for him and distracts from the real issues. Is that why so many birthers seem to be on different talk shows lately? Glenn explains. ( Transcript, Insider Audio)”
 
It is both shocking and appalling, Mr Beck, that you would write, much less send, something like this.  That you apparently did is making scores of Americans question not only your veracity but also your integrity.
 
There is no issue more important to this nation than the question of Also Known As (AKA) Obama’s eligibility to the office he holds.
 
If, as the evidence more than adequately indicates, AKA is not eligible to the office he holds, the United States Constitution is in great peril as is every right guaranteed the people of this nation under that document, including your right of free speech under the First Amendment.  Whether AKA legitimately holds the office of president is of paramount importance to every issue you address regarding his Marxist agenda.
 
You refer to the people gravely concerned by what, by all indications, is an egregious breach of our Constitution, as “birthers.” 
 
But I ask you, can you prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that AKA is eligible to the office he holds?
 
Have you seen AKA’s actual birth certificate issued at the time of his birth?  Have you?  Because, if you have, you are the only one, besides AKA, who has seen it.
 
AKA admits in his book, Dreams from my father, that he found his actual birth certificate among papers in his maternal grandparents home, in Hawaii, when he lived with them.  That being the case, Mr Beck, why the need to produce a laser printed document?  Why not simply produce his actual birth certificate as John McCain did when his eligibility was questioned? 
 
But we have seen the pictures of the Certification of Live Birth?  That we have.  And you know what, Mr Beck, they prove absolutely nothing.  “Here officer, let me show you the picture I have of my drivers’ license; it is no doubt just as acceptable as my actual drivers’ license!”
 
I have to ask, have you actually seen the Certification of Live Birth that AKA has claimed is his birth certificate?  No, I don’t mean pictures, I mean the actual document?  If you haven’t, then how do you know it’s legit?  In the day and age of PhotoShop, how do you know it wasn’t forged, especially in light of the fact that the digital files behind all those pictures on the internet show the pictures have been altered?
 
Don’t you find it rather odd that AKA has spent close to $2 million trying to keep his actual birth certificate, which he has, concealed while John McCain, when the question of eligibility arose, whipped his out for any and all to look at?
 
You’ve “spent minutes pondering that question”?  Really?  Does that have more to do with mental acuity or does it have more to do with the clown persona you seem to like to exude?
 
You have been quoted as saying that you believe those requesting that AKA produce his actual birth certificate are discrediting themselves.  Really?  On what do you base your assertion?
 
Do you base it on the fact that AKA has admitted he was a dual citizen at birth?  A dual citizen is not natural-born.  A natural born citizen is born of two American parents on American soil, a fact which AKA acknowledged when he became a co-sponsor of SR 511, passed by the Senate, and providing a “sense” of the Senate regarding John McCain’s eligibility. 
 
While AKA may have been born on American soil, his father was a British subject.  He is not natural-born and is not, therefore, eligible to the office of president under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, United States Constitution.
 
What about that do you find so hard to comprehend?
 
That, above and beyond all your clueless comments and accusations, is the crux of the situation.
 
But there is more that does play into this matter beyond the dual citizenship.  While it secondary to the fact of dual citizenship and ineligibility to the office of president, it is relevant to the matter.
 
How do you address the fact that when AKA claims he was born, there was a law in effect, in Hawaii, which allowed for the birth registration of foreign-born children?  That law was not repealed until 1972.  What this means, Mr Beck, is that until said time as AKA’s actual birth certificate, which he has, is produced and examined, where he was actually born is up for grabs.  The claim that he was born in Honolulu, in the face of that law, means nothing.
 
If he was born outside the United States, there is no question that he is not eligible.
 
So, please, tell us on what you base your assertion?  Or is the case more that you don’t want to be bothered by the facts?
 
You assert that AKA is an American.  He may be an American but that does not equate to being natural born.  But then, there has been no proof presented that he is an American, so your assertion is not based on fact.
 
There is yet more.
 
In Ann Soetoro v Lolo Soetoro, filed August 1980 when AKA was 19, it is stated that AKA is a “dependent [of the respondent, Lolo Soetoro] for the purposes of education.”  How is it possible for AKA to be considered a legal dependent of Lolo Soetoro absent AKA being legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro?  You are aware, are you not, of the registration of AKA at the Fransiskus Assisi Primary School in Jakarta, listing his name as Barry Soetoro and his citizenship as Indonesian?  That registration is dated January 1, 1967.
 
Was AKA, at the age of 19, named as a dependent of Lolo Soetoro for the purposes of education, so he could obtain, as an Indonesian citizen, foreign student scholarships to Occidental?  Is that why his Occidental records, Columbia records and Harvard records have all been sealed? 
 
And this leads to another question.
 
If ever eligible to do so, where are the legal documents wherein AKA reclaimed his American citizenship at age 18, one year before he was listed as a dependent of Lolo Soetoro in the Soetoro divorce papers?  Have you seen the legal documents where AKA reclaims his American citizenship?  If you have, you would be the first because no one else has.
 
AKA pledged, while campaigning, to be transparent.  That being the case, Mr Beck, why has AKA, as no other president before him, sealed every record that would divulge his past?  If AKA has nothing to worry about, has nothing to hide, why has he deliberately sealed his past from public view?
 
You have claimed those who have addressed the eligibility issue are a bunch of “idiots” hatched by the AKA camp to sideline more important issues.
 
If there is an “idiot,” it’s definitely not those you erroneously call “birthers.”
 
There is no issue more important to the very documents on which this nation was founded, than the question of AKA’s eligibility to the office of president.  If he is not our legitimate president, then every bill, every executive order, ever document he has signed is null and void, including the money appropriated to bail out his Wall Street buddies and benefactors.
 
And if he is not eligible to the office of president, a constitutional crisis exists.
 
You claim to stand for the Constitution.  You rail against graft and corruption; against dishonesty in government; against the bureaucracy that spins the truth.  Yet you believe that somehow, through all of that, and in the face of the evidence, the sealing of documents, the hiding of records, the scrubbing bubbles being applied to the internet to cleanse it of anything remotely connected to his past, that he is somehow telling the truth. 
 
Are you really so naïve?
 
In the end, your vitriol aimed at those concerned that our constitution is being shredded really says more about you than about those you take aim at.  If there is anyone doing the bidding of the AKA camp, it isn’t those concerned about a man sitting in the Oval Office, occupying the White House, who does so in violation of the United States Constitution, placing this nation in peril and endangering the rights of every American, you included.
 
If there is one issue that is more important than any other, it is the issue of AKA’s eligibility to the office he holds.
 
Only those augmenting AKA’s Marxist agenda are complicit in keeping the eligibility issue pushed under the rug.
 
Note:  As of this posting, Glenn Beck has not responded; not that I expected he would.  Has Glenn Beck been threatened if he speaks on the eligibility issue as other radio and television personalities have apparently been threatened?  It would stand to reason that he has.  It also stands to reason that the almighty dollar is much more important to Glenn Beck than what is right.  And therein lies the problem most true patriots have with those who purport themselves to be leaders in the cause of liberty.
 
Postscript:  The issue of the two social security numbers known to have been used by AKA, one issued in Connecticut, the other in Michigan, also play into the equation.  If AKA is a legal citizen, why would he need to use social security numbers not issued to him?”

Posted with permission of Lynn.

Dr Orly Taitz, Update, January 11, 2010, Captain Pamela Barnett et al V Barack Hussein Obama lawsuit, Not been heard on the merits, No discovery has been granted, Quo Warranto

Just in a few minutes ago from Dr. Orly Taitz, attorney in Captain Pamela Barnett, et al V Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle L.R. Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and    President of the Senate.

Dr. Orly Taitz, Attorney-at-Law
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-3078 
California State Bar No.: 223433
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 
Captain Pamela Barnett, et al.,                           §
                        Plaintiffs,                                     §
                                                                            §
              v.                                                           §        Civil Action:
                                                                            §
Barack Hussein Obama,                                     §        SACV09-00082-DOC-AN
Michelle L.R. Obama,                                        §         REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO
Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State,      §        MOTION TO TRANSFER;
Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense,             §        MOTION FOR LEAVE OF  
Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and                  §        COURT TO FILE QUO
President of the Senate,                                      §        WARRANTO
Defendants.                                                         §
 
Here come the plaintiffs in this case (aside from Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson represented by Gary Kreep ) and concur with the brilliant suggestion by the Department of Justice and move the court to grant the Leave of Court to file Quo Warranto challenging constitutionality of position of Mr. Barack Hussein Obama as the president of the United States under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution of the United States for following reasons.
 
(1.) The case at hand has not been heard on the merits, no discovery has been granted and the court simply granted the defendants’ pretrial motion to dismiss for want of Jurisdiction, when the defendants argued that the proper jurisdiction is Washington DC. In their opposition the defendants do not deny making such an argument.
(2.) The defendants twist the truth in their opposition claiming that the court didn’t find the jurisdiction in the District of Columbia. On page 26 of the order 89 the court states: “[T]he writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President  Obama holds office within that district. The quo warranto provision codified in the District of Columbia Code provides, “A Quo warranto may be issued from the United States District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States, civil and military”. D.C. Code §§16-35-1-3503. The court h! as denied the plaintiffs request to apply the District of Columbia quo warranto statute pursuant to California choice of law provisions. The court went even further by stating that “[W]hile the Court can apply the law of the other jurisdiction where appropriate, it is precluded from robbing the D.C. court of jurisdiction as to any quo warranto writ against President Obama because the D.C. Code grants exclusive jurisdiction to the District of Columbia. Plaintiff’s quo warranto demand is hereby dismissed for improper venue”.  The court dismissed plaintiffs quo warranto due to improper venue, not on the merits of the case. At this time the plaintiffs have 3 options:  A. App! ealing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as the DC statute quoted by the court itself does not state that the venue is exclusive and other district courts cannot apply this statute anywhere else in this country from Anchorage, Alaska to Tucson, Arizona, however an appeal might take a year and a half to get to trial, which means a year and a half of further usurpation of US presidency. B. The plaintiffs can file a new case in DC, however judging by stonewalling techniques of the Department of Justice, there will be another year of pretrial motions, which means another year of usurpation of US presidency. C. Motion for leave of court to file quo warranto to be granted by this court or to be transferred by this court directly to the Chief Judge of the US District of  Columbia Royce Lamberth who currently has under submission a related case and to include by reference all the pleadings in the current case of B! arnett et al v Obama et al. This will serve the interest of justice, it will clear the jurisdiction hurdle and will give both parties an opportunity to proceed with discovery and trial on the merits of the case. As this court very eloquently stated during the July 13 hearing, that the case should not be decided on technicality but on the merits. It is important for the country and the military.
 
     The plaintiffs have filed both with the Attorney General Eric Holder and the US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor and his successor Channing Phillips a request for Quo Warranto in March and April of 2009 respectively. Undersigned has already provided the Court with copies of the Certified Mail receipts, showing that those were received.  Hundreds of concerned citizens have called the Department of justice demanding a response to Quo Warranto submission. No response was received for ten months. Letters, e-mails, faxes went unanswered. Employees of the justice department were slamming phones in the face of the citizens calling and urging a response, even when those calls came from high ranking officers of US military. The undersigned does not know what was the reason for this t! otal dereliction of duties by Attorney General Holder and DC US attorneys Taylor and Phillips: was it A Laziness? B Lack of guts and spine? C Corruption? Regardless of the reason department of Justice cannot use their own inaction as justification in denying the plaintiffs ex-relators status in filing Quo Warranto. They cannot eat the cake and have it whole. This game of hide and seek by the Attorney General Holder and US attorneys played with the plaintiffs and their counselor is infantile at best and treasonous at worst, as National Security is on the line. Recent near tragedy of NorthWest 253, slaughter of CIA agents and tragedy at Fort Hood are only a few reminders of how dangerous it is to have a Big Question Mark with numerous stolen and fraudulent social security numbers sitting in the position of the President and Commander in Chief.       
 
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the undersigned counsel respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant Leave of Court to file Quo Warranto as ex-relators in the name of the United States of America against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States and to transfer this leave of court or transfer the request for leave of court with the rest of the file as an attachment to the US District court for the District of Columbia to be assigned to Honorable Judge Royce Lamberth, chief judge for the US District Court of the District of Columbia, who currently presides over a related case.
Writ of Quo Warranto
 
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
 
I.   What is Respondent Obama’s standard and burden of proof of his birthplace under Quo Warranto and ethical duties? – Considering Obama’s first cousin Raela Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, sealed alleged records of Obama’s birth in Mombasa; while the State of Hawaii holds Obama’s “original” sealed birth records, allows registration of births out of State, allows registration based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence and seals original birth records.
 
II. Does the State of Hawaii’s withholding Respondent’s Obama’s original birth records by privacy laws breach the U.S. Const. by obstructing constitutional rights duties of the People to vote, and State and Federal election officers to challenge, validate & evaluate qualifications of presidential candidates based on legally acceptable and not fraudulent records and the President Elect., per U.S. Const. art. II § 1, art. VI, & amend. XX § 3?
 
III.          Does the restrictive qualification for President of “natural born citizen” over “citizen” include allegiance to the U.S.A. from birth without any foreign allegiance, as required of the Commander in Chief in time of war to preserve the Republic, including birth within the jurisdiction of the U.S.A. to parents who both had U.S. citizenship at that birth, and having retained that undivided loyalty?
 
IV.          Does birth to or adoption by a non-citizen father or mother incur foreign allegiance sufficient to negate being a “natural born citizen” and disqualify a candidate from becoming President?
 
V.           Having attained one’s majority, do actions showing divided loyalty with continued allegiance to the foreign nationality of one’s minority evidence foreign allegiance sufficient to disqualify one from being a “natural born citizen” with undivided loyalty to the U.S.A., such as campaigning for a candidate in a foreign election, or traveling on a foreign passport?
 
VI.          Does a presidential candidate or President Elect by default fail to qualify under U.S. Const., art. II § 2 and amend. XX, § 3, if they neglect their burden to provide State or Federal election officers prima facie evidence of each of their identity, age, residence, and natural born citizenship, sufficient to meet respective State or Federal statutory standards?
 
VII.        Do candidates for office disqualify themselves if they seek office under a birth name differing from a name given by adoption, or vice versa, when they neglect to provide election officers prima facie evidence of legal changes to their name, or if they neglect to legally change their name?
 
VIII.       Does a President elect fail to qualify through breach of ethical disclosure duties, and obstruction of election officers’ constitutional duties to challenge, validate and evaluate qualifications for President, by withholding or sealing records evidencing identity, age, residency, or allegiance, or by claiming privacy and opposing in court efforts by Electors, election officers, or the People to obtain and evaluate such records?
 
IX.          Does misprision by Federal election officers cause a President Elect to fail to qualify, if they neglect or refuse to challenge, validate, or evaluate qualifications of Electors or a President Elect, being bound by oath to support the Constitution and laws, after citizens provided information challenging those qualifications via petitions for redress of grievance, or by law suits?
 
X.           To uphold its supremacy and inviolability, and to preserve the Republic, does the U.S. Constitution grant standing to Citizens to bring suit or quo warranto over negligence, obstruction, misprision, or breach of constitutional duties, and protect the People’s rights?
 
Here come the plaintiffs/ ex-relators in the name of the United States of America praying this Honorable Court issue Quo Warranto writ against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States and Commander in Chief.
 
Ex Relators are seeking Quo Warranto under District of Columbia Codes §§16-3501-16-3503 which provides for the “Writ of Quo Warranto to be issued in the name of the United States of America  against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military”.  The ex-relators assert that respondent Obama  has indeed usurped the franchise of the President of the United States and the Commander in Chief of the United States Military forces due to his ineligibility and non-compliance with the provision of the Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United  States that provides that the President of the United States has to be a Natural Born Citizen for the following reasons:
 
The legal reference and legal definitions used by the framers of the Constitution was the legal treatise “The Law of Nations” by Emer De Vattel as quoted and referenced in the Article 1, Section 8. The Law of Nations defines “…Natural Born Citizens, are those in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the conditions of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.” Book 1, Chapter 19, §212. In his book Dreams From my Father   as well as on his web site Fight the Smears respondent Obama admitted to the fact that his father was never a US citizen, but rather a British citizen from a British colony of Kenya and based on British Nationality act respondent Obama was a British citizen at birth and a K! enyan citizen from age 2 on December 12, 1961 when Kenya became an independent nation. As such, for the reason of his allegiance to foreign nations from birth respondent Obama never qualified as a Natural Born citizen. 
 
In spite of some 100 legal actions filed and 12 Citizen Grand Jury presentments and indictments Respondent Obama due to his ineligibility  never consented to unseal any prima facie documents and vital records that would confirm his legitimacy for presidency.
 
          The state of Hawaii statute 338-5 allows one to get a birth certificate based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborative evidence from any hospital. Respondent Obama refused to unseal a birthing file (labor and delivery file) evidencing his birth from the Kapiolani Hospital where he recently decided, that he was born. Similarly, respondent Obama refused to consent to unseal his original birth certificate from the Health Department in the state of Hawaii. The original birth certificate is supposed to provide the name of th! e hospital, name of the attending physician and signatures of individuals in attendance during birth. As such there is no verifiable and legally acceptable evidence of his birth in the state of Hawaii.
Circa 1995 Respondent Obama has made an admission in his book Dreams from My Father that he has a copy of the original birth certificate, when describing a certain article about his father he write “…I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms…” In spite of the fact that respondent Obama has a copy of his original birth certificate, he released for public consumption only a COLB, an abbreviated certification of life birth which was issued in 2007 and does not provide any verifying information, such as name of the hospital and name of the attending physician and signatures, which infers that he knows that he is not eligible and actively trying to obfuscate the records in order to usurp US presidency. An affidavit from one of the most prominent forensic document experts, Sandra Ramsey Lines, previously submitted to this court, states t! hat authenticity of COLB and inference of the US birth cannot be ascertained based on COLB alone without examining the original birth certificate in Hawaii, that respondent Obama refuses to unseal and present in court and to the public at large.
 
As respondents schools records from Indonesia, previously submitted, show him the citizen of Indonesia under the name of Barry Soetoro, and there is no evidence of legal name change upon his repatriation from Indonesia, there is a high likelihood of the scenario whereby the respondent was sworn in as a president not only illegitimately due to his allegiance to three foreign nations, but also under a name that was not  his legal name at the time of inauguration and swearing in as the president. 
 
Affidavits from licensed private investigators Neil Sankey and Susan Daniels, previously submitted to this court, show that according to national databases respondent Obama has used as many as 39 different social security numbers, none of which were issued in Hawaii, which in itself is an evidence of foreign birth. Most egregious is the fact that the respondent has used for most of his life in Somerville Massachusetts, Chicago, Illinois and currently in the White House SSN XXX-XX-4425, which was issued in the state of Connecticut between 1976-1979 and assigned to ! an individual born in 1890, who would have been 120 years old, if he would be alive today. Respondent never resided in the state of Connecticut and he is clearly not 120 years old. There is such a high probability of criminal acts of identity theft and social security fraud committed by the respondent that the undersigned requests this Honorable court to use its inherent powers to order Sua Sponte an evidentiary hearing on this particular issue for possible criminal prosecution of identity theft and social security fraud, as the respondent has submitted himself to the jurisdiction of this Honorable court and can be brought to a separate evidentiary hearing to ascertain if fraud was perpetrated upon the court by assertion of false identity, even if the underlying case is not heard or closed for one reason or another.  The undersigned requests to bar the US attorney’s office from representing the respondent in such hearing based on US Code 44 Section 22 and due to obvious inherent conflict of interest.
 
Wherefore the plaintiffs ex-relators in the name of the United States of America are requesting this Honorable Court to issue a writ of Quo Warranto against a respondent Barack Hussein Obama and order an evidentiary hearing whether fraud upon the court was committed and whether criminal charges should be brought  against the respondent for fraud, identity theft and social security fraud.
 
 
s/ DR ORLY TAITZ ESQ
:__________________________________
. Orly Taitz, Esq. (California Bar 223433)
 for the Plaintiffs
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Tel.:  949-683-5411; Fax: 949-766-7603
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
 
 
 
 
PROOF OF SERVICE
 
     I, the undersigned Orly Taitz,  hereby declare under penalty of perjury that on this, 01.06.2010, I provided electronic copies of the Plaintiffs’ above-and-foregoing Notice of Filing to all of the following non-party attorneys whose names were affixed to the “STATEMENT OF INTEREST” who have appeared in this case in accordance with the local rules of the Central District of California, to wit:
ROGER E. WEST roger.west4@usdoj.gov (designated as lead counsel for President Barack Hussein Obama on August 7, 2009)
 
DAVID A. DeJUTTE
FACSIMILE (213) 894-7819
 AND EXECUTED ON THIS 01.06.2010
 
/s/Orly Taitz
 
Dr. Orly Taitz Esq
29839 Santa Margarita PKWY
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Saudi government, Saudis bought Obama 2008 election, James Manning video, Saudis bought Columbia University, Obama Columbia degree, Obama Harvard degree, Saudis bought large share of Fox network, Obama in Afghanistan

Many Americans were stunned and outraged when this news and photo of Obama bowing low to the Saudi king emerged.

Now listen to Pastor Dr. James Manning, a man I have come to respect for his intelligence, articulation and patriotism.

Now do you understand why Obama bowed so low to the Saudi King?

Now do you understand why…..

Why Obama attended Jeremiah Wright’s TUCC church.

Why Louis Farrakhan attended TUCC church.

Why Wright and Farrakhan traveled to Libya and met with Moammar Kadafi (Ghadafi).

Why Obama did not take Federal matching funds.

How Obama stole the Democrat primaries and caucuses.

How Obama was able to utilize so many Internet and other resources to steal the 2008 election.

Why Obama traveled to Pakistan in1981.

Why nobody remembers Obama being a student at Columbia. 

Why Khalid al-Mansour and the Saudis paid for Obama’s Harvard education.

Why Syrian born Tony Rezko made contact with Obama while at Harvard.

Why Obama wanted Gitmo closed and Muslim terrorists given US Constitutional Rights.

Why the Saudis paid for Obama’ grandmother, Sarah Obama to fly to Mecca.

Why the Fox network will not touch Obama’s eligibility issues.

Obama is a Muslim.

And the biggest why of all….

Why Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records.

Everything makes more sense now, doesn’t it.

God bless Pastor Dr. James Manning.

Glenn Beck, Insults Americans, Birthers, Beck is uninformed, Glenn Beck can you hear us?, Listen and apologize or else, Glenn Beck insults on video

Apparently Glenn Beck has not apologized for being a hypocrite and a jerk. On Monday, January 4, 2010, on Glenn Beck’s radio show, Beck who is very much uninformed on the subject of Obama’s eligibility, insulted millions of hard working, concerned, patriotic Americans.

While I might agree with Beck on prioritizing the Obama eligibility issue, I had the good sense and respect for others to stay out of their way. It appears that Beck has not learned that lesson. It also appears, as my mom used to say that “He has gotten too big for his britches.”

Here is what is going to happen. Anybody can make a mistake. So I am willing to give Glenn Beck a chance to apologize, pay attention and either cover the story properly or keep his damn mouth shut.

I will attempt once again to contact him tomorrow.

If Beck has not responded, I will query the good people of this blog and others to possibly boycott Glen Beck’s shows.

What Beck has done is inexcusable. I listened to most of his Fox TV show today, January 7, 2010. After Beck had made the insults and today violated almost every principle he discussed today, I was ready to let him have it. I despise a hypocrite.

Glenn Beck, are you paying attention?

Glenn Beck, I challenge you, one on one, use your “arguments” to insult me.

Obama, January 2, 2010, Obama guilty, High crimes and misdemeanors, Treason, Kirk Lippold, Corruption ties, Middle east ties, Muslim ties, Obama avoids birth certificate and college records issue

Watch the following video of retired Commander Kirk Lippold chastising Obama.

Now ask yourself, are you surprised that Obama is being criticized.

Straight from the US Constitution requirement that the president be a natural born citizen and per the 20th amendment, that the president be qualified at the time of inauguration, Obama is not president and therefore not Commander in Chief.

Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records.

Obama is embedded in Chicago and Illinois corruption just as deep as Rod Blagojevich. Furthermore, many of Obama’s business and political associates and donors come from or are strongly tied to the Middle East and even tied to Saddam Hussein.

Obama lived in Indonesia, became part of a Muslim family and studied Islam.

Obama has ignored much advice from his own hand picked general and has made the CIA his whipping boy.

Obama is giving constitutional rights, reserved for US Citizens to Muslim terrorists.

Obama is planning to close Gitmo and bring enemy combatant, Muslim terrorists to this country for trial.

Obama, by treating enemy terrorists as common criminals, is stripping our military and other protective agencies of the ability to interrogate our enemy and effectively empowering the enemy to continue with more plans to attack us.

Can any intelligent, informed, concerned, patriotic American explain to me why Barack Obama should not be immediately arrested for treason, high crimes and misdemeanors or one of many other applicable reasons ?

Barack Obama, Commander in chief?, US Constitution, Oath of office, US Military, ZachJonesIsHome, Tortured Duty & Tortured Mission, Military service, Natural born citizen issue will not go away

“I, [name], 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.”
US Military officer’s oath of office

 
Officers in the service of the United States are
bound by this oath to disobey any order that
violates the Constitution of the United States.

From the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution.

“or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until
a President shall have qualified;”

I never refer to Barack Obama as president. The 20th Amendment to the US Constitution reveals why.

Zach, the name I use for the owner of the Zach Jones Is Home blog, has been a patriot blogger for almost two years, in the struggle to expose the truth about Barack Obama and to save this country. I have had many phone and email discussions with Zach. He has been an invaluable contributor to this blog and to the combined efforts of citizen journalists. In the article below provided by Zach today, January 1, 2010, Zach writes of his and his family’s military service. I would like to thank Zach, his family and all of those who have served this country in the military. I would also like to thank Zach for his efforts to reveal the truth about Obama and to take back this country. 

From Zach Jones Is Home, January 1, 2010.

“American Soldiers – Tortured Duty & Tortured Mission – The Whys and Whats Becoming Harder to Answer?”

“Families that honor military service are spread all across this nation.  I grew up in one. Even as a teenager in the sixties, I remember knowing that freedom wasn’t free.  My father had served in Patton’s 3rd Army, fought in the Battle of the Bulge, and served as a guard at the Nuremberg War Trials. How could I not know the price of freedom? WWII, now that was a just war.  Everyone knew it.  Everyone knew the war had to be won at all costs because failure clearly meant tyranny and death for an entire people, the Jewish people. Everyone knew, even the media knew the Whys and Whats.  Why they were fighting? What they were fighting for? They knew the cost of winning and losing! And,  victory wasn’t a dirty word.

However, my brother and I served in the United States Navy during a time in America’s history dominated by numbing callousness, selfishness, and indifference.  The loss of the Vietnam War brought about by the media and endless protests of duplicitous, naïve dreamers and schemers; the festering pain of Watergate continuously exploited by politicians in D.C., the good but lackluster caretaker President Ford portrayed as a bumbling stumbling fool on Saturday Night Live, the My Lai massacre and Lt. Calley’s conviction not quite distant enough to avoid its stench, and a war/corruption weary people’s vote for change promised by Jimmy Carter all marked this period.  Amazingly, like today, Carter’s change didn’t live up to expectations. Instead it brought gas lines, high inflation, 20+ percent interest rates and high unemployment – despair.”

“It was a perfect storm that had brought us Carter Presidency.  And with it’s battered and bruised image, the United States military seemed to have a hell of time riding out that storm until President Reagan could put his hands to the reigns. Reagan’s zero-tolerance drug testing came along after I got out and things started turning around rather quickly according to my brother.  I believe the foundation that President Reagan built (or rebuilt) continues to serve soldiers today and will not be easily surrendered by the military leadership.”

“See no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil is not a command structure that serves the military or the individual soldier well.  Neither is going with the flow.

But it’s the military leadership, the career guys and gals, who have a shot at controlling or changing the flow. Yes, sometimes they fail, but it’s their job to address the issues. It’s especially egregious when they, like politicians, just won’t see or acknowledge that something is becoming a problem – when they don’t want to get ‘their’ hands dirty or risk jeopardizing ‘their’ career paths.  Two words – Ft. Hood.

And so I come to write this conflicted accolade to today’s American Soldier.”

“Soldiers serving in the first few years after 9/11 must have had an incredible sense of the Whys and Whats that carried them through each and every day.”

“Today, we have Obama in the Oval Office and a Democratic controlled Congress (dominated by the radical left since 2006) and they are galloping as fast as they can towards creating a socialist system that would make Vladimir Ilyich Lenin proud. If you look past the rhetoric you easily see that they are attempting to create larger and larger voting blocks that are wholly dependent on the federal government, hands out, afraid to question anything, afraid to vote for anyone calling for personal responsibility. Having a nation of sheeple, like birds at a bird feeder, is not good for the country or our future. Look at the recent action Obama took diminishing our American sovereignty on Dec. 17. Constitution be damned.  Does anyone really think the Second Amendment is safe?”

“I use the phrase “defending freedom overseas” instead of “around the world” because, as much as I love them, I’m not sure they are defending our freedoms at home.  I can’t really blame the enlisted soldier because when I was in the military, I didn’t have time to keep up with what politicians at home were attempting to do to us. I basically thought politicians were all self-serving pieces of crap and the voting process would weed them out.  Unfortunately, that’s not the case today. (The statement that politicians “were all self-serving pieces of crap” is still accurate, but the vote might not be able to undo the damage they are doing to our freedoms and the Constitution.)

And the military leadership continues to see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil and ignore “the flow” that’s becoming more and more turbulent.

(And the American soldier is expected to accept “the flow” as he or she finds it?)”

“All of these illustrate situations where officers up the chain of command, including the “Commander In Chief”, appear ready to shirk their duty to the Constitution and America Soldiers under their command so they can protect their relatively trivial career ambitions and/or pursue their personal political agendas.

This is when it becomes hard to answer the Whats and Whys.  What does support and defend the Constitution mean?  Who are the enemies of the United States?  Why am I defending something that seems optional for my superior officers?   What is really important to the chain of command – advancement, career or the Oath? Who are the Oathkeepers? Why should I obey my superior officers when they choose to ignore parts of the Constitution? What’s the point? What am I doing that protects the Constitution and the Freedoms of my family and friends?”

“The duty – I think of this as the soldier doing his or her best to live up to the oath they took when they enlisted.  Basically the duty is to support, protect and defend the Constitution and the freedoms/protections flowing from it to each and every citizen.”

“The “natural born citizen” issue will not go away and I’m sure it’s on the minds of many in the military; it affects morale, re-enlistment decisions, and how many traditional military supporters view the institution.  It’s similar to how the epidemic of drug use in the 70’s military effected civilians & soldiers who knew about the problem and cared about what it said about the institution.”

“To the American Soldier – Thank you for your service and sacrifices for this country.

I am truly sorry to be in the position of having to speak so bluntly about an institution that I love.”

Read the rest of this great article from a friend, soldier and patriot:

http://zachjonesishome.wordpress.com/2010/01/01/american-soldiers-tortured-duty-tortured-mission-the-whys-and-whats-becoming-harder-to-answer-the-bopac-report/

Obama citizenship status, Natural born citizen, Obama illegal alien?, Kerchner V Obama, Attorney Mario Apuzzo, Obama not born to a US citizen father and mother, US Constitution, Hawaii or Kenya

Although this blog has not focused on Barack Obama’s citizenship status but  rather his status as a natural born citizen, Obama may indeed be an illegal alien.

Mario Apuzzo, the attorney in the Kerchner V Obama and Congress lawsuit, has presented an indepth analysis of the US Constitution and US laws and how they pertain to information supplied or not supplied by  Obama.

“What Is Putative President Obama’s Current U.S. Citizenship Status?”

“We have seen that Obama cannot be an Article II “natural born Citizen” because when he was born, regardless of what place that may be, he was not born to a United States citizen father and mother. The “natural born Citizen” clause of our U.S. Constitution requires that both of the child’s parents be U.S. Citizens at the time of birth. Rather, if Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims, then under the liberalized and questionable meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” he can be a born Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States” and a “citizen of the United States at birth” under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1401 (a). Again, that citizenship status does not make him an Article II “natural born Citizen.” But what would Obama’s citizenship status be if he was not born in the United States? First, let us examine why there is still existing doubts as to whether Obama was born in Hawaii. Second, let us examine what law would apply to determine Obama’s citizenship status should he not be born in Hawaii or any other part of the United States and what his citizenship status would be under that law.

These are the reasons for the existing doubts regarding Obama’s place of birth:

1. What Obama or some other unknown person posted on the internet is not a birth certificate (BC). Rather, he/she posted a digital image and picture of a questionable “certification of live birth” (COLB) which at best is only prima facie evidence of the place of his birth. The prima facie value of this document fails in light of numerous existing factual circumstances which contradict the COLB’s validity and which have not been adequately explained by Obama.

2. According to Obama and his Press Secretary, Mr. Gibbs, this digital document alone is supposed to allow Obama to qualify to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Military. According to them, this electronic image alone is sufficient to prove that Obama is a U.S. citizen and therefore qualified to have the full power of the executive vested in him. It is unbelievable that Obama would expect the American people to grant him such license over their lives based simply upon an electronic image on a computer screen. It is even more unbelievable that the Electoral College, our Congress, political institutions, security forces, and media would allow him to get away with it. This document, which in its paper form is undoubtedly a legal document, has no probative value given that it was posted by some unknown person on the internet as a digital image without following any prescribed electronic media security protocols. We know that digital images can be easily manipulated through computer technology. See http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/01102/010555.html for an explanation of the need to follow defined federal and state standards when it comes to electronic/digital information transmittal of legal documents. If Obama expects this digital image of a COLB to have such unprecedented value which allows him to be President of the United States, then he should at least show that the electronic image he posted meets electronic/digital security standards.

3. While not officially confirmed, the authenticity of the COLB computer image has been questioned by at least two digital image experts who have concluded that the COLB image is a forgery.

4. Obama says he was born in a hospital. A birth certificate provides the name of the hospital where the birth occurred and the name of the doctor delivering the baby. The COLB does not have this vital corroborating information.

5. The key point that Obama supporters are redirecting attention away from is that the underlying foundational information supporting his Certification of Live Birth is unknown. This unknown information may not matter much when it comes to an ordinary person. But for someone running for President of the United States and currently sitting in that Office it is of crucial importance.

6. When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone could under Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born in a foreign country by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born abroad. Hence, because of the contradictory evidence that exists such as statements made by relatives and newspaper reporters in Kenya and elsewhere regarding where he was born, plaintiffs are entitled to pierce the alleged COLB and examine the file that is in the possession of the Hawaiian Secretary of State which may contain a sworn application/petition in which some party set forth circumstantially all the facts upon which the application rested and supporting sworn affidavits of witnesses. The file could also contain the results of the Secretary or his designee examinations under oath of the applicant or other person who may have been cognizant of the alleged facts regarding the application/petition along with other documentary evidence that they may have obtained as a result of issuing subpoenas for books and other papers.

7. The DoD 5220.22-M, “National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual,” 2/28/2006 (NISPOM) provides baseline standards for the protection of classified information released or disclosed to industry in connection with classified contracts under the “National Industrial Security Program (NISP). It prescribes the requirements, restrictions, and other safeguards to prevent unauthorized disclosure of classified information. It also states at 2-209 that only U.S. citizens are eligible to receive a security clearance. The Manual requires a contractor to show proof of U.S. citizenship. It states at 2-208: “For individuals born in the United States, a birth certificate is the primary and preferred means of citizenship verification.” http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/522022mchaps.pdf. Surely, we should require such documentation of someone seeking to occupy the Office of President of the United States.

8. At the time that Obama was sworn in as President, not even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands accepted a certification of live birth (COLB) as conclusive evidence of being a native of Hawaii for its Homeland program. From its web site: “In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”

9. Since the controversy over Obama’s alleged birth certificate, Hawaii has changed its web page to read as follows:
“Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth.”http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl.

10. Despite the numerous law suits that have been filed against Obama, he continues to refuse to release his original birth certificate and has opted rather to spend large sums of money using lawyers to defend himself and to cause the courts and litigants to expend large amounts of time and resources pursuing litigation against him and other third parties. He relies on procedural and other threshold arguments such as jurisdiction, justiciability, standing, political question, separation of powers, mootness, and ripeness rather than simply produce his original birth certificate and make a motion for summary judgment with prejudice as to the merits so that no other future cases can be brought against him and others which would then put an end not only to the ongoing drain of money, time, and other resources but also to the great public outrage that continues to increase over time regarding his constitutional eligibility.

11. For some unknown reason and relying on federal and state privacy laws, Obama has refused to publicly release his original Certificate of Live Birth (BC) even though in his book, Dreams from My Father, he stated that he had it.

12. Obama and his half-sister, Maya, have each stated that he was born in different hospitals in Hawaii. In November 2004, in an interview with the Rainbow Newsletter, Maya told reporters her half-brother, Sen. Barack Obama, was born on August 4, 1961, at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. But Obama has said he was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children, also in Honolulu. Changing her story, in February 2008 Maya then told reporters for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Obama was born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children.

13. On February 5, 2008, Madelyn Dunham was still alive, but the Obama campaign did not make her available for interviews with the media. Obama’s maternal grandmother surely would have known where her grandson was born but Obama refused the media access to her. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004164387_brodeur05m.html.

14. Neither of the two or any other hospital in Hawaii or anywhere in the world has been willing to come forward and claim its place in history as being the hospital where the first African-American U.S. President was born. There is no Hawaiian hospital that has confirmed that Obama and/or his mother were present in any such hospital at the time of Obama’s alleged birth in Honolulu. Not a single person has come forward, not a doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, nor any one else to confirm Obama’s birth in Hawaii. “We don’t have plans to do anything,” said Kapi’olani Medical Center spokeswoman, Claire Tong, when asked how the center plans to commemorate the soon-to-be 44th U.S. president, who, according to Obama’s family and other sources, was born at that hospital on Aug. 4, 1961. “We can’t confirm or deny it — even though all the information out there says he was born at Kapiolani Hospital. And that’s because of the HIPA law.” Tong acknowledged that the center has received daily inquiries from news agencies far and wide asking for confirmation of Obama’s birthplace. Despite her wanting to do so, Tong said it is not possible. “Our hands are tied,” she said. http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. I wonder why Tong said that “even though all the information out there says he was born at Kapiolani Hospital.” He surely did not even slightly hint that any information in the hospital supported such a claim. One would think that Obama would do a simple thing and give the hospital permission to release the information to the news-thirsty public. After all, what harm to his privacy would he suffer from authorizing the hospital to simply confirm that the President of the United States was born there?

15. Attorney Philip Berg has served subpoenas on the hospitals mentioned by Obama and his half sister as the place where Obama was born to obtain the medical records which would show the fact of Obama being born in either one of them but Obama has refused to sign the consent that the hospitals need to release the documents.

16. “Birthplaces and boyhood homes of U.S. presidents have been duly noted and honored for nearly as long as America has been a nation. In the case of such towering figures as Thomas Jefferson, Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, those early locations have been deemed national treasures and historic sites, visited annually by the multitudes.” http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. But we have not seen any movement by any public charity or foundation, non-profit organization, or government agency to commemorate Obama’s place of birth in Hawaii.

17. We have not seen any media events or news conferences at the hospital where Obama was born which I am sure is a place the location of which is highly news worthy not only to the American people but to the whole world. Hence, we do not even know in which hospital Obama was born.

18. Other than the COLB and the two newspaper announcements whose basis for information is the same single source, there does not exist one known corroborating medical or other document of any kind which shows that Obama was born in Hawaii. The Honolulu Advertiser, on Sunday, August 13, 1961 contained the following short announcement: “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, son, Aug. 4.” The Honolulu Star-Bulletin, an unaffiliated, competing publication, carried the exact same notice the following day. The numerous birth announcements above and below the Obama listing also were identical in both papers. Advertiser columnist and former Star-Bulletin managing editor, Dave Shapiro, was not at either paper in 1961, but he remembers how the birth notices process worked years later when both papers were jointly operated by the Hawaii Newspaper Agency, which no longer exists. He states: “Those were listings that came over from the state Department of Health . . . . They would send the same thing to both papers.” http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081109/NEWS01/811090361/-1/specialobama08. Hence, we can see that the information for those birth notices comes straight from the state Health Department’s Vital Records Division. Hence, the birth announcements, not having their source of information in some other place, do not add any corroboration to the COLB. Other secondary evidence may include baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records, or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge about the facts of birth. Other documentary evidence can be early census, school, or family bible records, newspaper files, or insurance papers. No such documents have been produced for the American public. Furthermore, no one has been able to confirm that Obama’s mother and father in fact ever lived at 6085 Kalaniana’ole Highway, Honolulu.

19. Although Obama has had a first-class education that spanned 25 years, there is only a single document that has ever been released, the application for entrance to the Franciscus Assisi Primary School in Indonesia. That document was discovered by independent investigators. That documents shows that Obama was an Indonesian citizen. It is also reported that his Kindergarten records are missing. Needless to say how probative these kindergarten records would be since they would contain his legal name, parents’ names, date of birth, place of birth, and vaccination records.

20. No public official in Hawaii has publicly confirmed with any conclusive and credible evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. Whatever statements Director of Hawaiian Department of Heath, Fukino, has made are not conclusive on the question of whether Obama was born in Hawaii. What is lacking is what information the Department is relying upon to make its statements. Just from her statement alone, we also do not know what evidence exists in the Department of Health file to corroborate what is stated in the “original birth certificate.”

21. We have not heard from one international, federal, state, or local police or security agency that Obama’s birth place has been officially confirmed.

22. On June 27, 2004, the East African Newspaper, The Sunday Standard, in its article entitled, Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate, declared in its newspaper that Obama is Kenyan-Born. This long pre-dates Obama’s decision to run for President when the truth about his birth location was not being hidden. This is not the only African paper that made such statements during a time that Obama’s birth place was not an issue.

23. An Investigator working for Philip Berg, Esq. learned the following which is contained in the investigator’s affidavit dated October 30, 2008, that was filed with a Federal District Court in the case of Berg v. Obama, 08-cv-04083: Obama’s step-grandmother, Sarah Obama, told Bishop McRae, who was in the United States, during a telephonic interview on October 12, 2008, while she was in her home located in Alego-Kogello, Kenya, that was full of security police and people and family who were celebrating then-Senator Obama’s success story, that she witnessed Obama’s birth in Kenya, not the United States (the English and Swahili conversation is recorded and available for listening). She was adamant about this fact not once but twice. The conversation which was placed on speaker phone was translated into English by “Kweli Shuhubia” and one of the grandmother’s grandsons who were present with the grandmother in the house. After the grandmother made the same statement twice, her grandson intervened, saying “No, No, No, He [sic] was born in the United States.” During the interview, the grandmother never changed her reply that she was present when Obama was born in Kenya. The fact that later in the same interview she change her statement to say that Obama was born in Hawaii does not change the fact that she at first stated twice that she was present when Obama was born in Kenya. I cannot imagine a grandmother not knowing whether she was present or not at the birth of her American Senator and U.S. Presidential candidate grandson.

24. The investigator then personally went to the hospital in Mombasa, Kenya. He spoke with the Provincial Civil Registrar and he learned that there were records of Ann Dunham giving birth to “Barack Hussein Obama, III” in Mombassa, Kenya on August 4, 1961. The investigator then “spoke directly with an Official, the Principal Registrar, who openly confirmed the birthing records of Senator Barack H. Obama, Jr. and his mother were present, however, the file on Barack H. Obama, Jr. was classified and profiled. The Official explained Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. [sic] birth in Kenya is top secret. [H]e was further instructed to go to the Attorney General’s Office and to the Minister in Charge of Immigration if [he] wanted further information.”

25. The Kenyan Ambassador to the United States, Peter N.R.O. Ogego, confirmed on November 6, 2008, during a radio interview with Detroit radio talk-show hosts Mike Clark, Trudi Daniels, and Marc Fellhauer on WRIF’s “Mike In the Morning,” that “President-Elect Obama” was born in Kenya and that his birth place was already a “well-known” attraction. The radio interview went as follows:
Clark: “We want to congratulate you on Barack Obama, our new president, and you must be very proud.”
Ogego: “We are. We are. We are also proud of the U.S. for having made history as well.”
Fellhauer: “One more quick question, President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”
Ogego: “It’s already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive.”
Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”
Ogego: “It would depend on the government. It’s already well known.”
http://my.wrif.com/mim/index.php?s=Ogego
Later on, Ogego’s assistant, denying that Obama was born in Kenya, insisted Ogego was speaking about Barack Obama Sr., and not President-elect Obama.She said she could not say why Ogego responded the way he did. Listening to the radio interview in its entirety, it is very obvious the interviewers were all talking about President-elect Barack Obama and not his father. It is doubtful that Obama’s father’s paternal grandmother (Obama’s great-grandmother) was still alive. We would also expect that Ogego would have said that Obama was not born in Kenya, but there is an attraction there to honor his father. If it were true that Ogego was referring to Obama’s Sr. and not Obama Jr., we should have heard about and received credible evidence as to what preparatory steps had already been taken in Kenya to honor the birth place of Obama Sr. In evaluating Ogego’s statement, we have to also remember that Obama’s grandmother also said that Obama Jr. was born in Kenya. Hence, Ogego’s assistant’s claim that Ogego thought they were talking about Obama’s father does not appear credible.

26. It is alleged that the Kenyan government authorities have refused to cooperate and have thwarted all efforts by anyone to obtain any documents concerning Obama.

27. Obama has refused all effort to have him release the following documents, relying on sealing of records and/or privacy laws: Punahou High School records, Occidental College records, Columbia College records, Columbia Thesis paper, Harvard College records, Selective Service Registration, medical records, Illinois State Senate records, Illinois State Senate schedule, Law practice client list, Certified Copy of original Birth Certificate, Harvard Law Review articles that were published, University of Chicago scholarly articles, exit and entry immigration records covering all of Obama’s travels out of the United States; passports; and record of baptism, if any.

28. Fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org have since maintained silence on the birth place issue after the questionable COLB was posted on the internet.

29. Other than a digital composite image representation on the internet of a questionable letter dated January 24, 2009 that he allegedly wrote to Kapi’olani Medical Center congratulating the hospital on its centennial celebration (it is reported that he refused to confirm that the letter was genuine, http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103503), Obama has remained silent and has not declared publicly after his COLB and place of birth were questioned that he was born in Hawaii.

30. No member of the media, any political party, the Executive Branch of Government, Congress, any political institution, the Judiciary, or any law enforcement entity, has publicly stated that he or she has independently confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii. Nor has House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, the Chair of the Democratic National Convention, publicly announced that she confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.”

Continue reading:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/12/what-is-putative-president-obamas.html

Kerchner V Obama and Congress, Support Kerchner lawsuit, Charles Kerchner CDR USNR, Attorney Mario Apuzzo, US Constitution, Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury V Madison, Obama birth certificate, Father Kenyan British, Barack Obama not natural born citizen, No birth certificate, Obama spends millions to avoid

“Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.”

“So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of  these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.

If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.” …Chief Justice Marshall, “Marbury V Madison”

 

I have been in contact with lead plaintiff Charles Kerchner and attorney Mario Apuzzo since the inception of their lawsuit against Obama and Congress. The lawsuit is still alive and they are actively engaged in raising public awareness about the lawsuit and eligibility issues. One of their efforts has been to advertise in the Washington Times. Advertising and court cases require much money. Charles Kerchner has asked for my assistance. The Citizen Wells blog has a new page devoted to the Kerchner V Obama lawsuit and there is a link on that page and blog front page for donations to the cause.

Why is this lawsuit and other lawsuits important, aside from the obvious objection of removing an illegal usurper from office and saving this country?

By mid 2008, two things were abundantly clear:
1. There was enough evidence against Obama to stop his campaign for the presidency and the mainstream media was in bed with him.

  • Documented close ties to Tony Rezko, Rod Blagojevich and numerous crime and corruption figures.
  • Obama had kept hidden almost all of his important records.
  • There was no legitimate evidence that Obama was eligible and much compelling evidence that Obama was not a natural born citizen.

2. A Chicken V Egg scenario was emerging due to the Orwellian public perception crafting of the Obama camp and mainstream media. The court cases must emerge and move forward.

  • The US Constitution must be upheld.
  • The US Citizens must know the truth.
  • A constitutional crisis had to be avoided by preventing an illegal usurper from taking the presidency.

The merits of eligibility lawsuits will not be discussed here. That exercise has it’s place in the classrooms, court rooms and forums of the nation. No one desires to diminish the protocols and thought processes. However, it is clear from reading the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall, in “Marbury V Madison” that he adheres to the intent of the founding fathers to follow the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land, trumping other legislation and procedures. It is also clear that judges and state officials have forgotten or ignored their solemn oaths to uphold the US Constitution. Judges appear to be more concerned about subtle nuances, protocol, and yes, politics, than fulfilling their constitutional roles.

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?

If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.”…Chief Justice Marshall, “Marbury V Madison”

So even though the issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility is governed by the US Constitution and subsequent Admendments, judges and state officials have chosen to ignore their sacred duties and leave the American people devoid of the crucial protection of checks and balances and the protection of the supreme law of the land.

This has transformed the many eligibility lawsuits into a watershed role probably not envisioned by the founding fathers. We now have the lawsuits proving a point, critical to the survival of this nation, in the court of public information and common sense. Before the appearance of the multitude of lawsuits, the mainstream media in cahoots with the Obama camp, controlled public perceptions of Obama’s records and eligibility as well as legal definitions such as natural born citizen. Public awareness of Obama’s eligibility is still to a large extent governed by these Orwellian attempts. The straw that broke the camel’s back, imprisoned Al Capone and ultimately will be the Achilles heel of Obama, is a detail. In Capone’s case he was indicted on tax evasion charges. In Obama’s case it is the fact that he has spent so many resources to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and other records. This has been the blessing of the court cases. Despite the best attempts to pass the buck, play party politics and ignore constitutional responsibility, the truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility is emerging.
So why should you support an eligibility lawsuit? First and foremost we must demand that the US Constitution be adhered to as the supreme law of the land. Secondly, and what will ultimately indict Obama in the hearts and souls of the American public…

Why?

Barack Obama has employed a legion of private and government attorneys to prevent revealing his country of birth. Innocent and eligible persons seeking the office of president do not do that.
Support the Kerchner V Obama lawsuit and make certain you inform as many people as possible, Ask the simple question above.

From the new page at Citizen Wells.

 

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr, V Barack Hussein Obama II

Charles Kerchner
CDR USNR (Ret)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress

Donate To The Cause

Charles Kerchner, Attorney Mario Apuzzo interview.

For more information about the history of this case:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/