Winston Churchill birthday, God bless Churchill, Never never never give up
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“Never, never , never give up.”…Winston Churchill
It is fitting that we celebrate the birthday of Sir Winston Spencer Churchill today, November 30, 2010, the day after the US Supreme Court abdicated it’s responsibility in Kerchner v Obama to interpret and clarify the US Constitution and perform it’s sacred duty to check usurped power.
If one man can be attributed with saving the world from Nazi domination, that one man would be Winston Churchill. Thank God for the life of Sir Winston Churchill.
From The Churchill Centre and Museum at the Churchill War Rooms, London.
“Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill (1874-1965) described himself as “an English-Speaking Union,” being the son of Lord Randolph Churchill and the American heiress Jennie Jerome. He was educated at Harrow and the Royal Military College at Sandhurst, and was sent to India with a cavalry commission in 1895. He won early fame as a war correspondent, covering the Cuban revolt against Spain (1895), and British campaigns in the Northwest Frontier of India (1897), the Sudan (1898) and South Africa during the Boer War (1899). Churchill had authored five books by the age of 26. His daring escape from a Boer prison camp in 1899 made him a national hero and ushered him into the House of Commons, where his career spanned 60 years.”
The lying, narcissistic, corrupt usurper of power, Obama, rejected the bust of Winston Churchill.
From The Telegraph February 14, 2009.
“A bust of the former prime minister once voted the greatest Briton in history, which was loaned to George W Bush from the Government’s art collection after the September 11 attacks, has now been formally handed back.
The bronze by Sir Jacob Epstein, worth hundreds of thousands of pounds if it were ever sold on the open market, enjoyed pride of place in the Oval Office during President Bush’s tenure.
But when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: “Thanks, but no thanks.””
Kerchner v Obama, Supreme Court fails, Duty as checks and balances, Duty to interpret Constitution, Duty to uphold Constitution, Marbury v Madison
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”
“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.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”
“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?”… Marbury versus Madison
The US Supreme Court has denied the petition for writ of certiorari in Kerchner v Obama.
“(ORDER LIST: 562 U.S.)
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2010
CERTIORARI”
“CERTIORARI DENIED”
“10-446
KERCHNER, CHARLES, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.
The motion of Western Center for Journalism for leave to
file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a
writ of certiorari is denied.”
The two main reasons for the existence of the US Supreme Court are as follows:
1. Serve as checks and balances for the other two branches of government . Executive and Legislative.
2. Interpret the US Constitution.
Once again they have failed to do their duty and they should be impeached.
Irrespective of any birth certificate issues surrounding Obama, and those are enough to warrant involvement from the Supreme Court, Obama is clearly not a Natural Born Citizen and the justices know it. They are avoiding the Obama eligibility issues for some reason and should be removed from the court.
For those on the far left, those still in denial, or those incapable of rational thought, the decision to deny the petition is not a ruling on the Kerchner v Obama or any other eligibility case. The justices do not have to give a reason and have not done so. They have simply chosen the coward’s way out. I quoted Marbury v Madison again for a reason.
The swearing in of Obama by Chief Justice Roberts and the difficulty in stating the oath and the subsequent reswearing in are unprecedented in my lifetime.
The oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
CNN has covered the Supreme Court denial.
“The Supreme Court has again cast aside an appeal that raised doubts about President Barack Obama’s U.S. citizenship, a grass-roots legal issue that has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.
The justices without comment Monday rejected a challenge from Charles Kerchner Jr., a Pennsylvania man who sought a trial in federal court forcing the president to produce documents regarding his birth and citizenship.
Kerchner’s attorney, Mario Apuzzo, had argued in a petition with the Supreme Court that Obama did not fit the definition of a “natural-born citizen” required for the nation’s highest office, as defined by Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.
That clause states, “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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.””
“State birth certificate records show he was born August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His mother is a native of Kansas; his father was born in Kenya, which at the time was a British colony.”
“Obama and his staff produced copies of his birth certificate when he was running for president in 2008”
Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen, Obama birth certificate and college records, Simple question
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“I discovered this article, folded away among my BIRTH CERTIFICATE and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school,”…Obama, “Dreams of My Father”
I have been asking the simple question about Obama going to great lengths to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records for many months. Apparently some folks are confused about this. They mistakenly assume (assuming is one of my pet peeves) that the birth certificate issue is my main focus. They are wrong as many assumptions are.
The hidden birth certificate and college records are but puzzle pieces in the larger picture of many years of Obama deception. The reason that I pose the simple question is that it is non debatable by rational people. There is only one answer, one conclusion to be drawn from the question. Obama is hiding something(s). It is the “deer in the headlights question.” I strongly suggest that you use it. I used it yesterday.
It is clear that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen for at least one reason and probably more. His father was a Kenyan and therefore British citizen. Some have debated that Natural Born Citizen was not defined in the US Constitution. The answer to that is simple. Among educated people of that era, it was understood that to be a Natural Born Citizen, one had to be born of two citizen parents.
An analogy is presented in the movie “A few good men.” Tom Cruise, portraying a military defense attorney, questions a Marine witness in response to the prosecution attorney stating that “code red” was not mentioned in the Marine Handbook. Cruise asks the witness if mess hall was listed in the handbook. The witness responds that it is not. Cruise then asks how he knows where the mess hall is. The answer is that it was common knowledge.
Mario Apuzzo, attorney in Kerchner v Obama, provides excellent research and background on what Natural Born Citizen means and how our founding fathers understood it.
A more recent document from the US Senate, one signed by Barack Obama, acknowledges the importance of having two US Citizen parents to be a Natural Born Citizen and eligible to be president.
“SRES 511 ATS
110th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. RES. 511
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 10, 2008
Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary”
“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″
“Not every item of news should be published: rather must
those who control news policies endeavor to make every item
of news serve a certain purpose.”… Joseph Goebbels
As reported here yesterday:
“The Citizen Wells Citizen News site has a new page devoted to Obama eligibility information and lawsuits. This is an effort to organize numerous articles and information on the subject as well as introduce information to a new audience or an old audience with clearer vision.”
As part of this process, I have been revisiting the early history of the Obama eligibity issues and in particular the COLB that was posted on several pro Obama sites. Two of the mouthpieces of the Obama camp, Wikipedia and FactCheck.org will be presented as examples of Orwellian, Nazi Germany type propaganda and the far left agenda of “the end justifies the means.”
Here is just a snippet of the propaganda from Wikipedia:
“conspiracy theories.
The Obama campaign released his birth certificate, certified by the Hawaii Department of Health, and posted a scanned image of it online. The posted certificate states that Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961.[1] The certificate also states, “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding”. Frequent arguments of those questioning Obama’s eligibility are that he has not released a photocopy of his “original” birth certificate, and that the use of the term “certification of live birth” on the document means it is not equivalent to one’s “birth certificate”. These arguments have been debunked numerous times by media investigations,[10] every judicial forum that has addressed the matter, and Hawaiian government officials—a consensus of whom have concluded that the certificate released by the Obama campaign is indeed his official birth certificate.[11] Asked about this, Hawaiian Department of Health spokeswoman Janice Okubo stated that Hawaii “does not have a short-form or long-form certificate”.[12] Moreover, the director of her Department has confirmed that the state “has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
The paragraph above is loaded with Orwellian lies and misinformation.
Congress and the US Supreme Court will be held accountable. I will be making a followup call with Senator Richard Burr’s office this week. I hope to simplify the presentation of information regarding the pseudo birth certificate and get their attention.
My article on the truth about the COLB wil be presented soon. The intent is not to replicate other efforts or reinvent the wheel, but to present a simplified summary that even a congressman can understand.
Citizen News November 26, 2010, Obama eligibility, Tax cuts, Whose money is it?
From Citizen News November 26, 2010.
The Citizen Wells Citizen News site has a new page devoted to Obama eligibility information and lawsuits. This is an effort to organize numerous articles and information on the subject as well as introduce information to a new audience or an old audience with clearer vision. The effort has just begun and will take weeks or as long as it takes to complete.
“In January of 2008 I knew little about Barack Obama. After a few days of researching, accessing information available on the internet, from interviews by Tim Russert, The Chicago Tribune and Chicago SunTimes and other sources, I knew that we had a problem.
I then began getting feedback from researchers who had been paying attention long before me.”
Citizen Wells March 21, 2008.
“Here is the comment that was posted.”
“Obama has a dual citizenship with Kenya. His passport was breached today by inquiring minds because Obama is an anti-Israel pro-pan-arabism Islamic-socialist who has ties to marxist Libyan president Muammar al Gadaffi, Syrian tycoon Antoin Rezko, Saudi Arabian sheikhs, and Rezko’s “close friend” 3.5 million money pal Auchi, the one who gave Obama fundraiser money: Iraqi billionaire global arms dealer Nadhmi Auchi, was Baathist best friends with Saddam Hussein”
“Kenyan-born OBAMA makes history…wins presidential nomination.”
“For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his birth.”
“One of my favorite publications in NC is the Rhinoceros Times, published weekly, and one of my favorite writers is John Hammer, the author of “Under the Hammer” and Editor in Chief. John Hammer has been exposing much of the truth about Obama for years when the big city mainstream media outlets were giving Obama a free pass.
From John Hammer, November 18, 2010.
“The bias of the mainstream media is so pervasive that sometimes it’s hard to see the forest for the trees. In writing about the proposed tax cuts and ending some tax deductions, the mainstream media will invariably write, for instance, about “how much revenue the government will lose if the Bush tax cuts are extended.” The government will not lose a dime if the Bush tax cuts are extended because it isn’t the government’s money. The money belongs to the people who earned it.”
Hollister v. Soetoro aka Barack Obama update and history, Judge James Robertson biased or incompetent, Bias or conspiracy?
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”
“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.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”
“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?”… Marbury versus Madison
Is Judge James Robertson biased, incompetent or part of a conspiracy?
Citizen Wells December 30, 2008.
“Berg today, with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire, filed another lawsuit in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia on behalf of Retired Colonel Hollister against Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama demanding to know Obama’s real name and if he is constitutionally qualified to be President. Plaintiff, Gregory S. Hollister, is a resident of Colorado Springs, Colorado and Hollister has “standing” and needs a decision so he knows whether or not to follow any Order of Soetoro a/k/a Obama.”
“The following Order from DC District Court Judge James Robertson was issued for Hollister v. Soetoro yesterday:
ORDER
Plaintiff’s motion to file interpleader and deposit funds with the court [#2] is frivolous and is denied. His motion to shorten time for defendants to respond to his complaint [#3] is moot and is denied. The motions of his counsel [#4, #5] for the admission pro hac vice of Philip J. Berg and Lawrence J. Joyce are in abeyance until the Court has had the opportunity, in open court, to examine their credentials, their competence, their good faith, and the factual and legal bases of the complaint they have signed.
JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge”
“The following is from a Memorandum issued by
United States District Judge James Robertson
on March 5, 2009. The Memorandum is a response
to the Hollister vs Soetoro lawsuit.”
“This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve
mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is
foolish or that America has too many lawyers with not enough to
do. Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the
blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The right thing to do
is to bring it to an early end.”
“The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force
colonel who continues to owe fealty to his Commander-in-Chief
(because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is
tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey
orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven — to the
colonel’s satisfaction — that Mr. Obama is a native-born
American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be
President. The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,
vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by
America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign
for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a
court.”
The following statement by Judge Robertson should be sufficient to have him impeached:
“The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,
vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by
America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign
for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a
court.”
Obama’s citizenship may be an issue, but it is not the critical issue, which is his natural born citizen status and eligibility for the presidency per the US Constitution. Judge Robertson’s reference to the vetting of Obama on social media sites stands on it’s own for a high level of stupidity. The quote from Marbury v Madison above is the final arbiter of Judge Robertson’s guilt.
From World Net Daily November 26, 2010.
“Supremes challenged to put Constitution above Twitter”
“The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the Constitution will trump Twitter on issues of national importance, including the eligibility of a president, which could determine the very future of the American form of government.
The request is being made in a petition for writ of certiori, or a request for the Supreme Court to review the decision of a lower appellate court, in a case brought on behalf of Col. Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force officer.
He is among the many who have brought court challenges to Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office based on doubts about whether Obama qualifies for the position under the U.S. Constitution’s demand that presidents be a “natural born citizen,” a qualification not imposed on other many other federal officers.
The pleadings submitted to the court, compiled by longtime attorney John D. Hemenway, cite the incredible importance of the claims that Obama, in fact, failed to qualify for the office.”
“The questions suggested by the petition are weighty:
“Did the district court examine the complaint, as required by the decisions of this and every other federal court, to see if it alleged facts to support its claims?”
“By refusing to consider the issue of defendant Obama not being a ‘natural born citizen’ as set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, did the district court violate its obligations to consider the issues raised by the complaint?”
“In … relying on extrajudicial criteria such as an assertion that ‘the issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency’ combined with an attack on petitioner … did the district court not engage in such obvious political bias and upon extrajudicial factors as to render its opinion void?”
“Did the … bias engaged in lead to a decision which ignored the law as set out above and as a result place the respondent-defendant Obama above that law and the rule of law in this country generally and threaten the constitutional basis and very existence of our rule of law?”
“Did the courts below not completely ignore the decisions of this court and the clear language of Rule 15 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning amendments so as to compound its biased elevation of the defendant Obama above the rule of constitutional law?”
High ranking military questions Obama, Glenn Beck and media must follow, LTC Terry Lakin, CDR Kerchner, Generals defend US Constitution
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans
LTC Terry Lakin is facing a court martial in a few weeks for disobeying illegal orders to deploy. Lt. Colonel Lakin has an obligation to disobey those orders. He takes his oath seriously.
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) and his attorney Mario Apuzzo have a Petition for Writ of Certiorari that went to conference in the US Supreme Court on November 23, 2010. Commander Kerchner takes his oath seriously.
I am holding Glenn Beck most accountable because of the stupid, uninformed remarks that he made on his radio show. He insulted millions of concerned Americans including high ranking military officers. I will not stand for it. I am ready to get in Beck’s face if necessary.
I am also addressing the rest of the media, including Fox. It appears that Beck, Fox and the rest of the mainstream media have made deals with one or more devils. The American public is fed up with being lied to. We will not stand for it! Regardless of what the government does to the internet, irrespective of the lies and misinformation from the media, we will get the truth out. Some of you have heard me say that if they shut me down on the internet, I and others will go on tour. A new network is not out of the question.
We must hold “news organizations” accountable. I am starting with Beck. He should know better.
This also applies to the US Supreme Court. If you believe that you cannot be removed you are wrong. We are awaiting a decision on the Supreme Court conference that reviewed the petition in Kerchner v Obama. We will hold them accountable as well.
“You are probably, like I am, you are excited to enjoy a nice big meal with your family and friends — well, at least the meal part. I don’t know, I’m always excited for people to come over for the holidays until the family actually arrives. And then you hear the doorbell and you’re like — oh, crap, they’re here.
Unfortunately, for as excited as we all may be, I’m about to rain on your parade. Yes, that’s me. I’m your little black rain cloud. I’m going to issue to a challenge to you this Thanksgiving to try to think past the stuffing, think past the turkey in your face and watching football — and try to talk to your family this year about things that really matter.”
“I am the grim reaper of apathy. That is me.”
“I want you to honestly think of this, this weekend when you are with your family, what holds this country together? Is it our values, our principles, our history? Or is it materialism?”
“So, I want to apologize in advance, but it is important. If we don’t wake up our family and friends up and we don’t start having this conversation on a weekend like Thanksgiving, unfortunately, I don’t think that they’re going to know what hit them after the holidays.”
“I know it’s not easy to talk to your families about anything — really anything. You know, our families are so divided right now and we have to try to stitch it back up. And it’s hard to talk about anything other than football and food on Thanksgiving. But when you go through the news of the day, it’s apparent that it cannot be business as usual in this country.”
I agree with what Glenn Beck is saying. Our friends and associates who are ill informed and in denial need to be awakend. Glenn Beck addresses important issues like terrorism, our economy, inflation and more government control of our lives. But isn’t that like talking about problems in Nazi Germany in 1945 and not mentioning Adolf Hitler?
I agree that Barack Obama is not the only problem, but he is a huge part of the problem and his issues go to the heart of the matter. Upholding and defending the US Constitution.
Increasingly awareness of Obama eligibility issues has spread. Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity have all asked questions about Obama’s birth certificate, natural born citizen status and eligibility. High ranking military officers, including multiple generals, have come out and questioned Obama. Major General Paul E. Vallely, retired, has asked for Obama’s resignation. LTC Terry Lakin is facing court martial for refusing illegal orders to deploy.
Kerchner v Obama, with plaintiff CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret), went to conference in the US Supreme Court on November 23, 2010. No mention anywhere by Beck.
With all of the awareness and information about Obama’s eligibility issues, one major media player, Glenn Beck, has not only not covered these stories, he has insulted millions of concerned Americans who question Obama. Beck has not covered these issues on Fox, his radio show and TheBlaze.com.
Glenn Beck stated:
“But when you go through the news of the day, it’s apparent that it cannot be business as usual in this country.”
Glenn Beck, that includes you!
If you are not going to cover the important story, or at least ask this simple question and demand an answer:
“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”
If you are not going to cover this story of a lifetime, then at least
Apologize to the American people and the military.
WND EXCLUSIVE: U.S. SUPREME COURT CONFERS ON OBAMA ELIGIBILITY
Conducting interviews on this topic is the Washington, D.C staff writer for WND.com, Brian Fitzpatrick.
Is president a ‘natural-born citizen’ as Constitution requires?
By Brian Fitzpatrick
(c) 2010 WND.com
WASHINGTON – Is this the case that will break the presidential eligibility question wide open?
The Supreme Court conferred today on whether arguments should be heard on the merits of Kerchner v. Obama, a case challenging whether President Barack Obama is qualified to serve as president because he may not be a “natural-born citizen” as required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
Unlike other eligibility cases that have reached the Supreme Court, Kerchner vs. Obama focuses on the “Vattel theory,” which argues that the writers of the Constitution believed the term “natural-born citizen” to mean a person born in the United States to parents who were both American citizens.
“This case is unprecedented,” said Mario Apuzzo, the attorney bringing the suit. “I believe we presented an ironclad case. We’ve shown standing, and we’ve shown the importance of the issue for the Supreme Court. There’s nothing standing in their way to grant us a writ of certiorari.”
If the Supreme Court decides to grant the “writ of certiorari,” it may direct a federal trial court in New Jersey to hear the merits of the case, or it may choose to hear the merits itself. The court’s decision on the writ could be announced as early as Wednesday.
If any court hears the merits of the case, Apuzzo says it will mark the “death knell” for Obama’s legitimacy.
“Given my research of what a natural-born citizen is, he cannot be a natural-born citizen so it’s a death knell to his legitimacy. What happens on a practical level, how our political institutions would work that out, is something else,” Apuzzo told WND.
Apuzzo observed it is “undisputed fact” that Obama’s father was a British subject.
A hearing on the merits “is also a death knell because it would allow discovery so we would be able to ask him for his birth certificate, and we don’t know what that would show,” according to Apuzzo. “We might not even get to the question of defining ‘natural-born citizen.’ If he was not born in the U.S., he’d be undocumented, because he’s never been naturalized. We don’t even know what his citizenship status is. Hawaii has said they have his records, but that’s hearsay. We have not seen the root documents.”
Another attorney who has brought Obama eligibility cases to the Supreme Court, Philip Berg, agrees that discovery would sink Obama’s presidency.
“If one court had guts enough to deal with this and allow discovery, Obama would be out of office,” Berg told WND. “We would ask for a lift of Obama’s ban on all of his documents. The last official report said Obama has spent $1.6 million in legal fees [keeping his papers secret], and the total is probably over $2 million now. You don’t spend that kind of money unless there’s something to hide, and I believe the reason he’s hiding this is because he was not born in the United States.”
“The Supreme Court has never decided to hear the merits of an eligibility case,” Berg added. “If the Supreme Court would decide to hear a case, Obama would be out of office instantly. If Congress decided to hear a case, Obama would be out of office.”
“They’re taking a different approach, arguing that both parents must be citizens,” Berg noted.
Apuzzo is arguing the “Vattel theory,” which asserts that the term “natural-born citizen” as used in the Constitution was defined by French writer Emer de Vattel. Vattel, whose work, “The Law of Nations,” was widely known and respected by the founding fathers, used the term to mean an individual born of two citizens.
According to Apuzzo, Congress and the courts have addressed the question of who can be an American citizen, for example regarding former slaves, Asian immigrants, and American Indians. However, the term “natural-born citizen” has never been altered.
“The courts and Congress have never changed the definition,” said Apuzzo. “The founding fathers understood that the commander-in-chief of the armed forces needed to have two American citizens as parents so that American values would be imparted to him.”
Apuzzo said the Supreme Court had clearly accepted Vattel’s definition of “natural-born citizen” in “dicta,” or statements made in opinions on cases addressing other matters. He cited Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall’s opinion in the 1814 “Venus” case, in which Marshall endorses Vattel’s definition.
Apuzzo also cites the writings of founding father David Ramsay, an influential South Carolina physician and historian who used similar language to Vattel.
Previous cases challenging Obama’s eligibility have all been rejected on technical grounds. Numerous courts have decided that the plaintiffs do not have “standing” to bring a suit against Obama because they have failed to prove they are directly injured by his occupation of the Oval Office.
“To me that’s false,” said Berg. “The 10th Amendment refers to ‘we the people.’ If the people can’t challenge the president’s constitutionality, that would be ridiculous.”
“My clients have a right to protection from an illegitimately sitting president,” said Apuzzo. “Every decision he makes affects the life, property, and welfare of my clients.”
Apuzzo said the founding fathers had good reason to require the president to be a natural-born citizen.
“They were making sure the President had the values from being reared from a child in the American system, and thereby would preserve everybody’s life, liberty and property in the process.
“They made that decision, so my clients have every right to expect the president to be a natural-born citizen. It goes to all your basic rights, every right that is inalienable. The president has to be a natural-born citizen.”
Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh have all questioned Obama’s birth certificate, natural born citizen status and eligibility to be president. Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh stated the following on his radio show:
“The imposter got into the equivalent of the White House in Afghanistan. Did they not ask this guy for some kind of identification? They clearly didn’t. They clearly didn’t ask this guy for his birth certificate. How in the world could they trust in a leader and even give money to somebody who has not been properly vetted? Well, because it happened here in the United States. We have an imposter for all intents and purposes serving in the White House.”
US Supreme Court conference, Kerchner v Obama, SCOTUS blog, Supreme Court of the United States blog, Akin Gump
As reported here this morning, Kerchner v Obama, filed by attorney Mario Apuzzo, is to be distributed for Conference by the US Supreme Court Justices, today, November 23, 2010.
A historic case, with ramifications that could shake the foundations of this country, let’s see, why would the SCOTUS blog not be interested?
From the SCOTUS Blog.
“SCOTUSblog is devoted to comprehensively covering the U.S. Supreme Court—without bias and according to the highest journalistic and legal ethical standards. The blog is provided as a public service and is sponsored by Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP.”
Well, you know, sometimes us pesky folks over at Citizen Wells get a little curious. And, well, I just had to know why such an important case such as this wasn’t worth mentioning. So I did a search on Akin Gump Obama contributions and discovered that these folks are real generous with their money. Akin Gump. You know, “Life is like a box of chocolates.”
“OBAMA FOR AMERICA
PO Box 8102
Chicago, Illinois 60680
FEC Committee ID #: C00431445
This report contains activity for a Primary Election
Report type: October Quarterly
This Report is an Amendment”
cavalry commission in 1895. He won early fame as a war correspondent, covering the Cuban revolt against Spain (1895), and British campaigns in the Northwest Frontier of India (1897), the Sudan (1898) and South Africa during the Boer War (1899). Churchill had authored five books by the age of 26. His daring escape from a Boer prison camp in 1899 made him a national hero and ushered him into the House of Commons, where his career spanned 60 years.”
Citizen WElls 