Category Archives: Eligibility

Rick Santorum endorsement, Citizen Wells endorses Santorum for presidency, God Family Constitution Defense Budget, Legal immigration, Obama eligibility

Posted on December 29, 2011 | 119 comments

Rick Santorum endorsement, Citizen Wells endorses Santorum for presidency, God Family Constitution Defense Budget, Legal immigration, Obama eligibility

My friends have been asking me for weeks what my preference in a presidential candidate is. For weeks I have been stating, Rick Santorum. An intelligent, well informed friend of mine who I have known for many years agrees.

So far my biggest gripe with Santorum was his response to Obama’s eligibility deficiency. However, many otherwise good Americans have been fooled by the Orwellian brainwashing of the mainstream media. Like many decisions in life, Santorum for me is the lesser of evils, however, I find most of his positions appealing.

From the DesMoines Register August 7, 2011.

“Candidate profile: Rick Santorum refuses to compromise on principles”

“Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum knew he was in trouble as he sought re-election to his third term in 2006.

Public opinion was hardening against the war in Iraq and the president who started it. All signs pointed to a bad year for Republicans.

His supporters were blunt, recalled Charlie Artz, a Harrisburg lawyer and a friend since they were in their 20s. To win, they said, you need to change
course. You need to soften your opinions.

But Santorum wouldn’t budge. He described the state of America’s families as a moral crisis. He declared the nation at a critical crossroads in a fight
against radical Islamists. And he ultimately lost by 18 points to Bob Casey Jr., the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980.

“Rick is a very devout Catholic guy, and he believes in the principles of the founding fathers of this country,” Artz said. “He is not willing to compromise
on that. He will stand for his beliefs and his principles above any political expediency.”

Santorum, 53, is not about to start mincing words now that he’s seeking the Republican presidential nomination. That leaves little room in the middle between his supporters and his detractors.

Jamie Johnson of Stratford is a Christian pastor who has worked in 40 Republican political campaigns over the past two decades. He said he was drawn to join Santorum’s presidential bid after watching him lead the charge on family values legislation in Congress.

“I thought, ‘Wow. This guy is a guy of energy and passion and convictions,’ ” Johnson said. “If there was ever a time for a muscular Republican leader to
stand up against President Obama, it is now. I don’t see Michele Bachmann or Tim Pawlenty or Rick Perry having the intellectual or spiritual muscle to go toe
to toe with Barack Obama.”

Jim Burn, chairman of the Pennsylvania Democratic Party, has closely monitored Santorum’s political career, too, but sees him in an entirely different light.
By 2006, Pennsylvanians had come to view Santorum as completely out of touch with their values, he said.

“He was viewed as a Republican with extreme right-wing beliefs and was not viable,” Burn said.

His story starts with emigrating granddad
Santorum’s political outlook is firmly rooted in family.

On the campaign trail, he frequently tells the story of how his grandfather came to America from Italy in the 1920s because he detested living under fascist
dictator Benito Mussolini. His grandfather worked in Pennsylvania’s coal mines until he was 72, Santorum said.

During a campaign stop in July in Marion, Ia., Santorum told of kneeling before his grandfather’s casket as a teenager and looking at his large folded hands,
holding a rosary. His grandfather’s independence and hard work brought freedom to his family, he said.

“He gave me the opportunities that I have,” Santorum said. “I feel like I am standing on his shoulders.”

He describes his grandfather, Pietro, known as Pete, and his father, Aldo, a psychologist, as strong-willed, a trait he shares.

His dad was a typical Italian father who “would always yell first and speak softly later,” he said.

Santorum grew up in Virginia and Pennsylvania. Both his father and mother, Catherine, a nurse, worked for the Veterans Administration.

After earning bachelor’s and master’s degrees, he became a staffer for Republican state Sen. Doyle Corman while he earned a law degree. Then, too, he
demonstrated his strong-willed streak.

Corman said he hired Santorum because he was bright and ambitious, and Corman let Santorum know he was free to argue with his boss about politics.

“If Rick thought that I was headed in the wrong direction, we would have debates over it, and the staff couldn’t believe how hot our debates would get at
times,” Corman recalled in a phone interview. “You could hear us through the walls, but I wanted that, and Rick made me think things out well.”

Fast-rising career in U.S. House, Senate
He was a young man on a fast track. He started work for a prominent Pittsburgh law firm and did some lobbying at the Pennsylvania Capitol. Four years after
graduating from law school, he launched a bid for Congress.

Corman and others told him to forget it because it would be too difficult to defeat a long-term Democratic incumbent.

“He beat that seven-term incumbent, and the rest is history,” Corman said.

As a 32-year-old freshman, Santorum joined former U.S. Rep. Jim Nussle of Iowa and others to focus on government reform, becoming a member of the “Gang of Seven” that exposed the House banking and post office scandals.

In 1994, at 36, he won election to the Senate, once again unseating an incumbent, Democrat Harris Wofford. Two years later, he was an author and floor manager of a landmark welfare reform act that moved millions of people from the welfare rolls to the work force.

Again and again, he pressed abortion fight
It was about this time that he and his family experienced a defining moment, underlining his commitment to reverence for life.

After Santorum and his wife arrived in Washington, D.C., their family quickly grew to three children. But in 1996, Karen Santorum, who had worked as a neo-
natal nurse and a lawyer, experienced a difficult pregnancy.

During labor, she developed a severe infection in her uterus, and her temperature soared to 105 degrees. Their son was born prematurely and lived only two hours.

Karen Santorum describes how she and her husband brought their deceased infant home instead of allowing the child to be placed in a refrigerated morgue.
Their daughter, Elizabeth, cuddled the infant and announced, “This is my baby brother, Gabriel; he is an angel.”

A priest celebrated the Mass of the Angels in his grandparents’ living room, and the casket was placed in the back seat of the family’s van as they drove to
the cemetery.

Karen Santorum wrote a book about her son, “Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum,” which includes a forward by Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

At the same time, Rick Santorum was leading efforts in the U.S. Senate to ban what he describes as partial-birth abortions.

Santorum acknowledges that other Republican presidential candidates also say they oppose abortion. But he portrays himself as the candidate who has a proven
record fighting to restrict it.

He has spoken of losing a battle against President Bill Clinton for a partial-birth abortion act.

“I didn’t just offer (the bill), but I stood there and fought … year in and year out,” Santorum said. “We lost because Bill Clinton would veto the bill. …
But I continued to fight. I continued to stand up for life, and God blessed us.” (The bill was signed into law under President George W. Bush.)

As senator, called for balancing the budget
Besides championing anti-abortion legislation in the Senate, he supported a balanced federal budget and a line-item veto to curb spending.

That record makes him the right choice to lead a nation confronting out-of-control spending and a downgraded credit rating, he says.

Even before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Santorum proposed transforming the U.S. military from a Cold War force to a more agile one to meet modern threats. He was also a leader on U.S.-Israeli relations, authoring the “Syria Accountability Act” and the “Iran Freedom and Support Act,” despite initial opposition from President Bush.”

“Santorum has campaigned more days and conducted more events in Iowa than any other candidate. But he has had difficulty gaining traction. In The Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll in June, he registered 4 percent support among likely Republican caucusgoers.

But he takes heart in a Quinnipiac University poll released last week that showed him in a dead heat with Obama in a theoretical presidential matchup in
Pennsylvania, a key swing state. And he reminds voters that he has twice defeated incumbent Democrats.

He also notes that Abraham Lincoln lost two Senate races before he was elected president.

His friend Artz says Santorum will outwork other candidates and would make a great president because he would always put the country first.

“I think he is going to surprise some people out there,” Artz said.”

““Rick won’t apologize for America being great, and he will defend Israel. He didn’t shy away from taking on the partial-birth abortion ban or welfare reform,
and he’s certainly not going to shy away from getting this country back on track.” — Kim Lehman, Iowa’s National Republican Committeewoman and former president of Iowa Right to Life

“I don’t comment on who would be a good president or a bad president, but I can tell you that a lot of Rick Santorum’s policies and priorities are not in
keeping with core constitutional principles.” — Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State

“Not many politicians have spine; this one does.” — Talk-show host Glenn Beck, introducing Santorum before a June interview on Fox News”

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/08/07/santorum-refuses-to-compromise-on-principles/

Rick Santorum meets my priorities of :

God
Family
Constitution
Defense
Budget

Rick Santorum, like other decent members of Congress such as Howard Coble was brainwashed by the mainstream media and their own congressional resources.

Rick Santorum told WND, “My understanding is that issue was solved. If there’s evidence to the contrary [showing Obama is not eligible], they should bring it forth.”

When Santorum was reminded about the Natural Born Citizen requirement he allegedly responded “I don’t think that’s what the Constitution requires, and he (President Obama) was born in the country, so it doesn’t matter.”

I personally believe that Rick Santorum, when properly advised , will reconsider his position on Obama’s eligibility and will be open to ask more questions and seek more answers.

Mr. Santorum, I am at your service.

Contact me.

Wells

119 Comments

Posted in Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Congress, conservatives, constitution, Election 2012, Eligibility, Family, Glenn Beck, God, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Pennsylvania voters, Politics, Presidential candidate, Presidential debate, republicans, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, US House of Representatives, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , ,

Obama Georgia ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status deficient, Attorney Van Irion for David Weldon Files Blistering Opposition to Obama Motion to Dismiss

Posted on December 29, 2011 | 41 comments

Obama Georgia ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status deficient, Attorney Van Irion for David Weldon Files Blistering Opposition to Obama Motion to Dismiss

“Why did Obama, prior to occupying the White House, employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to assist him in avoiding the presentation of a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

First, I would like to thank Birther Report for their efforts to monitor the unconstitutional machinations of Obama, et al.

From Birther Report December December 28, 2011.

“Attorney Van Irion on behalf of David Weldon Files Blistering Opposition to Defendant’s(Obama) Motion to Dismiss in Georgia Ballot Access Challenge”

“For the reasons set forth below, none of the facts asserted by the Defendant are relevant. The only fact relevant to this case is the fact that the Defendant’s father was not a U.S. citizen. This fact has been repeatedly documented and stated by the party opponent, Defendant Obama. This fact is also evidenced by Plaintiff’s exhibit 6, previously submitted with Plaintiff’s pre-trial order and apparently authenticated by Defendant’s citation to this exhibit in Defendant’s “Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute,” number 7.”

“C. Right to Associate Doesn’t Negate Georgia Election Law

The Democratic Party of Georgia’s Constitutional right to determine its membership coexists with Georgia’s right to govern Georgia. Georgia code does not interfere with the autonomy of the political party’s internal decision making because it does nothing to prohibit the parties from submitting any name to the Secretary of State for inclusion in the Presidential primary. The Party is free to submit Saddam Hussein or Mickey Mouse as their next Presidential candidate. However, Georgia is not required to accept such submissions and waste taxpayer money on ballots for such candidates.

Georgia code does not prevent the political parties from submitting any name. Instead the code simply determines what the State does with the Party’s list of candidates after the Party has forwarded its list to the State. See O.C.G.A. §21-2 et seq. This code does nothing to prevent any political party from excluding, or including, any person they choose to exclude or include. Nor does it prevent the Party from choosing candidates to submit, in its “sole discretion.” Georgia’s code simply exercises the State’s right to administer elections in a manner that best serves the citizens of the State.

In the instant case Georgia’s Election code does nothing to infringe on the Democratic Party of Georgia’s right of association because the Party can and did include the Defendant in its organization. The Party can and did include the Defendant in the Party’s list of candidates. The Party’s rights, however, end there. Its rights cannot force the State to place the Defendant’s name on a ballot after the State determines that the Defendant is obviously not qualified “to hold the office sought.” §21-2-5. The rights of the Party and of the State simply do not conflict.4

The Defendant’s argument would logically require a conclusion that no state can preclude any candidate from any primary ballot for any reason without violating a political party’s right to freely associate. Since many candidates have been disqualified from primary ballots for lack of qualification to hold the office sought, we can safely conclude that the Defendant’s argument fails. If his argument succeeds, many election codes across the country will need to be re-drafted.

D. Defendant’s Conclusion is Offensive to the Constitution

The Defendant states that the issue raised by the Plaintiff was “soundly rejected by 69,456,897 Americans in the 2008 elections.” See Def.’s Mtn. at 5. This statement reflects a complete lack of understanding regarding Constitutional protections.

Contrary to the Defendant’s assertion, voters are not the final arbiters of whether an individual is qualified to hold office. America is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy without a constitution. In a Constitutional Republic the power of the majority is limited and cannot infringe upon protected rights of a minority.

The Constitution is an anti-majoritarian document; meaning that it protects individuals from invasions and usurpations by the majority. Constitutionally protected rights are held inviolate regardless of the majority’s desire to violate them. Without such protections any law enacted by Congress would be valid, even if it denied an individual their right to life, liberty, or property. Without the anti-majoritarian protection of the Constitution, Congress could legalize the killing of all Jews, for example, as was done in World War II Germany. Constitutional requirements are absolute, and must be followed regardless of how popular or unpopular such requirements may be, because they are in place to protect the minority.

The Defendant’s presumption that popular vote overrides the Constitution demonstrates his lack of understanding of the Constitution and emphasizes the critical role played by this Court in protecting Americans from a tyrannical majority. Contrary to the Defendant’s statement, a minority of Americans have an absolute right to be protected from a non-natural-born-citizen being elected President.

E. Contrary to the Defendant’s Assertion, No Court has Ruled on the Question Presented”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/12/attorney-van-irion-files-opposition-to.html

Thanks to commenter Pat 1789.

41 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Civil rights, constitution, Democrats, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electors, Eligibility, Judges, Lawyers, Lies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Natural Born Citizen lies and misrepresentations, Congressional Research Service Propaganda, Founding fathers intent, Obama eligibility, Leo Donofrio response

Posted on December 1, 2011 | 53 comments

Natural Born Citizen lies and misrepresentations, Congressional Research Service Propaganda, Founding fathers intent, Obama eligibility, Leo Donofrio response

Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States, and is criminally occupying the White House and should immediately be arrested. Irrespective of any deficiencies in his birth certificate, Obama did not have 2 US citizen parents and is not a Natural Born Citizen.
Presidential eligibility from the US Constitution

“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.”

Notice that being a citizen was not enough, unless you were so at the time of the adoption of the US Constitution. One must be a Natural Born Citizen. That requires 2 US citizen parents. The founding fathers understood that definition. One of the best examples I can think of this contextual knowledge is from the movie “A few good men.”

In 2008, John McCain was challenged on his eligibility. He immediately presented a legitimate certified copy of his original birth certificate. But since he was born abroad, the US Senate provided a resolution to clarify his status as a Natural Born Citizen.

“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
April 24, 2008
Reported by Mr. LEAHY, without amendment
April 30, 2008
Considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the
United States;

Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in
the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States,
as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country
outside of our national borders;

Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and

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.”

 Notice that emphasis was placed on the fact that McCain had 2 US citizen parents. Also note that Obama signed the resolution.

In 2008, numerous congressmen were contacted regarding Obama’s eligibility issues. It appeared at the time that they were all reading from the same scripted agenda. In 2010 we learned why members of congress responded with the same language.

From Citizen Wells November 8, 2010.

“Mario Apuzzo, attorney in Kerchner v Obama, first broke this story on November 5, 2010.

“Members of Congress Internal Memorandum — What to Tell Your Constituents in Answer to Obama Eligibility Questions – Their Talking Points Internal Memo Revealed. This was the spin that the Members of Congress were given to keep the American electorate at bay and confused in the debate about Obama’s eligibility issues all the while the Congress did nothing to investigate the matter in a congressional hearing like they did for similar concerns about John McCain.

We have obtained a copy of the talking points memorandum put out by a lawyer for the Congressional Research Service to the Members of Congress back in April 2009 as to what to tell their constituents when they write to the Members of Congress and ask questions about Obama’s eligibility. Now we know why all the answers coming back to constituents sounded like they were written by the same person and were full of the same obfuscations, omitted facts from history, and half truths & non-truths. This copy was obtained via the diligent and persistent efforts of a patriot going by the pen name of “Tom Deacon” who obtained it from a Senator’s office. Now we know the talking points the DC insiders and politicians have been groomed with to feed to their constituents who have been asking questions about the eligibility issues. Thank you Tom.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/congress-internal-memo-obama-eligibility-what-to-tell-your-constituents-jack-maskell-memo-citizen-wells-open-thread-november-8-2010/

Chris Strunk gave us a heads up yesterday that Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service is at it again.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/74176180/

Leo Donofrio has responded to this latest attempt at obfuscation of the meaning of Natural Born Citizen.
“Debunking The New Natural Born Citizen Congressional Research Propaganda.
 
Yesterday, attorney Jack Maskell issued yet another version of his ever changing Congressional Research Memo on POTUS eligibility and the natural-born citizen clause.  The CRS memo is actually a blessing for me in that I’ve been putting a comprehensive report together on this issue for about a month now.  But not having an official source standing behind the entire body of propaganda made my job more difficult.
The complete refutation will be available soon, but for now I will highlight one particularly deceptive example which illustrates blatant intellectual dishonesty.  On pg. 48, Maskell states:

In one case concerning the identity of a petitioner, the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”221
221 Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920). The Supreme Court also noted there: “It is better that many Chinese immigrants should be improperly admitted than that one natural born citizen of the United States should be permanently excluded from his country.” 253 U.S. at 464.
Reading this yesterday, I had a fleeting moment of self-doubt.  Could I have missed this case?  Did the Supreme Court really state that the son of two aliens was a natural-born citizen?  The Twilight Zone theme suddenly chimed in.  I then clicked over to the actual case, and of course, the Supreme Court said no such thing.

The petitioner was born in California to parents who were both US citizens.  His father was born in the United States and was a citizen by virtue of the holding in US v. Wong Kim Ark.  His mother’ place of birth was not mentioned.  Regardless, she was covered by the derivative citizenship statute, and was, therefore, a US citizen when the child was born.

It was alleged that the petitioner had obtained a false identity and that the citizen parents were not his real parents.  But the Supreme Court rejected the State’s secret evidence on this point and conducted their citizenship analysis based upon an assumption these were petitioner’s real parents.
Having been born in the US of parents who were citizens, petitioner was indeed a natural-born citizen.  But Maskell’s frightening quotation surgery makes it appear as if the petitioner was born of alien parents.  The Supreme Court rejected that contention.  And Maskell’s ruse highlights the depravity of lies being shoved down the nation’s throat on this issue.  I can imagine Mini-Me sitting on his lap while this was being prepared.
When you look carefully at Maskell’s creative use of quotation marks, you’ll see that the statement is NOT a quote from the case, but rather a Frankenstein inspired patchwork.  He starts the reversed vivisection off with the following:
“[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son…”

These are the first few words of a genuine quote from the Court’s opinion.  Then Maskell goes way out of context for the next two body parts.  The first is not in quotation marks:

of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is

And finally, an unrelated quote from elsewhere in the Court’s opinion:
“a natural born American citizen ….”
Put it all together and you get the following monstrosity:
…the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”
But the Supreme Court never said that.  Here’s what they actually said:
“It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 Sup. Ct. 456.”  Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920).

This real quote – when liberated from Maskell’s embalming fluid – does not resemble the propaganda at all.”

Read more:

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/debunking-the-new-natural-born-citizen-congressional-research-propaganda/

53 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Congress, constitution, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, Lawyers, Leo Donofrio, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Usurper, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

NH presidential election law, Natural born citizen clause, Statute changed in 2010, Orly Taitz ballot challenge, Obama 2007 signature

Posted on November 19, 2011 | 41 comments

NH presidential election law, Natural born citizen clause, Statute changed in 2010, Orly Taitz ballot challenge, Obama 2007 signature

I am presenting this article on NH presidential election laws for 3 reasons.

1. To remind everyone what Obama signed in 2007.

2. To reveal a change in the wording on the Declaration of intent.

3. To ask why this change in wording is not more widely reported.

I saved a copy of the Declaration of intent by September 18, 2009 from the following link:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-LXIII-655.htm

“TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 655
NOMINATIONS
Nominations by Primary
Section 655:17-b
    655:17-b Declaration of Intent; Presidential and Vice-Presidential Candidates Who File Nomination Papers. –
    I. Declarations of intent for each candidate for president and vice-president who seeks nomination by nomination papers shall be in the form provided in paragraph II. Declarations of intent required by this section shall be filed with the secretary of state, signed by the candidate, and notarized by a notary public.
    II. I, __________, declare that I am domiciled in the city (or town or unincorporated place) of __________, county of __________, state of __________, and am a qualified voter therein; that I intend to be a candidate for the office of __________ to be chosen at the general election to be held on the __________ day of __________; and I intend to file nomination papers by the deadline established under RSA 655:43. I further declare that, if qualified as a candidate for said office, I shall not withdraw; and that, if elected, I shall be qualified for and shall assume the duties of said office.
Source. 1985, 121:3, eff. July 19, 1985.”

Using the same link today, I find the following version:

“TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 655
NOMINATIONS
Nominations by Primary
Section 655:17-b
    655:17-b Declaration of Intent; Presidential Candidates Who File Nomination Papers. –
    I. Declarations of intent for each candidate for president who seeks nomination by nomination papers shall be in the form provided in paragraph II.Declarations of intent required by this section shall be filed with the secretary of state, signed by the candidate, and notarized by a notary public.
    II. I, __________, swear under penalties of perjury that I am qualified to be a candidate for president of the United States pursuant to article II, section 1, clause 4 of the United States Constitution, which 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.” I further declare that I am domiciled in the city (or town or unincorporated place) of __________, county of __________, state of __________, and am a qualified voter therein; that I intend to be a candidate for the office of president to be chosen at the general election to be held on the __________ day of __________; and I intend to file nomination papers by the deadline established under RSA 655:43. I further declare that, if qualified as a candidate for said office, I shall not withdraw; and that, if elected, I shall be qualified for and shall assume the duties of said office.
Source. 1985, 121:3, eff. July 19, 1985. 2010, 19:1, eff. July 6, 2010; 50:3, eff. July 17, 2010.”

Here is the Decaration of intent that Obama signed in October of 2007.

The wording in the document Obama signed in 2007 matches the wording of the Declaration of Intent I saved from September 18, 2009. Obama in 2007 did not certify that he was a natural born citizen.

41 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2008, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

NH Obama ballot challenge denied, New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission all Democrats?, Obama eligibility, NH law violated

Posted on November 19, 2011 | 24 comments

NH Obama ballot challenge denied, New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission all Democrats?, Obama eligibility, NH law violated

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

From the Concord Monitor November 19, 2011.

“‘Birther’ bid to derail Obama blocked
Ballot Law Commission members called traitors”

“As state election officials yesterday rejected California lawyer
Orly Taitz’s argument to keep President Obama’s name off the New
Hampshire presidential ballot, supporters lining the hearing room in
the Legislative Office Building cried out in protest.

“Traitors!” shouted one woman. “Spineless traitors!”

“Saying a treasonous liar can go on our ballot?” yelled State Rep.
Harry Accornero, a Republican from Laconia. “You’re going to have to
face the citizens of Laconia. You better wear a mask.”

The spectacle before the state Ballot Law Commission began with a
presentation by Taitz, who came to Concord yesterday afternoon to
continue her years-long

demand for proof of Obama’s U.S. citizenship.

Taitz, a dentist who was born in the Soviet Union, is running as a
Republican for a seat in the California Senate and runs what she bills
as the “world’s leading Obama eligibility challenge website,” refuses
to accept the veracity of the birth certificates released by the White
House in response to questions circulating through chain emails and on
the internet about Obama’s birth.

The administration released Obama’s birth certificate from the state
of Hawaii in 2008. When that didn’t satisfy the skeptics, it posted a
long-form version online earlier this year.

But Taitz insists that document is fake: The computer file is layered
and could have been altered with the Adobe Illustrator program, she
said.

“A child can see this is a forgery,” she told the commission. “Why are
they refusing to show the public the original?”

She also claims Obama doesn’t have a valid Social Security number.
Included in the 85-page packet Taitz submitted to the commission is a
tax return with “a number that was never assigned to him,” Taitz said.
She said Obama is using a Social Security number issued in Connecticut
around 1977.

In conducting her research, Taitz said she also found several birth
dates associated with Obama in a national database. And she found
information that she said contradicts Obama’s claim about the length
of time he spent attending Columbia University, which claims the
president as a 1983 graduate.

“We have an individual where we don’t know who he is,” Taitz said. “We
need to know that the person who is at the helm of this country, who
is leading our military, whose finger is on the red button of nuclear
weapons, has proper identification.”

She told the commission members they would be responsible for “the
most egregious election fraud ever committed” if they didn’t take
Obama’s name off the ballot.

“This is bigger than Watergate. This is a hundred times bigger than
Watergate,” Taitz said. “Ladies and gentlemen, in your hands is
national security for the United States of America.”

But the commission wasn’t convinced.”

“”I want to say, the Constitution is what makes America great,”
Sullivan said, drawing applause from the room.

It was out of the commission’s purview, however. Senior Assistant
Attorney General James Boffetti told commission members they could
only consider whether Obama had filed his declaration of candidacy
form in accordance with state law and paid his $1,000 filing fee. Both
form and fee were properly submitted by Vice President Joe Biden on
Oct. 20, according to Assistant Secretary of State Karen Ladd.

The five members voted unanimously to keep Obama’s name on the ballot.

Their response to the testimony during the hearing angered many of
those in the room, including state representatives.

“Unbelievable,” fumed state Rep. Susan DeLemus, a Republican from
Rochester, walking around the room during a break in the hearing,
before the commission took its vote.

“Let’s just bury the Constitution now and have a funeral,” DeLemus
said. “It just makes me want to throw up.””

Read more:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293382/birther-bid-to-derail-obama-blocked

From Commenter Starla

Submitted on 2011/11/19 at 1:44 am

““NEW HAMPSHIRE ELCTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS”

Obama Release Your Records on 2:00 PM
Friday, November 18, 2011

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS: ACCEPTS OBAMA’S BALLOT ACCESS PAPERWORK FOR 2012;
COMMITTEE MEMBERS BOOED AND CAQLLED TRAITORS”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-elections-committee-rules.html?showComment=1321679292167#c3169759953344384191

* * * *

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these
veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to
publish whatever I please on any subject.” – Elijah Parish
Lovejoy(1802-1837)

* * * *

Comments Under The Above Article:

Anonymous said…

“OH, YES, THANK GOD THEY WERE CALLED TRAITORS. THEY SHOULD BE CHARGED
WITH TREASON…..ALL OF THOSE NOT INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE WITHIN THAT
COMMITTEE SHOULD BE ARRESTED. WHERE ARE THE POLICE AND THE SHERIFFS?
THEY MUST ALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR TREASONABLE ACTIONS.
PEOPLE JUST KEEP WRITING AND WRITING FOR WE MUST SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM
ALL OF THESE TRAITORS. “IN GOD WE TRUST.”

November 18, 2011

* * * *

Anonymous said:

“If Orly is right about all 5 members being a Democrat, then she has a
solid appeals case for the NH Supreme Court. Here is part of the law:

http://www.sos.nh.gov/665-web2011.pdf

CHAPTER 665
BALLOT LAW COMMISSION

General Provisions

665:1 Organization. I. There shall be a ballot law commission
consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker
of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major
political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the
most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by
the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political
parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most
recent state general election.”

November 18, 2011″

* * * *

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELCTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS”

Obama Release Your Records on 2:00 PM
Friday, November 18, 2011

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS:   ACCEPTS OBAMA’S BALLOT ACCESS PAPERWORK FOR
2012; COMMITTEE MEMBERS BOOED AND CAQLLED TRAITORS”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-elections-committee-rules.html?showComment=1321679292167#c3169759953344384191

* * * *

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these
veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to
publish whatever I please on any subject.” – Elijah Parish
Lovejoy(1802-1837)

* * * *

Comments Under The Above Article:

Anonymous said…

“OH, YES, THANK GOD THEY WERE CALLED TRAITORS. THEY SHOULD BE CHARGED
WITH TREASON…..ALL OF THOSE NOT INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE WITHIN
THAT COMMITTEE SHOULD BE ARRESTED. WHERE ARE THE POLICE AND THE
SHERIFFS? THEY MUST ALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR TREASONABLE
ACTIONS. PEOPLE JUST KEEP WRITING AND WRITING FOR WE MUST SAVE OUR
COUNTRY FROM ALL OF THESE TRAITORS. “IN GOD WE TRUST.”

November 18, 2011

* * * *

Anonymous said:

“If Orly is right about all 5 members being a Democrat, then she has a
solid appeals case for the NH Supreme Court. Here is part of the law:

http://www.sos.nh.gov/665-web2011.pdf

CHAPTER 665
BALLOT LAW COMMISSION

General Provisions

665:1 Organization. I. There shall be a ballot law commission
consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker
of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major
political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the
most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by
the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political
parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most
recent state general election.”

November 18, 2011″”

Submitted on 2011/11/19 at 1:14 am

““EXCLUSIVE: ORLY TAITZ REPORTS ON NEW HAMPSHIRE BALLOT COMMISSION HEARING”

“PEOPLE WERE SCREAMING, ‘TRAITORS!’”

By Sharon Rondeau
© 2011, The Post & Email
November 18, 2011

Excerpt:

“Everybody jumped to their feet. They were screaming and yelling and
saying, “Traitors! You’re traitors! You have no decency! You have no
honesty! You’re committing treason!” It was huge. Cameras were
rolling, and they had to call security. (Rep.) Harry Accornero started
yelling at to the chair of the committee and the corrupt attorney, and
the attorney, Brad E. Cook, said, “Representative Accornero, you are
out of order.” And Accornero said, “No, you are out of order; you are
committing treason. You have to face the people of the state of New
Hampshire, and you better not get out of the house without a mask!”

I’ve never seen anything like it. People were so mad that I thought,
“In another minute, they’re going to bring a rope and start hanging
them all.” Representative Carol Vita kept getting right in the face of
the assistant attorney general; she was yelling and screaming at him.

Taitz reported that no one was hurt as a result of the hearing, which
lasted about two hours in total. She reported that Rep. Accornero said
that members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives went to the
Speaker of the House, and a meeting is set for Tuesday when they will
decide what to do. “I’m going to write an emergency appeal to the
Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Members of the House are going to join
my other cases in Hawaii, the Ninth Circuit, and in the DC Circuit.”

“The level of corruption was unbelievable. We found out that all five
members of the committee are Democrats,” Taitz said. “As I was
presenting all of the evidence, people were listening and getting more
and more angry.”

——————

Editor’s Note: If Taitz’s contention that all five members of the
Ballot Law Commission are from one party is correct, it is an apparent
violation of law.””

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/11/18/exclusive-orly-taitz-reports-on-new-hampshire-ballot-commission-hearing/

24 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Lawsuits, Lawyers, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Politics, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

NH ballot challenge to Obama, Orly Taitz complaint, Obama eligibility questions, Four New Hampshire House members question birth certificate

Posted on November 18, 2011 | 76 comments

NH ballot challenge to Obama, Orly Taitz complaint, Obama eligibility questions, Four New Hampshire House members question birth certificate

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

From the Concord Monitor November 18, 2011.

“‘Birther’ challenges Obama”
“Don’t pencil in a victory for President Obama in New Hampshire’s
Democratic primary just yet. Today, the incumbent president must
withstand a legal challenge that again questions his eligibility to
seek the country’s highest office.

At 2 p.m. in Room 307 of the legislative office building, the state’s
Ballot Law Commission is set to hear a complaint filed by Orly Taitz,
a California lawyer who has continued to question the validity of
Obama’s birth certificate and Social Security number since his 2008
election.

Backing her complaint, Taitz said, are four Republican members of the
New Hampshire House: Harry Accornero of Laconia, Larry Rappaport of
Colebrook, and Lucien and Carol Vita of Middleton.

“There’s sufficient controversy that I want it investigated,”
Rappaport, a Ron Paul supporter, said yesterday. “Every time this is
brought up . . . we get a lot of flak, but we’ve never gotten an
answer.””

“”I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I could take that
apart and see that it was fraudulent,” Rappaport said of the long-form
certificate.

Lucien Vita said the birth certificate issue “should have been put to
bed years ago” and also believes the documents released by Obama were
forged.

“Don’t believe anything you read and only half of what you see,” he said.

Vita considers himself a constitutionalist and both he and his wife
support Ron Paul, he said.

“I have doubts because of the delay in the time it actually took to
come out with a long-form birth certificate,” Vita said. “I don’t want
to go through another four years of the same tripe.””

“Taitz’s complaint also questions the validity of Obama’s Social
Security number, and she said the exhibits presented to the Ballot Law
Commission show “undeniable, irrefutable evidence that Barack Obama is
using a Social Security number that was never assigned to him.”

Read more:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293101/birther-challenges-obama?CSAuthResp=1321635127%3Akac5p0ac2a53k27d9iernpe2m5%3ACSUserId%7CCSGroupId%3Aapproved%3AC7BFB10B487EEBB060A53F45DE1EA54D&CSUserId=94&CSGroupId=1

76 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Eligibility, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama eligibility, Dumbing down Constitution for Obama’s sake?, World Net Daily, Constitution amended by fiat

Posted on November 7, 2011 | 92 comments

Obama eligibility, Dumbing down Constitution for Obama’s sake?, World Net Daily, Constitution amended by fiat

“Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise
that it will last; but nothing in this world is certain but death and
taxes.”…Benjamin Franklin

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

From Joseph Farah of World Net Daily November 06, 2011.

“
•”He’s clearly a citizen of the United States.”
•”We’ve seen his birth certificate.”
•”Without question, Barack Obama was born in the U.S.”
•”Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, and that settles it.”
•”It’s nuttiness and counterproductive to question the president’s eligibility for office.”
These are some of the phrases we hear from Barack Obama’s ardent defenders – people like Anderson Cooper and nearly all his colleagues in the news media.
We hear the same drivel from the Republican establishment – people like Karl Rove, who insist the important principle of constitutional integrity should not be a “distraction” in efforts to defeat Obama at the polls.
 
But what happens when the national debate is systematically stifled by these gatekeepers is that we allow Barack Obama’s clear lack of basic qualifications for office dumb down the rule of law, set a new lower standard of constitutional eligibility and redefine what the Constitution says and what the Supreme Court has ruled on its meaning?

In effect, we are allowing the Constitution to be amended by fiat – all because there is no political or legal mechanism in place to ensure candidates for president are constitutionally fit to serve.

Barack Obama is not a “natural born citizen,” as required by Section 2, Article 1, of the Constitution. It has nothing to do with where he was born. It has to do with what Barack Obama has consistently represented to the American people about his birth – that his father was a citizen of Kenya. This is a disqualifier for office because that fact means he is not a “natural born citizen,” the offspring of American citizens. It wouldn’t matter if he were born in Kansas on the Fourth of July or on the dark side of the moon.

As we mercifully approach the end of the Obama regime, it’s time to get serious about the bigger issue of presidential eligibility for the future of this country. If we allow the Obama eligibility standard to become the de facto law of the land, we lose one more important component of constitutional integrity – and we’re on our way to being a nation adrift from any legal moorings.

When I first set out on the lonely course to make this a national issue, against all odds, I predicted that it would not go away. I predicted it would be a major issue in the 2012 presidential election. I also predicted it would not be settled in any court in America. In other words, I was three for three in my predictions.

Today, there remains a total political disconnect between the American people, who understand Obama is an illegitimate pretender to the highest office in the land, and the elite media and political establishment – both Republican and Democrat – which simply doesn’t care what the Constitution requires.

But the Constitution and its clear intent and purpose are much bigger and more important to the future of America than is Barack Obama.”

“It’s not a choice between Democrat and Republican. It’s a choice between right and wrong.”

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=364953

Well said and amen Mr. Farah.

Thanks to commenter GORDO

92 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Eligibility, Government, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama birth certificate, Natural born citizen debate, Justia Supreme Court decisions altered, Conspiracies Lies and Justiagate

Posted on October 29, 2011 | 51 comments

Obama birth certificate, Natural born citizen debate, Justia Supreme Court decisions altered, Conspiracies Lies and Justiagate

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“The following statement at the bottom of the image placed on WhiteHouse.com, disqualifies the image as proof of being Obama’s original birth certificate: ‘or abstract.'”…Citizen Wells

“Just because something is a Conspiracy Theory does not mean it’s not true”

I did not take the Obama birth certifcate controversy too seriously until Philip J Berg and others filed lawsuits in 2008 and Obama with the help of private and USDOJ attorneys avoided presenting his records. This became a conspiracy theory, a bit of grey area subject to debate. However the following statement of Obama’s use of USDOJ attorneys in the question, which I adopted several years ago, is not a theory. It is a fact.

Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?

This is a good, simple, honest question. The American people deserve an answer.

I would like to add another statement.

The following statement at the bottom of the image placed on WhiteHouse.com, disqualifies the image as proof of being Obama’s original birth certificate: ‘or abstract.’

From American Thinker October 29, 2011.

“Conspiracies, Lies, and Justiagate”

“I have never believed in conspiracies — at least, not in the vast kind that Hillary felt the right wing deployed against her philandering husband.  More often, it seems the cover-up of truth, not the circulation of manufactured untruths, lies at the root of such conspiratorial ideas.
Nor do I believe in the kinds of conspiracies seen in movies, with a “spooky dude” in a tower plotting a global takeover while ordering minions to carry out his evil intentions.  Though I sometimes get carried away, especially after listening to Glenn Beck, my imagination does have its bounds.
But I do believe in the remarkable potential of a seemingly unguided force, either good or evil, consisting of great numbers of individuals doing what alone may appear insignificant — yet, when combined with the work of others moving in the same direction, all this work put together has the potential to become something very powerful.  The history of our great nation is a testament to the notion of the formidable forces of good.”

“Bearing these concepts in mind, I’ve been puzzled when others refer to the “birthers” as believing in a conspiracy, while plots of planting birth announcements in local newspapers or the cover-up of a teenage girl’s 1961 trip to Kenya did seem a little over the top.  When Tim Adams, a former Hawaii elections clerk, came forward and asserted that he and others in his office knew in 2008 that Obama had no birth certificate, I wondered: is it possible that others in Hawaii were also aware of this information, yet somehow resolved to keep it secret?  Recall also Governor Abercrombie’s failed attempts to produce the certificate.  Was he “in” on it, too?
Finally this past spring, on the heels of Donald Trump’s noisy demands and with a flourish befitting the finale of a dramatic three-year-long performance, the president presented a copy of what was purported to be his original long-form certificate.  Immediately, multiple experts dissected the “layered” digital image, and arguments continue to circulate the internet as to its authenticity.
I must admit that I do find the “birther” controversy fascinating, and I have kept up with the phenomenon since its inception.  A complete retelling of the whole thing, including the sometimes outlandish subplots (like Sheriff Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse”), combined with the history of the Constitution’s qualification phrase and the technicalities of law, would make for a book thicker than War and Peace and likely completely unbelievable, even if labeled fiction.
Yet even if we assume that the released certificate is legitimate, something still doesn’t feel quite right.  Do all of these sensational news tidbits seem just a little too contrived, making them and the timing of their release appear rather…conspiratorial?  Does a real conspiracy indeed exist, and if so, has it been clouded by all of the birth certificate hype?”

“Attorney Leo Donofrio was the first to assert the claim that Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him and also had the first eligibility case, in a long line of others, rejected for a full hearing by the Supreme Court.  In his ongoing quest to prove that the founding fathers never intended to allow the commander-in-chief to have divided allegiance at birth, Donofrio recently uncovered a strange situation he calls “Justiagate,” documented in an article by Dianna Cotter.
Cotter describes Justia as an “influential legal research website,” and “since Google most often returns Justia.com’s version of the case being searched for as the first or second hit, Justia’s version of Supreme Court opinions are most influential in the blogosphere’s forums and comments.”  She detailed Donofrio’s alarming discovery that at least 25 Supreme Court decisions on Justia’s database had been subjected to some sort of tampering.
It just so happens that all of the affected cases are relevant to the “natural born” citizen debate, all of the changes relate to the especially important decision of Minor v. Happersett (which contains a definition of “natural born citizen”), and all of the noted revisions occurred during the period from mid-2008 to when Donofrio’s discoveries were published.
Were the anomalies simply innocent programming errors, as Justia’s Tim Stanley asserts, or were they created intentionally, with or without direction from somewhere above?
And while “Justiagate” has been gaining in publicity in the blogosphere, preceded by the previous weeks’ renewed and related interest in the laws granting birthright citizenship surrounding the al-Awlaki killing, new headlines are screaming — and guess what about:
The birth certificate.

Again.  And again.  And again.
Conspiracy?

Pass the popcorn.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/conspiracies_lies_and_justiagate.html

 

Thanks to commenter Pat 1789.

51 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Eligibility, Hawaii, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Donald Trump CNN Piers Morgan interview, Trump questions Obama’s birth certificate, Rick Perry strategy, CNN investigation?

Posted on October 27, 2011 | 60 comments

Donald Trump CNN Piers Morgan interview, Trump questions Obama’s birth certificate, Rick Perry strategy, CNN investigation?

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

Donald Trump was interviewed on CNN by Piers Morgan on October 26, 2011. Trump continues to question Obama’s birth certificate.

From CNN.

“During an interview with CNN’s Piers Morgan, the real estate mogul
said the issue would help the Texas governor in the Republican
presidential primary, but might not be “good for him in the general
election.”

Trump championed the “birther” issue during his flirtation with a bid
for the White House. President Barack Obama, who was born in Hawaii,
eventually released the long form version of the document to seemingly
combat the growing rumors.

Texas Gov. Perry recently expressed doubts about the validity of the
birth certificate.

On Wednesday, Perry told Florida’s Bay News 9 he was “just having some
fun with Donald Trump.”

But Trump continued to raise questions about the certificate, saying
Obama “might have been” born in America.

“My gut tells me a couple of things. Number 1, you know it took a long
time to produce this certificate and when it came out, as you know,
you check out the internet, many people say it is not real. Okay? It’s
a forgery,” Trump said. “And the other thing is, nobody has been able
to see the day of his birth, they had twins born, they had the other
one born. Nobody has been able to find any records that he was born in
that hospital.”

CNN released the results of its own investigation into the controversy
earlier this year. Documents and statements from numerous public
officials and childhood friends made clear that the president was born
in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/26/trumps-birther-prediction-for-perry/?hpt=hp_bn3

CNN did not do much of an investigation or did not want the truth.

CNN, present your evidence and we will present ours.

60 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election Law, Eligibility, Hawaii, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama jobs pitch Greensboro NC Proximity Hotel stay, Occupy Greensboro protestors may picket Obama, Taxpayer funded campaign trip

Posted on October 17, 2011 | 20 comments

Obama jobs pitch Greensboro NC Proximity Hotel stay, Occupy Greensboro protestors may picket Obama, Taxpayer funded campaign trip

“Why did the Illinois Senate Health & Human Services Committee, with Obama as chairman, create and push Bill 1332, “Illinois Health Facilities Planning Act,” early in 2003, which reduced the number of members on the Board from 15 to 9, just prior to rigging by Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it“…Joseph Goebbels

From the Greensboro News Record October 17, 2011.

“Railing against Republicans, President Barack Obama on Monday pushed for a jobs package that Congress is splintering into pieces, as the White House predicted the Senate would start taking votes soon. Obama pressed lawmakers to act first on his idea of funneling aid to states to hire teachers and other workers.

Noting that Republicans in Senate rejected consideration of his whole $447 billion plan, Obama sought anew to turn that vote against them.

“Maybe they just couldn’t understand the whole thing at once, so we’re going to break it up into bite-size pieces,” Obama said in western North Carolina, back on the road to campaign for his agenda and, in turn, his own re-election.”

“Obama’s pitch came in the first stop of a three-day bus tour through North Carolina and Virginia. His goal is to keep pressure on Congress to act on individual pieces of his bill following last week’s Senate vote to shelve the plan.

A supportive crowed in broke into a chant of “four more years” for Obama. Said the president in response: “I appreciate the four more years, but right now I’m thinking about the next thirteen months.”

Republicans denounced the bus trip as nothing more than a taxpayer-funded campaign trip through two must-win states to try to bolster his standing for the 2012 election.”

http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/10/17/article/obama_begins_bus_tour_in_nc_to_promote_jobs_bill

Occupy protesters look for new campsite

“The neophyte Occupy Greensboro movement has a secure downtown campsite through Friday and is hunting another location to continue its protest for the long haul.

A day after staging a 600-person march through town protesting financial inequities, about 200 campers and part-time demonstrators agreed by unanimous consent Sunday evening to pursue other tactics, including the possible picketing of the Proximity Hotel where they expect President Barack Obama to stay tonight during his two-day visit to North Carolina and Virginia.

The group voted to ask Obama to meet tonight with some members — a delegation bearing letters of “individual grievances.”

“We wished to invite you to visit with our assembly and hear why the people gathered here are upset with our government,” the letter said.”

http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/10/17/article/occupy_protesters_look_for_new_campsite

In honor of Obama’s visit to my home state NC, here are 5 questions that we would like answers to:

1. Why did the IL committee you were chairman of in 2003 reduce the members of the IL Health Planning Board from 15 to 9 just before it was rigged by Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich?

2. Who murdered Donald Young, the choirmaster of your church, TUCC?

3. Why have you used numerous US Justice department attorneys and personnel, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?

4. Why did your administration push through federal loan guarantees for Solyndra?

5. What was your involvement in project Fast and Furious?

I have many more questions for you, but this is a good start.

20 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Blagojevich, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Congress, Donald Young, Economy, Election 2012, Eligibility, NC, News, North Carolina, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Rezko, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, US Department of Justice, US economy, US House of Representatives, US Senate, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,