Category Archives: Natural born citizen

Vermont Supreme Court appeal on Obama natural born citizen status, H. Brooke Paige standing, Attorney Todd Daloz flawed arguments, Standing non issue, Constitution and duties ignored

Posted on May 7, 2013 | 126 comments

Vermont Supreme Court appeal on Obama natural born citizen status, H. Brooke Paige standing, Attorney Todd Daloz flawed arguments, Standing non issue, Constitution and duties ignored

“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 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 Elections division protects the integrity of campaigning and elections in Vermont.”…Vermont Secretary of State website

H. Brooke Paige, whose case challenging Obama’s natural born citizen deficiency was rejected by Washington Superior Court Judge Robert Bent on November 2012, appealed his case before the following Vermont Supreme Court Justices on April 23, 2013.

Honorable Paul Reiber, Chief Justice
Honorable John Dooley, Associate Justice
Honorable Marilyn Skoglund, Associate Justice
Honorable Brian Burgess, Associate Justice
Honorable Beth Robinson, Associate Justice

Assistant Attorney General Todd Daloz represented Secretary of State James Condos.

The issue of standing dominated the hearing. Mr. Paige presented a clear definition of natural born citizen. His documentation was minimal. A further analysis of his argument will be provided later.

It is clear that the majority of citizens, including judges, attorneys and politicians do not understand what a Natural Born Citizen is as included in the
Constitution for presidential eligibility.

It is furthermore clear that status quo is passing the buck instead of fulfilling implied and explicit constitutional duties.

It is also clear that Secretary of State James Condos and other secretaries of state and election officials, when confronted by similar challenges about natural born citizen status should have requested clarification from their Attorney Generals and the courts.

Courts have shirked their responsibility, from the US Supreme Court to the state courts.

Marbury v Madison makes this clear.

“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?

Assistant Attorney General Todd Daloz makes the argument that Secretary of State James Condos has no power or duty to vet a candidate.

Oh really?

The states are responsible for the primaries, general election and events leading up to the Electoral College vote.

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under
the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

Manner of voting

§ 8. The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.

All state election officials swear an oath to uphold or defend the US Constitution.

Article VI of the US Constitution.

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislators, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the
United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;”

Some states explicitly provide for challenges by the secretary of state.

GEORGIA CODE
“*** Current Through the 2012 Regular Session ***

TITLE 21. ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 2. ELECTIONS AND PRIMARIES GENERALLY
ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5 (2012)

§ 21-2-5. Qualifications of candidates for federal and state office; determination of qualifications
(a) Every candidate for federal and state office who is certified by the state executive committee of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy
shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.

(b) The Secretary of State upon his or her own motion may challenge the qualifications of any candidate at any time prior to the election of such candidate.
Within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying, any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate may challenge the qualifications of the candidate by
filing a written complaint with the Secretary of State giving the reasons why the elector believes the candidate is not qualified to seek and hold the public
office for which he or she is offering. Upon his or her own motion or upon a challenge being filed, the Secretary of State shall notify the candidate in
writing that his or her qualifications are being challenged and the reasons therefor and shall advise the candidate that he or she is requesting a hearing on
the matter before an administrative law judge of the Office of State Administrative Hearings pursuant to Article 2 of Chapter 13 of Title 50 and shall inform the candidate of the date, time, and place of the hearing when such information becomes available. The administrative law judge shall report his or her findings to the Secretary of State.

(c) The Secretary of State shall determine if the candidate is qualified to seek and hold the public office for which such candidate is offering. If the
Secretary of State determines that the candidate is not qualified, the Secretary of State shall withhold the name of the candidate from the ballot or strike
such candidate’s name from the ballot if the ballots have been printed. If there is insufficient time to strike the candidate’s name or reprint the ballots,
a prominent notice shall be placed at each affected polling place advising voters of the disqualification of the candidate and all votes cast for such
candidate shall be void and shall not be counted.”

Explicit or implied,

Secretary of State James Condos took an oath to uphold the US Constitution.

One of the justices asked if all of the state election officials should be required to vet all of the candidates. That was not the question at hand.

In this case, the Vermont Secretary of State was notified of the problem and refused to act.

Once again, an American courtroom, despite the caution from Marybury v Madison, shirked their duty and tried their best to make this about standing.

Standing is a non issue in this case and they damn well know it!

In fact, at least one justice questioned this.

There are at least 3 reasons why H. Brooke Paige has standing.

1. Vermont election statutes clearly give him standing as a voter. Mr. Paige complied with the protocol.

2. Ruling from a lower court, the Superior Court.

3. The Tenth Amendment. If their argument is that the state does not have the power to challenge, then any citizen does.

Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the
people.

Attorney Daloz tries to obfuscate and minimize the VT elections statutes in regard to Mr. Paige having standing.

Quite the contrary. They are crystal clear.

§ 2603. Contest of elections

“(a) The result of an election for any office, other than for the general assembly, or public question may be contested by any legal voter entitled to vote on the office or public question to be contested.

(b) A contest is initiated by filing a complaint with a superior court alleging:

(1) that errors were committed in the conduct of the election or in count or return of votes, sufficient to change the ultimate result;

(2) that there was fraud in the electoral process, sufficient to change the ultimate result; or

(3) that for any other reason, the result of the election is not valid.

(c) The complaint shall be filed within 15 days after the election in question, or if there is a recount, within 10 days after the court issues its judgment on the recount. In the case of candidates for state or congressional office, for a presidential election, or for a statewide public question, the complaint shall be filed with the superior court, Washington County. In the case of any other candidate or public question, the complaint shall be filed with the superior court in any county in which votes were cast for the office or question being challenged.

(d) The Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure shall apply to contests of elections, except that such cases shall be placed upon a special calendar, and hearings shall be scheduled on a priority basis, as public policy demands that such questions be resolved promptly.

(e) After hearing, the court shall issue findings of fact and a judgment, which shall supersede any certificate of election previously issued. If the court finds just cause, the court shall grant appropriate relief, which may include, without limitation, ordering a recount, or ordering a new election. If during the hearing the court receives credible evidence of criminal conduct, the court shall order a transcript of all or part of the testimony to be forwarded to the proper state’s attorney. If a new election is ordered, the court shall set a date for it, after consulting with the secretary of state; in ordering a new election, the court shall have authority to issue appropriate orders, either to provide for special cases not covered by law, or to supersede provisions of law which may conflict with the needs of the particular situation.

(f) The court shall send a certified copy of its findings of fact and judgment to the secretary of state.”

Here are segments from the court proceedings that relate to Mr. Paige’s argument and compliance and attorney Daloz attempting to prove that Mr. Paige has no standing. Attorney Daloz even further tries to dilute the standing issue by implying that congress should be the arbiter. The states control the election process until the certification of the electoral votes by congress. Only then can congress question eligibility. They have failed to do so.

The entire proceedings can be heard here.

Mr. Paige’s inaccurate statements about Obama’s birth certificate will for the moment be assumed to be based on ignorance and not agenda. This will be explored later.

126 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Eligibility, Judges, Justice, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Marbury V Madison, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

No proof Obama born in Hawaii, Whitehouse.gov image proves nothing, Sheriff Arpaio investigation found fraud, Judge Parker Alabama Supreme Court no evidence Obama natural born citizen

Posted on May 6, 2013 | 29 comments

No proof Obama born in Hawaii, Whitehouse.gov image proves nothing, Sheriff Arpaio investigation found fraud, Judge Parker Alabama Supreme Court no evidence Obama natural born citizen

“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 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

“When asked where I believe Obama was born I answer, I don’t know. There is zero proof he was born in Hawaii. The only evidence of his birth location that we have is much circumstantial evidence and that points to Kenya.”…Citizen Wells

 

There is zero legitimate evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Here is the reason.

A person can be born elsewhere and obtain a “birth certificate” in Hawaii that is recognized as legal in that state. Look it up for yourself.

The image placed on Whitehouse.gov is not the kind most of us are used to seeing. Instead of an embossed stamp and certification that this is an official copy, this image has the following at the bottom:

WhiteHouseGovAbstractVerbage

The phrase “or abstract” disqualifies this as proof positive of being an image of an original.

The Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigation indicates it is worse than that.

From WND May 5, 2013.

“Sheriff Joe injects new life into Obama eligibility”

“A week ago, Democrats quoted late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel in their demand that a challenge to Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president be dismissed.

Now, those raising questions about Obama say they are bringing in professional law-enforcement investigators to shed light on the dispute.

It comes in a case brought by attorney Larry Klayman in which 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish are seeking to force Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.

The case, dismissed at a lower level, is now being appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, where strict constitutionalist Roy Moore was elected chief justice last November. The case becomes all the more intriguing because Moore is on record previously questioning Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president.

Last week, the Democratic Party insisted, “In order for one to accept the claim that President Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery [and that he is ineligible], one has to buy into a conspiracy theory so vast and byzantine that it sincerely taxes the imagination of reasonable minds.”

The document scoffs at “birthers” as a “tiny cabal of zealots” and quotes late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel – not widely recognized as a constitutional expert – to make its case: “These people could have personally witnessed Obama being born out of an apple pie, in the middle of a Kansas wheat field, while Toby Keith sang the National Anthem – and they’d still think he was a Kenyan Muslim.”

Now several blogs whose authors have been documenting the back and forth of the long-running dispute over Obama’s birth place, time – and subsequent eligibility to be president – confirm that Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., and his special Cold Case team lead investigator Mike Zullo will be providing evidence in the arguments.

Arpaio is one of few law enforcement authorities to look into the issue, and he launched his formal Cold Case Posse investigation into Obama’s qualifications at the request of his constituents. Already, Arpaio and Zullo have confirmed that evidence shows the birth documentation released by Obama as proof of his birth in Hawaii is fraudulent.

Their investigation has continued under the radar, and now Cmdr. Charles Kerchner, who brought one of the first legal challenges against Obama during his first term, confirmed that Arizona’s officials will be assisting with evidence in the pending question before the Alabama Supreme Court.

On the site, Zullo is quoted saying, “We recently discovered new irrefutable evidence, which confirms, hands down, the document is a fraud.””

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/sheriff-joe-injects-new-life-into-obama-eligibility/#cK5D6lWwd2q6E11t.99

29 Comments

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

Vermont Supreme Court Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen due to foreign father, H. Brooke Paige, Vattel Law of Nations cited

Posted on May 5, 2013 | 41 comments

Vermont Supreme Court Obama eligibility case, Obama not natural born citizen due to foreign father, H. Brooke Paige, Vattel Law of Nations cited

“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

“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

From the Burlington Free Press April 23, 2013.

“Vt. Supreme Court hears case challenging legality of Barack Obama’s run for re-election”

“President Barack Obama may be the “de facto” president of the United States, but that doesn’t mean he was elected legally, a former Republican U.S. Senate hopeful told the Vermont Supreme Court on Tuesday.

H. Brooke Paige, appearing without a lawyer before the state’s highest court, said Obama does not meet what the framers of the U.S. Constitution meant when they decreed that a person holding the presidency must be a “natural born citizen.”

Paige has contended historical papers that the framers relied on at the time the Constitution was written indicated a natural-born citizen was someone who was born of parents who were both American citizens. Obama’s father, now deceased, was a citizen of Kenya.

The argument was rejected by Washington Superior Court Judge Robert Bent in a ruling in November. Bent, in a seven-page decision, said Paige had no real proof to support his definition of the term natural-born citizen.

Paige, of the town of Washington, appealed to decision to the high court. At Tuesday’s hearing he told the justices he was not challenging Obama’s citizenship, as the so-called “birthers” group has contended.

“Don’t pay any attention to them,” he told the justices. “The birther argument is just a sheer flight of fancy.”

Obama, who was named in Paige’s original lawsuit, was not represented at Tuesday’s hearing. Paige said he was unable to get anyone to successfully serve Obama with his lawsuit, a predicament Justice John Dooley said concerned him.

“How can the court issue an order when he is not a party to the case,” Dooley asked. Paige said Obama “chose not to be present” and that copies of all of the filings in the case had been sent by registered mail to the White House.”

“As the hearing ended, Paige called out to the justices and began walking toward them as they were departing the courtroom, hoping to give each of them copies of “The Law of Nations,” the 867-page book first published in 1773 by Emer de Vattel.

Paige has claimed the framers relied on “The Law of Nations” when they inserted the term natural born citizens into the Constitution as a presidential requirement.”

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013304230018&nclick_check=1

The media and the Obama camp have striven to obfuscate the eligibility issue  and malign anyone questioning Obama. Therefore it comes as no surprise that Mr. Paige ( or possibly the reporter ) made several inaccurate statements.

First of all, no one is questioning Obama’s citizenship. After all, we will give that to anyone.

It is the Natural Born Citizen requirement for the presidency that is the concern. Mr. Paige accurately questions Obama’s status because he did not have 2 US citizen parents.

The other concern is Obama’s birthplace, which has not yet been proven. The Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigation is moving forward with evidence that the purported birth certificate image placed on Whitehouse.gov is fraudulent. It is believed that they will cooperate in a pending Alabama Supreme Court case.

41 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, College records, constitution, Courts, Election 2012, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Founding Fathers, Lawsuits, Marbury V Madison, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Vermont, white house

Tagged , , ,

Arpaio Obama investigator Mike Zullo, April 5, 2013, Carl Gallups radio interview, Criminal investigation moving forward, Obama birth certificate fraudulent

Posted on April 5, 2013 | 30 comments

Arpaio Obama investigator Mike Zullo, April 5, 2013, Carl Gallups radio interview, Criminal investigation moving forward, Obama birth certificate fraudulent

“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

“Barack Obama, show me the college loans.”…Citizen Wells

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Mike Zullo was interviewed and answered questions from Callers on the Carl Gallups radio show on April 5, 2013.

One of the topics that Zullo most responded to and elaborated on was the massive effort by the Obama camp to attempt to discredit anyone questioning Obama and his records. This, along with threats, is why so many “conservatives” in the media and in office shy away from joining in.

Both Mike Zullo and Carl Gallups spoke about RINOs who had backed down because of fear of ridicule or attack.

One caller mentioned John Woodman, a supposed conservative and author, who had offered to help the Arpaio investigation. Zullo echoed what was reported here about Woodman. Woodman is another example of misinformation and someone being touted as an expert when they are not.

When asked about joining forces with Orly Taitz and others Zullo reminded us that his is a criminal investigaiton, with a higher standard of evidence and could not be combined with civil cases. He used the example of the OJ Simpson trials, criminal vs civil.

From Citizen Wells September 2, 2011.

“John Woodman has written and published a book titled “Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?”.”

“The correct description and one that I have adhered to when writing about it is:

Is the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov a photostatic copy of a legitimate long form birth certificate for Obama proving birth in Hawaii?

The difference between these 2 statements is crucial in determining the truth.

Why is this important?

1. An image was placed on WhiteHouse.gov with absolutely no proof of chain of document, one that with a cursory examination is highly suspect. Even if proven to have come from the Hawaii Department of Health, it may simply be an abstract.

2. The Hawaii statutes in 1961 and today allow for a birth certificate for a non Hawaiian birth.

Mr. Woodman makes the following “hasty conclusion” or over generalization on Page 205 of his book:

“How Do The Experts Score?”

“So why do the “for’s” at this point, outnumber the against’s?”
Part of the answer is that a few of the individuals in the “for” group have experience and points of view that may not be adequate for, or not quite applicable to, the task. One is a teenager; one is mostly a business owner; another is mostly a financial specialist; one is a writer of non-technical books.

Another is a typographer working with distorted fonts.”

So business owners are incapable of analysis and drawing proper conclusions? This reminds me of the classic attitude of the left and so called intellectuals.

Mr. Woodman, I am uniquely qualified to offer my analysis.

Some of Mr. Woodman’s assertions are wrong or misleading.

From Page 207:

“Dr. Corsi has publicly promoted, either in writing or on the radio, at least twenty-three evidence-of-fraud theories that we cover in this book.
In writing and speaking about his own theories as well as those of others, he has publicly identified the following as potential indicators of fraud:

the nature of the layers
alleged editing of items on the certificate
the white halo
the duplicated characters
the date stamps
the “scanner with x-ray vision
the altered PDF posted at archiveindex.com by Doug Vogt
the supposed kerning
comparison with the “African birth” forgery
the supposed lack of text curvature
the apparent lack of a seal
the alignment of Ann Dunham Obama’s signature
the supposed existence of “hidden text”
the idea that a different document exists
the out-of-sequence birth certificate number
Paul Irey’s theory of different typefaces
the supposed misspelling of the word “THE”
the supposed “smiley face” in the signature stamp
the supposed record of the forger’s initials
the supposed lack of hospital records for Mrs. Obama
the discrepancy in Barack Obama, Sr,’s age
the allegations by Tim Adams
and the idea that Governor Abercrombie had stated that no birth certificate existed.

As we have seen, not a single one of these twenty-three alleged indicators or “proofs” that the document is a fraud or invalid really holds up under close examination..
Not one.”

Semantics! If we strictly look at only the image on WhiteHouse.gov as being tampered with, then perhaps Mr. Woodman can get away with this, although it makes me question his motives. Some of the items above are certainly open to inspection and questioning. However, if our objective is to ascertain whether or not the image represents a legitimate birth certificate, then Tim Adams affidavit and Governor Abercrombie’s statements are highly relevant. And has Mr. Woodman viewed any hospital records for Stanley and little Obama?

On page 217 Mr. Woodman states:

“Also weighing against the idea of a forgery is the fact that any conspiracy  would need to involve:

high officials in Hawaii state government (most likely, stretching across two gubernatorial administrations of both parties)

lower-level Department of Health staff.

probably at least one official from the White House

most likely some intelligence agency personnel

and Barack Obama himself.

As the number of people required for the conspiracy to work goes up, the likelihood of a successful conspiracy goes down.
Nonetheless, I will admit that it’s possible to believe that a fraud has been committed.”

Tim Adams, documented as having worked in the Honolulu elections office in 2008, has signed an affidavit stating that there was no birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii than and that it was common knowledge. Governor Abercrombie stated that he could find no birth certifcate for Obama. Only a notation.

Tim Adams and Governor Abercrombie may not relate to the image being a fraud, but they certainly do to Obama being one.

Mr. Woodman spends much of his efforts trying to debunk the layers and anomalies pointed out by others. He may be correct about some of his assertions. His explanation for most of this is a software program. By doing so, he is in fact proving that the image is not a photostatic copy.

He further compares the image to that of certified copies for the Nordyke twins. He states that they are from the same type of forms. However, the biggest difference between the 2 images is that the Nordyke twins certificates have a stamped seal and verbage that states:

“This certifies that the above is a true and correct copy of the original record on file.”

The WhiteHouse.com image has the following:

“I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of health.”  Alvin T. Onaki, Ph.D.

Abstract: “The term abstract is subject to different meanings, but in a legal sense, it refers to an abbreviated history of an official record

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/09/02/john-woodman-book-is-barack-obamas-birth-certificate-a-fraud-citizen-wells-analysis-and-review-another-messenger-shooter-woodmans-motivation/

30 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, media, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records

Obama alleged birth certificate on WhiteHouse.gov Arpaio investigation update April 5, 2013, MIke Zullo interview, Image not proof, Zero court worthy evidence, Abstract invalidates as proof

Posted on April 5, 2013 | 19 comments

Obama alleged birth certificate on WhiteHouse.gov Arpaio investigation update April 5, 2013, MIke Zullo interview, Image not proof, Zero court worthy evidence, Abstract invalidates as proof

“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

“Barack Obama, show me the college loans.”…Citizen Wells

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

You have been lied to by Obama and most in the mainstream media, including Fox News.

You have been told repeatedly, in a manner consistent with “1984” that Obama was born in Hawaii, that the image placed on WhiteHouse.gov by someone is a valid birth certificate and that anyone who questions Obama’s eligibility is a “birther.”

Mike Zullo, the lead investigator for Sheriff Joe Arpaio in the Obama records scrutiny, will be interviewed today about the progress. More on that below.

I am not just another blogger. I am an expert on computers and business systems. I also have a math/science background and have moved in the legal world as well.

What I am presenting here I have reported before. It is worth repeating for several good reasons.

The image placed on WhiteHouse.gov.

WhiteHouseGovBC

The verbage at the bottom is crucial.

WhiteHouseGovAbstractVerbage

The words “or abstract” will disqualify the image in a court of law as proof positive of a Hawaii birth for Obama. Why? Because per Hawaii law ( check it for yourself ) you can be born elsewhere and have your birth data recorded in Hawaii just as if you were born there.

Despite what you may have heard, Obama has not presented evidence in a court of law that he was born in Hawaii. The image above has also not been allowed as evidence in court to be challenged for authenticity.

From Birther Report April 5, 2013.

“Live Stream: Sheriff Joe’s Lead Investigator Set To Release New Obama Identity Fraud Info”

“Listen Live: Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Lead Investigator Mike Zullo
Set To Release New Obama Identity Document Fraud Information”

“Mike Zullo will appear and take calls on Carl Gallups radio show today (Friday) from 5:00 PM ET – 7:00 PM ET.”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/04/audio-zullo-updates-obama-fraud-case.html

19 Comments

Posted in 1984, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election 2012, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, fraud, Hawaii, Lawsuits, Lies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Orwell, Orwellian, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , ,

Obama eligibility appeal filed in Judge Roy Moore’s Alabama Supreme Court, Attorney Larry Klayman, Secretary of State Beth Chapman failed to verify, Moore expressed doubts about Obama

Posted on April 1, 2013 | 25 comments

Obama eligibility appeal filed in Judge Roy Moore’s Alabama Supreme Court, Attorney Larry Klayman, Secretary of State Beth Chapman failed to verify, Moore expressed doubts about Obama

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“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

From Attorney Larry Klayman April 2013.

“Obama eligibility appeal in Roy Moore’s court”

“Many cases challenging Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility have come and gone, but now an appeal has been filed with a state Supreme Court led by a newly elected chief justice who has expressed doubt about Obama’s qualification for office.
Roy Moore was elected chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court last November, a decade after he defied a federal order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the state Supreme Court building.
Now, 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish are asking the state’s highest court to force Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.
Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of the Washington, D.C.-watch dog Judicial Watch and now head of Freedom Watch, filed the appeal Tuesday with the Alabama Supreme Court, asking for oral arguments.
“We are hopeful that Chief Justice Moore and the rest of the jurists on the Alabama Supreme Court will follow the law,” Klayman told WND.
Klayman says he and his team “have great respect for Chief Justice Moore and his integrity and legal acumen.”
“He is one courageous and brave man. There are few in this country.”
The case is an appeal of a dismissal by the Montgomery Circuit Court.
In his brief, Klayman says “credible evidence and information from an official source” was presented to Chapman before the election indicating Obama might not have been qualified for Oval Office.
The complaint argues Chapman failed her constitutional duty as secretary of state to verify the eligibility of candidates.
Moore is on the record questioning Obama’s eligibility.
In an interview with WND in 2010, he defended Lt. Col Terrence Lakin’s demand that President Obama prove his eligibility as commander in chief as a condition of obeying deployment orders.
Moore said he had seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a natural-born citizen and much evidence that suggests he is not.
Moore said Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty.”
“And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful,” he said.
‘Affirmative duty’
Klayman asserts the secretary of state “has an affirmative duty that stems from her oath of office under both the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions, to protect the citizens from fraud and other misconduct by candidates.”
As a result of her refusal to investigate the qualifications of candidates for president, Klayman says, “a person believed to be unqualified for that office has been elected.”
The remedy, he said, “is to require each candidate to do what every teenager is required to do to get a learner’s permit.”
“It is to produce a bona fide birth certificate … and the Secretary of State is the official to cause that to happen.”
McInnish is a member of the Madison County Republican Executive Committee and also sits on the state Republican Executive Committee.
Citing the investigation of Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse, Klayman says Chapman “gained knowledge from an official source that there was probable cause to believe the Barack Obama had not met a certifying qualification.”
The appeal brief notes McInnish visited the secretary of state’s office Feb. 2, 2012, and spoke with the deputy secretary of state, Emily Thompson, in Chapman’s absence.
Thompson, the brief says, “represented that her office would not investigate the legitimacy of any candidate, thus violating her duties under the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions.”
As WND reported, Arpaio and his team concluded that Obama’s long-form birth certificate was a computer-generated forgery.
Klayman, in a previous brief, argued the secretary of state, “having the power to certify candidates, can surely de-certify – in effect disqualify – them if they are found to be ineligible.”
In his new appeal, Klayman points, as an example, to California Secretary of State Debra Bowen’s rejection of Petra Lindsay on the 2012 California primary ballot because she was 27 years old. The U.S. Constitution requires the president to be at least 35.
In his conclusion, Klayman argues the fact that the election is over does not make the case moot.
“It would be paradoxical beyond measure if the real and grave question of the legitimacy of the de facto President, a question which lies at the very heart of our American Constitutional Government, were left unresolved for want of the simplest of documents, a birth certificate.”
If either a bona fide birth certificate is produced or an admission is made that it does not exist, he writes, “this most important of legal questions will have been answered, the purity of Alabama’s ballot maintained, and the anxiety of Alabama citizens stilled.”
If the issue is not resolved, he said, citizens will be left with the impression “that their government was dysfunctional and has ignored their real concerns.
‘Certain documentation’
In an earlier step in the case one year ago, before a panel of Alabama Supreme Court justices, one justice raised doubts about Obama’s eligibility.
The justices denied a petition filed by McInnish seeking to require Obama submit an original birth certificate before he could be placed on the state’s 2012 ballot.
Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.
“Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”
The “certain documentation” is the findings of Arpaio’s investigation.
“The Alabama Constitution implies that this court is without jurisdiction over McInnish’s original petition,” Parker explained. “The office of the secretary of state of Alabama is not a ‘court of inferior jurisdiction’ that this court may control through the issuance of a writ in response to a petition.”
Now, however, the case is coming from a lower court.
‘Obama violated the Constitution’
Moore told WND in an interview after his election last November that the country must return to a standard in which the rule of law prevails over politics.
He said Obama violated the Constitution when he bombed Libya, because the Constitution stipulates only Congress shall declare war.
“No president has the power to violate constitutional restraints of power,” Moore said.
“The Constitution is the rule of law, and [my job is] to uphold the rule of law.”
Government’s job, Moore said, is to secure and protect those rights.
“There is little regard for the Constitution in the courts today, even the U.S. Supreme Court.””

25 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Judges, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, US Constitution

Tagged , , ,

Sean Hannity Ted Cruz interview, Presidential hopefuls, Hannity questions Cruz Canadian birth, Carl Cameron Cruz not eligible, Obama not natural born citizen

Posted on March 20, 2013 | 40 comments

Sean Hannity Ted Cruz interview, Presidential hopefuls, Hannity questions Cruz Canadian birth, Carl Cameron Cruz not eligible, Obama not natural born citizen

“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

“There is zero authentic evidence that Obama was US born and strong circumstantial evidence that Obama was born in Kenya.”…Citizen Wells

“But Cruz was born in Canada and is constitutionally ineligible.”…Carl Cameron Fox News

Sean Hannity on Fox News recently interviewed Texas Senator Tom Cruz about a possible presidential run in 2016. Hannity brings up the fact that Cruz was born in Canada and may not be eligible.

Carl Cameron on Fox News recently  commented about presidential hopefuls and in regard to Ted Cruz made the following statrement:

“But Cruz was born in Canada and is constitutionally ineligible.”

Thank you Carl Cameron. Now if we can only get you to challenge Obama’s eligibility.

Sean Hannity, et al. There are multiple sources that explain why Senator Ted Cruz is not eligible for the presidency. The US Constitution with it’s grandfather clause is one. However, we have a recent ruling from the FEC that makes it crystal clear that Cruz is ineligible.

“From the FEC October 1, 2012.

DISTRICT COURT ISSUES OPINION IN HASSAN v. FEC

WASHINGTON – The United States District Court for the District of Columbia on Friday issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order in Hassan v. FEC (Case 1:11-cv-02189-EGS). The text of the Memorandum Opinion may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_memo_opinion.pdf) and the text of the Order may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_order2.pdf).”

“Hassan’s challenge to the Fund Act rests on his contention
that the natural born citizen requirement has been implicitly
repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court need
not repeat the thorough and persuasive opinions issued by its
colleagues in at least five other jurisdictions, all of whom
determined that the natural born citizen requirement has not
been implicitly repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/abdul-karim-hassan-vs-fec-ruling-october-1-2012-presidential-election-campaign-fund-act-natural-born-citizen-requirement-not-repealed-by-5th-14th-amendments/

Also, remember, John McCain was a citizen with 2 US citizen parents, but he was challenged because of his birth location.

Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008, which Barack Obama signed, states:

“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.”

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/sres511/text

Sean Hannity, perhaps you can be a little more forceful and accurate when interviewing presidential hopefuls.

Thanks to commenter GORDO.

40 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election, Election 2016, Election Law, Eligibility, Fox news, media, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Sean Hannity, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Natural born citizen controversy over, Constitution FEC ruling Senate Resolution 511 and founding fathers provide answer, Politico The Blaze Media and politicians clueless

Posted on March 16, 2013 | 96 comments

Natural born citizen controversy over, Constitution FEC ruling Senate Resolution 511 and founding fathers provide answer, Politico The Blaze Media and politicians clueless

“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 did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

I have reported several Obama controversies from early in 2008. The Larry Sinclair Obama sex and drug encounter, Obama’s ties to Rezko and corruption in Chicago and Illinois and Obama’s eligibility deficiencies and efforts to hide his records.

I do not often report on the eligibility issue but I have kept the Hassan vs FEC rulings in the forefront for a reason. The FEC has helped to clear up some of the confusion regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen. This also explains why Obama refused matching funds from the FEC in 2008. He was not eligible for matching funds or the presidency.

The Obots, imbeciles in the biased mainstream media and politicians were either confused, ignorant and/or biased in 2008 when Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen was questioned. Many of them used the terms citizen, naturalized citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably. If Obama had requested matching funds from the FEC, as he had promised to do, his eligibility would have been challenged, as was Abdul Hassan’s.

There is no more controversy.

The US Constitution is a good starting point. It 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 . . . .”

This confirms that citizen is not equivalent to natural born citizen.

The FEC ruling against Abdul Hassan on September 2, 2011 states:

“No, as a naturalized American citizen, Mr. Hassan is not eligible to receive
presidential matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act (“Matching Payment Act”).

The United States Constitution provides that “[n]o 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 . . . .” U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 1, cl. 5.”

Click to access AO%202011-15.pdf

Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008, which Barack Obama signed, states:

“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 193”

McCain had 2 US citizen parents. Lawyers and legislators must be specific in what they include and omit.

The founding fathers, some of whom were trained in the law, had a clear understanding of what a natural born citizen is and that is why they had to be grandfathered in.

Case closed!

We have come to expect biased reporting from Politico and of course The Blaze, owned by Glenn Beck, who is clueless regarding Obama’s eligibility, predictably mis reporting on the Natural Born Citizen clause.

From The Blaze January 8, 2013.

“POLITICO WONDERS: IS TX SEN. TED CRUZ A ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’ ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR THE U.S. PRESIDENCY?”

“Only one week into his tenure as a Texas senator, Ted Cruz, 42, is already drawing presidential murmurs. While it’s certainly too early to tell what sort of leader Cruz will be, in practical terms, Politico raised a larger issue on Monday evening. Based on the fact that the politician was born to an American mother and a Cuban father in Canada, the outlet wondered if he is eligible to run for the American presidency.

The question at the center of the discussion is hypothetical at this juncture, as there’s no indication that the new senator is interested in the role. According to some, the fact that he was born outside of the U.S. could cause constitutional complications and uncertainties that would potentially cloud a candidacy. However, there is no precedent to examine that answers the viability question definitively. Politico explains:

While there’s no legal precedent for Cruz’s situation, most constitutional scholars surveyed by POLITICO believe the 42-year-old tea party sensation would be OK. But there’s just enough gray area to stoke controversy, as Cruz learned during his campaign for Senate last year.”

“Despite this analysis, it’s important to remember that Cruz is a newly-minted congressman. There’s no indication that he’s interested or seeking the presidency and such prospects, even if he does show an inclination, are years away. Still, on a grander scale, the discussion about natural born citizenship is pertinent — and one that seems continually unresolved.”

Read more:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/08/politico-wonders-is-tx-sen-ted-cruz-a-natural-born-citizen-eligible-to-run-for-the-u-s-presidency/

Huh???

What is going on at American Thinker? Too much Orwellian brainwashing?

Thanks to Obama Release Your Records for calling them out.

“Last Word: American Thinker Pushes Leftist Myth 14th Amendment Citizen Is Natural Born Citizen”

“Note to American Thinker’s Ken Blackwell, Bob Morrison, and J.R. Dunn.
If you don’t like Article II of the Constitution then seek to have it
amended. Crapping all over it and misleading your readers is
disgusting and shameful. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal are
citizens of the United States but they are not “natural born Citizens”
of the United States. See here and here.

Either you three are the stupidest fools on the planet or you are
purposely misleading the readers of American Thinker. And judging by
the lashings you’re receiving in the comment threads they clearly are
not stupid. Again, if you don’t like the Article II requirement then
have it amended. Articles in question declaring several potential, and
ineligible, presidential candidates eligible, here and here.

You say:
“Consider this historical question: Could it have been the original
intent of the Founders to disqualify themselves from serving as
president? It was not until Martin Van Buren, eighth president, that
we elected a man who had been born an American citizen.”

I was going to point out the Grandfather Clause to you but your reader
Countryman did it for me:”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/03/american-thinker-pushes-leftist-myth.html

96 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, FEC, Founding Fathers, Government, Lawyers, media, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, US Senate, Washington DC, white house

Abdul Karim Hassan vs Federal Election Commission, March 11, 2013, U S Court of Appeals Per Curiam Order, Hassan not Natural Born Citizen

Posted on March 11, 2013 | 15 comments

Abdul Karim Hassan vs Federal Election Commission, March 11, 2013, U S Court of Appeals Per Curiam Order, Hassan not Natural Born Citizen

“Moreover, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the distinction between natural born citizens and naturalized citizens in the context of
Presidential eligibility remains valid.”…Hassan vs FEC

“Because the natural born citizen requirement has not been explicitly or implicitly repealed, Hassan’s challenge to that provision, and the Fund Act’s incorporation thereof, must fail.”…Hassan vs FEC

“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

 

 

From the FEC March 11, 2013.

APPEALS COURT ISSUES PER CURIAM ORDER IN HASSAN v. FEC

WASHINGTON – The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit today issued its Per Curiam Order inHassan v. FEC (Case 1:11-cv-02189-EGS). The text of the Order may be found here: (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_ac_order2.pdf).

Background.

From Citizen Wells October 1, 2012.

“From the FEC October 1, 2012.

DISTRICT COURT ISSUES OPINION IN HASSAN v. FEC

WASHINGTON – The United States District Court for the District of Columbia on Friday issued its Memorandum Opinion and Order in Hassan v. FEC (Case 1:11-cv-02189-EGS). The text of the Memorandum Opinion may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_memo_opinion.pdf) and the text of the Order may be found here (http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/hassan_dc_order2.pdf).

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is an independent regulatory agency that administers and enforces federal campaign finance laws. The FEC has jurisdiction over the financing of campaigns for the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, the Presidency and the Vice Presidency. Established in 1975, the FEC is composed of six Commissioners who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

http://www.fec.gov/press/press2012/20121001_Hassan_v._FEC.shtml

Exerpts:
“Hassan’s challenge to the Fund Act rests on his contention
that the natural born citizen requirement has been implicitly
repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Court need
not repeat the thorough and persuasive opinions issued by its
colleagues in at least five other jurisdictions, all of whom
determined that the natural born citizen requirement has not
been implicitly repealed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

“Moreover, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the distinction between natural born citizens and naturalized citizens in the context of
Presidential eligibility remains valid.”

“Because the natural born citizen requirement has not been explicitly or implicitly repealed, Hassan’s challenge to that provision, and the Fund Act’s incorporation thereof, must fail.””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/abdul-karim-hassan-vs-fec-ruling-october-1-2012-presidential-election-campaign-fund-act-natural-born-citizen-requirement-not-repealed-by-5th-14th-amendments/

 

 

 

15 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Court of Appeals, FEC, Judges, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution

Tagged , , , ,

Judge Roy Moore sworn in,January 11, 2013, Ten Commandment judge returns, God and scripture references, No convincing evidence that Obama is a natural born citizen

Posted on January 13, 2013 | 54 comments

Judge Roy Moore sworn in,January 11, 2013, Ten Commandment judge returns, God and scripture references, No convincing evidence that Obama is a natural born citizen

“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

“Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty,” Moore said. “And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful.”

Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.

“This is the strangest thing indeed. The president has never produced [evidence] in the face of substantial evidence he was not born in our country. People are accepting it blindly based on their feelings, not on the law,” he said.

“They can’t fool all of the people all of the time, and that’s what they’re trying to do,” he said.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“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

From AL.com January 11, 2013.

“Ten Commandment judge returns: Roy Moore sworn in as Alabama’s chief justice”

“In a ceremony heavy on references to God and scripture, Roy Moore took the oath of office today as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.

Moore was joined by many relatives and a number of classmates from the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, where he graduated in 1969.

An overflow crowd attended the investiture ceremony at the state judicial building to see Moore return to the office roughly nine years after he was removed for his refusal to follow a federal judge’s order to remove a Ten Commandments monument that Moore had placed in the state judicial building. Moore has said that order was wrong.

He did not mention the controversy during today’s speech. He did quote George Washington from an inaugural address on the subject of acknowledging God.

“It was right then to acknowledge God. And it will continue to be so,” Moore said.
He also said the foundation of the judicial system was laid in Deuteronomy 1:16-17.
“We’ve got to remember that most of what we do in court comes from some scripture or is backed by scripture,” Moore said.
More than 100 people watched the ceremony from an overflow area on closed-circuit television.

Tommy Bryan, a member of the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals since 2005, was sworn in as an associate Supreme Court justice.

Bryan was elected to fill the seat vacated by Justice Thomas Woodall, who retired.

Moore was sworn in Circuit Judge John Bentley from the state’s 25th Judicial Circuit, which includes Marion and Winston counties. Bentley attended West Point with Moore. Bentley introduced a number of other West Point graduates who came to Montgomery for Moore’s swearing in.

Justice Michael Bolin swore in Bryan, whom he called one of his best friends.
C.O. Grinstead, pastor of Trinity Baptist Church in Oxford, drove to Montgomery to see Moore sworn in. He said Moore was a long-time friend.

“I’m thankful he ran and that is not a derogatory statement against the previous chief justice,” Grinstead said. “I just think the name Roy Moore is a statement in itself against crime and something for great morality.””
http://blog.al.com/montgomery/2013/01/ten_commandment_judge_returns.html

From WND September 20, 2010.

“Battle-scarred judge says Lakin decision ignores Constitution”

” The military judge who curiously noted without explanation that uncovering evidence about President Obama’s birth records could prove “embarrassing” and denied an officer the right to obtain potentially exculpatory evidence in a court-martial simply has forgotten the Constitution, the supreme rule of the United States.

So says Judge Roy Moore, who battled the politically correct climate as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court a decade ago and ultimately was removed from office by a state panel that refused to review the constitutionality of a federal court order.

His comments came today in an interview with WND about Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who yesterday was denied permission by Army Col. Denise R. Lind to obtain evidence that could document Obama is not eligible to occupy the Oval Office.

Lakin refused to follow his latest deployment orders to go to Afghanistan, because he was unable through Army channels to document Obama’s eligibility, and the president himself has declined opportunities to do so.

Judge Moore, who now operates through the Foundation for Moral Law, has personal experience with challenging the powers that be to follow the Constitution. His dispute centered on a Ten Commandments display he put in a state building to recognize the God who inspired the Founders of America.

A federal judge opined that the monument shouldn’t be there and ordered its removal. Moore refused and ultimately was removed from office by a state commission that he says “blindly” followed the order without evaluating its legitimacy.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential-eligibility mystery!

With her decision, Lind mirrored a number of federal judges who have ruled on civil lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility. They have without exception denied the plaintiffs’ access to any requested documentation regarding the president’s eligibility.

Lind ruled that it was “not relevant” for the military to be considering such claims, that the laws allegedly violated by Lakin were legitimate on their face and that the chain of command led up to the Pentagon, and that should have been sufficient for Lakin.

Moore said the ruling is a symptom of a judiciary across the nation that now believes in following “blindly.”

“The highest law in this country is not the order of the Supreme Court of the U.S., not the order of the commander in chief, or any subordinate officer,” he said.

Instead, it is the Constitution, which in this particular case demands that the president be a “natural born citizen,” a requirement not imposed on other officers.

There have been dozens of lawsuits and challenges over the fact that Obama’s eligibility never has been documented. The “Certification of Live Birth” his campaign posted online is a document that Hawaii has made available to those not born in the state.

“Lt. Col. Lakin has every right to question the lawfulness of the orders of the commander in chief. He’s not only the commander in chief, he dictates the whole war effort, as shown by the recent firing of [Gen. Stanley McChrystal],” Moore said.

It doesn’t matter, he said, that orders come from a colonel, or a general or even the Pentagon.

“The same thing applies in the military as in the judicial system,” he explained. “The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it’s not the order of a higher officer, not the order of a judge.”

Lind found that since Congress allocates money for the war effort and the Pentagon was created, an order tracing back to the military hierarchy should have been sufficient for Lakin.

“That’s wrong,” Moore said. “They’re not the commander in chief.

“No order in the military can be issued without the authority that backs the order. The president didn’t give the order, but he is the authority that backs the order,” he said.

With the current protocol to simply follow orders, Moore warned, the U.S. will develop more incidents like that involving Lt. William Calley in Vietnam. The atrocities of My Lai were carried out under the guise of “following orders,” Moore noted.

Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty,” Moore said. “And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful.”

Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.

“This is the strangest thing indeed. The president has never produced [evidence] in the face of substantial evidence he was not born in our country. People are accepting it blindly based on their feelings, not on the law,” he said.

“They can’t fool all of the people all of the time, and that’s what they’re trying to do,” he said.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2010/09/199001/#lbsZ5CFlGZtGHvzd.99

54 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, Election Law, Eligibility, Judges, Justice, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution

Tagged , , , , ,