Last Night on the O’Reilly factor on Fox, Bill O’Reilly and two fawning females belittled Dr. Orly Taitz and millions of Americans who support the US Constitution and want proof that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen. Commenter Jacqlyn Smith of this blog has presented a video that explains Obama’s eligibility issues in a manner that even Bill O’Reilly can understand.
From the Youtube video:
“Life and Liberty PAC presents the Proof Positive Series with Molotov Mitchell. In this fifth episode, Molotov takes a closer look at the people Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman call “kooks” and “cowards”, Dr. Alan Keyes and Maj. Stefan Cook.”
“Proof Positive: Just Some Guy”
“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”…Proverbs 16:18
“There is an epidemic of shooting the messenger in this country.”…Citizen Wells
Bill O’Reilly, who has a sinecure, maligned Orly Taitz and anyone questioning the eligibility of Barack Obama last night, October 27, 2009, on his Fox TV show.
O’Reilly is well known for being a pompous ass.
Last night, Bill O’Reilly was a coward.
Neither O’Reilly or his female fawners, who agreed the case was frivolous and that Orly Taitz deserved what she got, have done sufficient research to make an intelligent, informed comment on the subject. I criticize Bill O’Reilly for pontificating on a subject that he knows little about.
I also criticize O’Reilly for shooting the messenger.
Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, concerned active and retired military, myself, commenters on this blog and millions of concerned Americans are not the guilty party in this matter. Barack Obama is guilty.
Barack Obama
His father was Kenyan and a British Citizen.
Obama has not provided a long form birth certificate.
Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of someone’s money to fight proving eligibility.
Obama has consistently lied to the American people.
Obama is entangled in Chicago and IL corruption and should be indicted.
Obama’s further control of federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should alarm everyone.
So, Bill O’Reilly, quit shooting the messenger and do your damn job. After all, the Obama administration continues to shoot Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.
O’Reilly, you coward, try picking on me. I am a natural born citizen of the US, close to your age, male, with a strong business background. I have thoroughly researched Obama’s background and eligibility issues and written about it. I am not receiving a large salary for doing this. I simply care about this country.
I hereby challenge Bill O’Reilly to a battle of facts.
I will, of course, be attacking an unarmed opponent.
Bill O’Reilly, please explain why concerned Americans should not boycott your show.
And now for the response from Captain Pamela Barnett, a lead plaintiff in one of Taitz’ cases:
“(Oct. 28, 2009) — She was a captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to Military Intelligence; but now retired she’s fighting a war on two fronts.
Captain Pamela Barnett is lead plaintiff in a case that could lead to the removal and life-time imprisonment of Barack Hussein Obama on charges of high-crimes, election fraud, campaign fraud, and a laundry list of campaign financing violations.
But Captain Barnett is not shirking her duty to defend her fellow Plaintiffs in the case: no, she is rebutting the lies and falsehoods promoted by the widely followed, but often errant and politically correct, Bill O’Reilly of Fox News.”
“From Captain Pamela Barnett to Bill O’Reilly – October 28, 2009
I challenge you Mr. O’Reilly to interview me..
I am Captain Pamela Barnett U.S. Army Retired of Barnett v. Barack Obama.
I am sick and tired of you defaming our lawsuit and our attorney against the Resident in the Whitehouse Obama. 48 plaintiffs mostly military retired have brought this lawsuit to force the production of Obama’s vital records to determine if he is in fact a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN which is one of the requirements to be a legal POTUS and NOT an illegal USURPER. There is also a huge amount of information regarding fraud that Obama committed before being illegally sworn in as POTUS.
IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE TRUTH AT ALL.. YOU WILL CALL ME…
FROM WHAT I CAN SEE OF YOUR SHOW, THE TRUTH DOES NOT SEEM TO MATTER TO YOU OR THE REST OF THE SHILLS AT FOX. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE ONLY A COMMENTATOR, BUT AT LEAST GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE HURTING OUR CASE AND PROPAGATING LIES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Some of the initial comments on the Citizen Wells blog after O’Reilly’s remarks:
“How are these people like Lis, Bill, and Kimberly, on Fox, going to explain themselves to the public after Kerchner gets Obama thrown to the curb.
After hearing those idiots say Obama is legitimate I hope Obama is removed from office just so I can see the expressions on their faces, it will be priceless.”
bob strauss
“OWrongly just made me throw up a little in my mouth. How ignorant can he be? And that blond dimwit. It’s been repeatedly proved Obotomy was born in Hawaii? Looked into by Congress? WHAT???? And then they don’t even know what Natural Born even means? I don’t know why anyone watches that show.”
Paulajal
“O’Reilly sucks!”
zachjonesishome
“O’reilly sucks and double sucks!!
I stopped watching long time ago when he talked down to his audience and being an ex-teacher, as my daddy would say, ‘that don’t set right with me’.”
JJ
“O’Reilly has gotten way to big for his britches. That “nose up in the air” arrogance sickens me and reminds me of someone else we all know.”
Teedee
“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.”
bob strauss
“Yepppers,…. I have been losing my respect for o’reilly,……. this really nailed it shut. I have sent him emails telling him to find out the truth,…. but, it seems that he wants to remain ignorant on the facts of obamas birth. I will email him again and tell him he needs to change the name of his show. NO – SPIN…… what a joke.”
joyceaz
“Watched O’Reilly’s comments on Orly, I have been studying on this ever since. The comments were not fair or balanced. NOW Orly or one of her reps. should contact the No Spine Zone and have the opportunity to defend herself with the truth! The Big Leprachan is a know it all”
carmen
“joyceaz, Bill needs to change the name of his show to “The Spin Zone”.”
bob strauss
“After the 3 against 1 on O’Reilly I believe she should be on this week!”
carmen
“OK – O’Reilly was the show that started my turn from uninformed democrat to a strong conservative and for about the last year – I can hardly stand him. Now – he is dead to me. YKWIM
Thanks Venice and SueK for the welcome.”
DenisetheMenace
“Did anyone really expect anything different from O’Reilly?”
SueK
“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.
Thanks Bob. So it came down to an “O’Bloviate” segment only. Figures. He loves macho soundbites – but he’s definitely been looking old lately plus losing the hair more and more. They should give Beck his slot and put Lou Dobbs in Beck’s. None of them want to commit to the eligibility question though because they just don’t know Constitutional law or care and want to wait ’til the patriots get all bloodied up – then report it later and take the credit.”
Observer
“They have something on O’Reilly. There are too many reaasons why Obama’s COLB is suspect for him not to elaborate at all. They have something on him.”
Paxson
Additional comments from American citizens who are far more informed than O’Reilly:
“Obama law tab up to $1.7 million
‘Grassroots army’ contributions used to crush eligibility lawsuits?
“He’s full of it because those records were sealed shortly after Barky went to visit the dying Gramma Dunham. Does he really want us to believe that the State of Hawaii gave HIM the birth certificate?
He thinks we’re stupid; he has another thing coming.
Ratings or blackmail…take your pick. I’ll bet you a donut that he won’t consent to having Orly on to rebut his garbage.
Smug bastid.”
SueK
“His eyes go cross eyed when he even has the balls to bring this up. He says that he vetted it, but won’t publicly go into how he vetted it. He said that the state of Hawaii gave him a copy of the birth certificate (not certification). He said that he could find out the name of the hospital that President Obama was born in “tomorrow” (if he so chose). He’s a frigging liar. You can see it all over his face and he is being “black mailed” or his hands are tied to elaborate. Any normal person looking at this issue can see that something is up. Camille Paglia, noted LIBERAL, even accepts this fact. They can only keep their thumb in the whole of the dam for so much longer. They think we are stupid, and in the long run (whether during Obama’s term, or afterwards) the truth will be known. All of their careers will be over at that point.”
Paxson
“I am suspect about O’really picking Orly for a segment. At the very least I thought it would have simply been a gratuitous move.
No doubt it was meant to discredit her and the “movement.”
This on the heels of Judge Carter’s recent new hire. I can’t help but question if it’s not part of a bigger plan being implemented incrementally.”
JustMe
“I think O’Reilly is a jerk and I don’t like to watch him. He obviously is uninformed of what a NBC is and he thinks he knows it all. They like to discredit those who are trying to find out the truth because he thinks he knows the truth and says BO was born in HI so that makes him NBC. I don’t like O’Reilly. He is a fake conservative. He does not care about the country or the constitution, but he discredits those who do. He is lousy. I also think that Lou Dobbs should switch places with him.”
speedy
“BOYCOTT O’REILLY and let people know”
carmen
“O YOUR A PINHEAD!!!NEVER WILL WATCH HIM AGAIN!!!!”
GBAmerica
Just in from Charles Kerchner, plaintiff in Kerchner V Obama, October 27, 2009.
“Kerchner Appeal Filed with Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA
This is to give notice that today, Tuesday, October 27, 2009, at 2:19 p.m., I filed an appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA of Judge Jerome B. Simandle’s dismissal of the Kerchner et al. v. Obama & Congress et al. case.
Recently, the Hon. Jerome B. Simandle decided the Kerchner case, granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. As I explained, through the dismissal, Judge Simandle avoided having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible for the Office of President and Commander in Chief.
In the Kerchner complaint/petition, we allege that Obama has not conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. More importantly, we also allege that he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because when Obama was born his father was a British subject/citizen and Obama himself was the same, citing E. Vattel’s, The Law of Nations (1758) and John Jay’s letter of 1787 to then-General George Washington regarding providing a strong check on keeping foreign influence out of the Office of Commander in Chief by requiring that only a “natural born Citizen” occupy that critical and powerful office. As a naturalized citizen cannot be President because of being born subject to a foreign power, neither can Obama. It is important to understand that the Court did not rule in the Kerchner case that Obama has conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. It is also important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Rather, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ case because of jurisdiction (Article III standing and prudential standing) and the political question doctrine without commenting on the underlying merits of whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. The Court also did not rule that the plaintiffs’ claims are frivolous. By the Court finding that plaintiffs do not have standing and that their claims present a political question, the Court was able to avoid having to address the underlying merits of the Kerchner case. With such a decision, the American People unfortunately still do not know where Obama was born and whether he is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore constitutionally eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.
A court cannot refuse to hear a case on the merits merely because it prefers not to due to grave social or political ramifications. As I have shown in my essay entitled, http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/real-kerchner-v-obama-congress-case-is.html, the Court’s opinion dismissing the Kerchner complaint/petition did not address the real Kerchner case but rather looked for a way to dismiss the case without having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” It is my hope that the public will take the time to read the Kerchner complaint/petition and the legal briefs that were filed supporting and opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss so that it can learn first hand what the Obama ineligibility case is really about and draw an intelligent and informed decision on whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military.
The case is now with the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in Philadelphia PA which court we hope will decide the real Kerchner case and thereby reverse the decision of the Federal District Court. The American people deserve to know whether Obama was in fact born in Hawaii. More importantly, even if he is born in Hawaii, given that he was born with dual allegiance and citizenship, the American people deserve to know whether he is an Article II “natural born Citizen” which would make him eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. It is our position that because Obama was born with conflicting allegiances and citizenships at birth (British and U.S., if he was born in Hawaii), he cannot be President and more so Commander in Chief of our military men and women.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831
October 27, 2009
Posted by Puzo1 at 12:15 PM ”
This is the open thread for Tuesday, October 27, 2009. The theme is “1984” by George Orwell and how the Obama camp and the Obama Administration resemble the totalitarian regime described by Orwell. Daily, in conversations with my friends, almost without fail, someone states that we are living “1984.” I am working on an article on Tort Reform, another of the big lies being spoken about by the likes of Harry Reid. Even though tort reform is not listed below, consider it a victim of Orwellian lies.
Below are some of my favorite references to “1984” from the Citizen Wells blog.
The REAL case will soon be going to the higher courts on appeal, and then to Washington DC ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court. And the case the higher courts will hear on the merits will not be the imaginary straw-man version the case that Judge Simandle presented in his Opinion this week. The REAL case is about a core, basic, black-letter written, verbatim clause in the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, as to who is eligible to be the President and Commander-in-Chief of the military per our founders and framers of the Constitution. Our Constitution is the guarantor of our Liberty! We cannot let any part of it be ignored by a Usurper. Ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide this historic Article II case based on its merits, or our Constitutional Republic is history. And said history and “We the People” will record well and ultimately hold directly accountable those who are actively directly involved and also the enablers who are attempting to destroy our Constitution and Republic and participating in the cover-up. The facts and truth can only be sealed and hidden so long. Sooner or later the Obama fraud and cover-up will all be exposed. The truth will be told in a court of law and Obama and his enablers will be judged and held accountable for what they have done.
“A court cannot refuse to hear a case on the merits merely because it prefers not to due to grave social or political ramifications. As we have seen, the Court’s opinion dismissing the Kerchner complaint/petition did not address the real Kerchner case but rather looked for a way to dismiss the case without having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” It is my hope that the public will take the time to read the Kerchner complaint/petition and the legal briefs that I filed supporting and opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss so that it can learn first hand what the Obama eligibility case is really about and draw an intelligent and informed decision on whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. We are now working on filing our appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in Philadelphia which court we hope will decide our case dispassionately.”
Instead of writing one big article on Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, I will be writing a series of articles on Reid. Harry Reid is involved in so much dirty party politics and has negatively impacted this country in so many ways that one article does not do this subject justice.
Since Harry Reid was instrumental in ramroding through an illegal candidate for president, Barack Obama, and in supporting the usurper in office, it is fitting that we look at the core issue of why Harry Reid behaves as he does.
Harry Reid, as is true of many in Congress, has an ignorance of and disregard for the US Constitution. The Citizen Wells blog highlighted this fact by inducting Reid into the Hall of Shame in 2008.
The Citizen Wells blog and it’s well informed viewers and commenters are not the only ones to believe that Harry Reid has a disregard for the US Constitution.
From the Wall Street Journal, January 3, 2009.
“Harry Reid v. the Constitution”
“An Illinois court will eventually decide if Governor Rod Blagojevich is guilty of corruption. But on at least one issue he is more law-abiding than Majority Leader Harry Reid and fellow Democrats: the seating of Roland Burris to replace Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate.”
“Meanwhile, Mr. Reid and Washington Democrats are refusing to seat Mr. Burris, never mind their lack of authority to do so. As an initial matter, they’re hiding behind the Illinois secretary of state, who is refusing to certify the appointment. But Mr. Burris has asked a court to order the secretary of state to carry out what under state law would typically be a nondiscretionary duty. In any event, Beltway Democrats can’t inject themselves into what is clearly a matter of Illinois law.”
“While the Constitution says the Senate can determine its own membership, the Court in Powell interpreted Article I, Section 5 to say that “in judging the qualifications of its members, Congress is limited to the standing qualifications prescribed in the Constitution.” Nowhere in the Constitution is there a “qualification” saying that a Senator must not have been appointed by an embarrassing Illinois Governor.
Mr. Reid is also attempting the dodge of referring the matter to the Senate Rules Committee, which is run by Democrats, but the Powell precedent ought to be clear even to political lawyers. If Mr. Reid wants to banish Mr. Burris, he must first seat him and then persuade two-thirds of the Senate to expel him. Needless to say, the last thing Mr. Reid wants to do is create turmoil in his party by expelling an African-American Democrat whose only offense has been to accept an appointment to serve. But if Mr. Reid does go that route, we’d suggest worthier expulsion possibilities, such as Connecticut’s Chris Dodd, who received sweetheart mortgages from Countrywide Financial while sitting on the Banking Committee.”
“Republicans want Illinois to hold a special election for the vacant seat, and we recommended that ourselves (as did Mr. Obama) when the Blagojevich tapes first became public. But now that Mr. Burris has been appointed, Mr. Reid can’t legally deny him his seat. If this is the way Democrats are going to use their new monopoly on Beltway power even against a member of their own party, we’re in for an ugly couple of years.”
“The President says the Constitution is defective, and now Senator Harry Reid is preparing the coup de grace.”
“Once Reid and Obama emerge from their transparent closed-door consultations on how to blend the two competing Senate Health Care bills, Senator Reid has a nifty parlor trick up his sleeve. The normal course of legislative events would be to debate and vote on the bill on the Senate floor, and then send the result to a House-Senate conference committee. The committee would then blend the final House and Senate bills into a product acceptable to both houses.”
“The rub here, and the reason Senator Reid has conjured up his little parlor trick, is the Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 7: All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other bills.
Technically the amended bill will have originated in the House, in the same manner that a blank piece of House letterhead stationary originates in the House. This trick has apparently been used for expediency on past occasions, but the far-reaching and perhaps irreversible effects in this case, combined with the obvious intent to pull a fast one on America, lead one to question the respect for the American people exhibited by our so-called representatives, aka our elected royalty. Congress plans to employ a technicality to pay lip service to the Constitution, using the shell of a House bill to in effect make a hollow shell of the Constitution.”
Harry Reid has no regard for First Amendment Rights and freedom of the press.
From News Busters, August 30, 2009.
“Harry Reid Threatens Las Vegas Newspaper”
“Harry Reid, perhaps emulating the bullying tactics of an out-of-control Obama administration, has openly wished for the Las Vegas Review-Journal to ‘go out of business’ – a newspaper which has held opposing political viewpoints with the Senator.
But then, is this really shocking coming from a veiled supporter of the Fairness Doctrine?
The comment came when Bob Brown, the Journal’s Director of Advertising, met with Reid at a Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce luncheon. During the simple process of handshaking, an exchange in which most people with an ounce of class can pull off without issue, Reid said to Brown: “I hope you go out of business.””
“Frederick’s column ends with this thought: “…we serve notice on Sen. Reid that this creepy tactic will not be tolerated.” The question remains, will Nevadans also serve notice come the election in 2010?”
Harry Reid not only does not understand the law, he is out of touch with reality.
U.S. Senator Harry Reid – “Taxation Is Voluntary”
From Letters sent to Harry Reid regarding eligibility issues surrounding Barack Obama. This was part of the US Constitution Hall of Shame effort on this blog.
Letter 1
“I received the following letter and wrote a response to Harry Reid after an e-mail I sent him in November imploring him and all leaders to uphold the Constitution. He of course is one of the biggest idiots in the whole Washington elite THUGS!!! I will also post the letter and response my husband sent him in a seperate post. My initial e-mail to all elected officials in the state of Nevada…………………………….=============================
To Whom It May Concern:
I am a citizen of the United States of America and specifically the state of Nevada. Many of our citizens are getting caught up in what they are coining a “historic election” in electing the first black man to the highest office in our land. However, as a concerned citizen and patriot I am demanding that all of you state officials who represent my voice……. demand that we know who the people of this country elected to be POTUS in the name of Barack Obama.
He has not been forth coming with a lot of his background and history. We have not seen his official birth certificate that contains a state seal. My husband was born in 1961 also and his official birth certificate looks nothing like the one Mr. Obama is trying to pass off as authentic. No one has seen any detailed medical documents. A one page note from a doctor stating he is okay is not sufficient. My daughter needs more than that to be admitted back into school after a 3 day absence!!!
It is a requirement per our Constitution that anyone wishing to be POTUS must be a “natural born citizen”. To date no one has seen Mr. Obama’s birth certificate except for two people in Hawaii who say it exists. Now Obama has ordered this information to be sealed. As an American citizen and registered voter I have a vested interest in learning the truth here and we need you to act and act NOW!!!!!!!!!
I can’t and won’t support this president-elect until he comes clean with who he is and if he meets all of the qualifications to hold the most powerful job in the world!!
AS OUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO US TO SEE THIS THROUGH BEFORE OUR CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN PROSTITUTED BY AN ANTI-AMERICAN FRAUD!!!!!
Sincerely,
Jacqlyn xxxxxxx
Henderson, Nevada
P.S. If you happen to be an official of the Electoral College then I am requesting you vote on December 15, 2008 against Barack Obama and for the real patriot in John McCain…… unless Mr. Obama proves to the American people before then that he meets all the requirements to become “our” leader and entrust “our” lives and the lives of “our” children to him!!!!”
Letter 1 response
“December 5, 2008
Mrs. Jacqlyn xxxxxxx
Henderson, Nevada 89052
Dear Mrs. xxxxxxx
Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you.
According to Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution, any person serving in the United States House of Representatives must have reached the age of twenty-five and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least seven years, and any person serving in the United States Senate must have reached the age of thirty and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least nine years. In addition, Article II, Section 1 mandates that a person must have reached the age of thirty-five and be a natural born citizen in order to serve as President of the United States.
As you mentioned, some reports have surfaced that my former colleague, President-Elect Barack Obama, is not a natural-born American citizen. These reports are false. Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawai’i. His birth certificate is a matter of public record of the State of Hawai’i and is available online through various news sources, as well as on the Web site for the nonpartisan, nonprofit Annenberg Political Fact Check: http://www.factcheck.org. I hope you find this information useful.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at http://reid.senate.gov. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
My best wishes to you.
Sincerely,
?
HARRY REID
United States Senator
Nevada”
Response to Harry Reid’s response:
“HR:=========================My e-mail responding to his Dec. 5th e-mail!!!! Quite pathetic…..I haven’t heard from him since!!!
Mr. Reid—-Please look at the above e-mail I received from you!!! Is this a joke??? Do you really believe you can fool all the people all of the time? What you have written here is a lie and what Mr. Obama is trying to pull over on the American people is a CRIME!!! How stupid do you think we are??? Now ….as an elected official for the state of Nevada, I demand that you uphold the Constitution or you too will be committing a crime of TREASON!!! Now don’t send me this type of e-mail again until you show me the authentic, original vault copy of Mr. Obama’s birth certificate!!!! What you are telling me to check is not a copy of his original birth. The place you are sending me to has already been checked and everyone knows it is a FRAUD and not what is appropriate evidence to show one is eligible to be President. If you think it is then you have no right representing me in Washington. I would term you to be as stupid as stupid could be!!!! As my state’s Senator I will be waiting for your reply and it better not be the nonsense you just sent OUT!!!! THIS IS
UNBELIEVABLE!!!!! DO YOUR JOB THAT WE TAX PAYERS PAY GOOD MONEY FOR!!!!!!
Your constituent and your BOSS,
Jacqlyn xxxxxxx
Henderson, NV 89052
P.S. I can’t believe you expect me to accept this e-mail as true. I will be saving your e-mail as proof that you too are trying to fool the American people by sending out false information!!! You really are an arrogant SOB!!!!
Jacqlyn xxxxxxx
Submitted on 2008/12/30 at 5:20pm”
And now the response my husband got from Mr. Reid and what my husband told him…..My husband is much nicer than ME!!!!!
“From: correspondence_reply@reid.senate.gov [mailto:correspondence_reply@reid.senate.gov]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 1:36 PM
To: xxxxxxx
Subject: Correspondence from Senator Reid
December 5, 2008
Mr. Patrick xxxxxxx
Henderson, Nevada 89052
Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:
Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you.
According to Article I, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution, any person serving in the United States House of Representatives must have reached the age of twenty-five and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least seven years, and any person serving in the United States Senate must have reached the age of thirty and must have been a citizen of the United States for at least nine years. In addition, Article II, Section 1 mandates that a person must have reached the age of thirty-five and be a natural born citizen in order to serve as President of the United States.
As you mentioned, some reports have surfaced that my former colleague, President-Elect Barack Obama, is not a natural-born American citizen. These reports are false. Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawai’i. His birth certificate is a matter of public record of the State of Hawai’i and is available online through various news sources, as well as on the Web site for the nonpartisan, nonprofit Annenberg Political Fact Check: http://www.factcheck.org. I hope you find this information useful.
Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. For more information about my work for Nevada, my role in the United States Senate Leadership, or to subscribe to regular e-mail updates on the issues that interest you, please visit my Web site at http://reid.senate.gov. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
My best wishes to you.
Sincerely,
?
HARRY REID
United States Senator
Nevada”
Husband’s reply to Reid
“Dear Senator Reid,
Though the question of the authenticity of Senator Obama’s birth certificate is still in question – Sen. Obama has ties to the “non-partisan” factcheck.org” cited in your correspondence – even had he been born in Hawai’i, the federal law at the time would have caused him to have assumed the citizenship of his father. His father was born in Nigeria, a British colony at the time; therefore, Barry was born a British citizen as the USA did not allow dual citizenship in 1961.
One would think that you, with all of your resources and experience, would be aware of this. Perhaps if you were a bit more enlightened and more desirous of the truth rather than political gain, you might try and represent your constituents and put this issue to rest before a grave injustice is done and Barry is sworn in as POTUS.
Once again, I am disappointed in the “Democratic” process that you and your ilk feign to carry out.
Thank you for the form letter response and feel free to re-adjust your blinders.
Attorney Mario Apuzzo called me a few minutes ago. Judge Simandle has granted the DOJ’s motion to dismiss. More on this later. Mario will post some initial comments in the blog but he still has to read the Judge’s decision in full. I also need to read the full decision. But we will definitely appeal.
Like in the Battle of Long Island in the Revolutionary War, we have lost a battle. But we have not lost the war. The real decision on this will ultimately be made by the U.S. Supreme Court on the real crux of this matter … which is a legal issue, i.e., the legal question of what is a Natural Born Citizen per Article II of our Constitution per original intent, and is Obama one. I say he is not. Read this as to why:
Attorney Mario Apuzzo Makes Statement Regarding Judge Simandle’s Decision to Grant the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Lawsuit.
Court Dismisses Kerchner Complaint/Petition for Lack of Standing and Political Question. The Decision Will Be Appealed.
The Hon. Jerome B. Simandle of the Federal District Court in the District of New Jersey at 10:39 a.m., on October 21, 2009, filed his long-awaited opinion dismissing the Kerchner et al. v. Obama et al. complaint/petition. In the complaint/petition, we allege that Obama has not conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. We also allege that even if he was so born, he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because his father was a British subject/citizen when Obama was born and Obama himself was born a British subject/citizen, all of which makes him ineligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. We also allege that Congress violated it constitutional duty under the Twentieth Amendment to adequately investigate and confirm whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Judge Simandle ruled that the plaintiffs do not have Article III standing and that therefore the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction. The Court found that the plaintiffs failed to show that they suffered an “injury in fact.” It added that plaintiffs’ alleged injury is “only a generally available grievance about government” and “is one they share with all United States citizens.” Finally, it said that plaintiffs’ “motivations do not alter the nature of the injury alleged. . .”
By way of footnote, the Court said that even if the plaintiffs could show that the Court had Article III standing, they would not be able to show that the court should exercise jurisdiction because prudential standing concerns would prevent it from doing so.
Finally, the Court again in a footnote said that it cannot take jurisdiction of the issue of whether Obama is a “natural born Citizen” and whether Congress has acted constitutionally in its confirmation of Obama for President because the matter is a “political question” which needs to be resolved by Congress. The Court said that there simply is no room for judicial review of political choices made by the Electoral College and the Congress when voting for and confirming the President. The Court added that the plaintiffs’ remedy against Congress may be achieved by voting at the polls.
It is important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama has conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. It is also important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Rather, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ case because of jurisdiction and the political question doctrine without commenting on the underlying merits of whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. The Court also did not rule that the plaintiffs’ claims are frivolous. Given the nature of the Court’s decision, the American People unfortunately still do not know whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief.
As promised, plaintiffs will be filing an appeal of Judge Simandle’s decision to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831 http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
October 21, 2009
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”…Karl Marx
“Don’t cut off your nose to spite your face.”
2010 Elections
What I am about to say may be the most important words I have ever written or uttered.
We have an emergency.
When you are up to your @#&! in alligators, you don’t question why you forgot to drain the swamp.
We have an illegal, usurper, out of control, socialist, radical, communist Obama Administration.
We have a Congress with no regard for the US Constitution, rule of law or the American people.
We must:
Change the composition of Congress.
Make certain that congressmen know we are watching them.
Stay involved to insure that Congress is accountable.
Vote in the best candidate that is certain to win.
Not allow the congressmen to stay in office who will not do their duty.
We must not, we cannot allow bad congressmen to stay in office.
What I am about to say may offend some people. It is not my intention to offend anyone but to simply speak the truth and do my part to help save this country.
There are one or more emails circulating about voting next year. The one I received today states the following:
“NO INCUMBENTS
DNC OR GOP IN 2010.
ELECT INDEPENDENTS, GREENS, LIBERTARIAN, OR OTHER PARTIES.”
We are in phase 1 of dealing with the “alligators”, i.e., survival. Changing Congress is a emergency measure.
In phase 2, hopefully we will have the luxury of promoting “third party” candidates. If we can promote a “third party” candidate in phase 1 who we are certain will win, fine. However, the Obama camp is expert at divide and conquer and they would like nothing better than for us to weaken our chances of removing their cronies. If there are any good Democrats or Republicans in office or running, and I know that there are, vote for them.
Folks, we have a real serious emergency on our hands just as we had in World War II. I believe that we have one chance to save this country. We cannot afford to make major mistakes. I beg of you to take serious what I have written. Just as in World War II, the fate of our country and future generations hangs in the balance.
Once again the words of Benjamin Franklin urging us to hang together resonate with me as I write this.
Please share this message with as many as possible.
In the case of constitutional issues We the People and/or the Constitution created by We the People are sovereign. The fundamental law of our nation, the Constitution, can only be changed by amending it by the process provided in that Constitution, not by a branch of the federal government usurping or ignoring it. Congress cannot amend the Constitution by itself and certainly not with a simple majority vote. It takes a vote of 2/3 the members of Congress to put forward such an amendment to the several states and ratification by 3/4 of the several states of our nation. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a pure democracy. All rights and power not given to the federal government by the Constitution is reserved to the several states and to the People. See the 9th and 10th Amendments in the Bill of Rights for the details on that fact. We the People created the federal government enabled by the founding document, the federal U.S. Constitution. The Congress or the President cannot arbitrarily ignore the U.S. Constitution and those branches of the federal government cannot hide behind sovereign immunity. For if they can the Constitution is then no longer the supreme law of the land and the Congress and the President have placed themselves above that supreme law. We would no longer be a nation of laws if the supreme law of the land can be ignored and not enforced by the whims of the simple political majority in control of Congress.
I believe that Article I, Section 6, clause 1 protects the individual Senators and Reps from arrest and/or charges due to their speech and debate. It does not grant sovereign immunity to the Congress as a whole or the Senate as a body or the House as a body to totally ignore the Constitution, the “fundamental law” as Vattel describes such laws, and the foundational law of our federal government and nation. The sovereign power in our Republic is “We the People” and the Constitution we established to limit the power of the Federal Government, and thus the Congress which is part of that. Thus the Congress as a body in our government is not sovereign and thus cannot have sovereign immunity regarding charges that it as a body did not do its constitutional duty and/or ignored parts of the constitution. Who or what is the USA. It is the several states and We the People and the Constitution. It is not the Congress and it is not the President. The Constitution is the supreme and sovereign law. Congress is not sovereign and neither is the President and thus they cannot use sovereign immunity to betray and undermine the constitution. If the Congress is sovereign, then Congress would be the ultimate power and even be above the constitution. That is not our system of government. And that is not what Vattel taught either and wrote about a republic with a written constitution. The elected officials are our representatives and we acquiesce to them to run the government as long as they obey the Constitution and not ignore any part of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and that these elected representatives act in a way to protect our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness which our patriot ancestors and many who have served since fought and died to obtain and keep for us. The written Constitution is supreme and sovereign as that contract was established by We the People acting through the several states. And it states it takes 3/4th of the several states via agreement of the People of those states speaking through their respective legislative body to change that sovereign law, the U.S. Constitution.
We the People are the sovereigns and the Constitution is the supreme, fundamental, sovereign law in our federal system. The President and Congress are not above the law. No executive order or statutory law passed by them is supreme to the Constitution and the inalienable rights of We the People. I did not swear an oath to defend a man or any particular person serving as the President or a piece land. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We the People retain the ancient right of the sovereign, which is us in our system, to bring a Quo Warranto charge against a usurper Putative President. And I did so in my lawsuit. Any order or law made by Congress or anyone else in our federal government which stands in the way of We the People’s inalienable right to protect our Constitution, which we created, from a usurper must fall. Those laws must fall by the wayside as subservient and that they are not applicable to blocking our inalienable rights and cannot be allowed to block the People getting answers in the federal courts to Constitutional questions. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I intend to do so.
“Last week I published a report which established that Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett was invoking “attorney client privilege” as to the opinion issued to Department of Health Director Fukino wherein the AG reviewed and approved the July 27, 2009 press release which stated to the world that President Obama was born in Hawaii and is a “natural-born American citzen”.
Is there no story here? Attorney client privilege was applied to a public statement? How is that possible? The statement was issued in a press release. No privilege applies.
In part 3 of my UIPA report, I detailed the legal statutes and case law in Hawaii that demand the Attorney General opinion be made public.
Parts 1 and 2 of that same report explained how the Hawaii Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) gives “any person” standing to challenge in court the failure of a Hawaii state agency to release records which the public are entitled to.
Furthermore, I also detailed – here and here – how DoH Communications Director Janice Okubo has been running interference by failing to answer proper UIPA requests as is required by OIP administrative rules.
I am preparing a follow up on all of this which illustrates Okubo’s continued failure to answer UIPA requests under OIP administrative rules which has the effect of stopping all research. Additonally, my appeals to the OIP have gone unanswered.
WHERE IS WND?
They are allegedly in possession of a petition with half a million names on it in support of political leaders investigating Obama’s POTUS eligibility. My question to WND is – why don’t you investigate his eligibility by using the very simple devices listed in the UIPA?
All WND must do is write up a copy of the same questions we have asked… email it to Janice Okubo and then follow up with an OIP appeal and a judicial branch appeal (to be expedited to the front of the litigation calendar by statute).
I have always found the WND reporting on eligibility to be very convenient to the Obama administration. They have chosen to focus on the sensational conspiracy theory aspects of the issue rather than the genuine legal problem he faces in that he was a British citizen at birth. But if WND want to genuinely establish themselves as true investigative reporters on the issue of Obama’s eligibility, all they have to do is make an effort to use the public disclosure laws available to “any person”.
I would be happy to write model UIPA requests, model appeals to the OIP and model judicial complaints to be filed in Hawaii Circuit courts for World Net Daily to act upon and to gather information. Not only is Obama’s COLB available for discovery right now via these laws, but so is the Attorney General opinion which guided Fukino’s infamous July 27th press release as well as the original vital records she viewed which allowed her to state that Obama was born in Hawaii.
There’s no reason to be groping around in the dark looking for these documents in federal court rooms by people who have no chance of garnering standing. Standing is granted to “any person” in Hawaii. WND and all the other attorneys involved in POTUS eligibility should be using the UIPA laws in Hawaii, along with the OIP administrative rules and judicial precedent to get the information necessary for the country to have closure on Obama’s place of birth.
If Okubo tries to stonewall WND the way she stonewalls the rest of the public, then she can see her face and her replies spread over the front pages of WND. And WND certainly has the resources to take this fight to the judicial branch in Hawaii.
Hawaii officials appear unwilling to work with me under their laws. I will be filing law suits. But I don’t see why WND and other interested attorneys continue to ignore the UIPA, OIP and judicial branch in Hawaii where standing is not an obstacle. If your fight is to see the Obama birth records, then these laws make that possible.
I see a pattern emerging where the UIPA is ignored and the federal Quo Warranto statute is not followed properly. It feels like a big attempt to keep public eyes away from true legal solutions while impossible exotic suits are brought in federal courts which have no subject matter jurisdiction for plaintiffs with undeniable standing issues.”
I’ve deleted my prior post so that the journal mentioned might reverse course now that I’ve made my point: that information is available from Hawaii for those who will call Hawaii to follow their own public disclosure laws.
No news journal can talk about this issue and deserve any respect if they aren’t willing to use the law available to them for research. Research is to the media just as a hammer is to a carpenter – a necessary tool. We shall now see if they are interested in doing their job or if they will continue to dodge that chore.”
Citizen WElls 