Category Archives: US Constitution

Charlotte Observer Obama media arm, Media bias example, Times of “1984”, Praises Jim Pendergraph one minute then attacks him, Orwellian two minute hate

Posted on May 6, 2012 | 31 comments

Charlotte Observer Obama media arm, Media bias example, Times of “1984”, Praises Jim Pendergraph one minute then attacks him, Orwellian two minute hate

“we give our nod to Mecklenburg County commissioner Jim Pendergraph. We believe he has broad appeal and understands the district’s needs best. He speaks with a strong conservative voice but seems pragmatic in how he would represent the district – focusing on constituent needs and getting things done.”…Charlotte Observer April 28, 2012

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

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Despite the fact that what the Charlotte Observer has done in Orwellian, Joseph Goebbels fashion to demonize Jim Pendergraph and Sheriff Joe Arpaio after praising Pendergraph in an endorsement, disgusts me, I would like to thank the Observer for providing one of the clearest examples of media bias and “1984” thought control. I began quoting Orwell regularly in early 2008. Images of “1984” and Nazi Germany abounded. The similarities to the Obama camp were and are striking .

For example, note how the Charlotte Observer first praises Jim Pendergraph in their endorsement.

From the Charlotte Observer April 28, 2012.

“But we give our nod to Mecklenburg County commissioner Jim Pendergraph. We believe he has broad appeal and understands the district’s needs best. He speaks with a strong conservative voice but seems pragmatic in how he would represent the district – focusing on constituent needs and getting things done.

He did sign a no-tax increases pledge and said he would focus on spending cuts. But he said he would consider taxes if “every other way possible” was tried and failed to reduce the deficit and get the economy going.

Pendergraph gained national exposure as sheriff for his leadership in the 287(g) program, which allows local officials to enforce federal immigration laws. He was the first sheriff east of California to use the controversial program. But his views on immigration reform are more nuanced. He favors both enforcement and reforms that would allow the immigrant workers that the country needs to be able to work here. The issue should be dealt with in a “common-sense” way, he says.

Pendergraph’s long experience as a public servant, especially his 12 years as Mecklenburg County sheriff, would be an asset. He understands the value of service to constituents and responding quickly and efficiently to their cares and concerns.

This race has been marred by negative advertising, largely aimed at Pendergraph from GOP challenger Robert Pittenger, a former state lawmaker. Those ads and the sniping back and forth at debates distracted attention from the candidates’ records and positions. The people in the 9th district deserved better. We hope the candidates will give them better in the waning days of this primary season. If not, voters should remember that in the voting booth.”

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/04/28/3205731/pendergraph-strongest-pick-in.html

Next, after Jim Pendergraph mildly questions Obama.

From the Charlotte Observer May 3, 2012.

“What a run for Republican Jim Pendergraph. After winning the Observer’s endorsement in his bid for Congress, he has done nothing but embarrass us and himself.

By buddying up to one of America’s more hateful egomaniacs and then joining with fringe “birthers” to question President Obama’s citizenship, Pendergraph has contradicted much of what he told the Observer’s editorial board in his endorsement interview last month. As a result, we have lost faith in him, and urge voters to consider Edwin Peacock or Ric Killian in the 9th Congressional District race.”

“Then he rallied in Huntersville with Maricopa County (Ariz.) Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a Melvillian character on a never-ending crusade against Latinos. The only thing that energizes Arpaio more than stroking his ego is profiling Hispanics. The U.S. Justice Department found Arpaio led “a pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos” and one expert in the report said Arpaio led the worst racial profiling in U.S. history.

Pendergraph pandered further this week by saying he has “reason to be suspicious” about whether President Obama was born in the United States. “… Generally when there’s smoke, there’s got to be fire somewhere,” he said, even as he acknowledged “I haven’t seen the facts.”

It all gives one the sense that Pendergraph will say whatever a given audience wants to hear, if it will help him get elected. That makes how he would act in Congress a mystery.”

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/03/3217068/2-better-choices-in-9th-congressional.html#storylink=cpy

From “1984” by George Orwell.

“The next moment a hideous, grinding speech, as of some monstrous machine running without oil, burst from the big telescreen at the end of the room. It was a noise that set one’s teeth on edge and bristled the hair at the back of one’s neck. The Hate had started.

As usual, the face of Emmanuel Goldstein, the Enemy of the People, had flashed on to the screen. There were hisses here and there among the audience. The little sandy-haired woman gave a squeak of mingled fear and disgust. Goldstein was the renegade and backslider who once, long ago (how long ago, nobody quite remembered), had been one of the leading figures of the Party, almost on a level with Big Brother himself, and then had engaged in counter-revolutionary activities, had been condemned to death, and had mysteriously escaped and disappeared. The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Goldstein was not the principal figure. He was the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party’s purity. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of his teaching.”

I happened to witness some reactions to Jim Pendergraph questioning Obama and the Charlotte Observer discrediting him. Though not as vehement as some in “1984”, they were just as party programmed and automatic.

Scary.

31 Comments

Posted in 1984, Barack Obama, Charlotte, Charlotte Observer, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, George Orwell, Natural born citizen, NC, News, North Carolina, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Orwell, Orwellian, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Charlotte Observer lies to protect Obama, Observer endorsed Jim Pendergraph then rescinded and attacked, Charlotte Observer gives Obama free ride and attacks Pendergraph and Sheriff Joe Arpaio

Posted on May 5, 2012 | 94 comments

Charlotte Observer lies to protect Obama, Observer endorsed Jim Pendergraph then rescinded and attacked, Charlotte Observer gives Obama free ride and attacks Pendergraph and Sheriff Joe Arpaio

“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

“When you pick up your morning or evening newspaper and think
you are reading the news of the world, what you are reading
is a propaganda which has been selected, revised, and doctored
by some power which has a financial interest in you.”
…. Upton Sinclair
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

The Charlotte Observer, by hiding the truth about Obama and by attacking those courageous Americans attempting to bring the truth about Obama to light, has become an embarassment to the state of NC, the nation and all lovers of constitutional truth.

The Charlotte Observer endorsed Republican congressional candidate Jim Pendergraph and then after Pendergraph questioned the messiah, Obama, they rescinded their endorsement and attacked Pendergraph and Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is doing his job, unlike the Obama lackeys at the Observer.

Make no mistake about it. The Charlotte Observer has written lies about Jim Pendergraph and Sheriff Joe Arpaio and insulted millions of concerned Americans who still cherish and obey the US Constitution.

April 28, 2012: The Charlotte Observer endorses Jim Pendergraph.

“Pendergraph strongest pick in 9th District

Commissioner, former sheriff is conservative and pragmatic”

“But we give our nod to Mecklenburg County commissioner Jim Pendergraph. We believe he has broad appeal and understands the district’s needs best. He speaks
with a strong conservative voice but seems pragmatic in how he would represent the district – focusing on constituent needs and getting things done.

He did sign a no-tax increases pledge and said he would focus on spending cuts. But he said he would consider taxes if “every other way possible” was tried
and failed to reduce the deficit and get the economy going.

Pendergraph gained national exposure as sheriff for his leadership in the 287(g) program, which allows local officials to enforce federal immigration laws.
He was the first sheriff east of California to use the controversial program. But his views on immigration reform are more nuanced. He favors both
enforcement and reforms that would allow the immigrant workers that the country needs to be able to work here. The issue should be dealt with in a “common-
sense” way, he says.

Pendergraph’s long experience as a public servant, especially his 12 years as Mecklenburg County sheriff, would be an asset. He understands the value of
service to constituents and responding quickly and efficiently to their cares and concerns.

This race has been marred by negative advertising, largely aimed at Pendergraph from GOP challenger Robert Pittenger, a former state lawmaker. Those ads and
the sniping back and forth at debates distracted attention from the candidates’ records and positions. The people in the 9th district deserved better. We
hope the candidates will give them better in the waning days of this primary season. If not, voters should remember that in the voting booth.”

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/04/28/3205731/pendergraph-strongest-pick-in.html

April 28, 2012: Sheriff Joe Arpaio campaigns with and endorses Pendergraph.

“With his primary campaign for Congress entering what he called the short road, Republican Jim Pendergraph on Saturday drew support from controversial yet
popular Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Arpaio spoke at a Pendergraph campaign rally that drew 100 people to Lancaster’s BBQ in Huntersville ahead of the May 8 primary.

Arpaio and Pendergraph described each other as friends.

Both men have drawn questions over the years about their views on immigration. As Mecklenburg’s former sheriff, Pendergraph launched the 287(g) program that
identifies illegal immigrants in the jail. He took a federal job to increase state and local coordination of immigration laws.

Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County near Phoenix, is known for a hard-line approach toward immigration. The U.S. Justice Department has accused him of
violating the civil rights of Latinos.

He said when Pendergraph was with the federal government, he praised the operations in Maricopa. Arpaio never forgot his help.

Pendergraph said Arpaio is “trying to protect the citizens of Arizona because the federal government won’t.” He called on the federal government to enforce
the immigration laws.

Arpaio also said he hopes Congress will “finally look at (illegal immigration) and do something about it.”

Arpaio drew questions about his investigation into the authenticity of President Barack Obama’s birth records.

He said his probe shows the documents were forged, and criticized other elected leaders and law enforcement for failing to look into the issue. Obama and
others have long refuted claims the documents are false.”

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/04/27/3205885/arizona-sheriff-arpaio-lends-support.html

May 2, 2012: Jim Pendergraph, “I have reason to be suspicious,” 

“Pendergraph ‘suspicious’ of Obama’s birthplace”

“Few people are as publicly identified with the so-called “birther” issue as Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has his own “posse” on the case.

Last weekend, Arpaio shared his skepticism about President Barack Obama’s birthplace – and his eligibility for the White House – when he was in Charlotte
campaigning for Republican congressional candidate Jim Pendergraph.

So what does Pendergraph, and for that matter other 9th District candidates, think of Obama’s legitimacy?

“I have reason to be suspicious,” he said. “But I don’t know. I haven’t seen the facts. I think there’s a lot of smoke and generally when there’s smoke
there’s got to be fire somewhere.”uth
Obama sought to put questions about his birthplace aside last year when he released a birth certificate from Hawaii. For many people, that settled the issue.

Even Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus last year declared the issue a distraction and said, “the president was born in the United
States.”

But in March, Arpaio’s group declared the birth certificate a forgery.

While Pendergraph said he’s not sure it is, he said, “I’ve been around long enough to know people can forge anything.””

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/02/3214498/pendergraph-suspicious-of-obamas.htm

May 03, 2012: Charlotte Observer rescinds endorsement of Pendergraph.

“What a run for Republican Jim Pendergraph. After winning the Observer’s endorsement in his bid for Congress, he has done nothing but embarrass us and
himself.

By buddying up to one of America’s more hateful egomaniacs and then joining with fringe “birthers” to question President Obama’s citizenship, Pendergraph has contradicted much of what he told the Observer’s editorial board in his endorsement interview last month. As a result, we have lost faith in him, and urge voters to consider Edwin Peacock or Ric Killian in the 9th Congressional District race.

Not infrequently, the Observer endorses candidates with whom we do not agree on all, or even most, of the issues. That is because we consider the views of
the constituents the candidate seeks to represent. We often endorsed Rep. Sue Myrick using that logic. When choosing among 10 Republicans in the 9th District race, we considered not only the extent to which we agreed with the candidate but the extent to which he represented the views of the conservative 9th District. We seek a candidate with integrity, intellect, common sense and sincerity, and whose views are not so extreme as to not reflect his district.

Pendergraph came off as a decided moderate in our endorsement process, a comportment not entirely inconsistent with his work the past year-plus as a
Mecklenburg County commissioner. He sounded reasonable on immigration, saying that illegal immigrants who are already here should be allowed to stay here. He supported comprehensive immigration reform and allowing current illegal immigrants to pay some penalty and then have a path to citizenship.

He also talked about his disdain for the polarization that plagues Washington today. He said balancing the budget would require something like the Bowles-
Simpson plan, and specifically said taxes may have to rise as part of a comprehensive plan to erase the deficit. “Let’s be honest – it’s not going to be
without pain for all of us,” he said.

How sensible.

Then he rallied in Huntersville with Maricopa County (Ariz.) Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a Melvillian character on a never-ending crusade against Latinos. The only
thing that energizes Arpaio more than stroking his ego is profiling Hispanics. The U.S. Justice Department found Arpaio led “a pervasive culture of
discriminatory bias against Latinos” and one expert in the report said Arpaio led the worst racial profiling in U.S. history.

Pendergraph pandered further this week by saying he has “reason to be suspicious” about whether President Obama was born in the United States. “… Generally when there’s smoke, there’s got to be fire somewhere,” he said, even as he acknowledged “I haven’t seen the facts.”

It all gives one the sense that Pendergraph will say whatever a given audience wants to hear, if it will help him get elected. That makes how he would act in
Congress a mystery.

Peacock, Killian strong

Republican voters have at least two better choices in Tuesday’s primary. Former Charlotte City Council member Edwin Peacock brings a thoughtful, moderate
approach to issues. He seeks to solve problems rather than be paralyzed by partisanship. And state Rep. Ric Killian brings broad experience in public office
and the military. A colonel in the Army Reserve who has spent significant time in Afghanistan, Killian understands security matters. He is earnest and
forthright and would bring a sensible conservatism to Congress.”

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/03/3217068/2-better-choices-in-9th-congressional.html#storylink=cpy

To the Charlotte Observer.

If you wish to respond, I will publish it.

More importantly, if you wish to compare notes or discuss these issues, I am available.

The Charlotte Observer is awarded 5 Orwells.

94 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Charlotte, Charlotte Observer, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, democratic convention, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, George Orwell, Lawsuits, Lies, Natural born citizen, NC, News, North Carolina, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Orwell, Orwellian, Presidential candidate, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Bret Baier Natural Born Citizen update, May 2, 2012, Baier show coming with possible panel of constitutional scholars, No mention of Obama deficiency

Posted on May 2, 2012 | 44 comments

Bret Baier Natural Born Citizen update, May 2, 2012, Baier show coming with possible panel of constitutional scholars, No mention of Obama deficiency

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

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

“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.”…Marbury vs Madison

From Bret Baier of Fox News May 1, 2012.

“I posted this quickly as a response to all of the emails I was receiving about Senator Marco Rubio and whether he is a “Natural Born Citizen (the same emails comment about Gov. Bobby Jindal). I noted in the blog- there is a lot of dispute about the legal term and what the Founding Fathers truly meant. What I did not put in the blog -was that a large part of this was originally reported by Byron York of the Washington Examiner. I asked him to send me his reporting a few weeks ago – and I should have cited that in the blog this morning… I apologize to Byron for leaving that out. Bottom line… this is obviously getting a lot of attention.. so, we think we should do a full piece on the show about it.. and maybe have a panel of constitutional scholars… and legal experts to discuss this. There is obviously a lot of confusion.. uncertainty and misinformation out there about this topic. And as I wrote in the blog.. there is vigorous legal debate about the term… so we need to talk about it… and we’ll continue to report all sides.”

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/blog/2012/05/01/bret-explains-natural-born-citizen-requirements-president-and-vice-president

The inaccurate  report by Bret Baier on Natural Born Citizen from yesterday at Citizen Wells.

““Bret explains “natural born citizen” requirements for president and vice president”

“Many legal analysts and scholars agree with this take– and until the Supreme Court weighs in.. this is how the law is interpreted:

The Constitution requires that the president be a “natural born citizen,” but does not define the term. That job is left to federal law, in 8 U.S. Code, Section 1401. All the law requires is that the mother be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the father’s nationality.

The brouhaha over President Obama’s birth certificate — has revealed a widespread ignorance of some of the basics of American citizenship. The Constitution, of course, requires that a president be a “natural born citizen,” but the Founding Fathers did not define the term, and it appears few people know what it means.

The law lists several categories of people who are considered American citizens at birth. There are the people born inside the United States; no question there. There are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. There are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is a U.S. national (that is, from an outlying possession of the U.S.), provided the citizen parent has lived in the United States or its possessions for at least one year prior to the birth of the child. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, two of them after the age of 14.

They’re all natural born U.S. citizens. That also includes people who are born in Puerto Rico and people who were born in states before they became states. Born in Hawaii in 1950, a decade before statehood? You’re a natural born U.S. citizen.

That is how legal experts interpret the “natural born” requirement.. and how you get that status is actually pretty open. Until the Supreme Court weighs in on this issue (and there are no plans that we know of that that will happen)… — to your emails… Senator Marco Rubio and Governor Bobby Jindal are both eligible to run and become Vice President or President.”

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/blog/2012/05/01/bret-explains-natural-born-citizen-requirements-president-and-vice-president

Bret Baier is correct about one thing, the US Supreme Court needs to clarify the definition of Natural Born Citizen.

The article starts out with some accuracy “Many legal analysts and scholars.”

This is true, there is much disagreement and debate.

However, the article ends “That is how legal experts interpret the “natural born” requirement”, implying a consensus.

Without getting into all the subtle intricacies of law and legal precedent, I will make this simple.

First, the framers of the constitution provided some clarity with this provision:

“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;”

A distinction is made between citizen and natural born citizen. Also, this allowed the founder fathers to be eligible and also children born from the time of independence to the adoption of the Constitution on September 17, 1787.

Chief Justice Waite, in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875):

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/bret-baier-fox-news-natural-born-citizen-error-fox-motivation-for-media-line-have-obama-thugs-threatened-fox-supreme-court-must-clarify/

44 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, Founding Fathers, Fox news, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Bret Baier Fox News Natural Born Citizen error, Fox motivation for media line?, Have Obama thugs threatened Fox?, Supreme Court must clarify

Posted on May 1, 2012 | 82 comments

Bret Baier Fox News Natural Born Citizen error, Fox motivation for media line?, Have Obama thugs threatened Fox?, Supreme Court must clarify

“Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”

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

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

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

Bret Baier provided the following statements on the presidential requirement of Natural Born Citizen on Fox News May 1, 2012.

“Bret explains “natural born citizen” requirements for president and vice president”

“Many legal analysts and scholars agree with this take– and until the Supreme Court weighs in.. this is how the law is interpreted:

The Constitution requires that the president be a “natural born citizen,” but does not define the term. That job is left to federal law, in 8 U.S. Code, Section 1401. All the law requires is that the mother be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of those years after the age of 14. If the mother fits those criteria, the child is a U.S. citizen at birth, regardless of the father’s nationality.

The brouhaha over President Obama’s birth certificate — has revealed a widespread ignorance of some of the basics of American citizenship. The Constitution, of course, requires that a president be a “natural born citizen,” but the Founding Fathers did not define the term, and it appears few people know what it means.

The law lists several categories of people who are considered American citizens at birth. There are the people born inside the United States; no question there. There are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. There are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is a U.S. national (that is, from an outlying possession of the U.S.), provided the citizen parent has lived in the United States or its possessions for at least one year prior to the birth of the child. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, two of them after the age of 14.

They’re all natural born U.S. citizens. That also includes people who are born in Puerto Rico and people who were born in states before they became states. Born in Hawaii in 1950, a decade before statehood? You’re a natural born U.S. citizen.

That is how legal experts interpret the “natural born” requirement.. and how you get that status is actually pretty open. Until the Supreme Court weighs in on this issue (and there are no plans that we know of that that will happen)… — to your emails… Senator Marco Rubio and Governor Bobby Jindal are both eligible to run and become Vice President or President.”

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/blog/2012/05/01/bret-explains-natural-born-citizen-requirements-president-and-vice-president

Bret Baier is correct about one thing, the US Supreme Court needs to clarify the definition of Natural Born Citizen.

The article starts out with some accuracy “Many legal analysts and scholars.”

This is true, there is much disagreement and debate.

However, the article ends “That is how legal experts interpret the “natural born” requirement”, implying a consensus.

Without getting into all the subtle intricacies of law and legal precedent, I will make this simple.

First, the framers of the constitution provided some clarity with this provision:

“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;”

A distinction is made between citizen and natural born citizen. Also, this allowed the founder fathers to be eligible and also children born from the time of independence to the adoption of the Constitution on September 17, 1787.

Chief Justice Waite, in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875):

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

82 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, Founding Fathers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC

Tagged , , ,

Natural Born Citizen must be defined by courts, US District Judge S. Thomas Anderson, Obama eligibility case, Qualification for presidency important not trivial

Posted on April 27, 2012 | 47 comments

Natural Born Citizen must be defined by courts, US District Judge S. Thomas Anderson, Obama eligibility case, Qualification for presidency important not trivial

“Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”

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

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

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

From WND April 26, 2012.

“JUDGE WANTS DEFINITION OF ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'”

“A federal judge has determined in a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility for a state ballot that the meaning of the constitutional phrase “natural born citizen” is “important and not trivial.”

U.S. District Judge S. Thomas Anderson of Tennessee said the courts ultimately must define “natural born citizen,” affirming that the “issue of whether President Obama is constitutionally qualified to run for the presidency is certainly substantial.”

“This specific question has been raised in numerous lawsuits filed since President Obama took office,” Anderson wrote in his opinion. “The outcome of the federal question in this case will certainly have an effect on other cases presenting the same issue about whether President Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for the presidency.”

Van Irion, whose Liberty Legal Foundation brought the case, alleges the plan by Tennessee Democrats to register Obama as their nominee for president opens a case, under state law, of negligent misrepresentation and fraud or intentional misrepresentation because of doubts about Obama’s eligibility.

Irion was pleased the court recognized the significance of the claims.

“The court made several very positive statements about our case,” he noted.

He cited Anderson’s statement that the court “finds that the federal question presented, the meaning of the phrase ‘natural born citizen’ as a qualification for the presidency set out in Article II of the Constitution, is important and not trivial.”

“It is clear that the stated federal issue of President Obama’s qualifications for the office are ‘actually disputed and substantial,” the judge said.

Anderson said it also is “clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitution’s definition of ‘natural born citizen’ and the Supreme Court’s decision in Minor.”

Irion told supporters, “While it is certainly dangerous to read too much into such an opinion, the statements from this federal court are encouraging. The court appears to understand the most critical issues presented by our complaint.”

He told WND that the issue identified by Anderson is what virtually all of the dozens of cases challenging Obama’s eligibility have been seeking: a ruling on accusations that Obama is unqualified.

Previously, cases have been dismissed based on standing or other technicalities, not on the merits.

The decision from Anderson came in a case brought by Irion on behalf of voters and political candidates in Tennessee. The plaintiffs argue Obama’s name cannot be submitted because he is ineligible.

The defendants had moved the case from state court, where Irion wanted to argue the state issues, to federal court, where Obama virtually has batted a thousand in preventing cases from reaching the point at which the merits are assessed.

Irion had submitted a motion to have the case returned to the state courts, a request Anderson denied.

But Irion was heartened by the comments from the judge, who said that without a determination on the questions facing the court, there easily could be differing results in court jurisdictions around the nation.

“There is a risk of inconsistent adjudications on the federal issue presented,” the judge said.

Irion also had raised questions about “Obama’s dual citizenship” and allegations that his Social Security number is fraudulent.

“The court construes these allegations about President Obama … as corroboration of plaintiffs’ main allegation that President Obama is not a natural born citizen or otherwise qualified to be president,” the judge wrote.

Anderson’s opinion included a notation that the U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett defined “natural born citizen” as “all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens.”

“It is undisputed that the material fact at issue in this case is whether under the circumstances of president Obama’s birth, the president is a ‘natural born citizen,’ a term set out in the United States Constitution and construed under federal law,” he wrote.

The case is developing just as a new petition urges members of Congress to take the issue seriously by investigating it. The number of names on the document has surged past 40,000 and soon will be approaching 50,000.

WND reported just a day ago that members of Congress, regarding Obama’s eligibility, still are relying on statements from Hawaii officials, “vetting” by voters and his own word.

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio., for example has said. “I will continue to take the president at his word that he is a natural born citizen of the United States.”

Obama released an image of a Hawaiian long-form birth certificate on April 27, 2011, after years of stating that the document was not available. But at that time, the Hawaii Department of Health and governor’s office refused to confirm for WND that the image released was an accurate representation of the state’s records.

However, Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s law enforcement investigators have found probable cause that the document is a forgery. Others, meanwhile, argue that the document affirms Obama is not eligible, because it lists his father as a foreigner. The Founders, they argue, understood “natural born citizen” to be the offspring of two American citizens.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/judge-wants-definition-of-natural-born-citizen/

More on Natural Born Citizen from Citizen Wells December 28, 2008.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/natural-born-citizen-obama-is-not-eligible-obama-birth-certificate-us-constitution-founding-fathers-intent-lawsuits-obama-kenyan-vattel%E2%80%99s-the-law-of-nations-john-jay-berg-donofrio-k/

Reprinted from Citizen Wells December 7, 2008.

Donofrio versus Wells is before all nine Justices of the US Supreme Court
and it is expected that they will decide by Monday morning, December 8,
2008 whether or not they will accept the case for a possible opinion or ruling.
The Leo Donofrio case is based on the natural born citizen provision of the
US Constitution and the failure of New Jersey Secretary of State, Nina Wells to ensure
that Barack Obama is qualified under that provision. Having the US Supreme
Court give serious consideration to this case and uphold the US Constitution
is of utmost importance. However, this case demands attention to other
aspects of upholding the Constitution and clarifying duties that may in the
long term have more far reaching consequences. Here are three distinct
aspects of the Donofrio case that must be addressed and clarified by the
US Supreme Court Justices:

  • The Natural Born Citizen provision of the US Constitution as applicable to the 2008 election.
  • The powers given to state officials in the election process and inherent duties to uphold the
    US Constitution and Federal Election Laws.
  • The oath of office taken by federal and state officers, election officials and judges and the
    duty to uphold the US Constitution.

Not addressed specifically in the Donofrio lawsuit and therefore
not before the US Supreme Court, but a matter of much confusion,
is the statutes in some of the states and pledges by some
political parties to dictate how Electoral College Electors must
vote. This violates the letter and spirit of constitutional law
and the intent of the founding fathers to give carefully chosen
Electors the leeway to make wise choices.

Here is the basis in fact of Leo Donofrio’s lawsuit:

“On October 27, 2008, plaintiff-appellant, Leo Donofrio, a retired attorney acting Pro Se, sued Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, demanding the Secretary execute her statutory and Constitutional duties to police the security of ballots in New Jersey from fraudulent candidates ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States due to their not being “natural born citizens” as enumerated in Article 1, Section 2, of the US Constitution.”

“The cause of action first accrued on September 22, 2008, when Secretary Wells certified to county clerks, for ballot preparation, a written “statement”, prepared under her seal of office, that was required by statute to contain names of only those candidates who were “by law entitled” to be listed on ballots in New Jersey.  The statement is demanded by N.J.S.A. 19:13-22.

The law suit raises a novel contention that the statutory code undergoes legal fusion with the Secretary’s oath of office to uphold the US Constitution thereby creating a minimum standard of review based upon the “natural born citizen” requirement of Article 2, Section 1, and that the Supremacy clause of the Constitution would demand those requirements be resolved prior to the election.

The key fact, not challenged below, surrounds two conversations between the plaintiff-appellant and a key Secretary of State Election Division official wherein the official admitted, twice, that the defendant-Secretary just assumed the candidates were eligible taking no further action to actually verify that they were, in fact, eligible to the office of President.  These conversations took place on October 22nd and 23rd.”

“Now, post-election, plaintiff is seeking review by the United States Supreme Court to finally determine the “natural born citizen” issue. Plaintiff alleged the Secretary has a legal duty to make certain the candidates pass the “natural born citizen” test.  The pre-election suit requested that New Jersey ballots be stayed as they were defective requiring replacements to feature only the names of candidates who were truly eligible to the office of President.”

HERE ARE THE THREE DISTINCT ASPECTS OF DONOFRIO’S LAWSUIT THAT SHOULD BE REVIEWED AND CLARIFIED
BY THE US SUPREME COURT JUSTICES:

The Natural Born Citizen provision of the US Constitution as applicable to the 2008 election.

Leo Donofrio states:

“Don’t be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesia issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama’s ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama’s father was a Citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama’s birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen “at birth”, just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be President.”

Read more from Leo Donofrio

The powers given to state officials in the election process and inherent duties to uphold the
US Constitution and Federal Election Laws.

There is much confusion and misunderstanding about the duties and powers of state officers and election
officials involved in presidential elections.

Read more here

The oath of office taken by federal and state officers, election officials and judges and the
duty to uphold the US Constitution.

From the opinion by Chief Justice Marshall on Marbury Vs Madison:


“The oath of office, too, imposed by the legislature, is completely demonstrative of the legislative opinion on the subject. It is in these words, “I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich; and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent on me as according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution, and laws of the United States.”

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

If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.

Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”

For the Justices of the US Supreme Court to disregard this important
lawsuit by Leo Donofrio, I am certain that all nine Justices would
violate their oath to uphold the US Constitution and duty to review,
consider and clarify the important principles outlined above. We are
accountable not only to uphold  the US Constitution and rule of law
in regard to the 2008 election, but the future integrity of the
Constitution, our system of checks and balances and stability of our
government. I strongly urge the Supreme Court Justices to help keep
our Constitution and government intact.
“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.”

Chief Justice Marshall opinion, Marbury Vs Madison

47 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Courts, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, Federal Court, Judges, Lawsuits, Marbury V Madison, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama NJ eligibility court case update, April 11, 2012, Judge Masin rules in Obama’s favor, Mario Apuzzo files exception, WhiteHouse.gov image irrelevant

Posted on April 11, 2012 | 61 comments

Obama NJ eligibility court case update, April 11, 2012, Judge Masin rules in Obama’s favor, Mario Apuzzo files exception, WhiteHouse.gov image irrelevant

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

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

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

From Conservative New and Views April 10, 2012.

“OBAMA ELIGIBILITY: NJ ALJ DUCKS ISSUES”

“In the latest Obama eligibility challenge, an Administrative Law Judge cleared Obama for the New Jersey Democratic Primary today. The two men who objected to Obama’s nominating petition vowed to appeal.”

“Obama eligibility issues

Nick Purpura of Wall Township, NJ, and Ted Moran of Toms River, NJ, filed their objection Thursday with the New Jersey Board of Elections. Lawyer Mario Apuzzo of Jamesberg, NJ, delivered the brief and spoke directly to Robert Giles, Director of Elections. Apuzzo argued Purpura and Moran’s case today (Tuesday, April 10) at the Office of Administrative Law in Mercerville. The Elections Division notified the Obama campaign at once, and they sent their own lawyer, Alexandra Hill, to appear. Administrative Law Judge (and Associate Director of the OAL) Jeff Masin presided.

Purpura and Moran objected to Obama appearing on the June 5 Democratic Primary ballot on two grounds:

No one knows exactly who Barack H. Obama is, because he has had three different names in life. Furthermore, he has never furnished a true copy of his birth certificate to the Secretary of State. So no one can be sure that Obama was born in the United States.
Obama’s father was a British colonial subject. He not only was not a naturalized citizen on the alleged date of Obama’s birth, but indeed never sought naturalization. Therefore Obama could never be a natural-born citizen no matter where he was born.
Ms. Hill offered no evidence, but spent her time objecting to the entire case, to every witness whom Apuzzo called, and every document he tried to introduce. In every specific case, she said that the documents were neither originals nor certified copies. More generally, she said repeatedly that New Jersey law did not obligate Obama in any way to prove that he was eligible to the office of President. The only grounds for challenging a nominating petition, said Hill, were whether the petitions were in the proper form, all who signed were registered voters, no voter signed more than one petition, whether the campaign gathered enough signatures, etc.

Apuzzo countered that the New Jersey Constitution and at least one case on point (Strother, 6 NJ @ 565), obliged the Secretary of State to find affirmatively whether a given candidate was qualified for the office he or she sought, or not.

A surprise admission
About two-thirds of the way through the hearing, Hill admitted in open court something that no lawyer for the Obama campaign has ever admitted. Obama never furnished a true copy of his birth certificate to the New Jersey Secretary of State. Furthermore, the PDF file that the White House has served to the Internet since April 27, 2012, is not relevant to the case in any way.

Hill conceded this point after Apuzzo tried to call Brian Wilcox, an expert document analyst. He was ready to show that no one could rely on the PDF file as a substitute for a hard-copy long-form birth certificate. But Judge Masin said at once that neither he nor Secretary of State Kim Guadagno had ever seen a birth certificate, whether on paper, as a PDF file, or on the Internet. He told Apuzzo that calling Wilcox would be “premature.”

Then Masin turned to Hill and asked her directly:

Is it your legal position that the document on the Internet is irrelevant to this case?

Hill replied, “Yes.” Masin then asked:

And indeed you concede that Mr. Obama has not produced an alleged birth certificate to the Secretary of State.

Hill at first said, “It has been released nationally,” but then admitted that she did not know personally that Obama had given any such document to the Secretary of State, nor did she intend giving such a document to the court today. But she also argued, after Judge Masin asked her repeatedly, that Obama need not produce any evidence at all.

Apuzzo told CNAV during a recess in the hearing that this was the most stunning thing that any lawyer for Obama had ever admitted, in an Obama eligibility case or in any other case. When the hearing finally adjourned at 12:30 p.m., Apuzzo was confident of prevailing on this point. He observed that Hill, after objecting to everything that Apuzzo tried to introduce into evidence, offered no evidence on her own behalf and even admitted that the infamous PDF document was legally worthless.

A shocking turnabout
But the judge shocked Apuzzo when, at about 7:30 p.m., he called Apuzzo to tell him that the Obama campaign had prevailed on both points. Said the judge, according to Apuzzo:

As far as I’m concerned, Obama was born in Hawaii.

Apuzzo could not explain how Judge Masin could rule that way, after observing in open court that neither Obama nor his surrogates had shown that he was born in Hawaii.

Within two hours, according to a deadline that Masin gave him, Apuzzo filed an exception to Masin’s ruling. Apuzzo took exception to the following:

Judge Masin ruled that Obama was born in Hawaii with no evidence on record, after acknowledging that fact during the hearing.
Judge Masin ruled that Obama need not comply with statute to show that he is eligible, solely because he need not “consent” to someone circulating a nominating petition for him.
The judge suggested that Obama might have to show eligibility later. He laid no basis for such a ruling.
The judge misread the precedents and gave short shrift to the historical evidence that the Framers of the Constitution defined “natural-born citizen” as one born in-country to two citizen parents. Apuzzo devoted half of his 30-page exception to this analysis alone.

Apuzzo plans to appeal directly to the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court. He earlier told CNAV that he was ready to argue before the State and even United States Supreme Courts if he had to.”

http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2012/04/10/constitution/obama-eligibility-nj-alj-ducks-issues/

61 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , ,

Obama ineligible for presidency, Hollywood producer Bettina Viviano recalls Bill Clinton statement, Bill Gwatney murder, Jerome Corsi interview of Viviano

Posted on April 2, 2012 | 113 comments

Obama ineligible for presidency, Hollywood producer Bettina Viviano recalls Bill Clinton statement, Bill Gwatney murder, Jerome Corsi interview of Viviano

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

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

“Why were Donald Young and Bill Gwatney murdered?”…Citizen Wells

I spoke to Bettina Viviano a few minutes before the Jerome Corsi interview. She stated then as always that despite some friends being intimidated by the Obama thugs, she was not going to back down. Bettina is a friend and a patriot.

God bless Bettina Viviano.

From WND, World Net Daily, April 2, 2012.

“HOLLYWOOD PRODUCER HEARD BILL CLINTON SAY OBAMA INELIGIBLE”

“A successful Hollywood producer who had an insider’s view of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign claims she heard Bill Clinton say that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president.

Bettina Viviano – who started her own film production company in 1990 after serving as vice president of production for Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Entertainment – told WND that it was common knowledge among delegates committed to Hillary that the Clintons believed Obama was constitutionally ineligible and that Bill Clinton would eventually disclose his belief to the public.

The Clintons were the original “birthers,” Viviano told WND in an interview in Los Angeles.

“Everybody who has called this a conspiracy from the Republicans or the tea party, they need to know who started it – the Democrats,” she said.

“It was Hillary and Bill, and it percolated up from there,” said Viviano, who had access to the campaign through a documentary she produced on the claims of delegates that Obama and the Democratic National Committee were stealing the nomination from Hillary.

As WND reported, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his team investigating Obama’s eligibility believe there is probable cause that the documents released by the White House as Obama’s long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form are forgeries.

Help Sheriff Joe blow the lid off Obama’s fraud. Join the Cold Case Posse right now!

Viviano said that she was on a conference phone call during the primary season in the spring of 2008 in which she heard Bill Clinton refer to Obama as ineligible for the presidency.

In the course of the phone conversation with Hillary delegates, she recalled, Bill Clinton spoke of Obama as “the non-citizen.”

“In the world we were in, with [Hillary’s] super-delegates and delegates, it just was, ‘He’s not legit – that’s the end of it, period, end of story.’ It wasn’t up for discussion,” Viviano said.

Michele Thomas, a Hillary campaigner from Los Angeles, confirmed to WND that she learned from “many people who were close to Hillary” that Obama “was not eligible to be president.”

Thomas led a nationwide petition drive among delegates to force a vote on Hillary’s nomination at the convention after then-DNC Chairman Howard Dean announced her name would not be put into nomination and Obama would be declared the winner by unanimous acclamation.

Viviano said that it was understood that Bill Clinton would eventually go public with his contention that Obama was ineligible for the presidency.

“He, I believe, was frothing at the mouth to tell the truth about Obama,” she said.

In the meantime, she recalled, the former president would make ironic references in public in which he “teetered” on revealing he position.

“He would go on camera,” Viviano said, “and jokingly make comments about, you know, ‘Is Obama qualified to be president? Well, if he’s 35 and a wink, wink, United States citizen, I guess he’s qualified.’”

She claimed, however, that Bill Clinton’s intention to unequivocally state to the public that Obama was ineligible was stopped in its tracks by the murder of a close friend of the Clintons, Arkansas Democratic Party Chairman Bill Gwatney, just two weeks before the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Gwatney was killed Aug. 13, 2008, when a 50-year-old man entered Democratic Party headquarters in Little Rock and shot him three times. Police killed the murderer after a chase, and investigators found no motive.

The Clintons said in a statement that they were “stunned and shaken” by the killing of their “cherished friend and confidante.”

Viviano said a campaign staffer who was close to Hillary, whose name she requested be withheld for security reasons, told her Gwatney’s murder was a message to Bill Clinton.

“I was told by this person that that was ‘Shut up, Bill, or you’re next,’” she said.

The campaign adviser, according to Viviano, said that despite the intimidation and threats, Bill Clinton was prepared to speak out about Obama’s eligibility

“And then,” Viviano said, paraphrasing the staffer, “they went in and said, ‘OK, it’s your daughter, now, we’ll go after.’

“And then Bill never said anything.”

Others in the campaign who believe Gwatney’s murder was a message to the Clintons think it had to do with the fact that Gwatney was resisting an effort by the Obama campaign and the party to intimidate Hillary delegates into voting for Obama.

But Viviano argues that California delegates also were rebelling, and she says her source told her the same story two years later.

Since the 2008 campaign, Clinton has insisted publicly that Obama is eligible for the White House.

He weighed in on the issue in an April 2011 interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” when Donald Trump was urging Obama to release his long-form birth certificate to the public.

“If I were them, I’d be really careful riding that birther horse too much,” Clinton said. “Everyone knows it’s ludicrous.”

‘I had never voted in my life’

When Viviano headed production for Spielberg, her credits included the second and third “Back to the Future” films, “Cape Fear,” “Land Before Time,” “Schindler’s List,” “Always,” “Roger Rabbit” and the third “Indiana Jones” film.

She launched her own production and management company, Viviano Entertainment, in 1990. Her movies include “Three to Tango” and “Jack and Jill,” starring Adam Sandler.

Viviano was plunged into the world of campaign politics in 2008 as an admitted neophyte when Hollywood screenwriter and director Gigi Gaston asked her to produce a documentary called “We Will Not Be Silenced” on allegations of voter fraud against Hillary Clinton by the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

“I had never voted in my life. I wasn’t a Democrat, I wasn’t a Republican. I wasn’t anything,” Viviano said. “I didn’t know anything about any of this.”

Viviano said that when she and her co-workers informed Hillary campaigners that they were making a film about voter fraud, “the floodgates opened.”

“I mean, everybody had a story to tell about death threats, threats, intimidation, document falsifying, vandalism, property theft,” she said. “It was the most horrible thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”

Viviano said that in research for the film, allegations and evidence that Obama was not eligible “came up immediately.”

“We were getting hit with so many things about Obama,” she said. “This is when (Bill) Ayers and (Rashid) Khalidi were in the news, and then, all of a sudden, ‘Oh, and he’s not eligible to be president.’”

Viviano insisted to WND that her reason for speaking out now was not related to the fact that Obama beat Hillary.

“It’s not about Hillary,” she said. “It’s about No. 1, I’m American, I live in a country where there is a Constitution and a set of laws. I also have somebody in the White House who has lied, obfuscated, provided what we all know to be forged documents about who he is.”

She acknowledges that she could jeopardize her Hollywood career.

“What can you do?” she said. “It’s my country. My dad fought for this country in World War II in the 82nd Airborne.”

Her late father, she noted, was shot down twice during the war and was awarded two Purple Hearts.

“I think, would he rather have me sitting in the corner cowering, and afraid of people, or would he rather have me tell the truth and what I saw?””

Listen to the interview here:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/hollywood-producer-heard-bill-clinton-say-obama-ineligible/

113 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Birth Certificate, Citizen, Citizen Journalism, Citizen News, Clintons, constitution, Crime, democratic convention, Democrats, Election, Election 2008, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, fraud, Lawyers, Lies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama thugs, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Voter fraud, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Arpaio News Conference March 31, 2012, Obama birth certificate and selective service registration card, Forgeries and fraud, Investigation continues

Posted on April 1, 2012 | 72 comments

Arpaio News Conference March 31, 2012, Obama birth certificate and selective service registration card, Forgeries and fraud, Investigation continues

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

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

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”…Jesus, John 8:32

From Western Journalism March 31, 2012.

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Mike Zullo presented to the general public some of the results of their investigation into the online birth certificate and selective service registration card of Barack Obama. Most of the event was comprised of information that has already been released in earlier press conferences, but not widely reported on by the mainstream media, out of fear of ridicule, or perhaps fear of sanctions by the federal government.”
http://www.westernjournalism.com/sheriff-joe-arpaio-march-31-press-conference-full-video/
“A petition was circulated at the event requesting the Arizona State Legislature, in conjunction with Secretary of State Ken Bennett’s office, to take action and pass a specific resolution.
This resolution asks the Democratic National Committee to provide documentation validating Obama’s placement on the Arizona 2012 ballot. This documentation must be satisfactory to Sheriff Arpaio and the Cold Case Posse, the Arizona Legislature, and the Arizona Secretary of State’s office. If you are a citizen of the state of Arizona and would be interested in signing this petition, you can do so here.

Mr. Zullo, who has volunteered his time and efforts for the past six months without pay, then took some time to present the preliminary results of the investigation. He presented the videos from the original press conference, and commented between each video. Throughout this presentation, the crowd was responsive, often gasping at certain moments in the videos, and clapping at the end of each video.

After this presentation, Mr. Zullo revealed various updates on the continuing investigation. He hinted about new analysis of the typesetting of the online birth certificate. According to Zullo, the word spacing and typewriter fonts on Obama’s birth certificate are uneven, suggesting the use of multiple typewriters, and consequently, cutting and pasting from various original documents. In addition, he said that the team is looking into the numbers listed on the online document, suggesting that the numbers are out of sequence with other birth certificates released around the same purported time of Barack Obama’s birth. Zullo informed the audience that five experts, in various professions, were working on these further investigations. Mr. Zullo concluded that his team would continue the investigation and that “we won’t quit until it is finished.”

The topic then shifted from the birth certificate to Obama’s selective service card. Sheriff Joe sent a letter to the Selective Service feds conveying his concerns. In response, he was told that nothing was wrong and that if he had a reason to inquire further, he should get in touch with the FBI. For background of the investigation into Obama’s selective service card, watch this video. According to Zullo, the sheriff will continue to pursue this matter with the selective service authorities.

After presenting this information, Zullo opened up the conference to questions from the audience. When asked who could be behind a conspiracy of this magnitude, he admitted that they do not yet know exactly who is behind this conspiracy. When asked if George Soros was behind it, Zullo seemed to admit the possibility. Zullo was also asked if the team would go to other states to testify at various court challenges to Obama’s eligibility for the ballot; he answered that they would not as they wish to focus strictly on their investigation. In response to a question about the “African” designation on the online birth certificate, Zullo answered that they would likely not pursue that in depth, as he wants to make sure that this investigation is not about race. He insisted that, contrary to claims by the liberal media, this is not about race or even political party; if a Republican’s citizenship were questioned, Zullo (a Republican by self-admission) says that he would probably push even harder in investigating that matter. In response to questions about a purported Kenyan Birth Certificate, as well as a video making the rounds that seems to show Obama telling an audience he is from Kenya, Zullo made clear that both were fabricated and both distracted from real issues in Barack Obama’s eligibility.

Mr. Zullo said that it is possible there will be another press conference in the near future, possibly with a round table of the experts. He admitted that the scope of the investigation is increasing, even spreading internationally. Although a lot of this information is mind-numbing, he said, there is no doubt that we have a forgery on our hands. The team is on the hunt for those who committed the forgery, Mr. Zullo said, and that they “have some pretty good ideas” about who committed the forgery. He admitted that he is doing all of this work for his country, his family, and his children.”

http://www.westernjournalism.com/highlights-of-sheriff-joes-most-recent-press-conference/

 

72 Comments

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

Tagged , , , ,

Justice Tom Parker charges of forgery of Obama birth certificates legitimate cause for concern, Alabama State Supreme Court justice, Hugh McInnish petition

Posted on March 31, 2012 | 85 comments

Justice Tom Parker charges of forgery of Obama birth certificates legitimate cause for concern, Alabama State Supreme Court justice, Hugh McInnish petition

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

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

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”…Jesus, John 8:32

From WND, World Net Daily, March 30, 2012.

“HIGH COURT JUSTICE: OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE FISHY”

“Says evidence raises ‘serious questions about authenticity'”

“An Alabama State Supreme Court justice earlier this week agreed that findings suggesting Barack Obama presented a forged birth certificate to the nation “would raise serious questions about the [document’s] authenticity” if presented as evidence in court.

Though the Alabama court denied a a petition filed by Hugh McInnish seeking to require an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate before the sitting president would be allowed on the state’s ballot in November, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.

Parker writes, “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” Parker refers to is the findings of an investigation conducted by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

As WND reported, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse announced there is probable cause indicating the documents released by the White House last April purported to be Obama’s original, long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration card are actually forgeries.”

“Parker, who also wrote a concurrence in another case arguing Roe v. Wade should be overturned, agreed that Arpaio’s findings were legitimate cause to question Obama’s presented documents, but nonetheless joined his fellow justices in denying McInnish’s petition.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/high-court-justice-obama-birth-certificate-fishy/

85 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, 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

Tagged , ,

Lord Monckton Obama birth certificate plainly a forgery, Dennis Miller interview, I would regard that as a very serious matter, Miller disagreed

Posted on March 23, 2012 | 124 comments

Lord Monckton Obama birth certificate plainly a forgery, Dennis Miller interview, I would regard that as a very serious matter, Miller disagreed

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

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

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

From the Daily Caller March 22, 2012.

“Lord Monckton: ‘I’m no birther,’ but Obama birth certificate ‘plainly a forgery’”

“On Dennis Miller’s radio show Thursday Lord Christopher Monckton, a former policy adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and an activist against global warming “alarmism,” went all-in on questioning President Barack Obama’s citizenship.

Monckton, the 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, hinted about his position on the issue in April 2010 at a tea party rally on the National Mall near the White House. But on Miller’s show, he said the birth certificate issue was far more important that combatting so-called anthropogenic global warming.

“I mean, hey you got a president who has a false birth certificate on the Internet, on the White House website,” Monckton said. “It’s not even clear where he was born. You’ve got a national debt which is rising into the stratosphere. You’ve got unemployment certainly here in California at 11 percent, 50 percent in the construction industry. These are real problems. You’ve got real environmental problems — overfishing, deforestation, pollution, not so much in the west but certainly in other countries. These are real problems which ought to be addressed. You’ve got poverty. You’ve got disease. These are again serious problems in Africa for instance, that we could be helping with. But no, we’re obsessed with making the rich even richer and making the absolute bankers richer still by going for global warming and cap-and-trade and other nonsenses of this kind.”

Miller protested by saying he disagreed with the suggestion that Obama has a fraudulent birth certificate. But Monckton dug in his heels.

“I don’t know whether he is Kenyan or not,” Monckton said. “The point is that if I were you, I would want to make absolutely sure that he was born here before allowing him to be elected. And the birth certificate that he put up on that website, I don’t know where he was born. But I do know that birth certificate isn’t genuine.”

Monckton firmly asserted that the birth certificate on the White House website wasn’t real, and claimed it could be dismantled with software.

“It appears in layers on the screen in such a way you can remove quite separately each of the individual dates,” Monckton said. “You use Adobe Illustrator and each of the individual dates is in its own separate layer. This thing has been fabricated. Sheriff [Joe] Arpaio of Arizona has had a team on this for six months. And he has now gone public and said there’s something very desperately wrong with this and of course nobody is saying anything because the entire electorate has been fooled.”

“I’m no birther, don’t get me wrong,” Monckton said. “I haven’t a clue where Obama was born and I wouldn’t want to entreat into the private grief behind investigating. But the point is, is what he has done on the White House website is he has put up a document which he is plainly a forgery and I would regard that as a very serious matter.””

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/22/lord-monckton-im-no-birther-but-obama-birth-certificate-plainly-a-forgery/

What did Miller mean on the O’Reilly show on April 27, 2011?

“MILLER: Listen, I had six cab drivers today. I couldn’t have cobbled one birth certificate together through all half dozen of them, OK? So this birth certificate thing doesn’t bother me. I think what happened is Barack Obama got in, and on the first day he was in, he called the federal, you know, bureau of certificates and said, “I’d like a copy of my birth certificate.” It being a federal thing, it took two and a half years. I don’t think he’s been withholding it. I think it’s screwed up.”

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/transcript/dennis-miller-obama-releasing-his-birth-certificate

Miller, the enigma speak was cute on Saturday Night Live. Time to man up and speak the truth.

124 Comments

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

Tagged , , ,