Natural Born Citizenship
Articles, information and case law on the “natural born citizenship” requirement for President of the United States.
Well maybe or maybe not!
According to the African Press International (API) they have Barack Obama’s genuine birth certificate.
They say it proves once and for all Barack Obama was born in Mombasa.
Apparently what API does not understand is that Obama does not meet the requirement to be President of the USA because both of his parents were NOT AMERICAN CITIZENS.
Should the Obama Mombasa birth certificate actually turn up and be legitimate a whole lot of people here in the United States should end up at the end of a rope on a branch of the old oak tree.
Here is the story:
President Obama will be forced by circumstances to apologize: Genuine Birth Certificate surfaces – Americans have been led to believe otherwise, revelation to change the political landscape.
Posted by African Press International on March 9, 2012
Now it is here and places the president in the African continent. The debate surrounding it will now end after the revelation, and those who have not been telling the truth will have to be made answerable one way or another.
The revelation, however, coming during this election year 2012 is doing no good to the democratic party.
API on Tuesday the 6th March evening received President Obama’s genuine birth certificate. API decided not to hurry in publishing it immediately because we wanted to be sure of the content value.
Now that the scrutiny has been done, the publishing of the Birth certificate that will clear the air once and for all is being done without prejudice. This may force the US president to apologise to the American people for having been kept in the dark on the issue for a long time now on demanding the publishing of the birth certificate by President Obama.
The purpose of scanning the official letter is to ensure that what we have received as you see here is fully collaborated officially.
Everyone knows that the documents are very sensitive and are not for misuse by any person to gain upper hand in political games.
It is, however, fair that the whole truth is brought to light and have the whole saga put to rest once and for all.
Many people seem to be of the opinion that there is a plan to hide from them the real thing. The US President says he is born in Hawaii. Many documents being circulated worldwide says otherwise. Therefore, it is very important to be outright and get the real thing on the table without witch hunt or without trying to malign the president’s name, unless the truth is not what he personally has said.
A duly signed official letter and a very special document will be scanned here for all to see – this comes in a few hours or days, depending on how quick API gets the clearance to do so. The two documents will put the issue to rest and clear the air once and for all who wish to know the true facts of this case file that has bothered a section of the American people!
It is only reasonable to continue working on this case in order to reveal the truth of the matter.
Another issue important to consider is why many are so interested in this. If Obama has ruled now for three good years and is now in his fourth year – and already asking for another term that will give him new 4 years in the White House, is there any wrongdoing when he actually has delivered leadership and continues to do so? He has not run down the country, so what is all the farce about where he is born? After all, he has lived in the US all his life.
Whole story HERE.
For those who have been following the this birth certificate story we have already seen a Kenyan Birth certificate produced by Lucas Daniel Smith.
Will the documents match?
To my knowledge 12 days after the article posted by API no original birth certificate image has been produced.
Do they actually have one or have they been somehow scared off from presenting the story?
Here is the story behind the Smith document:
His website is HERE.
What a surprise Georgia Judge Michael Malihi punted the Barack Obama eligibility down the road to be settled in the future.
Ya have to love the legal systems double speak.
No wonder the “citizen mass” lives in a perpetual state of fogged up confusion.
Malihi stated in the Orly Taitz segment of the case: “None of the testifying witnesses provided persuasive testimony. Moreover, the Court finds that none of the written submissions tendered by the Plaintiffs have probative value.”
In “judge speak” the dodge is the Court had no evidence which proved Obama was born in Hawaii OR NOT.
That being the case saying Obama is a “natural born citizen” follows HOW?
Georgia Judge Michael Malihi has ruled that President Barack Obama’s name will remain on the Georgia primary ballot. Malihi dismissed one challenge that contended Obama has a computer-generated Hawaiian birth certificate, a fraudulent Social Security number and invalid U.S. identification papers.
He also turned back another that claimed the president is ineligible to be a candidate because his father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of Obama’s birth.
The findings by Malihi now go to Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who will make the final determination.
I expect Kemp will also kick the can down the road to be sorted out and solved later.
After Barack Obama is booted out of office on the merits of his own failed Presidential leadership skills.
From the beginning it has been clear that Barack Obama failed the “natural born citizenship” requirement of the Constitution to be President of the United States.
The question of his birth-certificate being a forgery simply adds to the problems he faces.
If the Obama birth-certificate proves to be forged those who unfortunately decided to help him in his cause are apparently ignorant of the outcome if caught.
Under Section title 18 chapter 228 section 3592 the penalty for HIGH TREASON IS DEATH.
A forgery of the Barack Obama birth-certificate will be deemed “causing grave risk to national security”.
From reading the founding documents it is pretty clear what the term “natural born citizen” means.
A child born under US jurisdiction of two (2) citizen parents.
Why no one in the Government has addressed it in regards to Barack Obama was the question.
Still today the media, primary candidates, political elites BOTH SIDES avoid the subject like the plague.
Is it ignorance or an agenda that drives them?
A big part of the public appear to be stuck in the limbo of “well if this was a real issue why is NO ONE IMPORTANT addressing it”?
I want to drop dead of fatigue when anyone asks that question.
Hell I don’t know!
I could give you about a hundred guesses that probably are accurate somewhere with part of those in charge.
Anyway the bottom line is this issue will not fade into the sunset.
Not as long as there are people who REALLY WANT to abide by the Constitution.
So no matter what the outcome of the Georgia case might be … the fight now moves into Alabama, Tennessee, Arizona, New Hampshire, and even Illinois, Obama’s home political base.
Part of the public is becoming educated.
We all have questions that NEED TO BE LEGALLY sorted out.
Yet SCOTUS remains silent.
Are they waiting for Obama to get out of office before they take on the case?
It will reach them sometime for sure.
There literally is not wiggle room for them to go against the founding documents.
The only change that could happen is an amendment to the Constitution.
Perhaps we need that for the future.
None of that bails Obama out of his dilemma he is what he is … a simple “citizen” IF THAT.
The problem for those making the judgments now? They are hooking themselves to treason against the country if they rule wrong. The states are responsible for saying who is eligible to get on the ballot and who is not. They were caught off guard in 2008. Today they are not. They play Russian Roulette with their own futures.
The seriousness of this issue just got kicked up a notch.
Those in charge of vetting Obama have now been thrust into the middle of a dilemma that better be thought out well before decisions are made.
Asses are quickly being dragged into the line of fire.
Who is going to pass go and collect $200 and who is liable to be brought up on charges for dereliction of duty? With a TREASON LABEL and penalty attached.
Definitely an interesting process to watch.
Nor will it until it finally creeps its way into the Supreme Court for settlement.
For anyone willing to take the time to look into the congressional records of THAT TIME it is clear that “natural born citizen” is clearly defined as a child born IN THE US of PARENTS who are citizens thereof.
That very simple “term definition” from John Bingham (author of the 14th ammendment) found in … 39th Congress Senate and House Debates (December 4, 1865 to July 28, 1866) PP Page 961 of 1920 Page 1291.
Image of that page can be seen HERE.
That says: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of PARENTS not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. . . ”
Anyone looking at that definition WITHOUT BIAS understands it to mean BORN IN THE USA OF TWO (2) CITIZEN PARENTS.
Now it can be argued until the cows come home IF, IF, IF or WHY, MAYBE? … and has been already.
Frankly I do not care who influenced who, how they arrived at or who just plucked the term out of the air.
I only care that they did and it was recorded in simple ENGLISH TEXT for those who can still understand BASIC ENGLISH.
I have yet to find any argument cropping up in Congressional records (for that period) which argues or redefines that specific term “natural born citizen”.
The movement being launched to keep Barack Obama off the official state ballots in election 2012 has began.
Rightfully Judge Michael Malihi has taken up the case, refused the Obama quash requests and ordered him to appear.
The door has now been cracked.
This hearing is a BIG DEAL!
It was the first time that a court has accepted arguments on the merits of the controversy over Obama’s status. Obama never met the constitutional requirements to occupy the Oval Office, and the states and Congress failed in their obligations to make sure only a qualified president is inaugurated. His supporters, meanwhile, argue he won the 2008 election and therefore was “vetted” by America.
WHAT A SURPRISE! Obama and his lawyer did not show up.
So now what?
Well the hearing went on without him.
Blow by blow results are below:
By Sharon Rondeau
The Post & Email (site is under maintenance at time of publishing; see The Post & Email for further details on this and other Obama eligibility cases, documentation, and history)
(Jan. 26, 2012) — The court convened at approximately 9:30 a.m. Judge Michael Malihi began by asking those present to stand and reading the last paragraph of Atty. Michael Jablonski’s letter to Brian Kemp, Georgia Secretary of State, “into the record,” commenting that Jablonski was not present at the hearing.
The judge called plaintiff David Welden to stand and asked where he resided and if he were a registered voter in the state of Georgia. Then his attorney, Van Irion, stood and stated that there were three types of citizenship in the United States. He then provided argument on the definition of “natural born Citizen,” referring to Minor v. Happersett.
“The court should recognize that the term ‘citizen” is not ‘natural born Citizen,’ Irion said. “The Minor court’s definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ says ‘parents.’
“In closing, this case is about the Constitution,” Irion said. We’ve shown that Barack Obama’s father was never a citizen…and that means he is not constitutionally qualified…Finally, the defendant was ordered to be here, and I wish to state on the record that that shows not just a contempt for this court…”
Then Irion was interrupted and stopped speaking.
9:54 a.m.: Atty. J. Mark Hatfield stood and stating that he represents Kevin Richard Powell and Carl Swensson. Hatfield mentioned the White House schedule as he saw that it related to Obama’s lack of attendance at the hearing.
Carl Swensson was sworn in at 9:56 a.m. and stated his residence and county. Then Kevin Powell was asked the same. Both were asked if they were able to vote for President of the United States.
Swensson and Powell explained their challenges filed with the Secretary of State’s office to the judge.
Hatfield held up the Certification of Nomination which Nancy Pelosi signed in 2008 to place Obama’s name on the ballot. The judge asked if it was a “certified copy,” and Hatfield answered that it was. He then read from it, stating that it did not affirm that the candidates met constitutional requirements to serve, while the wording from the Republican National Committee for its candidates did contain that wording.
The judge asked if the documents were from a “United States government source,” and Hatfield answered “Yes, sir, they were.”
Hatfield cited Jablonski’s January 25 letter “indicating that they did not want the proceedings to go forward and did not want to participate.” Hatfield also entered into evidence Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.
Ken Allen, a resident of Arizona, stood to present the documentation he had received from the State Department after submitting a FOIA request early in 2009, which The Post & Email reported on here. He stated that “Barack Obama Sr.” was “never a citizen.”
At 10:09 a.m. someone said, “Let’s take a short break,” and people stood up and began moving around and talking with one another.
At 10:17 a.m., the court was called back in to order.
Atty. Orly Taitz was called upon to speak. The Georgia registered voter whom she represents, David Farrar, stood and identified himself.
Taitz utilized a projector on the wall to the right of the judge as an aid in her presentation. She then stated that evidence existed that Obama possessed Indonesian citizenship, to which the judge was heard by this writer to say, “That’s not relevant.” Taitz then discussed the court’s decision in Minor v. Happersett and was interrupted by the judge, who said, “Counselor, can you save your argument for the closing?” She then stopped speaking.
Mr. Christopher Strunk of New York then went up to the front of the courtroom to testify, and Taitz began to ask him questions about the passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham, one of which contains the name “Soebarkah.” Strunk stated, “She wanted that expunged from her record, but we never got that.”
Susan Daniels, Private Investigator from Ohio, then took the stand, and spoke about her investigation which revealed that Obama had reportedly been using a social security number which she contended had not been assigned to him.
Taitz asked Daniels, “What was the social security number attached to your request?” and Daniels read off “042-68-4425.” Daniels said, “In all my years, I’ve never seen anything like this.” She stated that the person who had originally owned the number had been born in 1890.
“First I ran the social security number to check the address, and the same number came up for him in Massachusetts, Illinois, and Washington, DC. It showed a phone number, and it was always the same number…It would show intermittently ‘August 4, 1961′ and ’1890.’” Daniels stated that she obtained information “directly from the Social Security Administration.”
At 10:30 Mr. Chito Papa took the stand. He stated that he works in the field of Information Technology including Adobe® software.
Taitz asked Papa if the “birth certificate” which “Obama posted online” had flattened layers. ”Did you see one layer or multiple layers? Taitz asked. ”I saw multiple layers,” he answered.
Taitz asked Papa about Obama’s social security number which appeared on his tax return posted on the internet, and Papa stated that the layers had not been flattened. Taitz then thanked Papa for his testimony.
At 10:36 a.m. another witness, Linda Jordan, was called to the stand. Taitz adjusted her Powerpoint presentation by means of a laptop computer and began by asking a question about “E-Verify,” the U.S. government’s system for flagging potential illegal immigrants from working. Jordan stated that she ran Obama’s number through the E-Verify system and said, “When I read it, it was 2011, and it could not verify it. It came back.”
At 10:39 a.m., Douglas Vogt took the stand. Vogt stated that he owns a typesetting company and has been “in the business for 18 years now.”
Taitz asked Vogt if he examined the birth certificate which was posted online, and he said, “Yes, I did.” He stated that “sloping lines” would not be seen if the image had been made from a paper document.
Taitz asked, “Would you expect to see a clear embossed seal on the document?” and Vogt answered, “Yes, I would.” However, he stated that such was not present on Obama’s birth certificate. Regarding the number of Obama’s purported birth record, Vogt stated that “federal regs” require that “all birth certificate numbers have to be sequential, starting on January 1.”
At 10:49, witness John Sampson took the stand. He stated that he has a background in criminal justice, served as a police officer in New York City and worked as an immigration inspector. His background includes working for the INS in the area of “immigration fraud” and he was also a deportation officer. He stated that he has testified in front of “federal grand juries.” He stated that he started his own consulting firm in 2009 and has been self-employed since then.
Taitz asked Sampson about Obama’s social security number, and Sampson said that he “ran” the number 042-68-4425 and that it was assigned to Obama since 1977.
Taitz asked if Sampson had examined the birth certificate, and he said, “Yes.” He raised the issue of the Nordyke twins’ birth certificate, whose numbers were lower than Obama’s even though their birth occurred a day later. He stated that the registrar’s name was different than that on the Nordyke twins’ documents and that it was unlikely that the registrar would have been different in the “same hospital” regarding births one day apart.
Sampson recommended further investigation, including subpoenas and court orders, to obtain more information on the number “042-68-4425.”
Sampson mentioned that Obama has also been known as “Barry Soetoro.”
Taitz asked what Sampson thought needed to be done regarding the questions about Obama’s background, and he recommended asking for an official copy of the SS-5 for his social security number application and the Hawaii Department of Health to see “if he was born in Hawaii.” Sampson stated that an investigation would be “a criminal investigation” through a U.S. attorney’s office. He said that if a person has been found to be impersonating a U.S. citizen, he would be subject to “deportation.”
Shortly thereafter, Sampson’s testimony ended, and Taitz began discussing Obama’s alleged years in Indonesia from 1968-71, during which he was known as “Barry Soetoro.”
“We have another boy who from 1968-69 was in Hawaii,” she said. The judge then said, “Are you testifying? Do you know how?” which brought laughter from the assembly. The judge then said she could discuss the matter during closing arguments. Taitz responded, “I would like to testify,” after which she took the stand.
Taitz stated that “Mr. Obama has resigned from the bar.” The judge asked, “How is that relevant?” Taitz said that it was pertinent because Obama was “hiding his identity.”
“I’m going to ask you to submit your testimony in writing,” the judge said. ”OK,” Taitz said. She then left the stand and spoke from the assembly once again. She stated that “We have clear evidence of fraud and forgery…Mr. Obama has used other last names…” She then stated that of all the lawsuits filed against Obama regarding his eligibility, none were heard on “the merits.” Taitz asked Judge Malihi to order the release of Obama’s records in Hawaii and to hold Obama in “contempt of court” for failing to appear at the hearing.
The judge said, “Thank you” and adjourned the court at 11:12 a.m.