Two Obama Eligibility Cases Filed By Two Presidential Candidates
at U.S. Supreme Court: One Set for Conference on April 20th
BACKGROUND: WASHINGTON D.C. - POTUS Write-In Candidate Montgomery Blair Sibley today(3/28/12) filed his Petition for Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. That Petition presents the Supreme Court with record evidence that: (i) Barack Hussein Obama, II, is not a “natural born Citizen” as required by Article II, §1 of the Constitution and thus is ineligible to be President and (ii) that the “Certificates of Live Birth” released by Mr. Obama are in fact forgeries. Additionally, Sibley is filing a Motion to Expedite Consideration of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. By these documents, Sibley is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to expedite the resolution of his Quo Warranto lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court before the Honorable John D. Bates. Significantly, though eighty-five (85) days have passed since Sibley’s filing of the lawsuit on January 3, 2012, Judge Bates has refused to rule upon any of the pending matters in that suit.
Sibley’s filings procedurally forces the Supreme Court to declare whether they will take up the question of Obama’s eligibility to be President or allow the question to be relegated to a judicial process that would not reach the Supreme Court until well after the November 6, 2012, election, let alone before the September 3, 2012, Democratic Convention.
Sibley stated: “Obama’s eligibility to be President is now in the hands of the Supreme Court. I have properly invoked the federal statute which authorizes challenges to the eligibility of federal office holders and procedurally have now moved that question from the District Court through the Circuit Court of Appeals and now, with these filings, to the Supreme Court. If they deny my Petition to expedite resolution of the significant and fairly-posed question of Obama’s eligibility , it is a clear statement that they will refuse to allow that matter to be properly and promptly adjudicated. In that case, I fear “We the People” will have lost “the right, possessed by every citizen, to require that the Government be administered according to law.”1 For if the Supreme Court will not take up the issue of whether the Government is being administered according to the rule of law, then the government is clearly being administered instead by the rule of whim and caprice.”
Sibley concluded: “Thus I call upon the Supreme Court to forthwith resolve this heretofore unresolved question: Is Barack Hussein Obama, II, eligible to be President of the United States?”
READ THE PETITION HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/88294802/Montgomery-Sibley-Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-United-States-Supreme-Court-3-28-2012
The second case filed at the Supreme Court is Judy v Obama/Kemp. Judy is one of the Georgia plaintiffs and a 2012 presidential candidate. Background on the Gerogia challenge here and here.
READ THE PETITION HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/88295689/Judy-v-Obama-Kemp-Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-U-S-Supreme-Court-4-5-2012
VIDEO FLASHBACK: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Admits They're Evading Eligibility Issue - VIDEO HERE
HD VIDEO FROM 3/31 TEA PARTY EVENT WITH SHERIFF JOE POSTED HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/arizonavideo.html
-WATCH THE COMPLETE SHERIFF JOE PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/joe.html -
-ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
60 comments:
Is this the real reason the Fraud-in-Chief attacked the Black Robes earlier this week as an "unelected" branch of the federal government?
Yea, they are going to look at this case and BHO is pissed off about it.
I dont care why he does anything, the lying fraud must be arrested ASAP! Where the hell is the fbi, or secret service, joint chiefs! This is complete bullshit we have to wait for 9 assholes to take this shit up while they hear all kinds of other bullshit cases. Everything the kenyan signed is void!
After 3 years of failed attempts why would the Supreme Court take a case now? There's no real evidence of smoking gun as far as they are concerned. I'm just being honest. Let's get Arpaio's investigation and keep rolling with the State Sheriffs. That will yield much more fruit.
As a young boy being taught Islam in Indonesia or anywhere for that matter he would learn that constant intimidation and threat is the way of maintaining your chattel. This is a skill that the left has gleaned from the cooperation with those on the wrong side of history.
Nazi, Islamics, Socialists, Communists, etc ..
No , they will vote to see if they will look at it.. and they will vote no!!!
Have a nice weekend
kenyan fraud said...[Reply]
I dont care why he does anything, the lying fraud must be arrested ASAP! Where the hell is the fbi, or secret service, joint chiefs! This is complete bullshit we have to wait for 9 assholes to take this shit up while they hear all kinds of other bullshit cases. Everything the kenyan signed is void!
No matter how much you cry, wine whatever, Obama is not going to be arrested.
Anonymous said...[Reply]
Yea, they are going to look at this case and BHO is pissed off about it.
Lol,You really think Obama know's or and cares about this case!!
Terri is correct. They will refuse to hear it.@Terri
Sheriff joe went on meghan kelly a couple of days ago and he didn't say a word about obama's eligibility. He is a fraud and a phony.
At this point, I think the only way to remove Obama is for Arizona to remove him from the ballot. I think this is what Sheriff Joe Arpaio is planning to do. If Obama is removed from the ballot in AZ, liberal heads will explode and it will bring the issue into the main stream.
@kenyan fraud
"I dont care why he does anything, the lying fraud must be arrested ASAP! Where the hell is the fbi, or secret service, joint chiefs!"
---
Obama appointed the head of the FBI and all but one of the Joint Chiefs are also Obama appointees.
The head of the Secret Service is a Bush appointee but he serves at the pleasure of Obama under Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
That's why they do nothing.
kennedy and roberts , who voted NO the last times are pissed off enough NOW at BO , they will VOTE YES
In defence of the conservative SCOTUS justices one could easily argue that by their refusal to hear the birther case that they are not acting along party lines, like Oscama will try to claim if he loses the health care mandate. Hopefully someone has the balls to bring this up when he goes on the attack.
Why would the SCOTUS made up of two illegal Obama appointees, sworn in by a criminal Roberts who has always known Obama was ineligible, take this case?
Why would SCOTUS seek to expose Minor v. Happersett as the precedent case it is? Then all SCOTUS could do anyway is overturn MvH, which it can't.
The dishonorable chief justice roberts and both Obama appointees non justices kagan and sotomayor must recuse themselves from these proceedings, You can't allow roberts the knowingly complicit oath giver nor the irrelevant non justices have any part in such proceedings. The non-capitalization is deliberate, Obots: for these people are traitors. Did you read the pleadings? There is no doubt what is meant by natural born citizen for the strict and separate Article II section 1 qualifications for president. What Constitutional scholar that is an American could dare argue against this and not be a traitor. If you don't like the Constitution amend it,or die for destroying it and your nation traitors! If the court refuses it forever defines them as cowards sentences the court to meaninglessness or extinction.
I'm not anonymous I'm Bob M. from Ohio
No guts no glory. They need to stop f**king around and deal with it, otherwise Bari is right about them being political and easily intimidated. Worthless sacks of Sh*t.
@Anonymous
"What Constitutional scholar that is an American could dare argue against this"
Actaully, Bob nearly all of them do.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't Justice Scalia once say that only 4 Justices have to agree to hear the case, not a majority of 5?
Obama's little threat to the Supremes about validating the Health Care Mandate as constitutional makes sense now. Looks like he is setting up a "They are picking on me because they did not like what I said. That is why the are taking/hearing this petition/review." His little tirade was not really about health care but setting up anger and disbelief at the Supremes should they hear this. Everything Obama said in his little threat could easily have been said about him and the Supreme Court giving time to his eligibility. The guy is always plotting and planning the next confrontation.
The IMPORTANCE of these cases is that they are directed at CANDIDATE obama 2012, not president obama from 2008
Leo Donofrio did get his case in front of SCOTUS for emergency injunction before the election in 2008. He sued the SOS of NJ and had Standing issues with the lower courts. SCOTUS declined to hear his case in Conference. Once obama became prez the game changed as Standing became even more difficult.
Now roll forward to 2012. These two cases that just reached SCOTUS are the first to name Candidate obama 2012 and are both being challenged by other 2012 Presidential Candidates which SHOULD satisfy any standing issues.
Throw in Sheriff Arpeio and his public announcement of a duly elected law enforcement investigation, SCOTUS has now found themselves in quite a pickle....
What they do will define who they are, and how they are remembered for a long time. At this point, they have to realize that this birther shit AIN"T GOING AWAY ....
Bob M from Ohio. There is literally no support in law for your interpretation of the definition of NBC, Even former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, not exactly a liberal, disagrees with you. There is not a single case, statute ordinance or law that says what you claim. I challenge you to name even one authority that you rely on. Just one, I will wait.
Quote:
"Sheriff joe went on meghan kelly a couple of days ago and he didn't say a word about obama's eligibility. He is a fraud and a phony."
No, Joe isn't a fraud or a phony and that BS is getting really old. At the moment he is easily the best thing we have going.
John Doe--yes, he is a fraud. He did not do an investigation and rubber-stamped the Corsi lies. It was a total sham.
@kenyan fraud
Numerous concerned citizens have made criminal complaints to the FBI and the Secret Service. Both the FBI and the Secret Service are knowingly and intentionally turning a blind eyes to Obama's suspected forgeries and purportedly have actually refused to investigate on more than one occassion.
Don't believe me? They both have websites where you can report your suspicions. Try it, (I did more than once) you will never hear back from them, nor will you ever hear that they are investigating these forgeries, because they are not.
@AnonymousY
Then they are traitors or fools like you, Obot coward. There has never been any doubt as to the framers meaning of natural born and what their intent was: to protect the nation and the office of president and commander in chief from foreign influence. You know King George II? The Mad king. and every other foreign threat to our nation, immunized and inoculated by 2 generations of citizenship with undivided loyalties to the nation. It furthers this intent by requiring 2 other things the age of 35 thereby reinforcing the 'nurture' of even children of naturalized parents and then adds 14 years of living in the nation directly preceding the eligibility to run, why? Because they knew clearly of the many familial relationships to England and Europe and that many of the privileged class from this new nation would return to their roots and Europe for education and cultural grooming. Therefore 14 years of continuous residence would reinforce the nurturing and offer historic adult citizenship in practice for voters to see,
and if you recall until recently all of our Presidents had military service and most in wars. Nature and Nurture, born on our soil and immunized by 2 generations of citizenship, because they saw clearly the risk of a usurper like we have right now. Normal people can appreciate the truth of their intent and prophetic insight if you recall that we fought them again in 1812. This issue has never been visited either in amendment or court ruling and all precedence is purely anecdotal and related to mere citizenship, unless it has direct reference to Article II section 1 and the precedence that does... does not offer your traitor comrade any comfort. he's ineligible and your vote was a vote for treason. By the way my Irish/German ancestors fought and many were wounded or died in every war this nation has ever fought. Maybe you just haven't learned that kind of respect
I'm not anonymous like you Obot, I'm Bob M, from Ohio
@John Doe Sr.
"Sheriff joe went on meghan kelly a couple of days ago and he didn't say a word about obama's eligibility. He is a fraud and a phony."
Reading between the lines I think Fox told Sheriff Joe no birther talk. Knowing that he could not get on if he didn't agree he did so, but he put that plug in about him being Constitutional. In other words I am legit unlike the fraud in the whitehouse, without having to actually say it.
this case will have "teeth"-- gotta see this one
Anony@5:08
Minor v. Happersett
US v. Wong Kim Ark
Perkins v. Elg
plus it's already codified into the LAW
CRA1866 and 14th and US Code 1401
At Bob M. I asked you to provide authority. You didn't. So just admit that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Oh and Bob M. You certainly are anonymous. You can't even be honest about that.
Everyone listen: If the authorities believe that the majority of americans believe that there is doubt to the eligibility they will take action, not before. So do not take a position that nothing will happen, demand it.
Neither Minor or Perkins stand for that proposition and the Court in Wong Kim Ark expressly rejected the de Vattel definition of NBC in favor of the english common law. And title 8, section 1401 of the US code indicates that a person born on US soil is a citizen at birth regardless of parentage--see section a.
What else ya got?
@Anonymous
The US Constitution Article II section 1 clause 5 is my documentary proof.
The experts are clear on this:
Expert 1 Chester A. Arthur, only other usurper and his deliberate and historical cover up of his Natural Born status and complete concealment of family history.
Expert 2 Barry Soetoro and his complete cover up of all historical facts and documentation from his life and the obviously forged documents he presents to claim legitimacy. The 2 best experts ever on usurpation. And oddly boiler plate twins of cover up.
Expert 3 George Romney a non natural born citizen who left the presidential race in my voting lifetime as soon as this became an issue. Mitt are you listening?
If you have nothing to fear then let's beg the court to look and demand all documentation be released for examination. What the hell is this Soebarakah guy going to do when it comes to building his residential library? It's going to be full of what? welfare checks and failed green companies. Destroyed union coal and real energy jobs. A story of a nation run by race baiters? Where's his history you idiot?
I'm not anonymous like you Obot I'm Bob M. from Ohio
Quote:
"John Doe--yes, he is a fraud. He did not do an investigation and rubber-stamped the Corsi lies. It was a total sham."
What did the Sheriff rubber stamp?. How the hell do you know he, "did not do an investigation? They spent six months coming up with the BC and Selective Service stuff. Should they have told Corsi they did not want to see any of the research he had already done?
Why do you say Corsi's book is "all lies"?
Corsi has said several times the Posse has corrected him on errors they have found in his research.
As much as I like this website, it is crawling with Obots. The treatment Sheriff Joe is getting here reinforces how well the Sheriff is doing.
Stay tuned.
It's quite amusing to watch you get excited every friggin time a case gets filed and the conference date is announced. Each time is "OMG, this is THE CASE!"
This case has already been rejected. How do we know? Not a single judge called for the appellee to file a response to Sibley's motion. Not a single judge called for the Solicitor General to file a response.
It's a done deal. Just waiting for Monday Orders on the 23rd.
“WHY THE SUPREME COURT WILL STRIKE DOWN ALL OF OBAMACARE”
By Peter Ferrara
Excerpt:
“Barack Obama made a national laughingstock out of himself with his recent comments on the
Obamacare law now before the Supreme Court. Obama said on Monday, “I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” (emphasis added).
President Obama is not stupid. But he thinks you are. He knows the Obamacare health care takeover was not passed by a strong majority. But he figures you’re so dumb he can rewrite recent history in plain sight. The law passed a House with a huge Democrat majority at the time by only 219-212. It did not get a single Republican vote, but the opposition was bipartisan.
The law also barely squeaked past a Senate filibuster despite an overwhelming 60 Senate Democrats, and even then humiliating buyoffs were necessary. Public opposition was so strong that the ultraliberal Democrat controlled Massachusetts, the only state to go for George McGovern in 1972, elected a Republican in a special election for Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat, to terminate the Democrats’ filibuster-proof majority. That required final passage of the law improperly in violation of Congressional rules as a reconciliation measure, which is only to be used to clean up the budget and so cannot be filibustered.
And given that Obama is so certain you can’t remember what happened just two years ago, he is more than certain that you have never heard of the ancient history of Marbury v. Madison, where the 14-year old Supreme Court in 1803 took the then unprecedented step of overturning a provision of law adopted by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress, in the Judiciary Act of 1789. That case was where the Supreme Court first recognized its power of judicial review, under which it is empowered to strike down laws found unconstitutional. As the Wall Street Journal observed on Tuesday:
“In the 209 years since, the Supreme Court has invalidated part or all of countless laws on grounds that they violated the Constitution. All of these laws were passed by a ‘democratically elected’ legislature of some kind, either Congress or in one of the states. And no doubt many of them were passed by ‘strong’ majorities….probably stronger majorities than passed the Affordable Care Act.”
See The Forwarded Entire Article Here From The Wonderful Website: http://www.MichaelSavage.com:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/04/05/why-the-supreme-court-will-strike-down-all-of-obamacare/
“WHY THE SUPREME COURT WILL STRIKE DOWN ALL OF OBAMACARE”
By Peter Ferrara
Excerpt:
“Barack Obama made a national laughingstock out of himself with his recent comments on the
Obamacare law now before the Supreme Court. Obama said on Monday, “I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” (emphasis added).
President Obama is not stupid. But he thinks you are. He knows the Obamacare health care takeover was not passed by a strong majority. But he figures you’re so dumb he can rewrite recent history in plain sight. The law passed a House with a huge Democrat majority at the time by only 219-212. It did not get a single Republican vote, but the opposition was bipartisan.
The law also barely squeaked past a Senate filibuster despite an overwhelming 60 Senate Democrats, and even then humiliating buyoffs were necessary. Public opposition was so strong that the ultraliberal Democrat controlled Massachusetts, the only state to go for George McGovern in 1972, elected a Republican in a special election for Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat, to terminate the Democrats’ filibuster-proof majority. That required final passage of the law improperly in violation of Congressional rules as a reconciliation measure, which is only to be used to clean up the budget and so cannot be filibustered.
And given that Obama is so certain you can’t remember what happened just two years ago, he is more than certain that you have never heard of the ancient history of Marbury v. Madison, where the 14-year old Supreme Court in 1803 took the then unprecedented step of overturning a provision of law adopted by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress, in the Judiciary Act of 1789. That case was where the Supreme Court first recognized its power of judicial review, under which it is empowered to strike down laws found unconstitutional. As the Wall Street Journal observed on Tuesday:
“In the 209 years since, the Supreme Court has invalidated part or all of countless laws on grounds that they violated the Constitution. All of these laws were passed by a ‘democratically elected’ legislature of some kind, either Congress or in one of the states. And no doubt many of them were passed by ‘strong’ majorities….probably stronger majorities than passed the Affordable Care Act.”
See The Forwarded Entire Article Here From The Wonderful Website: http://www.MichaelSavage.com:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/04/05/why-the-supreme-court-will-strike-down-all-of-obamacare/
@Terri No matter how much you cry, wine whatever, Obama is not going to be arrested.
-------------------------------------------
I wouldn't put money on that bet if I were you. Obviously you haven't heard about the recent filings @ the International Court in the Hague. The Military is now under civilian control. In other words, they answer to WE THE PEOPLE now. So just keep running that mouth and watch what happens. lol I'd suggest you & all your Obot buddies & everyone else here, get educated on Common Law real soon. The country is ours again & you're not gonna like what's about to happen. :)
Anonymous @ April 6, 2012 5:52 PM
8 USC § 1401 enumerates which persons born on US soil are citizens.
Do you claim that "citizen" and "natural born citizen" are interchangeable terms? Article II argues against that.
@Anonymous
He's not allowed to say anything about it on the main stream media. They are the ones who put Obama in the White House, so why would they rat on themselves?
Anonymous @ 5:52PM:
Citizen at birth and NBC are 2 different definitions. One grants U.S. citizenship and the other grants citizenship AND eligibility to run for POTUS or VPOTUS.
@Anonymous
Of course, there isn't "single statute, case, or ordinance", you dummy
IT'S THE NATURAL LAW, STUPID
natural~ unmitigated, unequivocal
@John Doe Sr.
Agreed!
Arpaio has struck just about the right tone
tempered, disciplined, not given to hysterics
What is set for conference on April 20th is not the Petition for Writ of Certiorari. It is the Motion to Expedite that is set for conference.
@Anonymous April 6, 2012 5:52PM:
You've got nothing thus far.
If natural born citizen is the same as citizen why is it that only the office of president and vice president require the holder of that office be a natural born citizen?All other offices do not require that.How about an answer you Obot brown noses..
No, Joe isn't a fraud or a phony and that BS is getting really old. At the moment he is easily the best thing we have going.
*************************
I relunctantly have to agree that he is one of the TWO "best" things we have going.
The other is ORLY TAITZ -- albeit in a different direction that is just as important and possibly fruitful.
She is relentless, unstopable, and MOVES QUICKLY, (which Joe does NOT appear to be doing).
And I do think Arapaio should testify, for Orly, to at least what he has already publically stated. She is not asking for anything "new".
He argues that it is an ongoing case, but in that case he should not be saying anything, but since he has, there is nothing wrong with repeating at least that much it in a court-of-law.
Since Congress won't do anything, we need EITHER the Courts or Criminal proceedings.
We also need MORE SHERRIF's involved. Joe simply has too much baggage to be taken serious by too many people.
BUT ... the BIGGEST factor still must be the PRESS. Heck, we could have Obama either arrested/jailed and/or impeached, and the PRESS STILL WOULD NOT REPORT IT.
Sibley is a direct descendant of "Blair House"\
Backstory:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050302233.html
He goes to court in a Scottish kilts because he is LESS confined! He represented Larry Sinclair, Obama's alleged sex partner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKf1IdlDErc
He has been disbarred.
In other words, his name might open doors, but he never has a chance to sit at the table before he is told, "we'll call you."
The justices are EXTREMELY ANNOYED BY OBAMA'S PUGNACIOUS ATTITUDE AND OBNOXIOUS CONTEMPTIBLE BEHAVIOR.
Obama has insulted the SCOTUS twice now, the last time during the 2010 State of the Union:
“The President’s swipe at the Supreme Court was a breach of decorum, and represents the worst of Washington politics — scapegoating ‘special interest’ bogeymen for all that ails Washington in attempt to silence the diverse range of speakers in our democracy,” said Bradley A. Smith, chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics."
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0110/Justice_Alitos_You_lie_moment.html
At least 4 justices are reaching their threshold of "judicial retraint/protection".
The consequences of removal will be their legacy. A decision to hear the case is determined by the extent of their ambivalence to CHANGE HISTORY.
Patriot's day is April 16. MAYBE, they will feel it is serendipitous to carry the torch of those who fought and died during the first battles of the Revolutionary War at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts, the events that forged our Constitution and CHANGED HISTORY!!
it is long past time, that the SCOTUS pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor AND DEMONSTRATE THEIR PATRIOTISM FOR AMERICAN RATHER THAN LOYALTY TO AN IMPERIAL AND SHAM PRESIDENT!!
Orly Taitz has been beaten by an empty table twice. Exactly how is she unstoppable?
@Anonymous
"...And title 8, section 1401 of the US code indicates that a person born on US soil is a citizen at birth regardless of parentage--see section a.
April 6, 2012 5:52 PM "
Let's see what Title 8, Section 1401 of the US code, subsection (a) REAALY indicates:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
"The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a)a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;"
This is the same statement that is written in 14th Amendment.
Try to read the total statement and understand what "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means.
If you are honest, you'll understand that
NBC (Natural Born Citizens; article 2-1-5) = "...born in the US... AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof" (14th Amendment) since their birth = "born in the US of parents (plural) who are US citiznes" /in order not to have at birth an allegiance to any foreign coveregnty/.
Having foreigner father Obama doesn't meet this definition of NBC. So he wasn't and he isn't eligible to be POTUS according to the Constitution (regardless of his birthplace).
Details:
http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/why-obama-is-ineligible-regardless-of-where-he-was-born/comment-page-2/#comment-78299
by btw | March 9, 2012 at 9:32 AM
"Obama is not eligible to be POTUS according to the Constitution (regardless of his birthplace)."
Orly is going to court in MS this month for another try...Nothing beats a failure but a try!
Those that oppose Obama lose their lives. Juditial blindness is not about the law or politics. It's about personal survival.
@Anonymous
I don't see my comment being placed. So I repeat it.
Anonimous said: "... And title 8, section 1401 of the US code indicates that a person born on US soil is a citizen at birth regardless of parentage--see section a...
April 6, 2012 5:52 PM "
Let's see what 8 USC § 1401, section (a) REALLY indicates:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401
"The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a)a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;"
Exactly the same statement /like in (a)/ is written in 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
So try to read and understand the total statement including "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof".
If you honestly do that, you'll understand that
NBC (Natural Born Citizens; Article 2-1-5) = “…born in the US… AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof” (14th Amendment) since their birth = “born in the US of parents (plural) who are US citizens” /in order not to have at birth an allegiance to any foreign sovereignty/
Having foreigner father Obama doesn’t meet this definition of NBC. So he wasn’t and he isn’t eligible to be POTUS (regardless of his birthplace).
Details:
http://dancingczars.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/why-obama-is-ineligible-regardless-of-where-he-was-born/comment-page-2/#comment-78299
by btw | March 9, 2012 at 9:32 AM |
"Obama is not eligible to be POTUS according to the Constitution (regardless of his birthplace)."
Sheriff Arpaio and Jerome Corsi have both been instructed by FOX to not discuss the "birther" issue or they will not be invited on FOX anymore. Judge Napalitano was canned because he mentioned the issue on his show, Sean Hannity now supposedly "vetting" O.whodat won't mention it, Bill O'Really just repeats lies when anyone mentions it, Glenn Beck who is an anti-birther got canned for all the snooping he was doing about Soros who single-handedly bankrolled O.commie, Michael Savage is banned from FOX because he is a "birther", Lou Dobbs who got canned from C.rap N.ot N.ews got a FBN (FOX Bus. Network) job has never mentioned it and Joseph Farah who mentioned Rubio's ineligibility with two foreign parents when he was born in the US was told by Sean Hannity "that won't fly" and he's been blacklisted. So much for Fair & Balanced. SOMEONE BIG has shut down FOX on ANY birther stuff. Not to mention ALL the right talkers who WILL NOT MENTION IT: Rush, Levin, Graham, Hannity, Steyne etc. SCOTUS won't touch it. Judges and Congressmen won't touch it. We live in really strange, corrupt and fretful times when no powers that be will defend the Constituion and investigate, indict and incarcerate the Kenyan in Kontrol.
Well then it will be left to an angry God to act.
Well then, it will be left to an angry God to act.
Georgia Supreme Court
Farrar v. Obama et al.
Disposition Date: April 11, 2012
Application denied
All the Justices concur.
http://www.gasupreme.us/docket_search/results_one_record.php?caseNumber=S12D1180
11-1185
SIBLEY, MONTGOMERY B. V. USDC DC
The motion of petitioner to expedite consideration of the
petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
There is a third presidential candidate with an eligibility in court. John Dummett, www.johndummett.us
Post a Comment
“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject.” - Elijah Parish Lovejoy(1802-1837)
Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of BirtherReport.com. Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site.