Obama's Online "Birth Certificate" is Not Evidentiary, Says Professional Forensic Document Examiner

While addressing your attention to the featured article in The Right Side of Life, I.O. suggests one potentially essential reason that Barack Obama has spent approximately one million dollars to keep his actual Hawaiian birth certificate undisclosed:

Whatever it shows or fails to show, as to his place of birth, his Hawaiian birth certificate ostensibly demonstrates that Barack Hussein Obama I is his father. While not a new revelation, that would become compelling procedural evidence that he is not a natural born Citizen and is therefore not constitutionally permitted to be U.S. president.

On the other hand, Sandra Ramsey Lines explains why Obama's "online COLB" is not evidence of Obama's citizenship at all.

Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB

Submitted by Phil on Mon, Dec 29, 2008

Another case that had been flying under the radar was Keyes v. Lingle, where the Constitution Party and Dr. Amb. Alan Keyes were petitioning against Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, Chief Elections Officer Kevin B. Cronin, and various other Defendants as a means of holding an official accountable for determining Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility.

Documentation:

• Dismissed on December 5 (HTML/PDF)
• Motion to Reconsider dismissed on December 12 (HTML/PDF)

You will notice that the case was dismissed on a technicality (according to the judge, the Plaintiffs referred to the wrong Hawaiian statute(s)), not on content.

However, the bigger story to this lawsuit is the fact that forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines (pictured) has documented in an associated affidavit (PDF) the following:

2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.

3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.

4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all. [emphasis mine]

The above clearly illustrates that it is impossible to determine eligibility based on the widely-circulated certification of live birth and that the only way to determine Barack Hussein Obama’s natural born citizenship status is to retrieve the currently-sealed certificate of live birth.

It appears that we’re dealing with an individual who has so much to hide on so little a document.

Now, one cannot say this online COLB is evidence of absolutely nothing. That is because it is "natural" evidence of its own existence, also that it is purported to be about Obama's citizenship. It is "natural" evidence of this, because that is self-evidently true, even though the online COLB is not the evidence it is purported to be (of Obama being an American citizen of any kind). And that, by the way, may become criminal evidence, of fraud.

Why did I even write that? I am writing that to explain what "natural" means, in law. It means self-evident. E.g., a person demonstrably born to American parents in America is a natural born Citizen of America, but a person born to a foreign father and who thusly takes on his father's citizenship in another nation is not a natural born Citizen of America. That is, his citizenship is not self-evident, rather unclear, in doubt, needs further work, adulterated, etc., since one may be a citizen of only one nation at a time and international law holds that this person is a citizen of his father's nation, by hereditary right. That is what the term, natural born Citizen means, in Article II of the United States Constitution.

Thus, whether the Barack H. Obama II, who is the son of Barack H. Obama I was born in Hawaii, or Kenya, or in Dorothy's house in Kansas, he is manifestly ineligible to be United States President. With a Harvard J.D. in Constitutional (i.e., the American one) Law, BHO II presumably knows this.

January 8 is Coming: the Congressional Certification of a Fictitious and Fraudulent Presidency

There are precious few days until Barack Obama, who admits that his father was a Kenyan citizen of the United Kingdom and who thereby is specifically prohibited from being Commander in Chief by the framers of the Constitution, is to be certified by Congress as this nation's unconstitutional president-elect.

The criteria of Article II's natural born Citizen requirement are documented and supported by context: born to U.S. citizens, within U.S. territory, self-evidently free of foreign allegiance by any true jurisdiction, including hereditary or territorial right. Astounding, the willful ignorance of this age and how many are so obdurate in self deception, that we have gotten to this point, an ontological and epistemological atrocity in the making.

Then again, as we are willing to tolerate the killing of 1,000,000+ innocents per year, why should it surprise that we are so willing to mutely acquiesce to the murder of our own Constitution?

Immediately, let us tell Congress that we know about this treachery. Remind them of their own oath of office. Take just a few moments to contact your senators and representatives, charging them to uphold America's constitutional basis, or be party to a national malfeasance and fraud worthy of impeachment if not imprisonment.

Senators' and representatives' addressses, telephone and fax numbers, and email addresses
Update: Additional contact information, including staff of Senate & House leaders' staff
Protocol for a letter to United States senator

I.O. suggests calling both the local and D.C. offices and mailing a letter if time allows; otherwise faxing/emailing.

From attached comment of Capt-Dax:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Congressional Oath of Office

Oklahoma St. Rep. Mike Ritze Requesting Congress to Challenge Obama's Eligibility; Plains Radio Attacked After Streaming Interview?

Thank God, Pravda seems safe

12/24, 3:31am CT: As relayed and reported to I.O. yesterday evening by FReeper, BonRad, below is an email sent by Plains Radio, early Tuesday morning (emphasis by I.O.) [Ed. update: In the Monday interview described below, Dr. Mike Ritze, Oklahoma State Representative states that he is contacting OK Senators James Inhofe (R) and Tom Coburn (R), asking that they challenge the congressional certification of Barack Obama's election, based upon his not being a natural born Citizen according to the actual definition of that criterion. Rep. Ritze also describes his proposed state legislation to reform election law in that state, including the constitutional definition of natural born Citizen. Alabama's U.S. Senator, Jeff Sessions was also mentioned.]

date Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:11 AM
subject We took a wreckign ball to Obamas Glass house last night
mailed-by bounce.onlinelivesupport.net

Hi Folks:

Last night, Plains Radio made history. We had for the first time one of them to join us. Them? That would be Rep. Mike Ritze of the Oklahoma State house. Dr. Mike will now take our cause to the Senators and Congressman from Oklahoma. He will try and persuade Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma to stand up and challenge Obama Election.

If you missed that show, please listen to one of the replay today. The replays are at 8 am and 4 pm centraltime today. It will be worth your time. Last night, we took a wrecking ball to Obama glass house. We got one that now has the knowledge to bring others over to our side. How do you get a 100 Senators and Congressman over to our side and challenge Obama. 1 at a time. We are now going to win this and stop Obama from destroying our country. You owe it to yourself to listen to that show. It was a real barnburner.

The email goes on to say that on Friday, 12/26, they are scheduled to interview Obama outist correspondent for Pravda's Web publication (yes, Pravda). The only journalist that I.O. knows of who is reporting about Obama's ineligibility is Mark S. McGrew and it turns out McGrew was interviewed by Ed Hale of Plains Radio on Monday, 12/22, as well. Also, Stephen Pidgeon, attorney for Obama challengers in Washington state.

We will have guest like that at anytime on the Plains Radio Network. We have a very special guest this Friday night start at 6 pm central. You know that Russian newspaper, Prauda, that is running all those stories about Obama, well Friday night, we will have that reporter on our show for 4 hours. This is one you don’t want to miss. Please go to the Plains Radio web site by clicking here and listen to the show.

Thanks
Ed Hale

I.O. is listening now and will let you do the same. I may follow-up in this post or its comments -- or just leave that open. [End of initial posting]

U.S. Senators Inhofe, Coburn and Sessions

<<<<<<<<<<<<> I.O.<>>>>>>>>>>>>

Update, 12/24, 9:34am CT - Since this article was posted (below the I.O. divider in this posting, 3:31am) access to the archives pages of Plains Radio have become unavailable; also, apparently, their entire main Web site, PlainsRadio.com. Is this yet another cyber-attack, in an lengthening line of cyber attacks upon Web sites which are exposing Barack Obama?

This 11/21 thread in FreeRepublic.com documented earlier attacks.

Blog of Leo Donofrio, down? The blog service that hosts it, down? (Page Load Error)
NaturalBornCitizen ^ | 11/21/2008 | unspun

Posted on Friday, November 21, 2008 11:30:36 PM by unspun

I am trying to take a look at http://www.blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/ tonight. It is not coming up.

As you may recall, FreeRepublic.com was hit by a denial of service attack on, was it Election Day?

Also, after FR began publicizing the one-page article, Investigating Obama: Career Path Toward a Neo-Marxist Presidency, the site that stored the printable versions was attacked.

As it turned out, the first two of Leo Donofrio's three blogs were cyber-attacked, the first, by a denial of service attack, the second by dishonestly "flagging" his Google, Blogger site as violating terms of service. Does Plains Radio get the next "badge of courage?" Is the FBI working on it?

Currently, the Plains Radio forum site is still up and running, including their live streaming broadcast. [Ed. update, 11:09am: that streaming broadcast has ceased, at least for those listeners who have reported.]

I.O. will be monitoring this, through the morning. Plains Radio is located in Collinsworth County, TX.

10:31am - Calls to their published telephone number have not been answered.

7:39pm - I had been unable to report, until this evening. The Plains Radio site has been back up since earlier this afternoon, also their live streaming radio. The aforementioned 12/22, Monday evening broadcast of "The Lion's Den" with Ed and Carin Hale is back up and running -- very interesting radio. It may take some time to make connections, but I.O. will want to find out why their site went down, beginning reportedly between 7-8am, this morning.

L.A. Times Deletes the Lead about Schwarzenegger & Presidency, After Drudge, Free Republic, I.O. Feature it; Could it be... Obama?

Los Angeles Times caught red-handed

2nd Update, Monday 12/22, 4:02am CT

This entry was formerly entitled, "Elect Schwarzenegger President? Obama Says Yes We Can! Dear L.A. Times..." It was comprised of the letter shown below, which I also emailed to the Los Angeles Times, yesterday evening, in response to their Web article, "Schwarzenegger reveals tricks of the trade on '60 Minutes.'" I had found their story via Free Republic. Then, something very peculiar happened. Here is the story of the story.

After posting and sending the email, I found from a comment to this post, by Ted, that the very same L.A. Times article was featured in Drudge Report, entitled "Schwarzenegger: I Would Like To Be President!" And then, later in the evening -- poof! The lead disappeared! All references to Schwarzenegger not being a natural born citizen, thus not eligible for the U.S. Presidency were deleted. Funny how such a thing can happen, eh?

Was it because of the implications this has, at such a sensitive time -- what with cases before the Supreme Court clearly showing Obama to be a fictitious candidate, not a natural born Citizen at all? And with Congress yet to certify the vote? You can click the image above to enlarge it and see the article before it was so drastically edited. Then, click the image at the left, to see what it became, after the Drudge - FR - I.O., etc. hub-ub began to bubble.

Below is the initial I.O. post, the open letter to the L.A. Times and then my first update, when I learned of the redaction and before learning from Ted that Drudge had linked to the story. That is when the big picture came into focus.

<<<<<<<<<<<<>I.O.<>>>>>>>>>>>>

Dear L.A. Times Editors and Michael Rothfeld,

Sorry, but something that's getting way anachronistic showed up today in your article, "Governor reveals tricks of the trade on '60 Minutes.'" You wrote there that Gov. Schwarzenegger wants to be able to run for president but he can't, because he "is not a 'natural born citizen' of the United States, as required by the Constitution."

Hey, not to worry. I mean, if Congress and the Supreme Court allow Barack Obama to be our next president, next month, then the way is free and clear! You see, his father, Barack Obama I, was a Kenyan and a subject of the United Kingdom. He even passed on his citizenship to Barack II. The sites that your colleagues in the media defer to about Obama confess to it: Annenberg's factcheck.org and Obama's own fightthesmears.com.

To be a natural born Citizen, according to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, one must be born in United States territory and his parents must be U.S. Citizens. That is what the term meant to the Constitution's framers and therefore continues to mean, to honest people. You see, they wanted to do what they reasonably could, to assure that a true blue American would control our military -- one with no other allegiances at all, ever.

But, the joke is, John McCain was never legitimate for the office either, since he was born in Colon, Republic of Panama. And what's really ripe is, five states had a Nicaraguan on their presidential ballots: Roger Calero. Do you think it's a fad -- unconstitutional presidential candidates -- "the new black?" Over 120,000,000 American voters were presented a pair of fictitious candidates by the two parties that control our politics. Isn't that funny?

Please issue a correction and let your readers know the Constitution is becoming even more obsolete -- so all things are now possible! I trust the California governor may be pleased. Arnold in 2008! Maybe eventually he'll run against Vladimir? Mahmoud?

There's a whole world of possibilities, with our "Citizen of the World" at the White House door. Spread the word!

Regards,
Arlen Williams

PS: You could read about this, here -- and there is a whole incinerator-full, here.

ht: FReeper, curth

<<<<<<<<<<<<>I.O.<>>>>>>>>>>>>

1st Update, Monday 12/22, 1:20am CT

Since the L.A. Times article was excerpted in FReerepublic.com and written about here, it has been drastically edited. All references to Schwarzenegger's presidential ambition have been eliminated from it. Here is what the article used to say (and I've saved it in a "screen print" and posted the image file, below):

By Michael Rothfeld
4:46 PM PST, December 21, 2008
Reporting from Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger hasn't said whether he would pursue another job in politics after his final term ends in two years. But there's at least one position he might be interested in, if he were eligible for it: president.

"Yeah, absolutely," Schwarzenegger said in an interview airing tonight on "60 Minutes" on CBS, when asked by correspondent Scott Pelley if he would like to be president. "I think that I am always a person that looks for the next big goal. And I love challenges. I always set goals that are so high, that are almost impossible to achieve."

Budget standoff carries big risks, marginal rewards for California governor
Where Schwarzenegger goes, money follows
Gov. Schwarzenegger: Budget gap has increased by $3.6 billion

At the moment, becoming president would be impossible. Schwarzenegger, who was born in Austria and became a U.S. citizen in 1983, is not a "natural born citizen" of the United States, as required by the Constitution.

Talk of amending the Constitution was a hot topic in California and Washington during Schwarzenegger's first couple of years in office, when some of his backers waged an "Amend for Arnold" campaign and members of Congress proposed changing the rule. Schwarzenegger has said he would welcome such a move but has mostly joked about running when asked about it publicly.

Matt David, his spokesman, noted that on "60 Minutes," the governor was responding to a theoretical question.

In the interview, the governor also lifted the veil on some of his tricks of the trade, both in his cinematic and political careers. With Pelley lifting weights as they spoke, Schwarzenegger said that when he played a muscle man in the movies, he just pretended to lift 300 pounds. [excerpt; article continues]

Odd that they decided to redact the lead paragraphs from their Web article. Do you suppose they wanted to shorten it, to save you from scrolling?

(Click the picture, if you wish to expand it.)

Video - Orly Taitz States the Case, for the Obama Challenges

Dr. Taitz provides a very brief synopsis of her natural born Citizen cases, then goes further, urging for a federal fraud investigation of Barack Obama. You see, she assumes he knows what he is doing, including that he is not a legal candidate for the presidency. Considering Obama's Harvard J.D., she may have a point -- and her point includes that Obama may have committed numerous fraudulent acts along his career path.

I.O. may or may not comment further, below the videos, but will now get out of the way and let you hear Dr. Taiz speak her mind. Oh really.



Orly 1



Orly 2

Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote and Congressional Certification?

Is this why the Donofrio v. Wells (NJ) case is still "pending?" Is it only after the Electoral College votes and Congress certifies the election, that the Supreme Court believes it may take action regarding the eligibility of presidential candidates? The cases currently before the court, except for the Berg (PA) case, are versus state secretaries of state, not against Barack Obama, but perhaps that does not make a difference.

Is it similar to a prosecutor only allowed to prosecute after the crime and not before?

You may see this blog post, from Leo Donofrio's new hit thread, "Mother of all Conspiracy Theories, Obama has a Twin" (catchy tune, BTW).

Everyman Says:
December 14, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Yes, we have been betrayed by men… church-wise in the 60’s and maybe tomorrow, civil-wise by the SCOTUS;
Hell man, do you think you are any more protected from betrayal than our Saviour… take a long look at a crucifix… and remember his best friend Peter?

The only thing within your power is you… don’t betray yourself… know you are fighting the good fight and will continue to fight until you have satisfied yourself that you have done all that you can do to right the wrong… understand this…
if the case fails tomorrow that is not because you didn’t fight … if it dies tomorrow and you fail to continue to fight … you must answer to yourself and all those who have given their life to protect the constitution.

Oh you of little faith; so gifted in knowledge and talent to express your thoughts.
You have but to ask yourself have I done the best I could have done? … is there anything more I can do?
Perhaps the electoral must vote as directed in the following:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/100108.html#5
Judge Alsup wrote, “Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course.” Timing is everything… you maybe the only one able to raise an “objection”

Pity-party is over.
Regardless of what they say… you and I will Know the truth …and that makes all the difference.
You will call upon your Ancestors, for at this moment, YOU are the sole reason for Their existence.

And here, from the blog, Ballot Access News, Oct. 1, 2008, is the post about the McCain court case and the ruling of Judge Alsip.

McCAIN WINS BALLOT ACCESS LAWSUIT

On September 16, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup ruled that John McCain should be on the California ballot. Robinson v Bowen, C08-3836, n.d. The plaintiff, a presidential elector candidate for Alan Keyes, had argued that McCain is not "natural-born". Judge Alsup said that McCain is "natural-born." He also said that even if a candidate does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president, he or she should still be on the ballot.

Every time a minor party presidential candidate who does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president tries to get on the ballot, and the matter goes to court, courts rule that the candidate should not be on the ballot. The two leading cases are Cleaver v Jordan, in which the California Supreme Court said that Eldridge Cleaver should not be on the 1968 California ballot, and Jenness v Brown, in which a U.S. District Court in Ohio said that Linda Jenness (Socialist Workers Party presidential candidate in 1972) should not be on the ballot. Both Cleaver and Jenness were under age 35. Unfortunately, neither decision is reported, although the briefs in Robinson v Bowen cited the Cleaver case.

Judge Alsup wrote, "Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course."

The party that most often nominates a presidential candidate, or a vice-presidential candidate, who does not meet the Constitutional qualifications, is the Socialist Workers Party, which has done this in 1972, 1980, 2004, and 2008. Each time the party used a stand-in who did meet the Constitutional qualifications (but only in those states which refuse to print an unqualified presidential candidate on the ballot). Each time except 1972, the party did not fight in court to place its actual nominee on the ballot. Perhaps, if the SWP or any other party nominates someone in 2012 who doesn't meet the Constitutional qualifications, the party can raise the issue in court again, this time depending on the Robinson v McCain precedent.

What exactly do you think is going on? The "comments" link works just fine. Was Justice Alsip (no disrespect intended, Judge) just conning here, finding an excuse to allow McCain on the ballot, while passing the buck?

Is this the view of proper procedure that the SCOTUS maintains?

I'm going to comments now. You are invited to join me.

Obama's Presidential Ineligibility Makes the Media!

What could be more mainstream than this?

From their site:

Obama - Born in the USA?

PRESIDENT-elect Barack Obama is being rocked by a series of shocking new lawsuits charging his election was illegal! GLOBE's special report reveals why some national leaders believe his Hawaiian birth certificate was forged - and that America's next commander-in-chief was born in Kenya, which could doom his presidency. It's must reading.

From the point of view of the dominant Marxstream Media, this is the venue to handle Obama's ineligibility to be U.S. President. Take yours home today! Then a different issue comes out a week later and that's it. Let the "respected" media go and stay dark.

Who needs to get involved with futile attempts at refuting his disqualification, due to his father? I mean, how can a guy claim he hadn't inherited a foreign citizenship and allegiance by his foreign father, when it's a well-known biographical fact? But, that's just the ticket! Best to put the hide in plane sight strategy to work, instead.

So, Obama confesses to his U.K. birthright -- right on his own Web site -- just puts it out there in that cool, matter-of-fact, Obama way. The meta-message is, "If the idea that this would disqualify me weren't ridiculous, why would I have run for president in the first place? Of course I'm qualified. I mean, Constitution? I have a Harvard J.D. in this stuff." He sure can gain people's confidence -- and that is the sign of a great leader, right?

And then, we get some of the media players to discredit, besmirch, and otherwise ridicule the "birther-truthers," the few and the odd, and he has it made! It's in the book -- you know, the Alinsky book (rule 5, if you're keeping track). And Granduncle Trotsky's playbook too, as long as the end justifies the means, of course. And the masterstroke is for this to work so well that even some conservative pundits run up and hop on the ridicule train. Chuggin' that hot air from the useful-idiots-dot-com. LOL!

Constitutional, natural born Citizenship crisis? Who needs to know?

Just make it all about a perpetually withheld birth certificate, while... with a mix of impatience and pity... anyone bestirred by any allegations is comforted back into slumber by the "validity" of the (meaningless) certificate already released by Obama, online. Let the story hang there -- on a huge, lurid headline, FRONTPAGE: GLOBE.

That'll put the unwashed masses in their place, while we elites continue preparing our "rule." After all, "We are the ones we've have been waiting for." Man, it's cool that line got the big ovations -- confirmed the whole thing.

And if we disintegrate the U.S. Constitution in the process, so much the better! As Barack said in the Public Radio interview, that archaic document gets in the way of our redistribution model.

Best to get that Constitution out of the Obama way.

Gotta get to the store and pick up my souvenir!
Maybe stock up on water, plastic sheets, duct-tape, oh! Don't forget the tinfoil!!
Seriously, let's make sure they sell out -- and create buzz on their Web site.

Daddy Says No! - Articles Assessing the Constitution's "Natural Born Citizen" Clause, Barack Hussien Obama I, and BHO II

What are those criteria again, for a United States president? "Natural born Citizen?" Whatever does that mean, how can we tell, and why should it matter?

These are articles on the Web, most of which have been circulating among those in the know, about the challenges to the candidacies of both Barack Obama and John McCain. Regarding Obama, this is due to his foreign father, Barack Sr., who by natural law (and British code) passed along his U.K. citizenship, thus bequeathing a foreign jurisdiction to the little tyke, in the eyes of America. Well, at least in any open American eyes. In the case of McCain, the problem was his birth in the Republic of Panama, even though his parents were both true blue Americans.

How could this happen? That is for another article. But here is Barack Obama's "Daddy says no!" list, in chronological order. On January 2 or 3, I.O. intends to draw the Top Five Natural Born Citizen Articles from this list and feature them in a new posting.

"From Feudalism to Consent: Rethinking Birthright Citizenship," John C. Eastman, Ph.D., Mar. 30, 2006, The Heritage Foundation, heritage.org

"Why U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark Can Never Be Considered Settled Birthright Law," P.A. Madison, Dec. 10, 2006, updated Dec. 1, 2008, The Federalist Blog

"John Jay Did Not Want the Top Offices to be Open to Foreigners," John S. Bolton, June 29, 2008, Open City and its Natural Enemies

"Dual Citizenship Makes Obama Ineligible Under Article II," Judah Benjamin, Sept. 25, 2008, TD Blog

"The Betrayal of Mystery Babylon," Sidney Allen Johnson, Nov. 23, 2008, The Prophet of Wrath

"Natural Born Citizens: Or How to Beat a Subject to Death with a Stick," Judah Benjamin, Nov. 28, 2008, TD Blog

"Leo Donofrio Comments on Judah Benjamin Article Concerning Natural Born Citizen and the Common Law," Leo Donofrio, Dec. 1, 2008, Natural Born Citizen (Web log)

"Letters to Military Associations - CALL TO ACTION - File in US Federal Court Regarding Obama's Citizenship Status," Robert Reece, Dec. 3, 2008, Article 2, Sect 1, Clause 5 (Natural Born Citizen) (Web log)

"Defining Natural-Born Citizen," P.A. Madison, Nov. 18, 2008, updated Dec. 4, 2008, The Federalist Blog

"Stand by Me..." user: "DrKate," Dec. 5, 2008, TD Blog

"The Donofrio 'Natural Born Citizen' Challenge," Dec. 5, 2008, Investigating Obama (Web log)

"The Law -- Perkins v. ELG," user: "CalperniaUSA," Dec. 8, 2008, NYC Bedroom Communities (Web log)

"Obama and the Natural Born Citizen Clause," Randall Hoven, Dec. 9, 2008, American Thinker (Web log)

"Constituting A Natural Born Citizen," David Mivshek, Dec. 11, 2008, PolitiCode (Web log)

“'Natural Born Citizen': Defined by 14th Amendment Framers and in Treatise Relied on by Scalia," Leo Donofrio, Dec. 13, 2008, Natural Born Citizen (Web log)

"The Definition of Natural Born Citizen," by "Ken-in-AR," Dec. 24, 2008, The Liberty Pole (Web Social Network)

Shortly, I.O. will give each article a very brief characterization and... announce The Top-5 "Daddy Says No!" Articles Awards. It might have been a more traditional "Top-10," if I had been able to find that many really, specifically pertinent and illustrative ones, amid the dark, Mordorian mists of the Marxstream Media.

In the mean time, have a search for the truth, yourself, whatever Congress and the SCOTUS does.

Know of any other articles?
Hint: don't bother with cbsnews.com, newyorktimes.com, and their comrades.
If you have a link, please leave it in a comment.

Orly Taitz: Urgent! What Needs to be Done Now

The following is posted from the blog of Orly Taiz, DDS, one of the patriots leading the natural born Citizen charge, from California and Hawaii -- and now to the Supreme Court.

What can we do?

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Urgent! What needs to be done now

There are a number of things you can do:

1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524

2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.

3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:

a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud

b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses

c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)

d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged

e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".

f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.

Please call FBI and US attorneys office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009.

4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.


Contact Information

United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300

United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444

Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:

U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:

E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.

For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.


Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq

Posted by Orly Taitz, DDS Esq. at 8:51 AM

Video: Natural Born Citizen Press Conference, National Press Club, Monday 12/8/2008: Bob Shultz, Philip Berg, Orly Taitz, James Manning; Must See TV

As you may switch it on to see, Monday's NPC conference describes well, the constitutional crisis which America has been suffering since the Iowa Caucuses at least. It proceeds as follows:

0.00:00 - Bob Schulz, We the People Foundation, frames the reasons for calling for the presser.

0.15:50 - Philip Berg, obamacrimes.com, who does a very good job of summarizing the numerous problems which the Constitution's "natural born Citizen" clause has, with Barack Obama, to date. Berg also reprimands the Obamedia quite nicely.

0.36:00 - Bob Schultz, discussing the Donofrio suit -- thus, also the Wrotnowski petition, pending SCOTUS conference Friday, 12/12, presenting essentially an expanded version of Donofrio v. Wells, chiefly based upon Obama's foreign patrilineal descent. Also, the separate matter of the Chicago Tribune ad, which pleads for access to Obama's actual, original birth certificate.

0.44:50 - Orly Taitz (introduced by Bob Schultz) who, among numerous actions and along with Gary Kreep, is bringing "the Alan Keyes suit" in California, destined for the SCOTUS, blog: A Natural Born Citizen...Orly?.

1:09:15 - Pastor James David Manning, PhD., atlah.org, who leads the press conference in prayer, explains his use of inflammatory 1960's-ebonic terminology, and does not let up on Barack Hussein Obama II.

1:35:55 - Questions from reporters, answers from the panel, and more...

Update: more to come on the mystery woman who takes the microphone to speak of the influence of foreign oil money...

2:28:00 - You may especially wish to hear Orly Taitz at this point.
She gets to the point with the news media. A very refreshing point in a very informative and challenging segment.

Just one potential admonition if you will allow. I did not hear the term "fictitious presidency" used; maybe I just missed it. I did hear "usurper," though. Both apply. Come to think of it, I.O. should have been using these terms more its prior articles, too...

Note: We the People Foundation and google.com allow this entire press conference to be downloaded from its Google residence.

Hey, be sure to let me know when this shows up on C-Span...
Is there anyone to whom you wish to email the link, instead of waiting?

Email to David Horowitz and Some Others: Constitution's in the Balance, What's New with You?

From: "Investigating Obama"

To: "David Horowitz" (editor/at/frontpagemag.com), "Rush Limbaugh" (ElRushbo/at/eibnet.com), "Sean Hannity" (Hannity/at/foxnews.com), "Hugh Hewitt" (hhewitt/at/hughhewitt.com), "Mark Levin" (marklevin.show/at/citcomm.com), "Kathryn Jean Lopez" (klopez/at/nationalreview.com), "Rich Lowrey"(omments.lowry/at/nationalreview.com), "Glenn Beck" (me/at/glennbeck.com), "Dennis Prager" (dennis/at/pragerradio.com), "David Brody" (thebrodyfile/at/gmail.com), "Michelle Malkin" (michelle/at/hotair.com), et. al.

Subject: Friday: The Two Criteria of Natural Born Citizenship; Constitution in the Balance

Tomorrow is a critical day at the Supreme Court, and in the imminent future of our republic. The Court will have to decide, before the Electoral College is to vote on Monday, whether they will allow three candidates for president to stand, whom by their own reported biographies, are not natural born Citizens according to the two criteria accepted and documented from the framing of the Constitution.

In case some have missed it, I hope to provide by morning, a summary of the numerous ways in which Barack Obama is, or in some cases may be, a fictitious presidential candidate. Along with this, the right sidebar of Investigating Obama is humbly provided as a means of tracking immediate developments.

Your choice and mine, is to pay attention and inform the Citizenry, or to simply follow what is observably a fraud, protected and propagated by the power called "the fourth estate" -- leading to America's denial of its Constitution and whatever disorder this promises. What each of us has done or may do about this, is "upon our heads."

A week's worth of articles in Investigating Obama:

[listed the those recent titles here, with links]

If, somehow, I might assist you, please let me know.

Highest regards to fellow American Sovereigns,
Arlen Williams
I.O.

PS: Reader, there is still time to contact media... friends...

And there is key information about how to contact Electors, here

I.O. suggests using your own, short message with a couple references including the two critera:
1. born in the nation, and 2. parents of American citizenship.

Donofrio Ups the Ante v. Comments Discrediting Scalia's Referral and Full Court's Distribution to Conference

There seems to be an effort to discredit the action that Scalia and the SCOTUS took on Friday, Dec. 5, upon the Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz petition to stay the Electoral College vote. As you may know, this case was referred by Justice Alito and accepted by the full court to committee, which will assess the case this Friday, Dec. 12, in order to decide upon any further action. It could grant a stay, deny the case, call for a brief from the opposition, call for oral arguments, etc.

Whether the debunking effort is merely ad hoc, or being orchestrated, I cannot say, though the Axelrod Astroturfers are infamous. But I can relate this blogospheric attack, then post Leo Donofrio's replies. While Donofrio's own suit of the New Jersey Secretary of State was denied, he is representing Cort Wrotnowski, in his petition of the SCOTUS, based upon a Connecticut filing against its own SoS.

In the comments below an illinoisreview.com piece, "Supreme Court refers Obama natural born citizen question and moves forward," on Monday 12/8, is found this bold attempt at the debunk:

The Supreme Court has a rule: a litigant may request a stay from the Justice for the circuit where their case arose. If it is denied, they can come back and ask another Justice of their choice. When that happens, the 2nd Justice always refers the matter to the court for conference, so they can get all 9 to agree on throwing it out and be done with it.

If they ever get something they want to grant, they ALWAYS issue an order to the other side requesting opposition. No court would ever issue a stay without having first have heard from both sides.

Obviously, publicity-seeking vexatious litigants have now figured out that they can get a lot of attention by this 2-step process -- its a sure way to get the trash they file listed on the docket. I suppose we can expect this to continue all the way up through January 20th.

Posted by: Vera | Tuesday, December 09, 2008 at 02:18 AM

Similarly, in Donofrio's own Natural Born Citizen blog article, today: "The Washington Times Coverage of Donofrio and Wrotnowski SCOTUS Cases," he cites this criticism, as reported by Times reporter, Tom Ramstack:

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s nonvoting Democratic delegate to Congress, speculated that the Supreme Court is considering appeals that challenge Mr. Obama’s citizenship only long enough to reject them “and lay to rest manufactured doubts about the legitimacy of Obama’s election before the inauguration.”

To this denigration dealt by Rep. Norton, Donofrio responds in his piece:

That’s a rather absurd statement. Frivolous cases aren’t graced with any respect at all. If it deserves immediate denial, then they deny it. But on the same day the order came down rejecting my case, Justice Scalia referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz to the full Court and it was distributed for the Dec. 12 conference.

If the Court wanted to send a message as Norton suggests, they could have denied Cort’s case at the same time as mine. Now that would have sent the message she suggests.

For example, when a stay application is renewed to a second Justice, that Justice may deny it straight away rather than referring it to the full Court. Examine the following two SCOTUS dockets where stay applications were denied by the first Justice and then denied by the second Justice upon renewed application:

No. 07A638
Title:	Ate Kays Company, Applicant v. Pennsylvania Department of General Services, et al.
Docketed:
Lower Ct:	Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District

Case Nos.:

(175 EM 2007)

~~~Date~~~	~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feb 1 2008	Application (07A638) for a stay pending appeal, submitted to Justice Souter.
Feb 2 2008	Application (07A638) denied by Justice Souter.
Feb 6 2008	Application (07A638) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.
Feb 7 2008	Application (07A638) denied by Justice Scalia. —————

No. 7A421 Michigan, Applicant v. Corey Ramone Frazier Docketed: Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Michigan Case Nos.: (131041) Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) for stay pending disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Stevens. Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Stevens. Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) refiled and submitted to Justice Alito. Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Alito.

The intrepid New Jerseyan draws two examples from the SCOTUS record and puts more chips on the table. But, this does not satisfy one comments poster, who sees the bet and raises, as follows:

JudgeDredd Says:
December 10, 2008 at 12:06 pm

The second time you submit to a second justice, if they deny without submitting to the full court for review, you can submit it a third time. By sending it to the full court for review they can get rid of your case FASTER because that is your last shot. Your case will be one of thousands that the clerks pick through and recommend.It is very very possible (likely?) that not one justice has even seen your brief much less read it.The justices never even see the vast majority of applications.The court takes up such cases at its discretion and you have no Constitutional right whatsoever to even have it considered.

Donofrio sees the bet of JudgeDredd and calls:

Doesn't matter. If you submit it the first time or the second time, the Justice you submit it to has the option of referring it to the full Court and once it's referred, the Court may then deny it together. Upon the referral, if the full Court denies it without distributing it for conference, THEN NO 3RD RENEWAL IS ALLOWED. So, if the Court wanted to send a stern message they could have denied Cort's case as a full court on Monday without scheduling it for conference. Your point is in error. Once the full Court denies the application, you can't resubmit it to a 3rd Justice.

Thus, Leo maintains a countenance of confidence in his case and certainty in his place at the SCOTUS conference table. That tends to boost I.O.'s confidence.

Whom do you believe won the hand?

Are you a student of the SCOTUS who would like to state your case, here? If so, the "comments" link awaits you. Or, maybe something just "strikes you," somehow.

Or, if you wish to pass this question on to a litigious lifeline, please click the envelope.

<<<<<<<<<<<<> I.O. <>>>>>>>>>>>>

Addendum: Since much of this post comes across on the negative, I will mention another, rosier scenario, postulated by many. It "holds" that Scalia (and Thomas, perhaps others) may have wanted to dispose of the Donofrio suit in favor of a stronger Wrotnowski case and thus, he waited for the denial of Donofrio v. Wells and immediately referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.

In the same set of comments, Donofrio's remarks:

December 10, 2008 at 11:36 am

Just because a Justice refers it to the full Court, the full Court is not obligated to distribute it for conference. Upon Scalia's referral, the Court could have sent a stern message of denial without ever having distributed it for conference. The Court could have acted on Cort's application on the same day they denied mine by simply denying his. But they didn't. I don't know what it means, but neither does anybody else who isn't a SCOTUS Justice.