'Natural Born Citizen for Dummies' v. Dummy v. the United States of America

Constitutionalist activist, Dean Haskins provides a lesson instructing that a "natural born Citizen," according to the United States Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, is an individual born in United States territory, to parents who are both U.S. Citizens.

Further, he introduces the viewer to the Supreme Court case of Minor v. Happersett, which recognized this and thus established binding precedent, the adjudicated recognition of the meaning of the phrase "natural born Citizen" in the Constitution.

Video, "Natural Born Citizen for Dummies," June 28, 2011

Of course this means that Barack Hussein Obama II is our U.S. President illegally and spuriously, if Barack Hussein Obama I is indeed his father. And it shows how displaced from legitimacy and reality is our entire United States government at this moment.

"Never before, in the history of the America, have our leaders been so afraid of the rule of law, but the rule of law is what has made this country. If we allow them to shirk their duties in this matter, then the rule of law will be rendered of no effect and our country will soon go the way of every other country that succumbed to fear," observes Mr. Haskins. Fear of what, though? Of being found out?

To bring us up to date, eligibility attorney Leo Donofrio has written of the significance of the Minor v. Happersett decision in his blog, Natural Born Citizen:

"US Supreme Court Precedent States that Obama is not Eligible to be President," June 21, 2011

"Minor v. Happersett is Binding Precedent as to the Constitutional Definition of a Natural Born Citizen," June 24, 2011

"The Express Lane to Natural Born Clarity," June 30, 2011

States Mr. Donofrio in that third entry:

The Supreme Court in Minor specifically avoided construing the 14th Amendment as to the issue of whether Virginia Minor was a US citizen. Instead, the Court looked no further than the natural-born citizen clause in Article 2 Section 1. The Court held that Minor was a member of the “class” of persons who were natural-born citizens. They defined this class as those born in the US to “parents” (plural) who were citizens. (For more detailed analysis of this issue, see my two previous reports, here and here.)

The Court also noted that the “citizenship” of those born to non-citizen parents was subject to doubt. Since Virginia Minor was in the class of natural-born citizens, that doubt didn’t need to be resolved. The Court exercised judicial restraint and thereby avoided construction of the 14th Amendment as to the citizenship issue.

In the first of these entries, Donofrio quotes the dicta of the Minor v. Happersett ruling and this is the passage that establishes the precedent as to the meaning, understood at the time of the Constitution's framing, of "natural born Citizen," emphasis added.

“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.“

Another attorney who has been very active in this matter, Mario Apuzzo, also elucidates the matter at his blog, Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers, where among other things, he takes the tainted site Snopes to task for its inaccuracy and seeming bias.

Prior to these, the most comprehensive research and analysis displayed in any pertinent article I have seen has come to us via "The Meaning of Natural Born Citizen," (September 6, 2009). That is the work of a collection of activists and law students calling their site Undead Revolution, referring to the continuous presence of our founders' specifications of our government -- truth which haunts those who would deny this reality. And there are more nuggets there, besides Minor v. Happersett.

But just lately, as if on cue, the U.S. Senator from Illinois Richard "Dick" Durbin has issued an oral report of the absurdity of the progressives' stance on the matter of eligibility for the presidency. He speculates that an illegal alien granted amnesty may one day become our president.

Video, "Democrat Senator: Illegal Alien Could Be Our Future President," June 29, 2011

Even RealClearPolitics, with their history of editing out information on the matter, achieved clarity on that apparent gaffe. But was it a gaffe? Not for the progressive, who by definition, wishes to "fundamentally transform" America, by "progressing" beyond the established charter of our Declaration of Independence and compelling governmental design of our Constitution.

We now live in an America with not only an anti-American president by his behavior, but by his autobiography, a fictitious one. Our Congress is complicit, by its failure to abide by the Constitution, or to even seek to do so, at the time of his confirmation. There were no challenges as constitutionally provided. Do we have a Supreme Court which has the integrity to correct this, or in its failure to do so, or thus far to even observe the constitutional standing of the Sovereign U.S. Citizens who have brought this crisis to their attention, does it also invalidate itself?

Three strikes and America's entire federal government is out.

Letter to George Washington from John Jay regarding the insertion of the "natural born Citizen" clause
into the U.S. Constitution, "Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide
a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government,
and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the American army shall not be given to,
nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

---

Arlen Williams coordinates publishing of the new Webzine, Gulag Bound and has administrated the blog, Investigating Obama. Prior to this, he was an organizer of electoral action in Illinois and Wisconsin, while maintaining a career in technology sales. Arlen addresses the Marxofascist soft war for global empire, against authentic America and freedom and sovereignty worldwide, suggesting overwhelming First Amendment warfare in return.

He asks you to communicate with your neighbors, and to confront politicians and candidates with “The Three SOVEREIGNTY NOW Questions.”

Contact him at ArlenWilliams@GulagBound.com.

TerriK on 'The Awakening' this Monday Evening - MissTickly Communicating with You

Monday evening, 9-11pm ET,,, 6-8pm PT

Update ~ You may wish to look into these two MissTickly articles, before or during the program, tonight:

• "Rejected? (See Update)" by MissTickly, 10/7 [laying out her communications with the State of Hawaii, in orderly fashion]
• "Waaaaa! Was Obama a baby on August 4, 1961?" by MissTickly, 10/8 [ed., more odd and intriguing ways of wording things, from what increasingly looks like O-Team Hawaii]

From 10/11 ~ Special Guest: Terri K, the instigator of the Hawaiian open records law investigation of Barack Obama's Birth Certificate and related documentation.

There are new developments.
Hear how she and Leo Donofrio each continue to uncover the cover-up...


You may also wish to hear the prior Monday's Awakening, with guest, Leo Donofrio.

For further information, see "The Hawaiian Investigation of Birth Certificate Attestations & Realities," in Investigating Obama.

The Awakening, with Arlen Williams

Upcoming Episodes
10/13/2009 9:00pm ET - The Dave Levine Show
10/14/2009 9:00pm ET - Weekly Candor with Wish - The Truth About Vaccines

See These Two, from Leo Donofrio's Natural Born Citizen

I.O. suggests these two items, in addition to the above and the below, of course.

1. Obama Opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act And Won The Nobel Peace Prize

2. SCOTUS: No Private Right To Quo Warranto

The Hawaiian Investigation of Obama Birth Certificate Attestations & Realities: TerriK, Donofrio, et. al. -- Updated

Strand Magazine
...or compendium if you prefer, of the strands of evidence

Hawaii has an open records law, similar to the federal "Freedom of Information Act." A few individuals are looking for equal justice under that law. The articles below are suggested, roughly in this order, to understand the events, aspects, and nuances of the attempts to discover what the alleged "Hawaiian Birth Certificate" of Barack Obama actually is and what has been done with it, by whom, over the years.

Arthur Conan Doyle originally wrote his Sherlock Holmes stories as serials, published in a magazine. That art imitates the real life of a journaled investigation.

As of 10/4/2009

1. "Let'sProve Obama Was Born in Hawaii, So We Can Move Onto His British Birth," prologue by Leo Donofrio, 9/20/2009
2. "Pending Litigation: Hawaii Confirms that Obama's Vital Records Have Been Amended," initial thesis regarding TerriK's initial investigation, by Leo Donofrio, 9/21
3. "TerriK Investigation: Foreshadowing," by Leo Donofrio, 9/29
4. "TerriK Investigation – Part 1: Hawaii Department of Health Directors Fukino and Okubo Are Guilty of Misdirection," by Leo Donofrio, 9/24
5. "Okubo Refuses Another Citizen’s Request to Comply with Hawaii Law," by John Charlton, 9/ 24
6. "Hawaii D0H Official, Janice Okubo Places Her Thumb Directly in the Giant's Eye," by Leo Donofio, commenting on John Charlton's work, 9/25
   
7. "TerriK Investigation, Part 2: OIP Staff Attorney Linden Joesting’s Response to TerriK’s Appeal Appears To Confirm That The DoH Maintains Amended Vital Records For President Obama," by Leo Donfrio, 9/26
8. "Is Fukino's Office in Open Rout?" by John Charlton, 9/30 (Republished in Donofrio's Natural Born Citizen, 9/30, for those who wish to explore comments)
   
9. "TerriK Investigation, Part 3: Hawaii AG Mark Bennett Approved Fukino’s Natural-Born Citizen Statement; All Records Should Be Made Public According To Law," Leo Donofrio, 10/1
10. "Leo Donofrio is No Longer Spokesperson for TerriK," by Leo Donofrio, 10/2
11. "DoH Reverses Course - Releases Index Data for President Obama, Stanley Ann, and Barack, Sr.; No Records for Maya Exist," by Leo Donofrio, 10/2
12. "Okubo Caught Again: Admits Providing False Information Regarding DoH Maintenance of Divorce Records," by Leo Donofrio, 10/3
13. "Okubo has Really Got Herself in a Pickle Now," by John Charlton, 10/4
14. "Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed: Obama's COLB Lacks Legal Veracity; What now?" by MissTickly (a.k.a., "TerriK") 10/4 [I.O. ed., painting the picture, presenting the premise of her inquiries]
    
    New in this Update
    
    
15. "Rejected? (See Update)" by MissTickly, 10/7 [ed., laying out her communications with the State of Hawaii, in orderly fashion]
    
16. "Waaaaa! Was Obama a baby on August 4, 1961?" by MissTickly, 10/8 [ed., more odd ways of wording things, from Team Hawaii]
    

Further reading may be done at The Right Side of Life.

There you have it, for now, with a few more strands, knots, and loose ends, all hanging on the back side of the tapestry -- the side upon which we are presently kept.

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

Listen to MissTickly, a.k.a., TerriK on "The Awakening," this Monday evening, 10/12, 9-11pm ET,,, 6-8pm PT (and 4-6pm in Hawaii) and ask her your questions.


Listen to Leo Donofrio on "The Awakening," archived from Monday evening, 10/5 9-11pm ET,,, 6-8pm PT (and 4-6pm in Hawaii).

At the back of the tapestry?
Or, swept under the rug, along with your Constitution?
Latch onto a strand and hang on tight;
It may become a flying carpet.

'Quo Warranto for 'Interested Persons'' - Leo Donofrio; Plus Related Items: Are You 'Interested?'

Constitutional lawyer, Leo Donofrio and constitutional journalist, John Charlton have weighed in, on the question of jurisdiction for federal quo warranto petitions for District of Columbia office holders (including those which may question their eligibility - and in case our Attorney General is reading, no pun is intended for the word "holder," yet).

This is of import to the eligibility case, Barnett, et. al., v. Obama, et. al. In addition to this Donofrio article, see references at bottom, for further context, both in history and in present ramifications.

Quo Warranto for 'Interested Persons'

by Leo Donofrio, 10/9/2009

Section 16-3503 of the federal quo warranto statute allows an “interested person” to approach the DC District Court concerning a quo warranto trial (by jury) without requiring the permission of the US Attorney General or the US Attorney for DC.

An “interested person” may sign a “certified complaint” which states facts and those facts must be sworn to under penalty of perjury. Only facts may be sworn to, not allegations. The “interested person” gathers up all facts known to him/her and puts them in the petition, swears to them under oath and hands that in to the Court. Pretty simple, folks.

One fact which could safely be sworn to is that Obama was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 and that he was – at birth – a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies. These are facts admitted by Obama. These facts have never been laid before the DC District Court. These facts are not in the complaint before Judge Carter. Why not?

16-3503 states:

If the Attorney General or United States attorney refuses to institute a quo warranto proceeding on the request of a person interested, the interested person may apply to the court by certified petition for leave to have the writ issued. When, in the opinion of the court, the reasons set forth in the petition are sufficient in law, the writ shall be allowed to be issued by any attorney, in the name of the United States, on the relation of the interested person…

Plaintiffs in Barnett v. Obama allege that they have standing which is unique and special compared to the public at large. Therefore, they should have availed themselves of 16-3503.

But they’ve never even tried.

Plaintiffs have only attempted to avail themselves of 16-3502. All citizens are considered “third persons” under 16-3502, but all citizens don’t have unique standing and therefore 16-3502 requires permission by the Department of Justice to use the name of the US – ex relator – ina quo warranto proceeding.

But if you are an “interested person” under 16-3503 – aka a person with unique standing – then you do not need permission from the Department of Justice for the quo warranto.

The DC District Court examines the certified petition prior to allowing the suit to go forth based upon that petition. If the court is satisfied that the person issuing the petition is an “interested person” then that person is not needed any longer for the trial.

Once the name of the United States is allowed to be used, the “interested person” may step off, and the facts alleged are to be tried independently. For example, facts concerning what makes the President ineligible have nothing to do with the particular plaintiffs in Barnett v. Obama. So there’s no need for them to travel across the country for the trial. The trial is brought against the alleged usurper in the name of the United States.

There’s nothing stopping the plaintiffs from petitioning the DC District Court right now based upon facts known and verifiable as to the President’s British birth.

Why has this option been ignored? 16-3503 provides an excellent chance for review of these facts. There it is. Why not use it? A golden opportunity is being thrown by the way side.

Either the DC District Court will agree that these military persons are “interested persons” or it will not. Either the DC District Court will agree that 2008 Presidential candidate Alan Keyes is an “interested person” or it will not.

If the DC District Court does not agree that these plaintiffs are “interested persons” under the statute, then plaintiffs can make the same arguments they are making now before Judge Carter.

I don’t see any tactical advantage at all in avoiding the DC District Court.

Why give one of your tickets away for free? Why give away your best ticket for free? Why not avail yourself of the very statute created by Congress to review the eligibility of all US national office holders?

Doing so also avoids “political question doctrine” issues because the quo warranto statute is a congressional exercise of Constitutional authority to review the President’s eligibility. Why not kill two birds with one stone? Also, all arguments that a quo warranto action is too late now that he’s been sworn in are just patently bogus.

Quo warranto can only be invoked against somebody holding an office under false title.

Quo warranto only applies to actual usurpation not possible usurpation. It is the legislature’s sole enactment which allows judicial review of the President’s eligibility. And it appears that serious attempts are being made to avoid it. Before going off point and trying to force this issue upon courts which have not been given such authority, an action should have been brought – and still can be – under 16-3503.

Look people, I’m trying to help. Read this over a few times until it sinks in.

Leo C. Donofrio, Citizen Attorney - http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com

Copyright 2009

This article follows Mr. Donofrio's Natural Born Citizen piece, "Judge Carter Does Not have Subject Matter Jurisdiction for Quo Warranto in Barnett v. Obama." There, he muses over the ostensible failure of Obama's personal Department of Justice representation (personal DoJ representation? - what nation is this?) in their not citing the most relevant case, to demonstrate inappropriate jurisdiction. That case is State of Wisconsin v. First Federal Savings and Loan Association.

In The Post & Email, John Charlton analyzes the Wisconsin decision and this underscores the validity of Donfrio's point: "The 7th Circuit Court's Argument Against Quo Warranto's Use - and its Applicability to Barnett vs. Obama." At the same time, he would be reaching a bit, to find any other valid, quo warranto path. A path must be made, potentially via the People's petition for redress of grievances, where government has not already provided a path for constitutional rights and powers to be maintained. However, as Donofrio described, a sensible path has been provided.

Why so Wisconsin-less?

This is a strategically important question, indeed. DoJ attorneys do not fail to find cases cataloged as being those, most directly relevant. And this question is particularly, painfully relevant for those who seriously consider the little daydream: What if this Orly Taitz case were, somehow, set up to be Obama's "chosen one," for the doing of his Marxofascist insurrection's bidding?

Do Obama (and his "transnational progressive" web of string pullers) want eligibility cases brought to a head... in this particular case... in its particular, scheduled time? If so, why?

But, perhaps the most important questions here, are these:

• Do we who seek the authentic, constitutional America, wish to petition the court constitutionally, in the District of Columbia?
• Is this the appropriate move to make, at this time?
• Are some willing to take the lead before Orly Taitz does, this time?
• As the Soros-Obama-Pelosi revolution continues to destroy America, chiefly through violently and steadily draining our economy, is there any time to waste?

Leo Donofrio discussed this quo warranto quandary at the end of the first hour, of his Monday 10/5 interview, on "The Awakening," hosted by yours truly. The rest of the discussion focused upon the new Hawaiian investigations of Barack Obama's birth certificate and related documents, subject to Hawaii's open access law.

These sites are recommended, for keeping tabs on the players and their moves:

Natural Born Citizen
The Post & Email
The Right Side of Life
I may move in and out of it again, as well. Feel free to comment upon any of these questions, there, or in Investigating Obama.

Arlen Williams

Wikipedia animation

Last Night's Interview of Leo Donofrio

The interview of Leo Donofrio during last night's edition of The Awakening was very informative. Key progress has been made, leading to further work to be done. I encourage you to isten to the archived broadcast here:

I may post some reflections, here, tonight. There were items discussed that "stuck with me" and which should be pursued.

And we look forward to Leo Donofrio's and Justin Riggs' return, to discuss latest steps and next steps.

Leo Donofrio on the new Hawaiian Birth Certificate Investigation, on The Awakening, Monday

​Leo Donofrio will explain the pursuit he has, for a time, shared with Terri K, looking for the truth about the Obama Birth Certificate (if that is what is there) based upon the State of Hawaii's implicit admission that it has been amended -- plus, the pursuit of a possible conspiracy of fraud and cover-up. Or, has the Hawaiian Department of Health begun to cooperate? Perhaps they will be compelled to do so.
​
​And, as Donofrio and Terri K have described, Hawaiian official, Dr. Fukino's public pronouncements about what remains concealed may inadvertently open the door, under Hawaii's Open Records Law (UIPA) to the disclosure of the birth certificate, itself.

Listen live, Monday 9-11pm ET,,, 6-8pm PT, plus there will either be additional guests​ related to this, or we will take calls, or both. You may set up a reminder at this link.

There are more details and angles to come in I.O., along with links to articles exploring the legalities and possibilities.

Donofrio & TerriK Using Hawaiian Law, to Get to Obama's Birth Certificate, or Evidence it Was Altered

Constitutional justice activist, TerriK tipped us off about her Hawaiian idea, in recent I.O. comments and has since gotten Leo Donofrio on the case.

I.O. suggest you keep an Hawaiian Eye (not a stink eye) on this heretofore quiet investigation, of whether Barack Obama's apparent birth certificate of this state has somehow been altered. And, as Leo Donofrio explains, the nearly famous official statement of Dr. Fukino about it, should open the door, under Hawaii's Open Records Law (UIPA) to the disclosure of the birth certificate, itself. Book that, Dan-o.

See this excerpt, from Donofrio's new blog article, "Pending Litigation: Hawaii Confirms That Obama’s Vital Records Have Been Amended," then read the rest of the story as it develops, at Natural Born Citizen.

Section 92F-12(15) states that the following must be released to the public:

(15) Information collected and maintained for the purpose of making information available to the general public;

On July 27, 2009 Hawaii Department of Health Director Fukino issued a press release which stated:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

TerriK requested all information “collected and maintained” for the purposes of preparing the public statement made by Director Fukino as such information must be released according to the statute.

I.O. will continue to monitor what could be a Magnum Opus.

Ye gads, not even Zeus and Apollo,
can stand in the way,
of Leo D. and TerriK,
as they doggedly pursue the truth.

The True Natural Born Citizenship Criteria; Time to Refocus

Though the work of "birthers" has continued to focus largely upon the question of Barack Obama's place of birth, the damning issue remains his Kenyan/British citizenship, passed to him by natural succession, from his father. That is, if it is true that Barack Obama I is actually his father, something that seems evident, though he also seems to look more like Frank Marshall Davis with every change of season.

I.O. followed the attempts of Leo Donofrio and Cort Wrotnowski, to get the Supreme Court to pay attention to the actual natural born Cittizen standard, before Obama was certified and inaugurated. However, they were not granted an injunction, likely based upon those justice's opinions of the plaintiffs' standing. Thus, to this date, Barack Obama's apparent ineligibility to serve as United States President and Commander in Chief of our military forces has never been adjudicated upon its throbbing sore thumb merits. Constitutional justice remains to be served.

John Jay's request of the "natural born Citizen" requirement,
to the Constitutional Congress
click image to enlarge

By the common understanding of the phrase, natural born Citizen -- by the explanation of that phrase before the fact, the communications about it, at the time of the Constitution's framing, and the relevant analysis and case law, after it, this continues to be evident: that, to hold this qualification, two criteria must be met:

1. born of parents who were both United States citizens at the time of one's birth
2. born within United States territory
   

See the articles:

• The Donofrio "Natural Born Citizen" Challenge
• Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz "Natural Born Citizen" Case...
• Daddy Says No! - Articles Assessing the Constitution's "Natural Born Citizen" Clause, Barack Hussien Obama I, and BHO II

Mr. Donofrio, who appears to be a man of volatile temperament, has nevertheless resumed some of the tasks of explaining why this sore thumb continues to stick out. One way, has been to show how, according to the most up-to-date historical research, we have already had one fictitious U.S. president, in Mr. Chester A. Arthur. Like Obama, it was rumored that he was not born in America, but, by research Donofrio has brought to light, Arthur was actually engaged in a cover-up of the fact that his father was a British citizen at the time of little Chester's birth. Visit these recent Donofrio articles, to see for yourself.

• President Chester Arthur, et. al. Why they aren't Precedent for Obamma's Eligibility (12/4/2008)
• President Chester Arthur, et. al. Why they aren't Precedent for Obamma's Eligibility (12/5/2008)
• Historical Breakthrough - Proof: Chester Arthur Concealed he was a British Subject at Birth (12/6/2008)
• A Little More on Chester Arthur, from the Library of Congress (12/10/2008)

And, more recently:

• AP Issues Chester Arthur Propaganda To Protect Obama (8/17/2009)
• POTUS Usurper Chester Arthur Forced Military to Salute British Flag (8/19/2009)

Further, Donofrio has done excellent work in explaining why the case of Wong Kim Ark, often cited by Obama protectors, is actually further corroboration of the two criteria (parental lineage and place of birth) for being a natural born Citizen.

There is more to add to the mound of evidence of the true, constitutional definition of natural born Citizen, but that is for others to do and they will do it very soon. And, I.O. will continue to report it.

Constitutional justice must be served, if the term, United States of America is to maintain any integrity.

In 'Justice' Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Leo Donofrio Discovers 'Progressive' Eugenics on the SCOTUS Bench

A copy of the following came in an email. It is written by eligibility attorney/activist, Leo Donofrio, from his blog, Natural Born Citizen.

You see, Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently showed a lapse of the usual "Progressivist" deceit, a rare glimpse of honesty: that a primary reason for abortion in the United States is to reduce the population's "undesirables." However, if one examines Marxist, Social Darwinist ideological tradition, she is simply marching in step with her historic and contemporary comrades (see American and British "Progressivism" and German Nazism).

The reader may know that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was a racist eugenicist, celebrated by fellow "Progressives" and Ku Klux Klan alike. Planned Parenthood, to this date, markets their child murder inordinately into areas of the country where African-Americans are most prodigious. (See blackgenocide.org.)

It has been noted that Barack Obama, who has given us the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor (for whom Ginsburg has flaunted Court propriety by her public campaigning) has slaveholders in his lineage, but no known slaves, ironically enough. The virulent ideological strain, Marxism has also been found in his parentage, subsequently in his nurturing, training, political career development, and in his own words, methods, and now his White House transgressions. Accordingly, he has been a very aggressive champion of Planned Parenthood and abortion.

It should not come as a surprise that the Obama/Pelosi "Progressive" plan for "healthcare" includes measures which increasingly fund abortion by means of our confiscated tax dollars, plus measures which would curtail medical treatment of the elderly and those most dependent upon our care. Do you recall how Obama stated hypothetically, that a baby would be punishment for his daughter? How he said his chief mistake in the Senate was failing to fight Congress' attempt to provide due process, for the right to life, of Terri Schiavo? And do you recall how Obama handled his grandmother, as she neared her death?

A certain pointed word is redacted a bit, below, otherwise Mr. Donofrio's posting is represented intact.

Ginsberg Espousing Master Race Eugenics?

Pardon my leaving the NBC issue aside for now. Too much strange stuff flying around and I don’t really know what to make of it. I feel like a scene is being set – a dinner table if you will – and the meal is going to be a “long form” BC for your culinary delight. It just feels like a set up – all this long form – long form – long form — blah blah blah. That’s the standard being established for absolute eligibility.

It’s being allowed people. Just my opinion. But you have to be a complete lemming if you think Gibbs is now regularly calling on Les Kinsolving of WND in White House pressers just to be a fair dude. The administration appears to be controlling this game and leading it to an endgame where they give you EXACTLY what you’re all asking for. Notice the standard wording Major Cooke stated to the press – “All he has to do is show the long form BC…” etc. If that’s all he has to do to drive a stake through the heart of the eligibility issue… then that’s what you can expect. But I digress from my topic today.

I tell you… nothing felt more intellectually dirty or reeked of pure filth to me than my experience with the United States Supreme Court. I know the law. I know procedure. I knew the SCOTUS court rules. Yet, I had to be deloused after that experience. God knows what crawls in those chambers. Go back through SCOTUS history and see the vile possession by evil of those once hallowed chambers by eugenic skank like Oliver Wendell Holmes and his modern successors.

Eugenics is basically what Hitler’s Nazi regime worshipped via their final solution. It’s a concept of population control where the Government decides who can live and who can breed… and who cannot be allowed to breed.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is Jewish and one would think that she might find such a concept repulsive. But the abortion rights movement heralded by the BS decision in Roe v. Wade is more about eugenics then it is about a woman’s right to choose. And on July 7, 2009 Ginsburg confirmed what many suspected of her – that she’s a eugenic proliferating skank.

Check her comment given to the New York Times:

Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.

What populations are you speaking of you horn rimmed freak show? There’s not much else I can say about this crap except that the New York Times journalist – Emily Bazelon – failed to do her damn job and follow up on the alarming answer given by Ginsburg.

I got news for you Ginsburg, your s**t stinks bad, just as the s**t emanating from every other race. All s**t stinks. Yours isn’t pretty. It doesn’t taste good. It doesn’t smell like roses. Your s**t stinks, girl. I know that might be hard for you to accept, but I suggest getting your nose all up in it sometime and have a wake up call.

Who breeds and who doesn’t isn’t up to you and it never will be. You’ve already lost. Home is calling. He’s waiting for you. Got the sauna ready… and the air conditioning unit is permanently broken. Word.

One surmises the road to Hell will be smoothed by the feet of good "Progressives." Whatever avenue is taken, we need to get them out of America's way.

h/t: "Unalienable Rights"

Edit, 7/21: The reader may wish to observe the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform and blackgenocide.org visit of the NAACP convention, article in Jill Stanek's blog. (The NAACP was begun by Marxists/Progressives, while the Urban League was begun by believers in American principles.) Also, from the anonymous comment, see: maafa21.com for further information on the racism of the "Progressives."

Sam Sewell: AKA Obama Fans, All Together Now, Say OMG!!

by Aristotle the Hun

Somehow, you know it’s coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans.

“For nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.” Luke 8:17

It isn’t hard to imagine the gnawing anxiety that AKA OBAMA (Also Known As: an acronym used to describe suspicious persons who use more than one name) lives with, day in and day out. Much has been written about AKA OBAMA’s behavior that reminds mental health experts and others of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder.) A frequent manifestation of such a disorder is The Narcissist, as Liar and Con-man.

This disorder is frequently misunderstood as “self-love.” A more accurate understanding is love of a reflection of one’s self. Abused, abandoned and neglected children will compensate for damaged egos by creating an ideal reflection of themselves that they then embellish and vigorously defend. A person with NPD is quite capable of a mind twisting position like, “I have nothing to hide but I am hiding things anyway.” AKA OBAMA certainly fits the model of having such a childhood. While I am not in the position to deliver an official In Absentia diagnosis of a full strength NPD case, many of the indicators are present.

If AKA OBAMA were not in a position of public trust, most of us would probably overlook such deception and secrecy. For those of us who care about our Constitution and the rule of law, the issue becomes clear in this article that appeared in on-line Pravda by international columnist, Mark S. McGrew The Mysterious Shadow: Code Name Obama.

Most Americans do not want their president to be secretive about his past. However, if one is living a lie to preserve the ego compensating, idealized reflection of self, one will go to great lengths to hide things that most would routinely reveal.

For the person who has NPD tendencies, the lies used to create the reflection become so numerous that eventually the man in the mirror cracks, and so does the real human being hiding behind the reflection.A useful tool in evaluating things that are not known with certainty is Occam’s razor. When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood. I condense this to the simple question; what is most likely? In our discussion of the documents which AKA has hidden, most of this article is an examination of which explanation is most likely.

For example; which is most likely;
(a) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are innocuous?
(b) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are damaging?

What we know with certainty is that AKA OBAMA is not practicing the virtue of full disclosure. “ The biggest question, and the biggest reason for asking more questions, is the fact Obama has enlisted law firms across the nation to battle every attempt to access, among other documents, his birth, schooling, immigration or passport records.” New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo

There are so many potential sources that can end AKA OBAMA’s Presidency that it is impossible to keep them all quiet. It’s just a matter of time. As columnist Davvy Kidd says, IMPOSTOR PRESIDENT OBAMA: VICTORY WILL BE SHORT LIVED. First, let’s think of all the lawyers and support staff involved in keeping the birth certificate issue quiet. Isn’t it likely that some of them know what they are hiding? Isn’t it likely that several people at the Hawaiian Department of Public Health know what is, or is not, on the original birth certificate that AKA OBAMA refuses to release? Did you know that there is a one million dollar reward offered for AKA OBAMA’s Hawaiian birth certificate?

Please get this straight: Hawaiian officials have not validated AKA OBAMA’s place of birth. What they have said is that they “have the original document” on file. They haven’t offered a clue as to what information is in that document. They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from “our” Chicago con-man. Laws of the Territory of Hawaii ACT 96 To Provide For The Issuance Of Certificates Of Hawaiian Birth was in effect from 1911 until 1972 and allowed someone who was born outside the Hawaiian Islands to be registered as though he were born in Hawaii. Under that law, someone simply would have presented herself to the Hawaiian authorities and declared that the child was born in Hawaii. The person could have sworn under oath and presented witnesses and other evidence. If the authorities accepted it, that was the end of it. The only way to know where AKA OBAMA was actually born is to view AKA OBAMA's original birth certificate from 1961 to see what kind of birth certificate it is, and to examine what corroborating evidence supports what its says about AKA OBAMA's alleged place of birth. If the birth was in a hospital, as AKA OBAMA has maintained, such evidence would be the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him.

The Certification of Live Birth that was published on AKA OBAMA’s campaign web site is not a Birth Certificate. It is easy to tell the difference between the two types of documents. It is very likely that the COLB used by AKA OBAMA’s campaign is a fraudulent document. Several forensic document examiners have carefully scrutinized the COLB and declared it suspicious or an obvious forgery. The best evidence presented so far is from the Ron Polarik, PhD.

Dr. Polarik writes: “There are laws on the books in Hawaii and the Federal Statutes that clearly spell out exactly what constitutes forgery, and in both Hawaii State Law and the Federal Statutes, the act of altering an official government document -- even if it is just a facsimile of that document -- constitutes forgery. The bogus COLB that Obama created is also considered to be a "false identification document, a felony forgery.” Dr. Polarik’s evidence is preserved online. There is also a YouTube video summary of the evidence.

Forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines, a Former Federal Examiner with a long history of expert testimony in state and federal courts, has testified in an affidavit that states, in part:

After reviewing Dr. Polarik’s analysis, Sandra Lines says, “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.” Sandra Ramsey Lines summary is posted at U. S. Law Blog.

As long as we are on the subject of falsified documents, it seems that AKA OBAMA never registered for the draft, as required by Selective Service laws. When his career began to be noticed by the public, suddenly draft registration records appeared. Unfortunately for AKA OBAMA these documents have also been exposed as forgeries.

Another piece of information that many fail to realize is that in the birth certificate cases, all that is needed is for the case to be heard. This case will be over in the “Discovery” phase. Before a trial starts both sides are required by the court to put all their cards on the table to avoid “trial by ambush.” The judge orders all evidence to be presented by both sides. Since this case is about discovering documents that are hidden, the case will be decided by court-ordered presentation of all relevant records. Lawyers in birth certificate cases don’t need to win a trial; they only need to get a trial.

Enough on the hidden birth certificate and forged documents.

For those of you who think ridicule and name calling are effective debate tactics, I refer your kool-aid drenched, tin foil protected brains (a dose of your own medicine) to this article from American Thinker; Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate. What about the legal team that is keeping AKA OBAMA’s college records hidden? Several people probably know what they are hiding. The best guess as to what is so secret isn’t likely to be bad grades. More likely his admission papers will say he was a foreign student, or that he was receiving financial aid as a foreign student. How many people do you estimate already know what is on AKA OBAMA’s college documents? Those records were handled routinely for more than 20 years. How many personnel in the registrar’s offices of Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard University have seen AKA OBAMA’s records and know what is in them? How many of those people would be willing to talk about it, or maybe even “leak” just one sheet of paper that would put even more cracks in AKA OBAMA’s mirror? Is that number likely to be zero?

Do you think that AKA OBAMA worries about how many people know something that could destroy his career? Fear of being “found out” is an obsession for NPD types.So far we have only talked about the original birth certificate, supposedly locked up in Hawaii, and AKA OBAMA’s draft and college records. Already the potential sources for leaks are numerous. And you can bet that AKA OBAMA and his lawyers are concerned about many more possible leaks than these.

There is a long list of vulnerability points for leaks, and there is a story behind every one of them:

• Soetoro adoption records –
• Punahou (Indonesia) School records –
• Passports records –
• Any INS (Immigration & Naturalization Services) or port of entry documentation which may have been generated in his infancy or childhood –
• Selective Service Registration (Released, but is possibly an altered document) –
• Harvard Law Review articles (None, maybe 1, not signed) –
• University of Chicago scholarly articles (None) –
• Law practice client list –
• Illinois State Senate records (locked up to prohibit public view) –
• llinois State Senate schedule (Lost. All other Illinois State Senators' records are intact) –
• Baptism certificate –Medical records -

International columnist Mark S. McGrew* sums it up succinctly: “With all of Obama’s different names, with his documented long term relations to convicted criminals, with his active efforts to prohibit us from knowing where he was born, with his active efforts to keep us from seeing his credentials, with his documented registration to practice law, professing to have only one name, with his being an ex-attorney not authorized to practice law, but representing himself as such, with his non-existent “Office of The President Elect,” with the dozen or so lawsuits against him to determine his citizenship status, with the various promises he made to voters and on which he has since reneged, with his documented lack of respect to America, with his refusal to salute the American flag with others on stage or even to stand at attention, and his other disrespectful actions, with his many millions of dollars in campaign funds suspected to be from foreign sources, with campaign donations accepted from possible terrorists groups, . . . Obama has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he can not in any way, shape or form be trusted.”
* Mark S. McGrew frequently writes for Pravda and other foreign media outlets, because of the lack of free press in the United States.

I would ask the reader to accept the premise that there are many potential leaks from those things that are being kept hidden by a man who promised transparency in government.

But there are other problems from sources that are not hidden.

AKA OBAMA himself has made it known that his father was from Kenya.We know that records indicate that AKA OBAMA’s biological father was Barack Obama Sr, a Kenyan native, and a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s offspring. We know that the geographical location of AKA OBAMA’s birth is not considered by British law. Who the father was determines citizenship, not where you are born. Had AKA OBAMA been born in Tokyo or Texas he would still be a citizen of the United Kingdom under The British Nationality Act. A similar practice governs who is considered a citizen in several countries. Judaism is matrilineal, meaning that your mother’ lineage determines whether you are a Jew. That is why Jews from all over the world can claim Israeli citizenship.

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

In other words, at the time of his birth, AKA OBAMA might have been a U.S. citizen (by virtue of his allegedly being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.Obama’s British citizenship was short-lived. On Dec. 12, 1963, Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:

1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya is, on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), becomes a citizen of Kenya on the 12th of December, 1963.

As a citizen of the UKC who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UKC status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), it follows that Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship after 1963.

So we know for sure that, if OBAMA Sr is in fact his legal father, then AKA OBAMA was a citizen of the United Kingdom and then Kenya. Given all the efforts to keep his birth certificate hidden, it is reasonable to assume that he is not a citizen of the United States, but even if he were born in downtown Denver he would still have triple citizenship, and is thus ineligible to hold the office of President.

There is a similar problem with AKA OBAMA’s possible Indonesian citizenship. School records have surfaced that clearly indicate AKA OBAMA being listed as a "Muslim" with "Indonesian" citizenship.

So AKA OBAMA has been a citizen of the UK, Kenya, and there are inconclusive documents indicating that he was also a citizen of Indonesia. The missing birth certificate may be a false clue that leads away from the big crime. Even if Obama were born in Hawaii* he would still be ineligible to serve as President because of his dual (perhaps triple) citizenship. That is not likely, given the effort expended to keep the information about his birth a secret. By AKA OBAMA's and Bob Bauer, AKA OBAMA's Lead Lawyer's, own reports, AKA OBAMA has spent Six Hundred and Eighty Eight Thousand Dollars ($688,000.00) on legal fees defending against lawsuits claiming that he is not eligible. Why would AKA OBAMA spend that much money to hide a $10 Birth Certificate?

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

The facts are clear, and the law is clear. All it will take is for a judge to issue a ruling. Do you think AKA OBAMA and his lawyers fret about this? They certainly are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight this issue. So far, no court or judge has issued a ruling on the merits of any legal case against AKA OBAMA. Cases have been dismissed on legal technicalities, but no actual case has yet been heard.There are other potential leaks that come from AKA OBAMA’s international history. If Obama was born in Kenya, there should be a record of that birth in UK records. There are probably people in England and Kenya who already have information that would put cracks in AKA OBAMA’s distorted reflection of himself, and there is other information that can be mined from archives. The same is true for Indonesia.

In the unlikely outcome that none of the people talk, and none of the documents surface, would AKA OBAMA than be free of obsessive fear of being found out? No, even if none of his secrets are revealed and none of his lies are exposed, he will continue to remain vulnerable.Because of the way AKA OBAMA ran his campaign; donations from Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse, donations from illegal foreign sources, and ACORN’s crimes, etc, he is subject to criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code, federal campaign finance laws, and laws against voter registration fraud, according to a memo by Cleta Mitchell, co-chairman of the Republican National Lawyers Association.

You may have noticed that the usual role of the media in ferreting out high jinks in high places has not been mentioned. There is no “All the President’s Men” movie in the making. No one is being considered for a Pulitzer Prize for investigating AKA OBAMA. Is journalism dead in America? Well no, not quite.Somebody, a major news outlet executive, has done the Pulitzer research.

On his To The Point News website, Dr. Jack Wheeler said he will “Let the source of the information reveal it, in his own time. "...the details of what he told me are for him to reveal when he chooses, not me. I can tell you it is OMG wild."

So get ready folks. One of these days I will be asking all of you AKA Obama fans to, “All together now, say OMG!”

My conclusion: Obama will be indicted and charged very soon. Keeping in mind that the role of a grand jury is to determine if enough evidence exists to refer a case to the courts for trial, can any objective person review information like that presented above and reject the premise that this case needs to be referred to the courts for prosecution?

It is very likely that the American Grand Jury effort will result in an indictment by a conventionally impaneled Grand Jury.

The American Grand Jury was designed in a unique and very creative manner. Bob Campbell, the Founder of American Grand Jury, wanted to find a way to impanel a grand jury that was convenient, available free of charge to all citizens, and had maximum impact. He came up with a brilliant plan!

From across the nation citizens can collectively examine and discuss the evidence, make a decision whether to indict, and then act with the full power of the U.S. Constitution to present the indictment to local, state and federal authorities. American Grand Jury will also empower individual representatives to act on behalf of American Grand Jury Members and make presentments of evidence to jurisdictions anywhere in the United States. These representatives will be sworn in and subject to an oath similar to the American Grand Jury Members, and will then be authorized to make presentments to such authorities as Sheriffs, County, State and Federal Prosecutors.Even if the American Grand Jury were ignored, and deemed legally impotent, we can still expect a powerfully awakening increase in awareness and outrage on the part of the citizens. There are many potencies beyond the legal system.

However, it is highly unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment. All we need is one jurisdiction to order “Discovery.” The case against AKA OBAMA is unique because it will be over in the Discovery phase, as the first step in a criminal complaint. The goal of the project is to discover what AKA OBAMA doesn’t want us to know, and why he doesn’t want us to know it. Our goal will be achieved without a trial.

Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union:

• 50 States
• 3,007 entities named “County”
• 16 Boroughs in Alaska11 Census Areas in Alaska (for areas not organized into Boroughs by the State)
• 64 Parishes in Louisiana
• 42 Independent Cities (1 in Maryland, 1 in Missouri, 1 in Nevada, and the remainder in Virginia)1 District - the Federal District or District of Columbia.For a total of 3,191 opportunities to bring criminal charges against offending politicians.

Even if an independently convened grand jury is mistakenly seen as merely people assembling to exercise their Constitutional right to “redress their grievances,” that is no small thing. Hundreds of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of whom will almost certainly form more conventional Grand Juries to indict AKA OBAMA. Can one honestly surmise that there is not one prosecutor or judge in the entire nation who questions AKA OBAMA’s eligibility to be President?

Once the American Grand Jury presentments are made, it is likely that many prosecutors and judges will want a copy of the evidence.The American Grand Jury organization with which I am affiliated is using recognized expert witnesses with a long professional history of forensic testimony. The guiding principles for the project are the usual protocols of epistemology, scientific methodology, and rules of evidence. Any prosecutor or judge who ignores such evidence and testimony is at risk of being seen as acquiescent.

An excellent article by international columnist Mark S. McGrew will help the reader to understand the Grand Jury story.

press contact: Sam Sewell, National spokesman for AmericanGrandJury.org
email: writerpromo@comcast.net
fax (239) 591-1987
phone: clinic office -- (239) 591-4565 -- ask for Dr. Sam

Rev. Sewell, an ordained Christian clergyman, a Pastoral Psychotherapist, a member of Mensa, a U.S. Navy Veteran, and a Member of the Association For Intelligence Officers. He is a frequent commentator on religious and political issues.

The views and statements expressed by Investigating Obama contributors, and in quotations and citations, are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Investigating Obama and Arlen Williams -- who is, incidentally, not a fan of either taking or using the Lord's name in vain.

Update: Many Common Law Grand Juries Springing Up / Donofrio "vs." Swenson. et. al.: The Dos and Don'ts of Patriotic Action Under Increasing Pressure

There are many, very important questions to ask and answer. Please join us tonight and let us see to it.

News has been breaking over the weekend and through this day, regarding common law grand juries underway or being organized in twenty states, focusing up on Barack Obama and his void of validation of presidential eligibility. You may see these two new announcements:

"New Site Speaks on Citizen Grand Jury Action in KY, OH, TN and IL; Update: GA Support for Jury, Taitz," in The Right Side of Life, by Phil.

Interested Citizen's Grand Jury? in The Steady Drip, by Sam Sewell, now a spokesman for the new effort, AmericanGrandJury.org, site administrated by Bob Campbell.

Sam and possibly Phil will join in tonight's "The Awakening, with Hanen & Arlen," 9pm ET,,,6pm PT, along with Special Guests: Carl Swenson of the Common Law Grand Jury in Georgia, which has already issued an "indictment" and Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, North Carolina eligibility challenger. We will be focusing upon updating you about these events and gaining a valid understanding of the capabilities of this Grand Jury Movement.


You may use the widget above, or listen from the Sentinel Radio site: SentRad.com -- also call in just to listen, or after the first hour, call in to ask questions, at 646-727-2652.

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

Original Post, Friday 4/3/2009:

Don't have time for a major treatise here and it's Friday anyway, so let's just get to the point.

Are you up on the "Common Law Grand Jury," in Georgia? A coordinator of this, Carl Swenson will be a special guest on "The Awakening with Hanen and Arlen," this coming Monday evening (9pm ET,,,6pm PT).

Our other special guest is another aggressive eligibility challenger, Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, who in North Carolina, is continuing to press the courts. Sullivan is the one whose son was arrested 3/25, upon apparently no evidence, for not answering questions at a police vehicle stop. That was the same Wednesday of last week, when Stephen Pidgeon alleges he was the target of a Homeland Security surveillance exercise.

Swenson and this Georgia effort has been condemned by two of the original eligibility challengers, Andy Martin and Leo Donofrio. For Donofrio on this, I suggest yesterday's treatment in The Right Side of Life, Thursday, 4/2. For Andy Martin on this, see his net-radio interview by Mark McGrew, Friday, 3/27. Meanwhile, common law grand juries are being planned in a reported twenty states.

This will be a discussion that I humbly suggest, may be of top level importance:

• Might we be nearing the verge of civil war in America? Yes, we might be.
• Should we engage in unauthorized vigilante tactics? No!
• Do we need to know where the line is? Yes!
• Do we need to become more prepared in every Constitutional way, including the ways faithful Second Amendment? Yes!
• Do we need to recognize that the Constitution must rest upon all the principles of the Declaration of Independence and that if it is debauched, this signals the need for direct reliance upon the Declaration? Yes.
  

Godly principle and respectful public relations, are of the first and second order of priority respectively, in conflicts of state both political and militant. Therefore, the moral high ground must be aggressively gained and never, ever, surrendered.

Perhaps I will comment further in this post, perhaps in another article before the program, perhaps I.O. will wait until after Monday night. I beg your attention and your patience -- especially, I beg your diligence and aggressive action -- with virtue and patience.

Zapem: 'Obama Knew He Wasn't Eligible for POTUS'

In this article, originally posted in the blog of the same name, "Zapem" breaks a report of the history of sidestepping, skirting, and attempted Constitutional tinkering on behalf of unnatural born Citizen, John McCain -- thereby, an attempt to pave the way for Barack Obama.

If one were to look at the activity on Capital Hill during the campaign, there would be no question in their minds that both McCain and Obama were sweating the “natural born citizen” issue.

How do we arrive at that conclusion? We take McCain’s ingrained, glib advice and “Look at the record, my friends“.

Doing just that, we find that back on February 28, 2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill to the Senate for consideration. That bill was known as S. 2678: Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen. Thomas Coburn (R-OK).

Bill S. 2678 attempted to change article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States with reference to the requirements of being a “natural born citizen” and hence; the entitlement to run for President of the United States. This bill met the same fate that similar attempts to change the Constitution have in the past. Attempts such as The Natural Born Citizen Act were known to have failed and the text scrubbed from the internet, with only a shadow-cached copy left, that only the most curious public can find.

Sen. McCaskill, her co-sponsors, fellow colleagues and legal counsel, contend that the Constitution is ambiguous in article II, section 1 and requires clarification. But does it? According to the framers and such drafters as John Bingham, we find the definition to be quite clear:

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… . . - John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866

From the days of James Madison to the present, the courts have held that the amendment process be justiciable in accordance with its constitutionality and not self-serving or political. But is that what happened here? Again, we must go to the record.

Within only five short weeks after Senate Bill 2678 faded from the floor, we find Sen. Claire McCaskill back again, making another attempt with Senate Resolution 511. On April 10, 2008, she introduced a secondary proposal in the form of a non-binding resolution, recognizing John McCain as a “natural born citizen” in defiance of the Constitution. Curiously, it contained the same identical co-sponsors, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

ABCNews.com reported:

“With questions - however serious - about whether Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is eligible to run for president since he was born outside U.S. borders on an American Naval base, Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. today introduced a non-binding resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that McCain qualifies as a “natural born Citizen,” as specified in the Constitution and eligible for the highest office in the land.

Co-sponsors include Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois; Leahy said he anticipates it will pass unanimously.”

One has to wonder — what dire urgency could there possibly have been in persisting with trying to legislate a candidate into being a “natural born citizen”? Certainly providing a birth certificate and reading the Constitution would be more than sufficient. Why did these candidates and their wishful nominees go to such lengths in the Senate when obviously, they had more pressing matters to attend to? And why were there two Senators co-sponsoring such an issue, twice, who were in direct competition with John McCain in the 2008 election?

One answer is that looking at John McCain’s long-form birth certificate reveals he was not a natural born citizen and Barack Obama hasn’t submitted his long-form at all. John McCain was born in an “unincorporated territory”, held by the courts to be not part of the United States for constitutional purposes. Barack Obama has submitted only a Certification of Live Birth, but Hawaii law will certify a live birth using that document for births that occurred even outside of the country. Furthermore, Barack Obama’s father was Kenyan and never an American citizen. Since the status of citizenship occurs at birth, this makes Barack Obama a citizen if born in Hawaii, but not a natural born citizen. One must have two citizen parents, at the time of birth, and be born on U.S. soil, to be deemed a natural born citizen and be declared eligible for the presidency. The Senate, for all their trouble, cannot legislate a person’s born status. It happens at birth, according to the law.

While Senate Bill 2678 fell to the wayside, Senate Resolution 511 was passed on April 30, 2008 as a non-binding resolution. However, S.R. 511 is not a law, but rather, a unanimous opinion. Technically, it means absolutely nothing what they’ve written as it’s not a law, nor did the matter reach the House for review. It’s a stepping-stone in the larger scheme of things that haven’t happened yet; the push to change our Constitution.

World Net Daily reported on November 13, 2008:

More than a half-dozen legal challenges have been filed in federal and state courts demanding President-elect Barack Obama’s decertification from ballots or seeking to halt elector meetings, claiming he has failed to prove his U.S. citizenship status.

An Obama campaign spokeswoman told WND the complaints are unfounded.

“All I can tell you is that it is just pure garbage,” she said. “There have been several lawsuits, but they have been dismissed.”

Perhaps someone should have informed Obama’s spokeswoman that many of these cases have not been dismissed at all, rather they are mounting, and her statements are in fact, pure “garbage”.

Then perhaps someone may prompt an answer from the Obama spokespeople as to why they were entertaining the thought of fiddling with the United States Constitution back in February and April of THIS YEAR? Perhaps because it was in the best interest of Sen. Obama.

Then what of Sen. Claire McCaskill? What possible interest could she have had in these proceedings and leading the charge with her proposals? Was it a bonafide Constitutional issue of judicial importance, or rather a political one?

Digging further into the record we find that according to Wikki and subsequent footnotes therein:

“In January 2008, Claire McCaskill decided to endorse Senator Barack Obama in his campaign for the Democratic nomination for the presidential elections of 2008, making her one of the first senators to do so. She has been one of the most visible faces for his campaign.[14] McCaskill’s support was crucial to Obama’s narrow victory in the Missouri primary in February, 2008. She had been frequently mentioned as a possible vice presidential choice of Senator Obama in the 2008 run for the White House…”

So what we see is a definite political motive being dragged into the Senate for the purposes of legitimizing the 2008 candidates. But if these candidates were legitimate already, there would obviously be no reason for these proceedings.

So political was the motive of McCaskill, even Missouri’s Governor, Matt Blunt revealed that Sen. McCaskill was involved in the “abusive use of Missouri Law Enforcement“. This was dubbed as the “Truth Squad” during the election campaign by the media. The Truth Squad was comprised of Missouri officials and attorneys who set up shop on the streets of Missouri and threatened the public with criminal penalties and lawsuits if they engaged in critical speech against Sen. Obama. The Obama campaign also issued cease and desist letters to media station managers who carried advertisers who were unfriendly towards Barack Obama, namely, the NRA. Citizen outrage prompted this response from Governor Blunt:

“Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.

What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.”

Considering these facts and the judicial record, there is every reason to believe that Sen. McCaskill had no interest in resolving Sen. McCain’s eligibility, but Sen. Obama’s long-term. She manipulated the Senate and then threatened the media and the public thereafter, politically motivated at the prospect of becoming Obama’s Vice-Presidential pick. But it didn’t stop there.

Chairman Patrick J. Leahy entered into the Senate record a legal analysis of two high-powered attorneys hired by Sen. McCain - Theodore Olson and Laurence Tribe - both of whom are extremely politically active and biased, and attached that opinion to S.R. 511.

So controversial was that legal opinion, that it prompted a rebuttal by Professor Gabriel J. Chin of The University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law, in a discussion paper #08-14 entitled, Why Senator John McCain Cannot Be President. Professor Chin points out clearly where Tribe-Olson sought to draw out implied theories in the law, which in reality, are simply not there and in fact have been decided by the courts already, in opposition to the suggestions offered by Tribe-Olson. Simply put, the attorneys hired by Sen. McCain attempt to fit the law into their agenda with contrived implications. Professor Chin brings the law back into focus, requiring no implied theories.

Legalities aside, in anticipation of the feared “Fairness Doctrine”, the whole of the main stream media has since acquiesced to the intimidation tactics of the Obama campaign and paraded the non-binding resolution known as S.R. 511 to the public with unfactual foolishness. S.R. 511 is neither a constitutional amendment nor legally binding in any way. Yet the media caved to political pressure and reported it to the public as Chairman Leahy dictated, giving the illusion to the pubic that said resolution was binding to the 2008 election. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The public responded, initially by way of lawsuits contesting the eligiblity of not only John McCain, but Barack Obama and Roger Calero as well, citing them all, with equal disqualifying merit, as being constitutionally ineligible to run for President of the United States. Later, netizens of the internet caught wind of the court actions and responded with their own explosion of blogs, forums, websites, chatrooms, emails, etc. In an attempt to quell the discord, the main stream media offered personalities such as Thomas Goldstein which only served to infuriate the public further. The public saw such maneuvers as deceitful and an attempt to embarrass the now educated public.

However, the greater proof is in the activity which originated in the Senate in early 2008 which was hidden from the public, that sought to change what our representatives knew to be unconstitutional from the start. The public really needs to look no further than this activity, for it speaks to the heart of the deals that went on beyond the Senate doors. Rather than trust the preservation model our founding forefathers wrote into our Constitution, these respresentatives, beholden of the public trust, saw fit to manipulate the clauses contained therein, for the sole benefit of their own political self-interests.

Perhaps our representatives, the United States Supreme Court and the main stream media would be interested in reflecting on these records and then start answering truthfully the questions which have so far been ignored. The public has been promised transparency, but to date has only been dealt scoffing, deceitful rhetoric, if they choose to address it at all.

While the public has been patient and eduring, the questions remain and refuse to be dismissed. We expect them to be answered, preferrably prior to January 20, 2009.

We the people, deserve an answer!

____________________________________________________

Listing of 9 articles from the 110th Congress as entered.

1 . SENATE RESOLUTION 511–RECOGNIZING THAT JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III, IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN — Senate - April 10, 2008
2 . REPORTS OF COMMITTEES — Senate - April 24, 2008
3 . SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND SENATE RESOLUTIONS — Senate - April 10, 2008
4 . JOHN S. McCAIN, III CITIZENSHIP — Senate - April 30, 2008
5 . MEETINGS SCHEDULED — Extensions of Remarks - April 21, 2008
6 . Daily Digest - Friday, April 18, 2008
7 . Daily Digest - Thursday, April 24, 2008
8 . Daily Digest - Wednesday, April 30, 2008
9 . Daily Digest - Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Sources:

http://thomas.loc.gov
(r:110)

←→Calendar No. 715
110th CONGRESS
2d Session
S. RES. 511
RESOLUTION
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=sr110-511

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-simple-resolution.htm

© "Zapem," of Zapem's Blog

The views and statements expressed by Investigating Obama contributors, and in quotations and citations, are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of Investigating Obama and Arlen Williams