PayPal

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Why Obama is Not (Legally) President

By Nicholas Stix

I just posted this at American White History Month’s Facebook page, where some posters were calling for impeaching “Obama.”

Actually, his crimes are worse than that. He was ineligible to run for president, in the first place, which means that an impeachment movement is misguided, in affirming that he is legally president.

I am no birther, but:

• He violated federal election law, by filing to run under (both for the U.S. Senate and the Presidency) a false name. Unless he legally changed his name to Barack Hussein Obama II, his legal name is either Barry Soetoro or Barack Hussein Dunham;

• He was ineligible to run, due to having failed to legally repudiate his citizenship in nations besides America. He was and remains a citizen of at least three different countries: Kenya, Indonesia, and America; and

• He violated the natural born citizen clause, Article II, section 1, of the U.S. Constitution. In order to run for president, both of the candidate’s parents must have been American citizens at the time of his birth. “Obama’s” father never became an American citizen.

Thus, some process or act wholly independent of impeachment must be used to forcibly remove this criminal from the Oval Office… by any means necessary.

Not that I’m suggesting that anyone violate the law. God forbid! Heaven forfend! Heck, I’m only suggesting that someone enforce the law.

24 comments:

smrstrauss said...

Re: "his legal name is either Barry Soetoro or Barack Hussein Dunham;"

Actually, that is completely false. His legal name is the name on his Hawaii birth certificate, which has been repeatedly confirmed by the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii. And that name is Barack Hussein Obama II, which is the name that he ran for president with and the name that he uses. Why is it the legal name? Answer, duh, because it was never legally changed it remains his legal name.

(NO, he was not adopted either. Adoption requires PROOF of adoption, a legal document. In Indonesia, or the USA for that matter, it requires the action of a district court, and no such court document has ever been found.)

Obama was born Obama and since his name was never changed, he remains Obama.

smrstrauss said...

Re: "He was ineligible to run, due to having failed to legally repudiate his citizenship in nations besides America. He was and remains a citizen of at least three different countries: Kenya, Indonesia..."

Answer: A simple telephone all to the EMBASSIES of those countries in Washington will convince you that that is not true. Obama was NEVER a citizen of Indonesia, and his Kenyan citizenship (dual citizenship with that of the USA, where he was born) lapsed on his 21st birthday.

smrstrauss said...

Re: "both of the candidate’s parents must have been American citizens at the time of his birth. "

Answer: That simply is not true. EVERY child born on US soil (and Obama's birth in Hawaii has been shown overwhelmingly) is a Natural Born US Citizen---the only exceptions being the children of foreign diplomats, and neither of Obama's parents was a foreign diplomat.


"Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”---Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)


“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)--Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).


“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..."---- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

"Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning."---The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)


More reading on the subject:

http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is-rubio-eligible/

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/birtherism-2012

http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/04/vattel-and-natural-born-citizen/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/scotus-natural-born-citizen-a-compendium.html

Anonymous said...

Barry probably does not even know the truth himself. It was never even thought possible that a person having the nerve to run for President would ever be anything less than a fully recognized natural born citizen.

Also, it seems that none of the states have a mechanism in place to certify that a person is a natural born citizen and therefore eligible.

Anonymous said...

Contrary to what these various Senators and Edwin Meese say, there is NO BODY OF CASE LAW that categorically defines what a natural born citizen is.

And there is a difference between natural born citizen and merely citizen.

Children of American military personnel born on an American military base overseas are NOT natural born citizens.

Anonymous said...

If Obama was an American citizen, under what passport did he use to travel to Pakistan? NO record of his passport record in State Department files can be found.

Truth is that he probably traveled under an Indonesian passport.

Anonymous said...

How this whole citizenship thing start is most interesting?

Some person in the camp of Obama challenged the eligibility OF MCCAIN TO RUN! It was suggested that McCain might not be natural born.

And this Tribe the professor looked into the matter and said "he thought" McCain was good to go.

Seems that when John at that exact moment came out of his mothers womb he was on Panamanian soil.

That there even should be controversy about this item is hard to understand. In a nation of 300 million or so persons we cannot find even two individuals whose eligibility to run for the Presidency is crystal clear?

smrstrauss said...

Re: "If Obama was an American citizen, under what passport did he use to travel to Pakistan? NO record of his passport record in State Department files can be found. "

Baloney! YOU are making the last part up. Obama has a US passport, and has shown it on the Web. And, guess what, when he came back from Indonesia to attend school in Hawaii, he traveled ALONE. So he had to have a passport. And it had to be a US PASSPORT. Why? because if he had used any other country's passport, he would have had to have had a US VISA, and there is no record of his applying for a US visa in Jakarta.

As for what passport he used to travel to Pakistan. He used a US passport. The claim that he had to use a foreign passport because US citizens were not allowed to enter Pakistan at the time either by Pakistan barring them or the country being on a US "no travel list" is false. In 1982, which is when Obama went to Pakistan, Pakistan neither kept US citizens from visiting---in fact it was eager for US tourist dollars and maintained an expensive tourist office on Fifth Avenue in New York and Pakistan International Airlines flew from JFK via London to Karachi---nor did the USA keep US citizens from visiting what at the time as a strong US ALLY. (Need proof? Well there were travel articles in US newspapers in 1982 encouraging visits to "scenic Lahore.")

smrstrauss said...

Re: “….there is a difference between natural born citizen and merely citizen…”

Answer: Yes, you are right. There is a difference. The difference is that the category of citizen, as you put it “merely a citizen” INCLUDES naturalized citizens. The category of Natural Born Citizen EXCLUDES naturalized citizens. That is all. Every citizen who is not naturalized is a Natural Born Citizen. And that means that every US citizen who was born on US soil is a Natural Born Citizen.


Re: ” Contrary to what these various Senators and Edwin Meese say, there is NO BODY OF CASE LAW that categorically defines what a natural born citizen is.”

Answer: You are either totally nuts or completely uninformed:

Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling: “Those born “in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency..."

Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”

Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: “It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”

Purpura v. Obama (New Jersey 2012) ruling: “No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”

Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion."

Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”

smrstrauss said...

Continuing:

Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”

On October 1, the US Supreme Court turned down an appeal of the last of the rulings shown above, the Farrar case, which had ruled that "children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents." By rejecting the appeal, the US Supreme Court allowed the ruling of the lower court to STAND.

In addition to those rulings specifically on presidential eligibility, there are these:

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

“Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

“Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.”

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

“The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.”

That makes about 13 courts that I can cite easily that have ruled that the US born children of foreigners are Natural Born Citizens.


And, the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case really did say that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth.

Re: “Children of American military personnel born on an American military base overseas are NOT natural born citizens.”

Answer: You might be right. But that does not affect the fact that EVERY child born on US soil (which MIGHT include military bases, but that is not sure---a future Supreme Court case would have to answer it. McCain, however, was thought to be a Natural Born US Citizen due to his being born on a Naval base within the leased US territory of the Panama Canal Zone. Other bases might not be in that special status) is for certain a Natural Born US Citizen (Yes, that includes the US-born children of illegal aliens, there are no exceptions---other than the children of foreign diplomats). EVERY child born on US soil except for the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born US Citizen.

smrstrauss said...

Re: "Seems that when John at that exact moment came out of his mothers womb he was on Panamanian soil."

Answer: The FORGED McCain birth certificate that is online (McCain never had his birth certificate posted on the Web) claims that he was born outside of the US Canal Zone, in Colon, Panama.

But that is not likely to be true since it was posted by someone who apparently disliked McCain and liked Obama. McCain himself has claimed that he was born in the Family Hospital on the US Naval Base INSIDE the US Canal Zone.

smrstrauss said...

Re: "Also, it seems that none of the states have a mechanism in place to certify that a person is a natural born citizen and therefore eligible."

The US Constitution leaves the final decision on eligibility and on all other matters relating to the election of a US president to THE US ELECTORAL COLLEGE, which voted for Obama twice without a single member changing her or his vote to vote against because of the nutty idea that Obama might be born in a foreign country or the similarly loony constitutional THEORY that two US citizen parents are required in order to be a Natural Born US Citizen.

NOT one single member changed her or his vote. Obama won 365 Electoral Votes in the general election in 2008, and he received the votes of 365 electors. He won 332 votes in the general election of 2012, and he received the votes of 332 electors. Not one of those nearly 700 electors thought there was anything to the "born in Kenya" (or some other country) notion, or that two citizen parents are required in order to be a Natural Born Citizen.

jeigheff said...

So why did Obama present the world with a forged birth certificate when Donald Trump started to make things hot for him?

I work with a variety of publications in my job, and am familiar with what scanning can and can't do. The fact that Obama's birth certificate (in PDF format) was built in layers, and was not saved in one layer of raster art, was very suspicious. Others have also made mention of the fact that at least two different styles of typewriter keystroke fonts were used (obviously, only one would have been used in the typing of his birth certificate.) This is something a Photoshop forger might hope go unnoticed. The absence of any kind of background texture, whether it be paper texture, a watermark, etc., has also been noted.

One theorist wrote that he believes Obama's concocted birth certificate was built by two parties. The first one tried to make a hopefully passable forgery. The second party deliberately added some gaffs (like Dr. U K Lay Lee, or whatever the forged name was), which were intentionally designed to bring forth howls of criticism. The critics of the birth certificate were then denounced as being unable to accept the "truth" (ha ha ha ha) of finally being shown "Obama's" "real" birth certificate. (Sorry, I got carried away with the hard quotes there.)

There is more that I could write. But the fact that none of us proles have been allowed to examine Obama's actual hard-copy birth certificate and compare it to the scanned one does not give "Obama" and his defenders much credibility.

Am I a birther? I probably fit the definition. I am neither proud nor embarrassed to own that. I also believe that I could have made a better forgery with my own modest scanning and Photoshop skills.

However, I'm willing to put the issue of Obama's questionable birth and early background aside and instead focus on the real damage this man and his supporters are doing to our country at this very moment. If Obama were to be impeached, I would rejoice, even though that would mean his expulsion was a consequence of his being eligible legally. The fact that he would be out of office would suffice for me, even though his gang would still remain behind him. (Only one head of the hydra would have been removed, you see.)

Anonymous said...

At the time of filing your application [papers] to run for the Presidency [at the state level], NO ONE ever asks the question, are you eligible and can you prove it with documents? Evidently this is not done as Obama only with great difficulty more or less was forced to release his birth certificate.

smrstrauss said...

Re: "So why did Obama present the world with a forged birth certificate..."

Answer: So, the answer is that IT ISN'T FORGED. Simply because birther "experts" CLAIM that is it forged does not make it forged. They haven't shown that they are even real experts, much less fair and impartial. That is why they are not believed by Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck or the National Review, or by John McCain, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, or by Gingrich, Santorum or Huckabee, or Michelle Bachmann (who voted to confirm Obama's election twice).

Just because birther "experts" say that the birth certificate is forged does not make it forged. That is just another way that they have of attacking Obama. And they have made up their criteria for claiming forgery as well. For example they say that a sign of it being forged is that it shows layers---but, guess what, pdf shows layers naturally, that is how it works. And they say that it shows "kerning"---but that is the normal skipping of an old manual typewriter.

So, the answer to the question is that it IS NOT FORGED.

Re: " different styles of typewriter keystroke fonts were used (obviously, only one would have been used in the typing of his birth certificate..."

That is explained by the use of the Xerox workstation to put the image of the long form birth certificate into pdf.

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/08/the-importance-of-the-xerox-7655-identification/

http://rcradioblog.wordpress.com/2013/08/11/xerox-for-dummies/

http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/xerox-workflow/the-xerox-workcentre-workflow-successes/

smrstrauss said...

Re: " Evidently this is not done as Obama only with great difficulty more or less was forced to release his birth certificate."

Obama released his Hawaii birth certificate, the OFFICIAL short-form birth certificate that thousands of people in Hawaii use to get their US passports every year, way back in June 2008---five months before the election of that year, and the REPUBLICAN officials at the time confirmed that they had sent it to him and that all the facts on it were accurate. In 2011, Obama ALSO released his long-form birth certificate, but that was not necessary since the short-form is the official BC. Mitt Romney, BTW, released only his short form BC, and in fact released only a Web image of a photocopy of his short-form BC---which did not even show the raised seal. (Obama's did.)

Anonymous said...

smrstrauss What Obama released was a certificate of live birth. He has never produced his "vault original copy" birth certificate. This is a document that any real American citizen has had to produce in their life time any number of times and most can do it on a moments notice. So far and I think forever Barry Soetero will never produce that copy willingly.

Anonymous said...

Re: "What Obama released was a certificate of live birth. "''

Answer a Certificate of Live Birth is, wait for it, a fancy name for A BIRTH CERTIFICATE. IF search for an image of Mitt Romney's birth certificate, you will see that it is a Certificate of Live Bith.

Obama has shown the official short for copy of his BC (The Certification of Live Birth) and the long form copy of his birth certificate (The Certificate of Live Birth), and in both cases he has shown the official legal copies on security paper with the seals properly on the back---where they are supposed to be. (The seal on Mitt Romney"s BC is not visible.) And the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that they sent the short form and long form BCs to Obama and that all the facts on them are accurate, and that is further confirmed by the public Index Data file and by the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers that were sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961---and ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send notices to that section of the newspapers, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.

Anonymous said...

Anyone saying Barry Soetero has produced his birth certificate is lying. He has never produced it and has ordered all his records sealed. Officials that are in charge answer any request for Barry's birth certificate by saying they are not authorized to present Barry's birth certificate. On Barry's certificate of live birth it has his father's race listed as African a term not in use at that time in history. It's all fake and fraud and it has been examined by experts that have announced at official announcements that it is a fraud, just as Barry himself is.

Anonymous said...

Re: "Anyone saying Barry Soetero has produced his birth certificate is lying. "

Answer: Obama has produced his birth certificate TWICE, first the official short-form birth certificate, known as the Certification of Live Birth, then in 2011 the long form Certificate of Live Birth. In both cases the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that they sent the birth certificate to Obama and that ALL the facts on the copy that Obama had put online are exactly the same as on the one that they sent to him. And the fact that Obama received a birth certificate from Hawaii is further confirmed by the public Index Data file:

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/04/in_hawaii_its_easy_to_get_birt.html

And by the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961. (And only the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the newspapers, and it only did so in 1961 for births in Hawaii.

Oh, and there is this:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiol …

And, btw, birthers have never been able to show that Obama's mother even had a passport in 1961---and very very few 18-year-olds did in those days.

Still, they'd like gullible people to assume that she was one of the few 18-year-olds to have a passport, and one of the extremely few women who traveled abroad during the last three months of pregnancy because of the risk of stillbirth (she could not have gone earlier because she was attending college) and that she traveled overseas ALONE (WND has proven that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961. And they'd like gullible people to believe that all that happened, AND that the birth certificate of Hawaii is forged and that the officials of Hawaii of both parties who have repeatedly stated that they sent it to Obama are lying---and so is the Index Data and so are the birth notices, and now the hospital is lying too.

Instead, of course, the simple fact is that THEY are lying. In fact, they lied quite deliberately when they said that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya. She never said any such thing, and in fact she said repeatedly that Obama was born "in Hawaii, where his father was studying at the time" Birther sites simply did not quote her in that statement, and cut off the tape ust before she was asked "where was he born?"

Anonymous said...

Re: "On Barry's certificate of live birth it has his father's race listed as African a term not in use at that time in history."

Answer: Hawaii allowed anyone to describe their race using any words that they wanted. No one stood over your shoulder telling you what word to use, and there was no list of approved words for races. You could use any word you wanted.

And what was the word that AFRICAN exchange students normally used to describe their race in the 1960s? Answer: The word was "African."

Anonymous said...

More than a year has passed since this article was posted, and Obama is still the president of the United States. And there have not even been calls to investigate his birth certificate or his place of birth or his Natural Born Citizen status in the US Congress. The reason, of course, is that the article is wrong and that Obama really was born in Hawaii and that every child born on US soil except for the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born Citizen.

Nicholas said...

Anonymous Leftwing Imbecile Monday, February 9, 2015 at 10:57:00 A.M. EST

Next time, read the article before commenting on it.

Anonymous said...

Nearly two years have passed since this article was posted, and Obama is still the president of the United States. And there have not even been calls to investigate his birth certificate or his place of birth or his Natural Born Citizen status in the US Congress. The reason, of course, is that the article is wrong and that Obama really was born in Hawaii and that every child born on US soil except for the children of foreign diplomats is a Natural Born Citizen.