Courtroom Details of Obama’s 1/26 Eligibility Hearing, Georgia – PE

Details from this morning’s eligibility hearing in Georgia, to accompany the Breaking News, “Default Judgment Against Obama Discussed: Today’s Eligibility Hearing in Georgia.”

By Sharon Rondeau
The Post & Email (site is under maintenance at time of publishing; see The Post & Email for further details on this and other Obama eligibility cases, documentation, and history)

Judge Michael Malihi is presiding over the Obama ballot challenges being heard today in Atlanta, GA

(Jan. 26, 2012) — The court convened at approximately 9:30 a.m.  Judge Michael Malihi began by asking those present to stand and reading the last paragraph of Atty. Michael Jablonski’s letter to Brian Kemp, Georgia Secretary of State, “into the record,” commenting that Jablonski was not present at the hearing.

The judge called plaintiff David Welden to stand and asked where he resided and if he were a registered voter in the state of Georgia.  Then his attorney, Van Irion, stood and stated that there were three types of citizenship in the United States.  He then provided argument on the definition of “natural born Citizen,” referring to Minor v. Happersett.

“The court should recognize that the term ‘citizen” is not ‘natural born Citizen,’ Irion said. “The Minor court’s definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ says ‘parents.’

“In closing, this case is about the Constitution,” Irion said. We’ve shown that Barack Obama’s father was never a citizen…and that means he is not constitutionally qualified…Finally, the defendant was ordered to be here, and I wish to state on the record that that shows not just a contempt for this court…”

Then Irion was interrupted and stopped speaking.

9:54 a.m.:  Atty. J. Mark Hatfield stood and stating that he represents Kevin Richard Powell and Carl Swensson.  Hatfield mentioned the White House schedule as he saw that it related to Obama’s lack of attendance at the hearing.

Carl Swensson was sworn in at 9:56 a.m. and stated his residence and county.  Then Kevin Powell was asked the same.  Both were asked if they were able to vote for President of the United States.

Swensson and Powell explained their challenges filed with the Secretary of State’s office to the judge.

Hatfield held up the Certification of Nomination which Nancy Pelosi signed in 2008 to place Obama’s name on the ballot.  The judge asked if it was a “certified copy,” and Hatfield answered that it was.  He then read from it, stating that it did not affirm that the candidates met constitutional requirements to serve, while the wording from the Republican National Committee for its candidates did contain that wording.

The judge asked if the documents were from a “United States government source,” and Hatfield answered “Yes, sir, they were.”

Hatfield cited Jablonski’s January 25 letter “indicating that they did not want the proceedings to go forward and did not want to participate.”  Hatfield also entered into evidence Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.

Ken Allen, a resident of Arizona, stood to present the documentation he had received from the State Department after submitting a FOIA request early in 2009, which The Post & Email reported on here.  He stated that “Barack Obama Sr.” was “never a citizen.”

At 10:09 a.m. someone said, “Let’s take a short break,” and people stood up and began moving around and talking with one another.

At 10:17 a.m., the court was called back in to order.

Atty. Orly Taitz was called upon to speak.  The Georgia registered voter whom she represents, David Farrar, stood and identified himself.

Taitz utilized a projector on the wall to the right of the judge as an aid in her presentation.  She then stated that evidence existed that Obama possessed Indonesian citizenship, to which the judge was heard by this writer to say, “That’s not relevant.”  Taitz then discussed the court’s decision in Minor v. Happersett and was interrupted by the judge, who said, “Counselor, can you save your argument for the closing?”  She then stopped speaking.

Mr. Christopher Strunk of New York then went up to the front of the courtroom to testify, and Taitz began to ask him questions about the passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham, one of which contains the name “Soebarkah.”  Strunk stated, “She wanted that expunged from her record, but we never got that.”

Susan Daniels, Private Investigator from Ohio, then took the stand, and spoke about her investigation which revealed that Obama had reportedly been using a social security number which she contended had not been assigned to him.

Taitz asked Daniels, “What was the social security number attached to your request?” and Daniels read off “042-68-4425.”  Daniels said, “In all my years, I’ve never seen anything like this.”  She stated that the person who had originally owned the number had been born in 1890.

“First I ran the social security number to check the address, and the same number came up for him in Massachusetts, Illinois, and Washington, DC.  It showed a phone number, and it was always the same number…It would show intermittently ‘August 4, 1961′ and ‘1890.’”  Daniels stated that she obtained information “directly from the Social Security Administration.”

At 10:30 Mr. Chito Papa took the stand.  He stated that he works in the field of Information Technology including Adobe® software.

Taitz asked Papa if the “birth certificate” which “Obama posted online” had flattened layers.  “Did you see one layer or multiple layers? Taitz asked.  “I saw multiple layers,” he answered.

Taitz asked Papa about Obama’s social security number which appeared on his tax return posted on the internet, and Papa stated that the layers had not been flattened.  Taitz then thanked Papa for his testimony.

At 10:36 a.m. another witness, Linda Jordan, was called to the stand.  Taitz adjusted her Powerpoint presentation by means of a laptop computer and began by asking a question about “E-Verify,” the U.S. government’s system for flagging potential illegal immigrants from working.  Jordan stated that she ran Obama’s number through the E-Verify system and said, “When I read it, it was 2011, and it could not verify it.  It came back.”

At 10:39 a.m., Douglas Vogt took the stand.  Vogt stated that he owns a typesetting company and has been “in the business for 18 years now.”

Taitz asked Vogt if he examined the birth certificate which was posted online, and he said, “Yes, I did.”  He stated that “sloping lines” would not be seen if the image had been made from a paper document.

Taitz asked, “Would you expect to see a clear embossed seal on the document?” and Vogt answered, “Yes, I would.”  However, he stated that such was not present on Obama’s birth certificate.  Regarding the number of Obama’s purported birth record, Vogt stated that “federal regs” require that “all birth certificate numbers have to be sequential, starting on January 1.”

At 10:49, witness John Sampson took the stand.  He stated that he has a background in criminal justice, served as a police officer in New York City and worked as an immigration inspector.  His background includes working for the INS in the area of “immigration fraud” and he was also a deportation officer.   He stated that he has testified in front of “federal grand juries.”  He stated that he started his own consulting firm in 2009 and has been self-employed since then.

Taitz asked Sampson about Obama’s social security number, and Sampson said that he “ran” the number 042-68-4425 and that it was assigned to Obama since 1977.

Taitz asked if Sampson had examined the birth certificate, and he said, “Yes.”  He raised the issue of the Nordyke twins’ birth certificate, whose numbers were lower than Obama’s even though their birth occurred a day later.  He stated that the registrar’s name was different than that on the Nordyke twins’ documents and that it was unlikely that the registrar would have been different in the “same hospital” regarding births one day apart.

Sampson recommended further investigation, including subpoenas and court orders, to obtain more information on the number “042-68-4425.”

Sampson mentioned that Obama has also been known as “Barry Soetoro.”

Taitz asked what Sampson thought needed to be done regarding the questions about Obama’s background, and he recommended asking for an official copy of the SS-5 for his social security number application and the Hawaii Department of Health to see “if he was born in Hawaii.”  Sampson stated that an investigation would be “a criminal investigation” through a U.S. attorney’s office.  He said that if a person has been found to be impersonating a U.S. citizen, he would be subject to “deportation.”

Shortly thereafter, Sampson’s testimony ended, and Taitz began discussing Obama’s alleged years in Indonesia from 1968-71, during which he was known as “Barry Soetoro.”

“We have another boy who from 1968-69 was in Hawaii,” she said.  The judge then said, “Are you testifying?  Do you know how?” which brought laughter from the assembly. The judge then said she could discuss the matter during closing arguments.  Taitz responded, “I would like to testify,” after which she took the stand.

Taitz stated that “Mr. Obama has resigned from the bar.”  The judge asked, “How is that relevant?” Taitz said that it was pertinent because Obama was “hiding his identity.”

“I’m going to ask you to submit your testimony in writing,” the judge said.  “OK,” Taitz said.  She then left the stand and spoke from the assembly once again.  She stated that “We have clear evidence of fraud and forgery…Mr. Obama has used other last names…”  She then stated that of all the lawsuits filed against Obama regarding his eligibility, none were heard on “the merits.”  Taitz asked Judge Malihi to order the release of Obama’s records in Hawaii and to hold Obama in “contempt of court” for failing to appear at the hearing.

The judge said, “Thank you” and adjourned the court at 11:12 a.m.

Embed This


G & M
Subscribe to The Globe & Malevolence, your daily intelligence briefing via Noisy Room, Maggie's Notebook,
Gulag Bound,
and other key sources.
Oh yeah, it's free -- maybe as long as we are.

Comments

  1. Obama is not eligible to be president. He presented a falsified birth certificate. His mother was underage and his father was not a citizen. There is no solid proof he was born in hawaii.

    As a child his aunt called him “Bari” but there is no record of a name change. He called a radio station and referred to himself as “Barry”

    Barak Obama is the made up alter ego of Bari Soetoro who most likely had indonesian citizenship during his time in indonesia. It would have been hard for him to attend school otherwise. This would disqualify him.

    Let him bring to court a real copy of his birth certificate with seal. They should be able to forge something that actually passes the experts within time for the election

    • Wow. You folks need to take your medication.

      Past– I heard that some people used to call Ronald Reagan “Ronnie”, or even “Gipper”. With no official record of a name change, it’s clear that Ronald Reagan was an illegal usurper of the office of President.

    • I hope everyone gets off the subject of trying to prove or disprove that Barry was born in Hawaii. It’s not relevant to his fraudulent election. What is relevant is that, in order to be elected POTUS, you have to be a “natural born citizen.” Barry’s dad is NOT a citizen – we all know this, so he is NOT a “natural born citizen.” If they can prove he was born in Hawaii, that only confirms that he is a “NATIVE born citizen”.

      • Well said.

      • With that flimsy attempt at logic how many of the founding fathers would be eligible to be president?

        • All of them. Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 states:

          ” No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”

          • Here’s a case for you.

            US vs Wong Kim Ark

            http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/169/649/case.html

            “A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution,”

            Neither of his parents were US citizens. However, Wong Kim was born in San Francisco. The SCOTUS ruled that he was, indeed, a natural-born citizen.

            Also, Arkeny Vs Daniels. http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

            Relevant finding:

            “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.”

            Obama’s Father’s citizenship does NOT matter for Obama’s citizenship.

          • ALSO! People tend to overlook this paragraph in Happersett:

            http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0088_0162_ZO.html

            “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 [p168] 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. The words “all children” are certainly as comprehensive, when used in this connection, as “all persons,” and if females are included in the last they must be in the first. That they are included in the last is not denied. In fact the whole argument of the plaintiffs proceeds upon that idea.”

            Happersett does NOT define natural-born citizenship as ‘must have two parents of US citizenship” – only that, in M v H, the fact that the woman had two US citizens as parents was sufficient. It did NOT address the situation when one parent was a US Citizen and the other was not.

        • The Founders/those of their ilk -were “grandfathered in” by the ARTICLE’s “Sunset Clause”

          My God how this Nation’s Citizenry has deluded

        • KenyanBornObama says:

          All of the Founders were eligible under the Constitution except Chester Arthur, who was accused of not being a natural born citizen because his father was not a citizen when he was born! He will be voided and anything with his name attached to it, (INCLUDING Wong Kim Ark) after Obama is proven ineligible because he was a usurper too!

      • That is not true, Phil. Even though Obama’s father is not an American citizen, he is still considered to be a “natural born citizen” because of his mother’s American citizenship. — “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement”. Congressional Research Service. Nov. 14, 2011.

      • Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) is the only president born of two immigrants, both Irish.
        Presidents with one immigrant parent are Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), whose mother was born in England, James Buchanan (1857-1861) and Chester Arthur (1881-1885), both of whom had Irish fathers, and Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) and Herbert Hoover (1929-1933), whose mothers were born respectively in England and Canada.

        • KenyanBornObama says:

          And he was eligible under the grandfather clause of article 2 section 1 caluse 5!

        • You silly person —ever hear of ARTICLE II’s “Sunset Clause” ?

          Further IT IS NOT THAT YOUR PARENTS CAME FROM SOMEWHERE , IN FACT , ARTICLE II is PRO-IMMIGRANT—WHAT IS ESSENTIAL IS THAT THESE TRUE IMMIGRANTS DESIRE AND BECOME U.S. CITIZENS SO THAT THEY MAY BEAR NATURAL BORN CHILDREN OF THE NEW NATION

          A NOTE—BARACK OBAMA SENIOR WAS NOT AN IMMIGRANT TO THE U.S. HE WAS A VISITOR

          WILSON’S MOTHER WAS A U.S. CITIZEN (DERIVATIVE THROUGH MARRIAGE TO HER US. CITIZEN HUSBAND) AT THE TIME OF WOODROW’S BIRTH

    • I recall way back at the begining readibng an article in my google groups forum and it was written by a professor who was extremely well qualified in the bisness of imagration stauses and all of the small print and many other parts that people really know nothing about at ll unless you’r like the guy I’m talking about,He brought up something to the effect that the law required the mother had to stay in the country for a certain amount of time for the child to be considered a legal citizen of this country and that she had not met those requirements,not by a longshot among a host of very many other legal prases etc al taken from the books concerning imagration staus and just exactl what it does take in order for a person to be a real and bonafied citizen and Obooboo failed on each and every count.I wish I could remember who this person was but his credentials were impecable to say the least.The end results did in fact show that going by the books completely and thuroughly that Obooboo did not indeed qualify as a legal citizen of this country.Also there’s the fact that making a birth certificate that looks to be totaly genuine and aged etc is relatively easy to do,especialy when it comes to government agency’s who can do this and nobody would ever be able to tell if in fact it was genuine or not

  2. Taqqiya-gate is breaking wide-open! One thing that I gathered from this reporting of the proceedings of the administrative hearing in Atlanta is that the plaintiffs used only as much information as was necessary for them to achieve their goal then and there in Georgia. The one simple fact that Sheriff Joe Arpaio is being held in reserve until he has completed his investigation tells me that as the magnitude of the relevance of this case and others that shall surely follow in its path around the country increases more and more pertinent facts surrounding the truth that Barack Hussein Obama II has criminally usurped the office of the president of the United States of America and conspired to contravene the Constitution of the United States of America shall come to light.
    Given his indoctrination into the murderous cult of Islam during his formative young years in Indonesia; our elected representatives, judges, and those tasked with responsibilities relating to our national security would be remiss in their duties if they failed to recognize in their consideration of the fraud and forger illegally occupying the Oval Office that deceptively practicing taqqiya is a modus operendi of Muslims dedicated to the advance of political, religious and militant Islam.
    ‘We the People’ must demand the Abrogation of the constitutionally illegal election of an ineligible candidate to the office of the president of the USA and the retro-active abrogation of all that his illegitimate, criminal administration has committed in the commission of the crime. All those complicit in this, the crime of many centuries, must be held accountable. No impeachment would suffice, for to impeach one would first need recognize Mr. Obama’s legal occupation of the White House which is not now and has never been the case. No pardon would suffice for to pardon the criminal would open the door for a possible presidential pardon from whomever were to legally replace George Bush as president in Anno Domini 2012- we currently have no legitimate president and commander-in-chief in office. This is a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS of the greatest magnitude. Mr. Obama has availed himself of much highly sensitive information in the commission of his crime, the release of which would further imperil the national security of ‘We the People.’ Mr. Obama must be prosecuted for his crimes and held accountable in a military courts martial for usurping the rank and authority of commander-in-chief.

    • I meant ‘no resignation would suffice for to accept his resignation one would open the door for a possible presidential pardon…”

      • I most CERTAINLY do NOT want his resignation! I want his ARREST!! The only problem I’ve seen is that, to date, no one court has seen enough evidence to make any legal decision whatsoever. Each has been called such things as “without merit.” Well, that’s fine when you have proper, legal, and investigative evidence to support that claim. However, each claim that the plaitiff’s case was “without merit” was based upon the very documents the plaintiff’s were attempting to prove were not real (or official, or tampered with – whatever your wording).
        Looking into the validity is the very thing the court is compelled to do! Why, then, have they not? Hmm? I cannot imagine a sitting judge not wanting do DO HIS/HER JOB just because of possible pressure from …wherever.
        I voted for him and, although I’m still a supporter of many of his policies, I cannot, in good concience allow such a travesty of justice go without proper adjudication. It looks to me that he is in fact, not a NATURAL born citizen, POSSIBLY not a NATIVE born citizen, POSSIBLY a citizen of another country, and absolutely NOT qualified to be POTUS!
        Just because I voted for him is not reason for me not to want every document and every record that’s been requested from his past because it DOES matter!
        I want to know where his money came from, where he traveled, under what passports/names and circumstances he traveled, and what he did in school. Yes, this man is the President of the most powerful nation on earth. You’re darned right I want it all!!

    • You, sir, seriously need to have your dosage adjusted.

      First off, do you think that your argument sounds more valid if you express it with lots of multisyllabic words and lengthy sentences? Grandiosity is not the same as intelligence– as you have shown here in Anno Domini 2012.

      Next, I think that if there were any factual basis at all for these Birther claims, we would have seen some results from all the other lawsuits filed in various courtrooms over the years challenging the President’s citizenship. Alas, all such claims remain unproven in any court, and the Birther movement is left to rant on Kook Central, Michigan Militia, stock-up-on-canned-goods-and-ammo Web sites like this one.

      • To have a “factual basis”, the facts must be allowed to be presented. This has not been the case in all previous courts. They have simply been disregarded without the merit being shown. This is the first time a judge has allowed the facts to be presented. I believe the Obama idiots are going to be surprised when more of these ballot challenges are allowed to proceed on the merits.

      • karin zzoanelli says:

        previous numerous court proceedings have bbeen closed because obama does not want to have himself be investigated. SPJ Kagan was instrumental in almost all the cases. the claim by the way were not investigated by any court in this country. WHY????? thos of us who KNOW that the document obama submitted is a forgery – why did it take 2 1/2 years in the first place.
        the SS number is astounding – you cannot have a number from a different state, only he does. because – no, I am not going to tell you – its another forgery case. this time by his mother.

      • Tommy is showing the true and unmistakable sign of a leftard Obot.

        First, if you can not argue on the merit of the topic then bring in the ‘linguistic expertise’ by using big words like ‘multisyllabic’ in order to show linguistic superiority and beat down the opponent in that department.

        In his second paragraph, he goes off the deep end with his assumptions. He mistakenly states: ‘we would have seen some results from all the other lawsuits filed in various courtrooms over the years challenging the President’s citizenship’. Tommy either does not know or neglects to admit that all of the court cases were thrown out based on procedural reasons and not on merit. Reason? The corrupt and coward judges did not dare to go against Obama. This will change now.

        Lastly, Tommy makes a mistake to identify the ‘birthers’ as right wing cooks. Remember Tommy, that two or so years ago the Tea Party was identified by Nancy Pelosi as right wing Nazis and AstroTurf? Where in Nancy Pelosi now? Eating crow? Later the Tea Party made a huge difference and they will make a big difference again because they are the silent majority. Change your your rabid leftist ideology which is based on blind personality cult towards Obama. He will be soundly defeated in November.

      • KenyanBornObama says:

        Did you not see a GA judge say their is merit and move on with the case? DOH?
        Obama WILL be removed from the ballot in the next week or so!

    • Blacksunshine84 says:

      Taqqiya-gate? LoL Love it!

  3. After Obama is rightly disgraced and hopefully imprisoned/deported, let us beware of ineligible Republicans on the threshold of the White House, such as Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, and possibly Rick Santorum. It is illegal and absurd to have anyone as our Commander-in-Chief who was born to a non-citizen parent.

    • News bulletin for Harry– the Father of our Country was born to non-citizen parents! Good God, it’s a conspiracy of massive proportions!

      I don’t know where you dreamed up this phantom rule that one needs to have US citizen parentage to be considered a natural- born citizen. But I admit that it makes a racist rant like yours easier to justify. The one thing I do not understand, though, is… Santorum? Come on, he’s a God-fearin’, Tea-Party lovin’, choice-hatin’, gay-hatin’, gun-lovin’ white guy, idn’t he? Right in your wheelhouse!

      • “I don’t know where you dreamed up this phantom rule that one needs to have US citizen parentage to be considered a natural- born citizen”

        You contradict yourself.
        Perhaps you should do some research? Also consider the Constitution and the safety of this country before making uneducated remarks.

      • Good grief, Tommy.

        By the language of Article 2, those U.S. Citizens already born at the time were exempted. It helps to read the source, when the source is the U.S. Constitution.

      • Blacksunshine84 says:

        Our forefathers distinguished themselves from natural-born citizens with what is known as “the grandfather clause.”

      • WRONG! She was involved in his eligibility at least THREE TIMES that can be verified by factual documentation …and allegedly more. If you really want to prove or disprove this, the documentation is very easy to locate by a 9 years old child (that who found one of them).

      • KingDariusOfPersia says:

        News Bulletin For Tommy – It was George Washington who proposed to John Jay that only natural born citizens, not just citizens, be eligible to be President. The grandfather clause allowed non-natural born citizens, such as George Washington, to be President in order to temporarily have a pool of candidates until the new natural born citizens could reach the age of eligibility. Where do you suppose George Washington got his definition of natural born citizen? It was a concept well known by the founders and authors of the Constitution. It comes from natural law that all people educated in the law and government in the 18th century were familiar with. They knew it to mean those persons born on a country’s soil to two parents who were citizens of that country. Search on Emmerich de Vattel, Minor v. Happersett, and Breckenridge Long. You will learn alot.

      • Tommy, Tommy, Tommy. Here we go again. Making statements which are not only wrong but betrays you how ignorant you are. Here is your statement: “I don’t know where you dreamed up this phantom rule that one needs to have US citizen parentage to be considered a natural- born citizen”

        Here is the answer from the Constitution:

        Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 states:

        ” No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”

        If you can not decipher this statement, then you are hopeless. I suggest Tommy, that you get your facts together before you babble.

      • Donna L. Schoening says:

        The 14th Amendment to the Constitution defines citizenship this way: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

        But to be President, you must also be a “natural born” citizen, according to Section I, Article II of the U.S. Constitution

        The only thing that is black-and-white about citizenship and the presidency is this:
        1.A child of a two American citizens who is born on U.S. soil is clearly eligible to be President;
        2.Anyone who becomes a naturalized U.S. citizen after birth (think Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger) is clearly not eligible to be President
        Purists insist that both parents must be U.S. citizens and you must be born on U.S. soil. This narrow interpretation would mean that Barack Obama is ineligible to be President of the United States.

        If, in fact, Obama Sr. is/was Obama’s birth father he WAS NOT a U.S. Citizen

    • Here’s a case for you.

      US vs Wong Kim Ark

      http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/169/649/case.html

      “A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution,”

      Neither of his parents were US citizens. However, Wong Kim was born in San Francisco. The SCOTUS ruled that he was, indeed, a natural-born citizen.

      Also, Arkeny Vs Daniels. http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

      Relevant finding:

      “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.”

      Obama’s Father’s citizenship does NOT matter for Obama’s natural-born status for purposes of Article II.

      Which means that the hurdle you have to overcome is to prove that the State of Hawaii – not Obama, mind you – is lying when they say Obama was born there.

      • Dena, it is unfortunate that you did not watch/listen to the live feed of the court proceedings. If you had you would not have written this post which clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding of the matter. In the court proceedings either attorney J. Mark Hatfield or Van R. Irion explained how the Wong Kim Ark case relates to the Minor v. Happersett case. If you care to become enlightened now you can do so by reading the very clear explanation here:
        http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/minor-v-happersett-revisited-2/

        • I listened, and I read the cases for myself.

          Did you?

          Do you understand what the clause I quoted means?

          Do you understand that MvH does NOT address when one parent is a citizen and the other is not, when the child is born in a US State? That the lawyer is interpreting the case incorrectly?

          Do you recognize what AvD tells you?

          • Yes.
            Yes.
            The word they used was parentS. (Please note the use of plural.) Do you think they would have said that if they had really meant to say something else?
            Do you understand that they probably would have included exceptions or additional terms to their definition if they had intended to?

            I am not an attorney. Are you? Do you think there is a chance that the lawyers who have been micro analyzing the laws and every other contemporary and historical document and scholarly legal opinion on these matters since prior to December 2008 might actually have a better understanding of them than you? I do. I have been following their discussions and reports since then. Have you?

        • I also notice that he convenientlly leaves out the finding of Daniels.

          • Perhaps it was a good thing the Daniels ruling was left out since the court could not seem to get the correct clause of the constitution in the finding. It is Article II section I clause V that is pertinent, not clause IV !! Not much brain power in that court and that is very inconvenient for the court not knowing what clause they are talking about!

          • WKA Court finds that Wong is a “CITIZEN” alas did not declare ‘natural born Citizen’

            In fact, they compared the two Citizen and ‘natural born Citizen’ clearly delineating THEY DID NOT EQUATE THEM

            OH BROTHER THIS IS SO SAD OUR NATION IS IN A TERRIBLE STATE WHEN THE “PEOPLE” ARE SO LACKING IN VERY BASIC COMPREHENSION SKILLS

      • KenyanBornObama says:

        Wong Kim Ark is VOID because the justice who gave the opinion was appointed by Chester Arthur, so there is obvious fraud connected to it. Chester had a stake in the game because he was not a natural born citizen and his appointee changed that to make Chester legal! But, you can not change the Constitution without an amendment anyways, so WKA, has no bearing!

      • James P. Carter says:

        Hey Dena,

        From your quote of Wong Kim Ark:

        “….becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States.”

        A “citizen” indeed, not a “natural born citizen” as required by the U.S. Constitution.

  4. Hail to Judge Michael Malihi for honablly protecting the foundation of our Goverment…our Constitution. My thanks to him and to all those who participated in bring these charges to a court of law.

  5. Ovomit can never be released and must be held incommunicato for as long as he lives.

    He is a clear and present danger to this nation.

    Gordon

    • I agree 100%. Barry the usurper is the #1 national security threat facing the United States of America at the present time. He is truly the 21st century version of The Manchurian Candidate.

    • Gulag Bound edit: ad hominem post deleted; measures are being taken regarding this poster.

      • Gee….maybe because W the Stupid wasn’t ineligible to run.

      • Hey Tommy, it didn’t look like satire – me thinks you were serious.

        Expect a visit from the FBI

        Lol

        It’s apparent Tommy wasn’t paying attention during the Bush Years.

        http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621

      • oh, well, the libs at their best. NO, it is NOT President Bush’s fault, it is the inexperience and socialistic brain of obummer, the kenyan born person, and make no mistake about it – why would anybody spend over 5 million dollars to defend a lie, a forgery/ he may fool you, but he does not fool the educated part of our votership: the REPUBLICANS.

        America IS WIDE AWAKE – I admit they were not before, but now they are.

        see yu in November – someplace.

    • James P. Carter says:

      Obama, Soetoro, Soebarkah or whatever his actual legal name is is indeed a clear and present danger to this country…he in fact told us so five days before the 2008 election when he boisterously proclaimed to a gathering of his unknowing frenzied subjects: “Five days from now we begin fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

      Nothing short of his immediate arrest, trial, conviction and execution for Treason, Bribary and other High Crimes and misdemeanors will suffice.

  6. The bottom line is…it would be very easy and painless for him to release all documents to prove he is who he says he is IF HE WAS WHO HE SAYS HE IS. Clearly he’s not. If he was, he’d be in a big hurry to embarrass half the country who think he’s a fraud. He can’t…because he IS a fraud. And his continual disrespect to our laws and our Constitution is clear and disgusting.

    • It might be painless and expedient for you but it would spoil all Obama’s fun as well as the fun of his supporters.

    • He has already told us that he was born a dual citizen. There is absolutely nothing more that needs to be released or provided because he will never, under any circumstances, be a natural born citizen of the United States. It couldn’t be any simpler.

  7. omg! look what he knows about OUR country…that he can take to ‘whomever’ and sell us out….the sheep followers have doomed us all….we need our counry back!! I hope other states follow and do
    what Georgia is doing…the s*** is going to hit the fan!!

    • you know Alabama is right behind – and there will be a whole lot more.
      to be considered a natural born US Citizen you have tio 1. be born IN THIS – and for all the hoopla abaout his so called certificate: it is forgery, that means he has something to hide.
      also: since he was born outside the US, both parents must be US Citizen. well, his daddyo wasn’t.

      the SS number, of course, is a totally different case: the gentleman who received it originally was born and resided in Connecticut, until he moved to Hawaii in his old age. he passed away there, without ever applying for SS benefits.
      now obamas grandmother was working in the government office that clears records of numbers of people who are deceased – all documented. she found this “unused” number and issued it to her grandson. soooo easy.
      I know you won’t believe it, but the Judge obviously does.

    • Follow what? Georgia has not removed Obama from the ballot and they have no intention of doing so.

  8. You cannot impeach a president that was never legitimate without giving tacit acceptance to his legitimacy. An arrest is more appropriate.

  9. This is great news. I sincerely hope there are more Americans who want the truth more than they want to argue.

    It might be easier to cope with the destruction Obama has brought upon our nation, if I was satisfied that he was eligible to be President.

    The false documents, the false SS numbers, the obfuscation and the lies, all point to one thing – deception and crime!

    I hope to see Obama arrested and I hope Americans realize this guy must be held in American prison. He has had access to the most sensitive information in our nation, military too, and if he is convicted of falsely holding the office of President, he cannot be allowed to be free.

    His bad.

  10. Too Good To Be True?

    Obama Blocked From Registering For Alabama State Primary Until Eligibility Is Validated By Court.

    http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/13/obama-blocked-from-registering-for-alabama-state-primary-until-eligibility-is-validated-by-court/

    • Yes unfortunately for you it is too good to be true. There is no court order preventing Obama from registering for the Alabama State Primary

      • Mister you should read the constitution of the UNITED STATES. IF HE WERE LEGAL HE WOULD HAVE PROVIDED IT WHEN THE QUESTION CAME UP, IF HAD NOTHING TO HIDE.

  11. History Teacher says:

    Last I checked once you are born in this country, you are a citizen NO matter what nationality your parents are. That is why when many immigrants come over and have children here, there are clashes in cultural understandings. Hawaii become a state in 59, the man was born in 61. Let it go! Come with another argument that has merit. How about Newt with the open marriage or better yet Romney’s dad being born in Mexico? One even better the classism & racism in the GOP (good ole boy party)!!! I’m just saying.

  12. Wow. Internet access at the state mental hospital now??? Mom was a citizen. He is a citizen. The black guy is president. Get used to it. You have another 4 years to suffer…. ;)

    • James P. Carter says:

      Hey Keith,

      His dad was not a citizen. He is not a “natural born Citizen.” The mulato is a usurper. Own up to it. You are the next one he will throw under the bus.

      • Please don’t let your hate cloud your judgment. Whether you like him or not, he is a “natural born citizen.” Read below.

        • James P. Carter says:

          mu-lat-to; noun. 1. A person having one white and one Negro parent. 2. Anyone having mixed white and Negro ancestry. Don’t let your racism cloud your judgement. Whether you like it or not, he is not a “natural born Citizen.” The below referenced Arkeny v Daniels case was a State of Indiana Circuit Court of Appeals case and, as such, IN NO WAY, SHAPE or FORM supersedes/overrides U.S. Supreme Court case Minor v Happersatt which defined “natural born Citizen” as being born in the country to citizen parents (plural) of the country.

        • KenyanBornObama says:

          Where is your proof with sources to prove this? I know there are none!

      • James, wrong.

        Arkeny Vs Daniels. http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

        Relevant finding:

        “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.”

        Obama’s Father’s citizenship does NOT matter for Obama’s natural-born status for purposes of Article II.

        • James P. Carter says:

          Dena,

          The relevant thing is that Arkeny v Daniels was an Indiana Circuit Appeals Court case while Minor v Happersett was a U.S. Supreme Court case. In no way, shape or form does the former supersede/over-ride the latter.

          Obama’s father’s lack of U.S. citizenship IS THE reason why he was not born and can never be a “natural born Citizen.”

  13. “The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. The Congressional Research Service has stated that the weight of scholarly legal and historical opinion indicates that the term means one who is entitled under the Constitution or laws of the United States to U.S. citizenship “at birth” or “by birth,” including any child born “in” the United States (other than to foreign diplomats serving their country), the children of United States citizens born abroad, and those born abroad of one citizen parent who has met U.S. residency requirements.”

    —— quote from: WIKI, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement”. Congressional Research Service. Nov. 14, 2011. Retrieved November 30, 2011.

    • James P. Carter says:

      Hey Aaron,

      The Congressional Research Service lied. U.S. Supreme Court case Minor v Happersett defines the term (natural born Citizen) as one born in the country to citizen parents (plural) of the country, and has never been over-turned.

      • The 1874-75 case ruling where the exact wording is “parents” does not specifically contradict the Congressional Research Service. It seems to be more like an addendum, or clarification. However, I am not a scholar of the Constitution, nor am I judiciary expert. Secondly, that point is moot if he was indeed born in Hawaii.

        • James P. Carter says:

          You’ve got it backwards. Since the Congressional Research Service report came after the U.S. Supreme Court case, it’s up to the former to contradict the latter…which it does not. Moreover, the CRS is not a controlling legal authority like the U.S. Supreme Court is so legally it doesn’t matter what the CRS says. Finally, anyone who believes the only requirement to be a “natural born Citizen” is being born in the country is kool-aid inebriated.

  14. He has NOT released his birth certificate for inspection to anyone or any court!
    That’s the problem.

    All he released is a computer screen image. Since when is a computer image accepted by anyone, anywhere as Certified or valid?

    Try it for yourself. scan an image of your birth certificate. Now take it down to DMV, show them the image with the seal on your laptop screen. See if they will accept that as valid ID and issue a drivers license.

    DMV will not accept an image of your birth certificate on a computer screen as a valid birth certificate. They will tell you they won’t because it is all to easy to load a a document creator program, type one out, cut and paste to add a state seal or some signatures from any web site and call it a real document. No, DMV will want to see the actua,l physical, paper birth certificate.
    Or scan the image of your actual drivers license. Bring your laptop and try to cash a check using the image on your computer screen as your ID. Think anyone will accept it as a valid ID?

    Yet that is ALL obama has shown the public. Georgia merely wants to see the original document a you would have to present yours to DMV to get a valid ID.

    So, why does obama spend millions for a lawyer to keep anyone from seeing the simple pieece of paper? We all have to do it to open a bank account, cash a check, get a passport, or even for a child to get into little league. Its no big deal to someone who actually has a real birth certificate. So please, get your head out of the sand and use logical sense in this.

    No court, No document examiner, NO ONE in the USA has ever seen an actual original paper birth certificate for obama with a raised seal. Hawaii wont show it, either. All obama has is a computer image, and no state in the land certifies a computer screen image.

    Georgia simpley wants to see the actual, physical, paper birth certificate so they can tell if it’s real or not.
    Since obama is spending millions to keep from having to show it, if even only sending it with his lawyer, it logically follows that it is not real.

    • ^5 sharon 5^

      As soon as it became apparent to me that none of the various images of Obama’s alleged short-form “Certification of Live Birth” had a legible to the naked eye embossed official seal of the Hawaii Department of Health as required by the latter to authenticate all birth certificates, I scanned my credit-card sized enclosed in plastic N.H. birth registration using my 3-function MFC, an Epson NX515, onto my computer and lo and behold the image had a legible to the naked eye embossed official seal of the City Department of Health. As easy as that was, that alone proved to me way back in mid-2008 that there was something fishy about Obama’s birth history/records.

  15. natural~ free of affectation

    IT IS THAT SIMPLE, FOLKS

    IF YA GOTS TO DO SOMETHIN’ TO FIX ; THAT IS, “PERFECT”(rid of defects) YOUR CITIZENSHIP AFTER BIRTH then you are NOT
    AN ARTICLE II ‘natural born Citizen’

  16. THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN THING IS NOT JUST A REPUBLICAN THING IF YOU CARE TO CHECK OUT.. IT IS AMERICAN CITIZEN THING AND THE MAJORITY WANT IT PERIOD.

  17. KingDariusOfPersia says:

    Remember this from CNN

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2009/07/cnn-president-jon-klein-declares-birther-story-dead.html

    “Klein sent an e-mail to staffers of “Lou Dobbs Tonight” just as the program went to air, informing them that CNN researchers had determined that Hawaiian officials discarded all paper documents in 2001. A long-form birth certificate with details about the doctor who delivered Obama no longer exists, they reported. ”

    So, how did Obama get a certified copy of his long-form birth certificate from Hawaii that he showed on April 27, 2011? Either Obama is lying or Jon Klein as President of CNN was lying. Why isn’t this front page news? Either the President or one of the nations top news outlets is flat out lying to the American people. This is a scam. Where are our watchdogs? CNN didn’t even object when Obama “showed” his BC at a press conference on 4/27/2011. They say the researched it and it does not exist. Where is the outcry from CNN? Shouldn’t they be challenging the President since their very own expert researchers verified that his long-form BC doesn’t exist? CNN needs to be challenged on this.

  18. OBAMA HATER 4 SURE says:

    It is my belief that your all going to be surprised when this is all over said and done. You will be amazed at how many people are going to go down the tube with OBUMMER. People like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all those who were in the power slots when OBUMMER was certified a eligible when he announced he was running for POTUS. Here is why I say this, It is my opinion and only my opinion that the Clinton Machine searched his eligibility to be POTUS and found out all of this information back in late 2007. HITLARY went to all of those in power at the time and to those who might be in power in the near future like Boehner and Cantor and told them all what had been discovered and swore them all to secret and was holding this a her hole card if things got real sticky during the primary. Well things got sticky and she met with OBUMMER and told him what she knew and he told her to keep her mouth shut and get out of the race and she did. Then when he won the election over McCain and was sworn into office he would make her Secretary OF State.
    She accepted this proposal with one exception she wanted OBUMMER to pay off her $500G campaign debt and she would be silent and he agreed with that. This way she could stay in the limelight as SOS and be ready to run for POTUS in 2016 when OBUMMER was out because of term limits. The reason she wants to be POTUS someday is because HITLARY & SLICKWILLIE will then be the only husband and wife team in history to both be POTUS in 2 different centuries, think about it folks in the history books forever as the first and maybe the only husband & wife team to be POTUS, WOW what a distinction that is. Well are you beginning to see the conspiracy yet. Do you see why the leadership of the house has not brought impeachment proceedings against OBUMMER, they can’t because he is not a citizen of the U.S.A. which would mean if they did try to impeach him they would all be found guilty of hiding and assisting a criminal.
    I guess it just to easy to see this when you have tried to get into the minds of criminals for so many years.
    Well there it is folks the opinion of a criminal researcher but when you think about it, it make pretty good since and if it’s not true it sure will make a heck of a book.

  19. As I said above to the poster who keeps referring to Ankeny v Daniels…the opinion of that court is useless. The court repeatedly refers to the wrong clause in Article II. It is a sad day in America when a court cannot even get Article II section I clause V pinpointed as the NBC requirement, but instead opines on clause IV!

  20. WE HAVE AN ILLEGAL PRESIDENT.
    Obama is not a “natural-born Citizen”, as is required to even legally run for President, simply because his father was a foreigner.
    Obama is an illegal-alien as he was born a British Subject, in Kenya, before he was adopted in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro.
    As Soetoro he applied to Occidental College and received a Fulbright scholarship for foreign students. In 1981 he travelled to Pakistan on a foreign passport.
    Obama’s Selective service registration is falsified.
    The Hawaiian Birth certificate is a forgery and he is using a stolen Connecticut Social Security Number.
    THIS IS A NATIONAL EMERGENCY AND A CONSTITUTIONAL-CRISIS
    Technically we have an illegal-alien in The Whitehouse
    http://www.BirtherReport.com
    http://www.WND.com
    http://www.unlawfulpresident.com
    http://www.BirtherSummit.org
    http://www.Art2superPAC.com
    “Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but such as keep the law contend with them.”
    Proverbs 28:4
    GOD HELP US!

Speak Your Mind

*