Obama, and the coming Constitutional crisis

Folks...there are more people who question his Constitutional qualifications than before. The numbers are growing, not shrinking. And, this has occurred without the so called MSM, or major newspapers, or major magazines, or talk radio (even conservative talk). More and more people are starting to 'connect the dots' here once they objectively look at the evidence (even the little amount at the moment). The single biggest one of course is that he himself acknowledges that he had dual citizenship (British & American) AT birth. Couple that with a non citizen father...it doesn't matter if he were born in D.C. itself. He could not be a 'Natural Born' citizen with dual citizenship at birth. Otherwise, for example, if a foreigner marries an American citizen and they live in the foreigner's country...but then visit America and have a baby born here...that baby could NOT be a Natural Born citizen.
This is why SCOTUS continues to distribute cases to the full court. If they thought this was crazy stuff, not one of these lawsuits would get even that far. I believe they haven't taken on one of the cases yet is because he hasn't violated the Constitution...yet. The Natural Born clause pertains to POTUS, not Senator, not running for POTUS and not POTUS elect. Also, the 20th Amendment only recently came into play as he wasn't officially POTUS elect until Congress certified the Electoral College vote...just 2 days ago.

Don't forget, Nixon's 'Watergate' happened BEFORE he was POTUS and SCOTUS didn't release the tapes until AFTER he was a sitting President.

People are starting to get it...and they are starting to speak out about their legitimate concerns:


"A letter from Lieutenant-Colonel Dr. David Earl- Graef
Friday, January 9, 2009 4:41 PM
From: This sender is DomainKeys verified "David Earl-Graef" View contact details To: dr_taitz@yahoo.com

Orly please feel free to edit and use at your discretion . It is strong language but factual

To All Americans,

I am sorry to interrupt this discussion thread but this is extremely
important.

This is not about sore losers, this is not about race. This about the
very foundations of our Nation. It is not about fear of change. I for one do not fear change but
only fear change that is not given the careful consideration our
founding fathers would have afforded it.

This is about America and the ability of our military to defend her and possibly much more. As a US military officer, I am just beginning myself to see the potential problems that may be
facing us. Before you discard any of this information please take the time to verify on OFFICIAL US Government sources such as the site for our United States Supreme Court.

FACT: Chief Justice John G. Roberts has agreed to hear Bowen vs
Lightfoot. A case challenging the constitutional qualifications of
Barak H. Obama aka Barry Soetoro to be POTUS. Check the court Docket.

http://search.access.gpo.gov/supreme-court/SearchRight....&q1=08a524&x=25&y=23

Comment- If the Chief Justice did not think we have a problem he would NOT distribute this case let alone give it to the full court to read. He does not want to look dumb or waste the time of the court after all he is the Chief.

FACT: Congress did not listen and hear this very loud signal he sent
to them yesterday but it rang a warning shot through many of the United States Armed Forces
more like a loud bomb. If I heard it, I KNOW the Joint Chiefs of the Military heard it.

Fact: Unfortunately you will have to take this as true on its
merits. But I assure you The Joint Chiefs as military officers take the
constitution very seriously.

FACT: If only ONE of the Joint Chiefs of Staff balks we lose an
entire arm of our military ! He can not nor will not give the order
to mobilize the forces if he has a reason to question the validity of that order. In
fact he himself is duty bound to not obey this if not given by a "legal" President or at a minimum is conflicted as to the right thing to do !! The Oath states he will obey the lawful orders of those above him not ANY order. Chief Justice Roberts has as much as told them by distributing this case we may have a constitutional problem with Obama. So at this very moment our Military leaders are likely conflicted. Not a good thing.

*****The words of JOE BIDEN. He warned of an international crisis
soon and implied it would be of immense proportion soon after Obama took office may . ****** Have you
already forgotten ????? Have you been distracte by the economy. Did Biden know something ??? Has anybody bothered to ask him??

And he thinks Barak can handle it. Do you ??? Let Obam face down Putin without the Navy or maybe the
Air Force or maybe the Army or mayybe ALL of them to back him up. I suppose some of you out there
still believe in a Superman. Reality check. He was a comic book
character and Obama is not a Superman like some of you believe. He is not the messiah otherwise he would not be giving us doom and gloom for the economy. He would waive his hand and fix it. Please wake
up !!

We are not asking Obama for the moon only that he give us some
additional information to assure us he is who he says he is AND qualify under the Constitution and we in the military will do whatever he asks us to do to protect this country. This is what we do.

This is reasonable and prudent but Obama is refusing and fighting this with
everything and I mean everything in his power.

To my Fellow Fellow Officers and Enlisted who are required to lay their lives at the very feet of Liberty.

Do not despair but take good faith. Remember those who came before. He is not our President yet so you still have a right to raise concerns all the way to the Pentagon. Let the Officers in your command know that Justice Roberts has taken the first stand to insure the Constitution is followed. Let our Chief Justice know you support him and appreciate him for HIS courage valor to stand up for us. Call/ write your congressman. Pass this letter to every blog you can. Ask your family to do the same we are a mighty voice and it can be heard."

Reference: http://drorly.blogspot.com

And there's more...

Dr. Douglas W. Schell (former USAF Officer from 1963-1967)

Title:
"Joint Chiefs of Staff, Constitutional Crisis, January 11, 2009, Doug Schell email, Obama not eligible, Oath of office, Electors failed in duty, Congress failed, Obama not natural born citizen, Uphold and Defend the Constitution of the US, Restore the CONSTITUTIONAL Republic"

Snip:
"WHO HAVE PROVEN TO BE TRAITORS?
1. The Electors failed to do their Constitutional duty after being educated as to the crisis.
2. On Jan 8, 2009, the entire Senate and House of Representatives dishonored their oath to sustain and defend the Constitution after also being educated about this crisis.
3. The Federal Courts, including the Supreme Court, are using all types of legal technicalities as an excuse not to keep their oath.
The ONLY group that is left to turn to is the military. If you fail us we have two choices left. First, we can submit to the fall of our Constitutional Republic and live under a New World Order or SECOND we can do as the Patriots did in 1776 and win back our liberties under God. I believe most retired military will take that position as I would. “Don’t Tread On Me” will be our theme like it was the former Patriots.
"

Source:
http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/joint-chie...born-citizen-uphold/

and?

So many people (Sheeple really) out there are totally out to lunch on this issue. They either have zero clue on what is really going on...OR they could care less about our Constitution which is setting our country up for a very perilous situation without question. Since there is sooo much mis-information out there, lets take a look at some facts (with references) regarding Barak Obama and why the U.S. may see a usurper posing as President:

A) Hawaiian law, at the time of Obama's birth, allowed for FOREIGN born baby's to be registered in Hawaii via a 'Certificate of Live Birth':
"[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State..."

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0...S_0338-0017_0008.htm


B) The Hawaiian govt' officials NEVER stated that Obama was born in Hawaii. They only stated that they have seen his birth certificate on file. But a B.C. from where?? (see above).

On October 31, 2008, Dr Chiyome Fukino, Department of Health:
"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf

For the Hawaiian 'Policies and Procedures' she refereed to...see item #1 above which, again, affords foreign born babies to obtain a Hawaiian COLB.


C) Examples of Hawaiian Long Form COLB's:
1963 Hawaiian Long Form COLB:
http://a5.vox.com/6a00c2252293c4604a0100a80270e5000e-pi
1962 Hawaiian Long Form COLB:
http://passportsusa.com/wp-content/gallery/passportusa/edith_front.jpg

Obviously, what the Obama camp has released looks nothing like those two Hawaiian COLB's from that time. Where's his?

How about a Hawaiian short form COLB for a famous Chinese leader, born in China?

Info about Sun Yat Sen: http://www.time.com/time/asia/asia/magazine/1999/990823/sun_yat_sen1.html


D) If it's proven Obama was indeed foreign born (Kenya), He would NOT have received U.S. citizenship based, only, on his mother's citizenship status. Per U.S. law at the time of his birth (December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986).
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock:
"For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child."

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

Obama's mother didn't give birth to him at 19 (14 + 5). Therefore, Obama could not obtain U.S. citizenship based only by virtue his mother's citizenship.

Note that the law only pertains to 'Citizenship', and not 'Natural Born' Citizen. There is a difference. Governor Schwarzenegger from Ca. is a citizen, yet he could not be POTUS because he isn't a Natural Born citizen. He's a Naturalized citizen.


E) And then there is the dual citizenship issue (which could make the above totally irrelevant). Factcheck themselves state that Obama was indeed a British subject and did in fact hold dual citizenship AT Birth.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama...yan_citizenship.html
"In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen ... and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC)"

Obama could therefore not be a Natural Born citizen because Natural Born citizens can not hold dual citizenship at birth. It has to do with the potential for divided loyalties and the very reason the
writers of the Constitution themselves allowed for their exception (grandfathered in) because all of them were British Subjects at birth.


F) Without question, Constitutionally UNqualified presidential candidates where placed on (at least) some state's ballots!

Why?

Socialist Workers Party candidate Roger Calero isn't even a U.S. citizen! Naturalized OR Natural Born, yet appeared on the following state's presidential ballot:

New Jersey, Delaware, Minnesota, New York and Vermont.

Calero is a permanent resident alien (holding a green card).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B3ger_Calero

Note: Not in any particular order. Simply, points of fact and information.


WHAT CAN YOU DO?

1. Contact Information (email & main addresses for media, elected officials and others): http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Contact_information

2. Stop the Obama Constitutional Crisis (Sign the growing Petition. Will deliver via email and option for mail delivery to your representatives. Easy!).
http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualificati...nstitutional-crisis/

3. Write one [1] letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court (names are listed below), make nine [9] copies and put them in nine [9] separate envelopes, addressed to each Justice, and then place them into one [1] manila envelope and mail to:

U.S. Supreme Court
1 First Street, N.E
Washington, D.C. 20543

Supreme Court Justices

Chief Justice John Roberts

Associate Justices:

Samuel A. Alito
Clarence Thomas
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
David H. Souter
John Paul Stevens
Stephen G. Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsberg

Example letter: http://libertynjustice.wordpress.com/2008/11/14/write-t...rth-certificate-etc/

Note: Any communications received by the U.S. Supreme Court via e-mail or fax are thrown away. The U.S. Supreme Court will not take telephone messages for the Justices. All communications to the U.S. Supreme Court must be done in writing and sent to them by way of U.S. mail, UPS, Federal Express, etc

4. Military Personnel (active or reserve, former or retired, any age): "THIS IS A REQUEST TO SAVE YOUR CONSTITUTION, by participating as a Plaintiff in an urgent action lawsuit." http://defendourfreedoms.org/ATTENTIONALLMILITARYPERSONNEL.htm

Related to #4 above:
Hollister v. Soetoro: Retired Colonel Wants to Know Obama’s Real Name
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=2332

15 Years Out, Vet Ordered Up to Deploy
http://www.military.com/news/article/15-years-out-vet-o...=1186032310810&wh=wh

Will you (the reader) help to protect our Constitution and request that appropriate documentation be (finally) reveled by Barack Obama?

ok, now which words are yours? feel free to high-light them.

All of them, except of course the actual government links, the titles to the links and the various quotes (as indicated by quotes).

why?

do you dispute any of those facts? if so, which ones and why?

b.t.w. I've been looking into this issue shortly after Berg came out with his lawsuit back in Aug 2008. I've been compiling information as I found it.

Just curious as I wasn't going to waste my time with a new member who only posts what others think without posting his own thoughts up front.

As for the subject matter here, I'm curious as to why the decision by the Supreme Court to not even hear this isn't good enough for you. Certainly if the Supreme Court deemed it a non-issue then why all the angst over this?

And as for the label of usurper? Where the heck did that come from?

President Elect Obama is going to be sworn in as the ELECTED President here shortly, so its best to just deal with it. Ain't nothing on the internet going to stop that from happening.

By the way, if you have read anything on this board, you would already know who in here supported Obama and who didn't.

From the dictionary:
"Usurper: to seize and hold (as office, place, or powers) in possession by force or without right"

That's why.

No matter where Obama was born (I seriously doubt Hawaii due to facts posted above), even if he was born in D.C. itself...he could never be a natural born citizen.

why?

Article II section I states (in part):

"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"

Do you know why it says, "or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution"?

Because at the time of adoption of the Constitution, those adopting it were British subjects AT birth. Just like Obama! Obama himself has admited he had British citizenship AT birth! However, Obama (obviously) doesn't fit the "or a citizen of the U.S. at the time of adoption!"

Obama (might) be a citizen...perhaps a native citizen or perhaps a naturalized citizen, but he certainly is not a natural born citizen, and neither were the founders...and they knew it...thus the need for the clause that exempted themselves!

Another way of looking at this through modern spectacles: The Framers and Founders were entitled to British Passports, yet they were also citizens of this country (because of the Declaration of Independance). Obama (aparently) a citizen of the U.S. was entitled to a British Passport as well because AT birth he too was a British subject.

Therefore, he is not a natural born citizen, and therefore can not be POTUS.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: rxsid,

b.t.w regarding the Supreme Court, currently:

Here's some information:

URGENT From Lisa regarding Today’s SCOTUS ruling

written by Linda Starr, January 12, 2009

Here is a very brief explanation of what today’s ruling means to us…

What today’s ruling means is that WE’RE STILL ALIVE in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. Phil filed a Petition for Writ of Cert BEFORE JUDGEMENT (in the 3rd Circuit) with SCOTUS. They denied the petition for Writ before judgement under Rule 11 because the case before the 3rd Circuit is still pending and there is still a legal remedy available to our case in the lower courts. If this case is denied at the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals, THEN Phil can once again go back to SCOTUS for remedy. The SCOTUS may yet grant the motion for emergency injunction against counting the votes for Soetoro/Obama - in effect, preventing the Inauguration on the 20th. As I understand it, then Biden would serve until this is resolved in some fashion. And Roberts COULD REFUSE to swear in Soetoro/Obama if this isn’t resolved.
If it comes to that, then Roberts could state that Barry needs to cough up the documents proving he is eligible, or he won’t be sworn in. We jsut don’t know what might happen next.

In the meantime, Bill Anderson’s motion for “permission” to file his case as a friend of the court was granted.

WE ARE NOT DEAD YET!!!

Phil is putting together a press release to be posted today on obamacrimes.com

Source: http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=2663

Also, don't forget that there is another lawsuit that Chief Justice Roberts himself has distributed to the full cort, Lightfoot v. Bowen

To some, it may seem like this is a dead issue. However, there are more and more people waking up to this problem...all without the 'help' of the so called MSM, the newspapers, the magazines (save for Globe) or talk radio!

At this point, it appears that SCOTUS isn't acting just yet because....Obama hasn't violated the Constitution yet as he isn't President yet. Article II section I pertains to POTUS, not Senator...not campaigning for POTUS and not POTUS elect.

If you'll notice, the lawsuits have been dismissed for 'lack of standing' and NOT due to 'lack of merit.'

and yeah, your probably right in that he may be sworn in. however, that isn't the end all be all slam dunk game over. don't forget that Nixon's 'Watergate' happened during the campaign. SCOTUS released the watergate tapes After he became POTUS, and of course the rest is history.

My take is that he will be sworn in, but will either need to leave office on his own or be forcibly removed. How that would be done, not sure, perhaps federal marshals. He could not, however, be impeached because in order to be impeached he would have had to actually have been POTUS, legally speaking.

Yeah, he will get sworn in. The one chance to get this before the Supreme court failed due to lack of standing. Merit has nothing to do with what the court hears. Lower courts can do whatever they want, heck, some have even issued arrest warrents for President Bush and VP Cheney. Like those had any effect what-so-ever.

Nixon broke the law and knew he broke the law and paid theprice for it. Obama hasn't broken any laws, as he was vetted during the party nomination process. Or doesn't that count for anything, and not to mention that he soundly whooped everyones ass in the election?

Mind you I am not an Obama supporter and most in here weren't either. We do however fully support the Office of the President. The man sitting there will have to do some pretty spectacular things in order to earn our respect. If he can do half of what he said he could, then the country may very well get out of this friggin mess we are in and that is a good thing in my book. I for one would like to be able to sell my house at a profit rather than a huge loss.

And on the other side of this. lets say you get yer wish to have Obama arrested by Federal Marshalls over this, that would leave who as President? Biden is no way much of a viable choice os President in my opinion. All this would make for a downward spiral the likes the world has never seen before.

Be very careful of what you wish for. Oh yeah and by the by, just who are you? Prior military?

So, you would support a President who had British citizenship at birth? Interesting. How about a President that had Russian citizenship at birth, or Chinese citizenship at birth. According to what you've stated, you would support them too so long as they made it to the white house and had one parent who was a citizen.

Also, you say Obama was vetted during the party nomination process. Can you provide evidence as to who did the vetting and what process they used? Did they ask for a copy of his original vault bc? Where they aware Obama was a British subject at birth? Would you be referring to Howard Dean (the DNC Chair), who promptly resigned 11/10/08 after so much (apparent) success, to basically 'get outa dodge' so to speak? This would be valuable information if you indeed have it. Would put a growing number of citizens at ease I'm sure. So...the links to who/when and what regarding the vetting are where?

Here is some additional information that is fact, not opinion:

Part of Berg's case was denied (petition No. 08-570) the stay for the E.C. vote: http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm

however....part of No. 08-570 was not denied...it was Granted! (see same link above)

"Jan 12 2009 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Bill Anderson GRANTED"

"Amicus Curiae
Definition: Latin term meaning “friend of the court”. The name for a brief filed with the court by someone who is not a party to the case.
... a phrase that literally means “friend of the court” — someone who is not a party to the litigation, but who believes that the court’s decision may affect its interest.” William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 89."

Bill Anderson is an elector from Arizona.
Here is Bill Anderson's amicus brief that was granted by SCOTUS today:

http://wthrockmorton.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/joy...son-amicus-final.pdf
In part:
"Your amicus submits that it will not be possible
for this Court to dispose of this case properly without
considering the following points which either have
not been brought to the attention of this Court by the
parties or which have not been adequately discussed:

1.) This Court is not facing a question of the
constitutional aspects of standing, but a
question pertaining to the prudential
considerations only; and,

2.) The lack of an adequate remedy following
the inauguration of Barack Obama,
and the potential civil and military crises
which could arise therefrom, crises
that could not be readily addressed by
the ordinary processes of the law, must
be considered in addressing the prudential
aspects of standing; and,

3.) With respect to the prudential considerations
of standing, certain aspects of
this case are analogous to the doctrine of
res ipsa loquitur

...

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1.) Since this Court has already recognized that
the petitioner has an interest in this type of case, the
limits of standing for this petitioner are based not on
constitutional considerations, but on prudential
considerations only.

2.) The lack of a practical remedy following
inauguration may present an unprecedented constitutional
crisis with civil and military implications,
implications not readily addressed by the ordinary
processes of law.

3.) The prudential elements should also be
considered in light of how the instant case is analogous
to the circumstances in which courts apply the
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
"

Remember...the above quoted amicus submitted by Bill Anderson was Granted by SCOTUS today!

This is far from over, and this certainly isn't about arguing (at least, not for me anyway). It's about getting to the truth and doing our best to make sure the Constitution is upheld...even in this day and age. At this point, I've provided numerous facts with references. If one chooses to ignore them or to think the Constitution doesn't really matter anymore because we have hope and change (although, 70% Clinton appointments is not really change IMO), I would say they do so at their own risk.

b.t.w. Mr. Berg also has another petition that the full court will hear this coming Friday (petition No. 08A505) the stay for the Congressional certification of the E.C. vote :http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a505.htm

Oh yeah, and P.S. If Biden or Pelosi are granted temporary POTUS status because of this fiasco, then so be it. At least they are both Constitutionally qualified.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: rxsid,

Gunny your wasting your time, while I am NOT a supporter of Obama I like you respect the office of President, and who can predict what will happen in the next 4 years, hell he may be able to pull the off.

Coachman,

Yeah, your right. We go through this every election. Reckon if thats the way they want to spend thier money in tying up the legal system, when the system should be focusing on more of the nations critical issues, then let em.

That and he never answered my question concerning just what his affiliation with the military was.

Is McCain in on this? He must be, because otherwise, he would be contesting the elections.....

And well know that everything posted on the internet is true!

I agree with most of the posting and most of the old timers know how I feel about mis-using the President's Office.I will say this President Elect Obama was not properly vetted most Americans only learned what the Media let us learn.I truly believe George Sores and the Left Media with all of their Propaganda sold Obama to the public and I hope this Country survives this full Democrate Admin.& Congress.The day Obama is sworn in I will support him as my President and the only way I will speak against him is by my vote.

Jeez! all this waste of bandwidth over whether Obama is a closet Brit?? WTF does it matter? other than it may rub the Constitution a bit[ and piss off a sore losing bunch of Republicans ]...

Obama has never said anything to suggest that as soon as he gets into the White House he's going to turn the country over to the Queen...I'm surprised this ' new poster' hasn't questioned Obama's right to govern 'cause he's a closet/former Muslim who is going to go jihad all over Uhmurrika as soon as he gets the key to the Oval Office.. sounds too much like we have us a conspiraloon on this site...[ and this coming from a charter member of HM Colonial forces ]..

Besides, a Non-American president of the US was supposed to have been elected before,and the country didn't fall off the rails..Wasn't it Chester A. Arthur accused of being a closet Canuck upon his election because he was born too close to the border and some folks thought his mom gave birth on the Canajan side and snuck him back over to ' register the birth' ??[ my history on this is a bit suspect, I'm sorry -and its too early to bother googling or whatever one does these days to prove a point. ]

So you gots a ' deep cover foreign agent'[ alleged, of course ] as President..well call out the secret militias and pull the tarps off the buried cahces of weapons and put them good ol' boys on standby.. As soon as Obama makes his move to ' destroy America in the eyes of the world ' lead the charge down Pennsylvania Avenue and take back the land...

That will leave Biden and Hillary in charge which will be perfect for all concerned...right?