Obama Presidential Eligibility - An Introductory Primer

Tonchen does an excellent job summarizing the facts!

Go read it here

Leahy and Chertoff's Opinions: Big O is Ineligible!

I have followed the posts at The Obama File for quite some time. They are not afraid to ask the questions that the obamedia want to silence. Make sure to check out their latest news page.

Today, 6/12/2009, they revisit a conversation about the meaning of the phrase 'natural born citizen' from April of last year. It seems everyone knows what NBC means unless they are referring to HWHTTOPOTUS.

Sen. Leahy Says Obama Not Eligible


On April 10, 2008, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was a 'natural born Citizen,' as specified in the Constitution and eligible to run for President.

"Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen," said Leahy. "I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate."

At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President.

"My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen," Chertoff replied.

"That is mine, too," said Leahy.

What's interesting here is that Sen. Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary, confirms that a "natural born" citizen is the child of American citizen parents.

Parents -- that's two. That's BOTH parents.

Every time the words, "citizen" and "parent," are used by Sen. Leahy and Sec. Chertoff, the plural case, "citizens" and "parents," was used. The plural case is the operative case.

It is Sen. Leahy's opinion -- his own recorded words, on his U. S. Senate website -- that Barack Obama is not a "natural born" citizen, and therefore not eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief, regardless of his birthplace.

Obama had one American parent --singular -- his mother. His father was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain.

Obama, himself, "at birth," was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain -- he says so on his own campaign website. This fact introduces the concept of "divided loyalties," -- the reason the founders created the eligibility requirement in the first place -- a fact that further underlines Obama's ineligibility.

The source of this information is Sen. Leahy's own website. The webpage contains a statement about the resolution; the resolution, itself; the Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.); and an excerpt of Sec. Chertoff's testimony.

The plural word "parents" is used four times. When used to identify the parents, the word "citizens" is used five times. That's nine times that Sen. Leahy, on his own website describes the eligibility requirement. There is NO PLACE in any of these four documents where the singular case of "parent" or "citizen" is used as in reference to presidential eligibility.

On Being a Natural-Born Citizen

Please note that there are two types of US citizenship. Basic citizenship (a 'citizen') can be acquired by birth or naturalization. Natural-born citizenship (a 'natural born citizen') is the condition where a citizen is born to two parents who are also citizens and has no foreign-citizenship granted at birth by another country. This distinction is made to insure that a natural-born citizen president will have no split allegiance to a former homeland or those of the parents. There are no laws or amendments to the Constitution (including the 14th) that have changed this distinction that the Founding Fathers made.

If you are born to parents where one is a US citizen and the other is a foreign national, you may have US citizenship and/or foreign citizenship (a 'citizen'), but you will never be a 'natural-born citizen'.

If you are born in the US, you are a 'citizen' and a 'native-born citizen', but are only a 'natural-born citizen' based on the citizenship status of your parents at the time of your birth.

If what Obama has stated is true, then Obama's birth certificate is a red herring. His father was Kenyan, not a US citizen. Therefore, Obama is not a 'natural-born citizen'. He is a 'citizen' by virtue of his birth in Hawaii, but he is ineligible to hold the office of POTUS.

On the other hand, if his birth certificate shows he has a different father who was a US citizen at the time of Obama's birth, then he is a 'natural-born citizen' unless he was born in a foreign country. In that case, he is a 'citizen' but may not be a 'naturally-born citizen', if he acquired foreign citizenship at birth.

The law around this is something that I will cover in detail in a later post, but briefly.

Article II of the Constitution requires that the POTUS be a 'naturally-born citizen' (NBC) OR a citizen at the time of the Constitution's adoption (1789?). The Founding Fathers used the Law of Nations by Vattel for much of their work on the Constitution. Vattel defines NBC as a citizen born without multiple allegiences (I'll quote in a later post).

An early immigration act (1791?) specifically granted 'natural-born citizenship' to a certain class but this law was repealed and/or replaced (1795?) and the new wording deleted 'natural-born' and granted only 'citizenship'.

The XIV Amendment grants 'citizenship' to a certain group, but never utilizes the term 'natural-born citizen', and does not remove the NBC requirement for POTUS.

Obama - A Simple Birth Certificate

You have probably heard something about Chairman O's Birth Certificate, but it was probably as part of a dismissal by the main-stream media (henceforth MSM). Maybe you heard it from your senator or even read about it on Snopes or FactCheck.com. If this is the extent of your knowledge, let's address a couple of things right now.

Hawaii maintains birth records in at least a couple of ways. The first is what used to happen back when a child was born in an Hawaiian hospital in the early sixties. The doctor and hospital staff fill out a form that looks a lot like this. (http://incogman.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/major-developments-in-obama-citizenship-case/)

Note that the owner of this copy blacked out some of his own personal information - a wise practice in the age of identity theft. More on this later...

Of course, in the sixties it was difficult to quickly create a duplicate that could be provided as proof of identity from a paper original document. Enter microfilm. Take a picture of the original paper document and all the others in the collection. Store these images in fingernail sized portions of a larger piece of film. Copies of these films could be kept in any public records office and very quickly could be printed to photo paper to create a copy for the owner of the record. This looked much like this


(http://mobiusinformer.com/2008/10/16/wheres-the-beef-obama/)

Any official birth form, from any copy method will have an embossed seal (official seal) and usually a signature of the person who certified the copy. I'm not familiar with the practices to be able to say whether this is always on the front or on the back in the case of Hawaii, or perhaps it is allowed on either side. You can see the embossing and the signature on the next picture.

Note that these two examples are 'Long Form' certificates, because, as we shall see, progress has brought us a newer faster, 'safer' version of the birth form. This is known as the database report form. As a fellow traveler in the information age, you know that information in a records drawer or in a box of photographs isn't as useful as something in a database. At some point Hawaii bit the bullet, paid an outside contractor, or lots of happy union employees to type all the info from their paper/photo birth certificate records into a computer database somewhere. Those happy computer technicians also configured a form that allowed a single birth record to be printed onto a fancy piece of state birth record stationary to create a paper copy of an original birth document. In later years it is quite possible that the printer not only prints the birth info, but also the fancy background, header and footer for the form.

Here is a typical example:

(http://incogman.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/major-developments-in-obama-citizenship-case/)


Note that this form contains a LOT less information than the original form provided by the hospital to the state records office. No hospital name, parental employment info, doctors signature, etc. This is to help prevent identity theft. In the age of anonymous baby adoptions, it is also to protect the rights of the natural parents of a child that was put up for adoption. My understanding is that you can only get back the info on your form, that you have already provided on your request form. That information is displayed on the official print out.


So if the system is working correctly, then a hypothetical citizen of Hawaii walks up to the records clerk, fills out a request, plunks down a few dollars, and gets a short copy of their birth information from the database, but only the information that matches the information on the request form.

So, Chairman O has indirectly made available a scanned/photographed image of a short form Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth - see below.



Is that it? Is this case closed? Well, no it is not closed. Here are a few questions that are still unanswered?

1. Is the Obama certificate authentic? It is not valid, as 'ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFCATE' and it is clearly redacted by removing the certificate number, just as the long form certificate at the top of the page. Neither is a valid certificate for purposes of a court of law. Both have been further altered by scanning into a computer. Only an official copy from the records clerk can be used for legal purposes.
2. Has the document been doctored using PhotoShop or another photo editing program? Maybe, there are reasonable arguments made by both sides. Only a valid copy could prove this one way or the other.
3. Does the info on the form provided match that of the original piece of paper filed with the State of Hawaii. The Hawaiian official who commented on Chairman O's certificate stated only that they had an original certificate in their office, but she did not confirm or refute that the data matched that on the scanned internet version. The word ing was very jilted and legalese.
4. Would you or I just go down to the records office with someone from the opposing camp and request a copy right then and there and be done with it? Yes, but Chairman O has spent many many (some say hundreds of thousands) of dollars to prevent its release. This is insane unless he is hiding something.
5. Oh, yes. Number five. I forgot to mention that in the past, you didn't actually have to be BORN in HAWAII to get put in their database and get one of this pretty certificates. It was common practice for children born outside the US of A, to a US citizen parent, to have their birth registered by their parent or stateside grandparent back in Hawaii, within a year of their birth. So it is possible for the State of Hawaii to have an original record for B.H. Obama even if he was not born in the state.
   
6. The State of Hawaii has a special program for people of indigenous Hawaiian ancestry. Because of the problem with the basic Certificate of Live Birth not necessarily proving that a person was born in the state, the state agency that awards these benefits requires copies of the original long form birth certificate for persons requesting benefits. This confirms that the state still has the capacity to copy the original birth document or at least the microfilm version. Therefore, any claim that the short form certificate is the 'only available form that you can get' is clearly false.
7. Oh, yeah! As we will see in a future post, the certificate that is claimed to be B.H. Obama's Certificate of Live Birth, cannot prove he is a Natural Born Citizen. It is only possible for it to prove he is not. Birth on the soil of the United States of America is only a portion of the requirement to be naturally born.

Stay Tuned

HWHTTOPOTUS = ???

HWHTTOPOTUS = He Who Holds the Title Of President of the United States. It is my decision to not use the term President of the United States or POTUS to refer to Mr. Obama/Soetoro. The two primary reasons are pretty simple. I do not believe that he has proven his eligibility to serve as POTUS and we have never been shown proof that his name was ever changed from Barry Soetoro back to Barack Hussain Obama (II or Jr.). So from this we get HWHTTOPOTUS. Due to his political leanings, I will also often refer to him as 'Chairman O', a name appropriate for the defacto head of the Democratic Socialists of America and who's name is as popular as Oprah's.

All the News that Chairman Obama Does't Want You to Know

Well, here it is a few days past the 4/15/09 Tax Tea Party days. I attended the local events in St. Cloud and St. Paul, Minnesota. I loved them. Real Americans. Concerned about their government coming off the rails and the likelyhood of a significant train wreck coming around the next bend. What was the general sentiment. It was not racism, or partisan politics, or even sour grapes. It was a mix of fear and despair and love of country and what our flag has stood for since the days of the founders. It was not the despair of someone whose stock and home values have plummeted, forcing them to work more years before they can retire. It was the realization that the actions taken by our government in the last 90 days or so, could be sufficient to permanently impare our currency, and our children, and grand-children's ability to be "better off than their parents and grand-parents". There was a bright anger against those like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Nancy Pelosi, and a general feeling of shock at the incompetence and/or malice of the man who sits in the seat Him Who Holds the Title of President of the United States (HWHTTOPOTUS). I never heard or saw anything that led me to question if anyone disliked HWHTTOPOTUS because of the color of his skin. It just wasn't on the table.

This blog is a result of my attendance at the Tea Party, watching John Ziegler's excellent 'Media Malpractice' documentary, and my general belief that we have a POTUS who does not deserve to be where he is, and people currently in control of our government that do not have the interests of "We The People" as their primary concerns.