Constitutional Elections Conference: Carl Gallups speaks on Obama’s Eligibility Fraud (Running Time 59:40) [Video]

Either way, Obama has lied. And either way, the respective lie is no small matter.

Will the 1991 Biography Discovery Force Obama to Open the Hood?

By Monte Kuligowski | May 26, 2012 | American Thinker

 If you have a young boy, you’ve probably watched Disney’s Cars 2 about a thousand times.  For those who don’t know, at the movie’s end (an obligatory spoiler warning here), Sir Miles Axlerod is exposed as a fraud when he’s forced to open his hood by Mater, the hayseed hick.  Hold that thought.

Three possibilities follow the bombshell discovery that Barack Obama was promoted in 1991 through 2007 by his professional agency as an author “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”  (1) Obama untruthfully presented himself as Kenya-born.  (2) Obama untruthfully presents himself as Hawaii-born.  (3) Obama had no knowledge that his bio contained the 16-year-old “error” which was corrected in April of 2007, when Obama was gearing up his campaign for the U.S. presidency.

Hawaii Provides “Verification” of Obama’s Birth to Arizona! Really?

Arpaio: Looks Like Hawaii ‘Hiding’ Obama Birth Record

By Art Moore | May 18, 2012 | WND

Arizona secretary of state threatens to remove president from ballot

The Hawaii Department of Health’s refusal to confirm to Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett that it has a valid birth certificate on file for President Obama makes it look like Hawaii officials “are hiding something,” said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in an interview this morning with WND.

Bennett told Phoenix talk-radio host Mike Broomhead yesterday on his KFYI AM  show that he might keep Obama’s name off of the state’s presidential ballot if he doesn’t receive the confirmation.

Eight weeks ago, the secretary of state asked Hawaii officials merely for an email confirming the Department of Health has a certified copy of the birth certificate. But Bennett told Broomhead, reported the White House Dossier blog, that Hawaii officials have not complied.

Law Professor: Fox Anchor Wrong on Eligibility

By Bob Unruh | May 2, 2012 | WND

Network host makes ‘common error’ about ‘natural born citizenship’

Attorney Herb Titus, who has taught constitutional law for nearly 30 years and was the founding dean of the College of Law and Government at Regent University in Virginia Beach, Va., is offering a correction to Fox News anchor Bret Baier’s explanation of “natural born citizen.”

The issue arose this week when Baier posted online his explanation of “natural born citizen” and said that the issue is resolved by federal law. He pointed to 8 U.S. Code, Section 1401, contending all that is required is for the mother to be an American citizen who has lived in the U.S. for five years or more, at least two of these years after the age of 14.

The question arose in the context of concerns he was observing regarding the eligibility of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who was born before his parents were citizens of the U.S.

Baier asserted that people born in the U.S., born outside the U.S. to parents who are both citizens or born outside the U.S. to one parent who is a U.S. citizen are “all natural born U.S. citizens.”

Titus’ takes Baier to task.

“Bret Baier commits a common error,” he wrote in the response posted online at the Article 2 Superpac. “He assumes that ‘natural born citizen’ means the same thing as ‘citizen by birth.’ They are not the same. A citizen by birth is one who by constitutional or statutory provision is made or recognized as a citizen based upon where or to whom they were born.”

He continued, “Under Mr. Baier’s view, a natural born citizen, then, is a citizen of a particular nation only by positive law. If a natural born citizen is defined by statute, as Mr. Baier claims they are, then by statute Congress can take away their natural born citizenship status, subject only to the 14th Amendment’s definition of citizenship by birth. And even that citizenship can be taken away by an amendment to the Constitution. Indeed, according to Mr. Baier, no one could have been eligible to be elected president UNLESS Congress passed a statute designating one’s citizenship by birth, or until the 14th amendment definition of citizenship by birth was ratified.”

The issue has been in the news since Barack Obama campaigned for president in 2008. Questions about his eligibility have yet to be resolved, as he’s continued to conceal many personal documents.

The birth documentation from Hawaii that Obama released from the White House last year has been described as a probable forgery by the investigators of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse.

And if it’s not fraudulent, there are critics who say it proves his ineligibility, as it lists Barack Obama Sr. as the father, who never was a U.S. citizen.

Titus argues the father’s citizenship is important.

“A natural born citizen, by contrast, is not dependent upon Congress passing a statute or the constitution being amended. A natural born citizen is a citizen of a specific nation by the law of nature of citizenship. The law of nature of national citizenship is written into the very nature of the universe of nation-states, and is universal as to place, uniform as to person, and fixed as to time. By definition the law governing natural born citizenship exists independent of any human power, legislative or otherwise. That is why ‘natural born citizenship’ is not defined in the Constitution. Such citizenship exists whether recognized by positive law or not. Such citizenship is God-given. To qualify one must be born to a father and a mother each of whom is a citizen of a particular state in order for the person to be ‘natural born’ citizen of that state,” he explained.

Earlier, when Baier’s statement first was posted, Harvard-educated Jerome Corsi, author of “Where’s the Birth Certificate?,” said Baier wasn’t quite on track.

“Baier incorrectly interprets that 8 USC Section 1401 was written to define ‘natural born citizen,’ as specified in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution,” he said. “The purpose of 8 USC Section 1401 is to define ‘nationals’ and ‘citizens’ of the United States ‘at birth.’”

Corsi explained that citizens at birth are not “natural born citizens” under the meaning of Article 2, Section 1.

“Nowhere in 8 USC Section 1401 does Congress make any mention of the term ‘natural born citizen’ or to Article 2, Section 1,” Corsi said.

See all of those who have made statements about Obama’s eligibility, in The BIG LIST.

Baier, who took over the time slot from Brit Hume in January 2009, previously was the network’s chief White House correspondent. Prior to that he was national security correspondent, reporting on defense, military and intelligence community issues. He has reported from Iraq 12 times and from Afghanistan 13 times.

He said he posted the information because of the questions being raised about whether Rubio and Louisiana Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal qualify as “natural born citizens.”

“This is obviously getting a lot of attention … so we think we should do a full piece on the show about it … and maybe have a panel of constitutional scholars … and legal experts to discuss this,” he wrote.

“There obviously is a lot of confusion.”

He said, “The brouhaha over President Obama’s birth certificate – has revealed a widespread ignorance of some of the basics of American citizenship.”

Corsi agreed.

“To novices, the distinction between ‘citizen at birth’ and ‘natural born citizen’ may be trivial. Under law, the distinction is meaningful and important. A mother who takes advantage of ‘birth tourism’ to fly from Turkey or China (or any other foreign country) to have a baby born in the United States might arguably give birth to a ‘citizen at birth,’ under the meaning of the 14th Amendment, extended by 8 USC Section 1401,” Corsi said.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Fox News anchor declares Obama is eligible (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• How Obama’s Enablers Mislead the Public on the Meaning of an Article II “Natural Born” Citizen (johnmalcolm.me)
• Bret explains “natural born citizen” requirements for president and vice president (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Natural Born Citizen? (Parts 1 & 2) (johnmalcolm.me)
• Natural Born Citizen (blogs4victory.wordpress.com)
• Obama Media Boot Click Cowardice (moralmatters.org)
• Evidence Broadens Obama Natural Born Conspiracy (johnmalcolm.me)
• Immigration Aticle of the Day: “A Kenyan Birth? Still Natural Born” by SALAR GHAHRAMANI (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
• JustiaGate: More “Natural Born Citizen” Shenanigans From the Wizards of Marx, Um, I Meant the Wizards of Smart (johnmalcolm.me)

Narrative Wars: How the GOP Can Win

By Cindy Simpson | April 24, 2012 | American Thinker

There is one thing that President Obama refers to as a silly distraction.  But in reality, it represents a key part of the bigger thing conservatives must overcome to win this election battle.

The biggest thing was described by the “Big” sites’ creator, Andrew Breitbart, in his book, Righteous Indignation:

The left does not win its battles in debate…The left wins because it controls the narrative.  The narrative is controlled by the media.  The left is the media.  Narrative is everything. [i]

Breitbart highlighted the “turning point” in the history of media control — the mainstream coverage of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.  The “guys who idolized Woodward and Bernstein” had been transformed into “open partisan hacks,” rewriting the narrative with Clinton cast as the hero and Republicans the villains.  Breitbart also noted that the “institutionalized conservative movement” became “conspicuously silent” because they had allowed the left to control the spin and “didn’t want to put themselves in harm’s way” [ii].

The “Democrat-Media Complex” (Breitbart’s term) control of the Obama screenplay has been obvious from day one, even when there was no narrative to shape.  Instead of offering evidence to refute criticism of their star, the Alinsky-schooled Complex lazily lob potent word-missiles like “racist” or “birther.”  Most Republican elites defensively duck and run for cover lest any of the labels stick.  Conservatives hope that intelligent discussion of economic and policy issues will win election battles, but they fight within an arena defined and controlled by the leftist media, leaving the home court advantage to the left.

Refusing to play by Democrat-Media Complex rules, conservative writer Diana West bravely observed the relationship between two of Obama’s scandals: his socialism and the probable fraud of his identity documents.  The assertions are related in that even though both are supported by facts and evidence, neither fits the narrative, and so both are ignored by the mainstream.  And most of the conservative establishment has reacted the same way it did in the Clinton-Lewinsky affair: conspicuously silent and self-censoring.  Author Roger Kimball noted the disturbing consensus that has rendered Obama’s nativity a topic “literally undiscussable.”  Sometimes conservatives side vocally with the Complex, brushing aside the quest for truth as less important than debate on other issues.

While debate on the big issues is important, Breitbart was right — regaining control of the narrative is the big thing.  Until last year, Breitbart was focused mainly on “winning issues”; however, a few weeks before he died, his battle lines were redrawn at CPAC with the promise that “this election, we’re going to vet [Obama].”

Vetting of Obama becomes both a big and winning issue because it takes control of the conversation away from the Democrat-Media Complex.  And the first step is re-examining all of the things that make up Obama’s personal narrative.

Most famous conservatives are reluctant to do so.

Angelo Codevilla observed: “In our time, asking how a young man of scarce achievement got into position to win the Democratic Party’s nomination for president courts the contemporary synonyms for ‘impious’: ‘birther,’ ‘conspiracy theorist,’ and, of course, ‘racist.'”

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• 2012: TEA Party & FreedomWorks vs GOP Establishment? (lsnewsgroup.com)
• Time to ‘Breitbart’ Obama (wnd.com)
• With Activists Like Breitbart, Who Needs An Establishment? (theatlantic.com)
• Part 3: Breitbart’s ‘Narrative’ of Obama (usamericanfreedom.com)
• Andrew Breitbart, 1969-2012 (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com)
• What Is On Andrew Breitbart’s Hidden Tapes on President Obama? Tapes to Be Revealed in 10 Days (ibtimes.com)
• GOP likely to go safe route with budget (timesleader.com)

U.S. Press MIA: Pravda Reports Barack Obama Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence

By Dianna C. Cotter | March 29, 2012 | Pravda

On March 7^th, 2012, Pravda called out the U.S. press for its deliberate neglect of the largest scandal in modern American history. Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio released credible forensic evidence that Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States, presented to the world a forged Birth Certificate on April 27th, 2011.

Since then, the scandal has only expanded. Former United States Postal Service worker Allen Hulton has recently come forward with compelling testimony given under Oath, which leads to only one conclusion: Barack Obama attended College in the United States as a Foreign Student.

In the summer of 2008 the presidential primary season was winding down, and America could not help but note the fervor a significant number of media personalities expressed while supporting the candidacy Barack Obama. Indeed, it was collectively decided within the liberal media, that Obama’s associations with racist pastors and violent domestic terrorists was to be suppressed.

The exposure of the “Journolist” email scandal in 2010 made this glaringly clear: Stories like Obama’s ties to Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr.of the Trinity United Church, and more relevant, to Bill Ayers and his radical past in the Weather Underground Organization were to remain largely un-reported and uninvestigated. Any realistic investigation into Barack Obama’s background was to be minimized, inquiries eventually mocked, and investigators labeled racists.

These tactics have isolated honest media who could and should have reported on these and other important stories yet have inexplicably remained silent. Now we know why. More on this in a moment.

The Postman

Retired United States Postal Worker Allen Hulton recently signed a sworn affidavit for the Maricopa County, Arizona Cold Case Posse convened by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, attesting under oath, to conversations with Mary Ayers, the mother of Bill Ayers. He made his testimony public in a three hour long taped interviewed on March 19^th, 2012. Mr. Hutton, by signing an affidavit has subjected himself to laws regarding perjury, not something to be taken lightly as telling the truth is now for him a requirement of law.

His testimony states Mary and Tom Ayers (Parents of Bill ”I don’t regret setting bombs” Ayers) were sponsoring Barack Obama as a foreign student, and financially supporting his education.

This is a huge revelation on not one, but two separate fronts.

Bill Ayers of dubious “Weatherman” fame, was not just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood”, as then candidate Obama brushed aside. The video linked here comes from a televised DNC Debate in the summer of 2008. As Hillary Clinton revealed then, Obama served in a paid position on the Woods Foundation with Bill Ayers and the two were involved in several projects dispersing millions of dollars over several years.

Realistically, the Ayers family could be said to have adopted Barack Obama, if not as a son then certainly as a kindred Marxist spirit, and treated him to one of the finest educations possible.

There is little doubt Mr. Obama has been less than honest with regard to the Ayers family and their significance in his life.

As disingenuous as this is, it is by no means the most important revelation.

If correct, and Obama was introduced to Hulton as a Foreign Student, this means Barack Hussein Obama would have been using a Foreign Passport to get and prove his foreign student status for entrance into Occidental College, Columbia, and later Harvard Universities. Because Hulton has signed an Affidavit, this cannot be disregarded as mere hearsay; it is instead evidentiary in nature.

The significance of this development may not be immediately apparent until one recognizes American law regarding citizenship status. Citizenship laws as expressed in Title 8 of the United States Code states the use of a Foreign Passport constitutes adult recognition of relinquishment of American Citizenship:

8 USC 1481

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality-

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; 8 USC 1481

Using a foreign passport in order to obtain status as a foreign student is precisely that, proof of naturalization in a foreign state.

The child Barack Obama became an Indonesian Citizen when he was adopted by his stepfather Lolo Soetoro and the family’s subsequent relocation to Indonesia. Young Barack by law needed Indonesian Citizenship in order to attend school, and his adoption provided this. Indeed, in young Barack’s situation adoption was necessary to gain it.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Barack Obama Was A Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence | Western Journalism.com (estherlou.wordpress.com)
• Forgerygate: Ignoring Arpaio’s Report is a Scandal in Itself (johnmalcolm.me)
• Obama and Deception (oneway2day.wordpress.com)
• Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Has Obama’s usefulness come to an end? Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (zionistoutrage.com)
• Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (wnd.com)
• Is Obama a CIA Controlled Manchurian President? (newsworldwide.wordpress.com)

U.S. Press MIA: Pravda Reports Arizona sheriff finds Obama presidential qualifications forged

By Dianna Cotter | March 7, 2012 | Pravda

A singularly remarkable event has taken place in the United States of America. This event occurred in Arizona on March 1^st and was an earth shattering revelation.

A long awaited press conference was given by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a five time elected Sheriff, which should have made national and international headlines. Arpaio’s credentials include serving in the United States Army from 1950 to 1953, service as a federal narcotics agent serving in countries all over the world with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and served as the head of the Arizona DEA. Without doubt, this is a serious Law Enforcement Officer, not one to be taken in by tin-foil-hat wearing loons.

Yet, in the five days since his revelations there has been little in the way of serious reporting on the findings he presented in his presser. With 6 short videos, the Sheriff and his team presented a devastating case, one the tame US press is apparently unable to report.

On April 27, 2011, President Barack walked into the White House Press room with a Cheshire cat like grin and a “Long Form Birth Certificate” from the State of Hawaii in hand.  From the podium in the press room, Mr. Obama said, “We’re not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,”. Quite the barb from a man holding a forged document.

That’s right, forged.

The president himself created the scene; one filled laughter from an adoring press corp., a scene of unprecedented fanfare while holding a forged document which was later posted on the White House website. This was the news Sheriff Arpaio revealed on March 1, 2012 in Arizona.

Arpaio asserts that his investigators discovered, during a 6 month long investigation which is ongoing, not only was the “Long Form” likely a digitally created forgery, but the presidents Selective Service Card (Draft Card), allegedly filed in 1980, was also a forgery. These documents are what Barack Hussein Obama relies upon to prove his constitutional eligibility to the office of President of the United States.

Forged documents are being used to qualify a President of the United States for the office he holds. Or is usurped the more accurate term?

The silence from the main stream media in the US is deafening. It almost seems as if the press is terrified to even think the question, let alone ask it: Is the President a criminal? The press in Arpaio’s audience were certainly asking him to state precisely that, yet nowhere has the question been asked of the White House by the press. Instead the American Press is aggressively protecting the presumed President of the United States, pushing the fraud upon both America and the world, supporting a man who may well have usurped the office.

For months before Mr. Obama released the April 2011 forgery, American businessman Donald Trump had been demanding that the president show the country definitive proof that he was born in the state of Hawaii, and eligible for the Office of President. The birth certificate forgery which was presented by Mr. Obama was in response to the repeated public requests from the billionaire businessman.

One can easily imagine the reaction of the press had this scenario been about George W. Bush in 2004.

On the contrary, the press itself forged documents regarding the 43^rd President: Long term CBS newsman Dan Rather lost his credibility along with his job when he presented forged Air National Guard documents allegedly denigrating the president’s service in the 1970’s. One can imagine the glee evidence presented by law enforcement officials of a real forgery made by President Bush would have generated. The press feeding frenzy would have eclipsed that of Watergate, the most controversial political event in modern America history which led to the resignation of President Nixon in August of 1974.

The questions in the White House Press room would have been merciless to say the very least.

What has been the response from the Obama era press?

Silence.

Silence so loud it can be felt.

What has been the response from the 44^th president so far?

A tweet from Obama Campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt, containing a link to the conspiracy theory television show “The X-files” theme song: a mocking, Saul Alinsky like, retort.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors appear to have been committed by the President of the United States or his personal representatives in presenting a forged document to the press and the Nation as a legitimate document, and this information has been delivered from Law Enforcement Officials.

Arpaio refused to take the bait offered by a clearly hostile press in the conference room. He refused to accuse the president directly, instead informing the world that they had a “person of interest” in the forgery, and were continuing with the investigation.

Where is the outrage from the press??

As surreal as this is, it isn’t the main event. It’s only a part of a larger story.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Forgerygate: Ignoring Arpaio’s Report is a Scandal in Itself (johnmalcolm.me)
• Eligibility investigation petition gaining ground (wnd.com)
• Pravda: Commies Report On Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Obama Investigation (theroycroftreport.com)
• Russian News Outlet “PRAVDA” Accuses Obama & U.S. Media Of Hiding Fraud (onthearizonaborder.wordpress.com)
• Pravda asks: What happened to American media? (wnd.com)
• Pravda asks: What happened to American media? (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Pravda Article on Obama’s Forgeries (ontoliberty.wordpress.com)
• Obama Lawyer Admits In Court Birth Certificate On White House Website Is A Forgery (johnmalcolm.me)
• | POLL: 88% of Americans Vote YES to an Obama Impeachment! (truthaholics.wordpress.com)
• Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (wnd.com)

The Sea Change: Obama’s Confirmed Forgeries Are Not Going Away

By Monte Kuligowski | April 19, 2012 | American Thinker

For several years, an Orwellian-type fear of being “marginalized” held reporters and pundits back from questioning Barack Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of the presidency.  To raise an eyebrow at the bizarre secrecy of Obama was off-limits.  To question whether the historic definition of “natural born citizen” applied to Obama was taboo.

The era of fear, however, is happily winding down.  It will take some time for this realization to fully take hold.  But make no mistake: the tables have turned.

Like it or not, the ground has shifted, and it cannot shift back.  The evidence of Obama’s forgeries is not going away.

Up until this point, Mr. Obama controlled everything, including the talking points and burden of proof.

Rather than simply produce certified paper copies for state election officials and make the original available for officials to inspect in Hawaii, Obama played games with his purported birth certificate.  We were told for three years that Obama’s birth certificate had been posted online in 2008 — though it turns out that it was a scant certification.  In 2010, when confronted with the alarming doubts of the American people, Mr. Obama lamented to a sympathetic Brian Williams of NBC: “I can’t spend all my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead.”  The following year, out of left field, on April 27, 2011, Obama “released” the elusive birth certificate by posting a now-discredited file image online.

This time he wasn’t teasing.  It was “proof positive.”  Mr. Obama, in his robotic style, barked that it was time to stop the “silliness” and move on.

No one ever wanted Obama to get all crazy and walk around with his birth certificate plastered on his forehead.  But many took the reasonable position of wanting the mysterious birth certificate produced, not plastered or uploaded to a computer.  Many wanted Obama to produce certified copies for state officials and make the original available for inspection.

But because no authority forced him to comply with basic legal standards, Mr. Obama was able to create a sideshow atmosphere by selecting non-experts to verify his internet postings behind closed doors.  His media sycophants were able to make those who questioned Obama’s staunch secrecy appear as the unreasonable ones.  Somehow the burden of proof was erroneously placed on the citizenry to prove that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii.

Well, the burden never actually rested with the people to prove anything.  That was all smoke and mirrors.  No conspiracy theories are needed to demand that Obama comply with basic legal standards — especially in context of a state with a history of certifying foreign births as Hawaiian.

After Obama “released” the birth certificate in 2011, nonpartisan computer software experts immediately recognized that the embarrassing image had been computer-assembled.  Of course, few in the free press dared to report on the “silliness.”  Fox News quickly summonsed Adobe-certified expert Jean-Claude Tremblayto to conclude, nothing fishy here (but his ORC explanation has been demonstrably debunked by the control-test findings of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s investigative team — see below).

It’s simply unfathomable to the consensus media that the One they worked so hard to elect could be a fraud — or, at minimum, could have something to hide.

Unfortunately, Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s team of law enforcement and investigative experts were able to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that forgeries have been committed.  It turns out that the sheriff simply confirmed the “open secret” shared by technical document experts across the country.  As with many crimes, if not for their abject carelessness, the forgers might have gotten away with it.  But the strength of the evidence is such that local law enforcement was able to conclude that “probable cause” exists to show that the White House uploaded a computer-generated forgery of a birth certificate.  Ditto with Obama’s Selective Service registration form: it is also a crude forgery.

Who would have thought that Obama’s illegal immigration nemesis, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, could turn the tables on Obama?

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Obama Lawyer Admits In Court Birth Certificate On White House Website Is A Forgery (johnmalcolm.me)
• Eligibility investigation petition gaining ground (wnd.com)
• Obama attorney: ‘Mickey Mouse’ could be on ballot (wnd.com)
• Obama Birth Certificate A Forgery? (projectbrainsaver.wordpress.com)

Obama Lawyer Admits In Court Birth Certificate On White House Website Is A Forgery

By Stephanie | April 14th, 2012 | FedUpUSA

Normally, I have stayed away from commenting on the controversy surrounding President Obama’s eligibility or the legitimacy of his long form birth certificate posted on the White House website; however, because this is now a matter of court record and has been captured on court house video as well, I feel compelled to present the information as yet more evidence of the massive corruption in our country’s government.  I also feel compelled to post this because the mainstream media has made it pretty clear it isn’t going to – because this happened 4 days ago and I have yet to see it even mentioned.

What is important here is what is admitted during the hearing, not the outcome of the hearing itself.  The first article is by Dan Crosby of the Daily Pen and reproduced over at The Obama Hustle.

Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery But Disregards “Image” As Indication Of Obama’s Ineligibility

4-11-12

DAMAGE CONTROL: A recent ballot challenge hearing in New Jersey exposes a desperate strategy by Obama to distance himself from his forged certificate and induce the contrived value of his transient political popularity as the only “legitimate qualification” needed to hold the office of the presidency.

By Dan Crosby of  THE DAILY PEN

NEW YORK, NY – After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obama’s ineligibility in a court of law.

Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.

Hill went on to contort reasoning by implying that Obama needs only invoke his political popularity, not legal qualifications, in order to be a candidate [emphasis added].  At the hearing, attorney for the plaintiffs, Mario Apuzzo, correctly argued that Obama, under the Constitution, has to be a “natural born Citizen” and that he has not met his burden of showing that he is eligible to be on the New Jersey primary ballot by showing that he is indeed a “natural born Citizen.”

He argued that Obama has shown no authenticate evidence to the New Jersey Secretary of State demonstrating who he is and that he was born in the United States. Apuzzo also argued that as a matter of law, Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” because he was born to a father who was not a U.S. citizen.

As Obama’s legal argument becomes more contorted, he is being forced to avoid an ever shrinking legal space, and an increasing weight, of his failure to meet constitutional eligibility requirements.  Hill, of Genova, Burn & Giantomasi Attorneys in Newark, made a desperate motion to dismiss the ballot objection arguing that Obama’s lack of natural-born citizenship status was not relevant to being placed on the New Jersey presidential ballot because no law exists in New Jersey which says that a candidate’s appearance on the ballot must be supported by evidence of natural born citizenship status. Only the U.S. constitution restricts eligibility to hold the office of president to natural born citizens.

Judge Masin denied the motion to dismiss and the case proceeded to trial.

“Sadly, regardless of her moral deficiency, Hill is legally justified,” says TDP Editor, Penbrook Johannson, “Obama’s eligibility is a separate matter than the charges of forgery and fraud. Of course, we have evidence that he is not eligible. But, evidence of forgery by as yet unidentified counterfeiters working on behalf of Obama is not what legally excludes Obama from appearing on a ballot, by itself, until some authority is willing to consider this as evidence of forgery on its merit as an indication of actual ineligibility in a court of legal authority. Until some court of competent jurisdiction is willing to hear evidence of forgery and fraud, you can’t legally punish a political candidate for that crime which has not been proven that they committed. However, since Obama is not eligible because of a lack of authenticated evidence to the contrary, he could be held off the ballot for that reason.”

According to Johannson, there is an overwhelming level of moral certainty that Obama is a usurper, but until a court with jurisdiction considers this case, Obama’s status as a legitimate president is in limbo.

“He does not exist as a president except in the imagination of those who blindly support him. Whereas he is politically desired by a transient consensus, his legality is unresolved until a responsible court makes a determination. This is the essence of our crisis. Our nation exists in a state of non-authorized identity. Obama is just some guy calling himself a president and living in the White House without the confirmative authority to do so.”

Obama’s document forgery and fraudulent presidency have now forced him to flee to a “strange twilight zone” between political popularity and legal legitimacy where poorly counterfeited records are apparently allowed to be published by Obama using government media resources for political purposes, yet those same records are held by the courts as irrelevant for determining Obama’s legal eligibility status because they are, according to judges, “so poorly forged” they are obviously meant to be satirical and not to be taken seriously as evidence.

Shockingly, parting from widespread public ignorance, Hill actually acknowledged two of the three necessary components of determining natural born citizenship as being place of birth and citizenship status of both parents. However, she argued that, “No law in New Jersey obligated him (Obama) to produce any such evidence in order to get on the primary ballot.”

The third component of natural born eligibility is maintenance of natural born citizenship status from birth to election without interruption, involuntarily or voluntarily, due to expatriation, extradition, renouncement or foreign adoption.

“Obama is mocking our constitution,” says Johannson, “His position is that he never claimed the image was an indication of his natural born status, just that it was information about his birth. Whether it is forged or authentic is irrelevant to Obama because plausible deniability affords him the security in knowing that no legal authority is willing to hang him with it.”

Of course, Johannson adds that it makes Obama look like a willing accomplice and a liar, but, he says, “…show me a politician who cares about being seen as a liar by the public. If people who support him want to vote for a person like that, it reveals more about the reprobate character of Obama supporters than competency of any legal determination about his lack of constitutional eligibility. Degenerates will vote for a degenerate while patriots will exhaust all civil means to remove him…until those civil means are exhausted. Then things get ugly for government.”

“However, Hill is also essentially admitting that Obama is not a legitimate president and that Obama believes that his illegitimacy does not matter to his legal ability to hold the office. Obama holds to a political tenet, not a legal one with respect to his views on his eligibility. That’s what corrupt, criminal politicians do. When the law convicts them, they run to public favorability for shelter with the hope that their supporters will apply pressure to disregard law in their case.”

Obama is now arguing that because he is politically popular, as he points to as being indicated by his so-called ‘election’, despite accusations of eligibility fraud and election fraud, the constitutional eligibility mandate is not relevant, in his view. Until a courageous authority is willing to disagree and hold Obama to an equally weighted legal standard, civil remedies for the Obama problem are limited.

Johannson adds that Obama is making the same argument on behalf of Obamacare.  “If he had the gall to actually tell the Supreme Court that they have no authority to determine the unconstitutionality of his illegitimate policies, what makes anyone think he believes they have the authority to disqualify him due to his lack of constitutional eligibility? Obama believes he holds preeminent power over all branches of government because of his delusions of political grandeur.”

He correctly points to a lifetime pattern of behavior and testimony by Obama which indicates a complete lack of regard for the U.S. Constitution when it restricts Obama’s political agenda and lust for power.

“This is a guy who illegally defaced public property when he scribed his aspirations to be ‘king’ in a concrete sidewalk at the age of ten, for God’s sake. Now, his ‘majesty’ wants to put his illegal ‘graffiti’ into American law books. However, his problem is that he has to face the fact that he is an abject failure in his capacity to meet any standard required by the 250-year-old U.S. Constitution, in everything he tries to do. The Constitution owns him and he can’t stand it. He hates it. Therefore, instead of admitting his lack of constitutionality, he simply breaks the rules and proceeds to illegally scribe his fake authority on everything until someone is willing to physically stop him. Obama is not just an illegitimate politician, he is a rogue outlaw without regard for the divine providence of American law.”

Apuzzo submitted that New Jersey law requires Obama to show evidence that he is qualified for the office he wishes to occupy and that includes showing that he is a “natural born Citizen,” which includes presenting evidence of who he is, where he was born, and that he was born to two U.S. citizen parents. Apuzzo added that the Secretary of State has a constitutional obligation not to place any ineligible candidates on the election ballot.

The account of the trial can be read at:  http://www.teapartytribune.com/2012/04/11/nj-ballot-access-challenge-hearing-update/

The following is from Mario Apuzzo, Esq.’s  own Blog:

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Obama Lawyer Admits In Court Birth Certificate On White House Website Is A Forgery (ironymous.wordpress.com)
• Obama’s lawyer admits his birth certificate is a forgery (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility (silverdoctors.com)
• Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery But Disregards “Image” As Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility (theobamahustle.wordpress.com)
• Obama lawyer: Birth certificate irrelevant to eligbility (wnd.com)
• Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Obama Lawyer Admits In Court Birth Certificate On White House Website Is A Forgery (zionistoutrage.com)
• Congress listening? Tens of thousands calling (wnd.com)
• George Soros pledges $10 million to defeat Sheriff Joe for reelection (tatoott1009.com)
• Birthers return: Republican Rep. ‘doubts’ Obama’s birth certificate (examiner.com)

Back to Back: Dial ‘O’ for Murder & Sheriff Arpaio’s Press Conference – Obama Birth Certificate Forgery

Related Articles

• Obama Tool AG Eric Holder: ‘Instances of In-Person Voter Fraud Are Extremely Rare’ (ferrellgummit.wordpress.com)
• ‘Birther Movement’ aka; ‘Constitutional Requirement For President Eligibility’ Started By Bill Clinton In 2008! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• How Barack Obama will steal the 2012 Presidential Election. #VetObama (afteramerica.wordpress.com)
• Hollywood Producer Heard Bill Clinton Say Obama Ineligible (theobamahustle.wordpress.com)
• Filmmaker Tells How Clinton’s Were To Challenge Obama Birth Cert & Was Stopped By Murder Of Friend In 2008 (onthearizonaborder.wordpress.com)
• Bill and Hillary: The Original “Birthers” (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Voter Fraud? nawwwwwwwww (aleksandreia.com)
• Fox News smacks anchor for tweeting WND video…(Hillary Story, Etc…) (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Get Ready for Obama Fraud Part II:This Time They Don’t Care how Blantant (wyldgoose.wordpress.com)
• Obama Conspiracy 2.0: Obama Campaign Threatened to Whack Chelsea If Clintons Spoke About Obama’s Ineligibility (thewesternexperience.com)
• Obama Birth Certificate a “Forgery”, Arizona Sheriff Says (inquisitr.com)
• Arpaio hits ‘censorship blackout’ on Obama forgery probe (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Arpaio: GOP candidates ‘hiding’ from eligibility (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• As Sheriff Arpaio Continues His Investigation of Obama, the DOJ Escalates Its War Against the Sheriff (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
• The Mainstream Media Blackout Of The Arpaio News Conference | Expose Obama (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Sheriff Arpaio: Obama birth certificate a ‘forgery’ – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Live Video: Sheriff Arpaio’s Ridiculous Birther Press Conference (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• Born in the Usa (hwnsurf.me)

Obama Eligibility Cold Case Investigation Press Conference [Running Time 81:55]

Related Articles:

• Sheriff Joe: ‘Tons’ more shocking Obama info
• Full-blown media cover-up of hottest U.S. story
• Postman: Ayers family put ‘foreigner’ Obama through school
• Breitbart editor: We won’t probe eligibility
• Rush: Media ignoring Sheriff Joe death threat
• Obama ‘fanatic’ guilty in Arpaio death threat
• Donald Trump: Say it is so, Sheriff Joe
• O’Reilly: My probe better than Sheriff Joe’s
• Arpaio: ‘Probable cause’ Obama certificate a fraud
• What does law say about Obama’s eligibility?
• Alinsky-style leftist ramps up effort to oust Sheriff Joe
• 100,000 line up to back Sheriff Joe
• Obama backer arrested for death threats against Sheriff Joe
• Justice Department blinks in battle against Sheriff Joe
• Anti-Arpaio protesters ousted from meeting
• Another protest against Sheriff Joe fails
• Obama’s harassment of Sheriff Joe
• ‘Resign now’ protest against Sheriff Joe fizzles
• Sheriff Joe targeted for ouster
• Sheriff Joe ‘suspicious’ of motive behind Obama attacks
• Sheriff Joe to Obama: I’ll keep doing my job

The Ryan Test: Demagoguery Versus Ideas

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Jonathan S. Tobin | August 11, 2012 | Commentary Magazine As John wrote earlier today, liberals are convinced that Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan to be his running mate offers them a golden opportunity to savage the Republicans about the Wisconsin congressman’s budget plans. Predictably, the New York Times delivered one of the first such salvos in its editorial posted […]

Smoking Obama’s Crack and Yearning for the Mud

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Vanderleun | August 10, 2012 | American Digest [From 2008. Only the names have been changed because the target has changed.] This downward flight of intellectuals has been going on ever since the Romantic movement began its counter-revolution a couple hundred years ago. No matter how much they flap their lips it’s a fall, not […]