Corsi To File Criminal Charges Against White House Over Obama Birth Certificate

reply to post by spinalremain

Thankfully only a tiny margin of Americans take in fiction as reality.

Oh, I don't know......seems like a lot of them voted for Obama anyway.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by grahag

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by userid1
3rd eye:

What other interpretation have you heard of this? That anyone can be POTUS? please no YOU give it up. Show me where the 14th says it clarifies who can be POTUS.

Precisely my point. It does NOT specify that parents must be US citizens, neither does Article II. YOU made the case that they MUST because that was YOUR interpretation of what the founding fathers *must* have meant. Unfortunately, the Constitution does NOT specify this, and while US Code IS more specific (if you'd JUST bother to read it), but it still doesn't help your case.

Please show me where I suggested that ANYONE could be POTUS? If you'll just re-read my comments - you'll *clearly* note that I said there are only two kinds of citizens - "naturalized" (can't be President) and Natural Born (can be President)

naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com...

So... You have to have NATURALIZED parents to be a natural born citizen? That means we all have to have immigrant parents that were naturalized in order to be natural born citizens!

While I know where you're going with that, the speech of one man on the floor of the house does not make law or define terms. In the end, if there is a dispute regarding the verbiage, then it'll be decided in court and it has been.

Where do you people come off with such inflammatory nonsense.
It is sick how people keep twisting around such an easy concept. The Pro obama crowd keep referring to the case of Wong Kim Ark as if it was intended to prove his eligibility to be POTUS. That is clearly explained in Leo Donofrio's blog. He is an attorney who has filed suit against Obama and that is why I am pointing to his material. Frankly I think you and a couple others here are just determined to do the support-Obama thing come what may, and use the stuff you've heard from the liberal blogs. I've heard it ad nauseum.

I'm not sure what you mean by inflammatory. I don't see any language there to incite flames... My only argument is that it will be and has been decided in the courts multiple times. The courts typically fall on the side of the person whose citizenship is being questioned.

Go to en.wikipedia.org... for those cases. It's gone to the supreme court and has been decided. You are either a naturalized citizen or a natural born citizen. Unless you can find some other legal case, precedent, or document that states differently I'll stick to my guns on this one.

Originally posted by Antiquated1
reply to post by wcitizen

 

So to sum up your character in your own words -
You made a character judgment on Obama and decided he was not trustworthy. You feel he lied to you and lost credibility and is not to be trusted on many things.
You believe a complete stranger online that began with "Hi, I am a 20 year old female" just because you do.

Did I get that right?

Wow, you really want to make a point about me personally, don't you.

Yes, I CHOOSE who I trust and who I don't. Not you, ME, I MAKE MY OWN INFORMED CHOICES.

If you don't like it, tough.

reply to post by wcitizen



I don't think the point was about you, personally, but your judgment. I'm positive that I have some posts here which might contradict some things I say, but my general philosophy stays the same.

I'll play devil's advocate though and say that we don't have the big picture. Maybe we don't have information based on your relationship with the person in question and maybe she has given you reason to trust her outside of what we know.

The biggest problem with the argument though is that it undermines your credibility for your criteria of proof. Maybe you're just a sucker for a skirt? I know MY judgment has been affected numerous times because of that and I can hardly fault you for that, but you need to reconcile the difference between the burden of proof for Obama and then some girl who thinks she's being targeted by the Illuminati if you want people to take your arguments seriously.

Originally posted by grahag
reply to post by wcitizen

 

I don't think the point was about you, personally, but your judgment. I'm positive that I have some posts here which might contradict some things I say, but my general philosophy stays the same.

I'll play devil's advocate though and say that we don't have the big picture. Maybe we don't have information based on your relationship with the person in question and maybe she has given you reason to trust her outside of what we know.

The biggest problem with the argument though is that it undermines your credibility for your criteria of proof. Maybe you're just a sucker for a skirt? I know MY judgment has been affected numerous times because of that and I can hardly fault you for that, but you need to reconcile the difference between the burden of proof for Obama and then some girl who thinks she's being targeted by the Illuminati if you want people to take your arguments seriously.

Wow, what is this? Let's all give WCitizen a hard time day?

This whole argument is nonsensical and I won't be drawn into it. Whom I trust and whom I don't is my decision and no-one else's,period. . It's my business and mine alone. If I make choices you don't agree with, and that undermines your credibility in me, frankly I don't give a damn.. I don't know either of you and your opinion on my character or my choices is of no consequence to me whatsoever.

The End.

.

For crying out loud, if anyone wishes to read this book that he so wishes to be in the public eye (even tho there ARE avenues to provide it freely) Just drop me a message, it can easily be obtained in PDF form from me or on the internet, but I'm sure he would rather everyone buy the book than to provide the American public with information that would proove Obamas illegitimacy to be the POTUS.
Read it, then tell us all on what page the valid, solid proof is on.

so has he filed any criminal charges yet ?

reply to post by syrinx high priest


It doesn't matter - it never did. Just as it doesn't matter if he actually won a case. The only point of the statement is publicity. *That's* what keep his name (and his book) in the public eye and keeps people thinking about buying it.

It's really no different with Orly Taitz. By now, she's probably realized that legally, she's got no skills and no case. But, by presenting herself as "fighting the good fight", (or at least not giving up despite common sense), those that believe in her will keep hitting that [DONATE] button on her web site won't they?

Originally posted by lance_covel
For crying out loud, if anyone wishes to read this book that he so wishes to be in the public eye (even tho there ARE avenues to provide it freely) Just drop me a message, it can easily be obtained in PDF form from me or on the internet, but I'm sure he would rather everyone buy the book than to provide the American public with information that would proove Obamas illegitimacy to be the POTUS.
Read it, then tell us all on what page the valid, solid proof is on.

I started asking people to tell me what page I could find even one fact on about a week ago. Only one person on ATS even claimed to have the book aside from me and even they could not supply a page, just ask me what I thought about 90-92 which covers that stupid Obama's grandma/birthplace hoax. So I am as eager as you to hear just one thing from this book that is supposed to be valid proof. It is full of questions like "Where are the adoption papers?" and other useless emptiness. I got mine for free too but I am not looking to help Jerome spread his word. If the birthers can promote him for months, they can give him their money and finally explain what the hell it is we were supposed to get out of this book.

reply to post by Antiquated1


I'm going to assume that there is some evidence not in the book if it's going to be played out in the Supreme Court, otherwise it won't be permissable as evidence. Just a guess.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by Antiquated1

 

I'm going to assume that there is some evidence not in the book if it's going to be played out in the Supreme Court, otherwise it won't be permissable as evidence. Just a guess.

What is going on at the supreme court?

Kenya probed claim Obama born in Africa Internal intelligence reports indicate government investigation

Critics point out many reasons to be skeptical of the recorded telephone conversation, including the possibility something was lost in the translation and the fact that, through her interpreter, she later clarified that her famous grandson was born in Hawaii, not Kenya. Nevertheless, two members of the Obamas' Luo tribe who are fluent in the local Luo dialect, Swahili and English told WND that after carefully listening to the tape they believe she declared Barack Obama Jr. was born in Kenya and that she was present at the birth. The discussion of Sarah Obama's purported claim is found in reports by Kenya's National Security Intelligence Service, or NSIS, and official letters indicating the Kenyan government investigated the possibility that President Obama was born in Kenya.

An "interim report" by the NSIS issued in September 2008 "concludes that a birth certificate in the name of Barack Hussein Obama may have been issued" in Kenya "but to confirm this would require a further thorough joint investigation" by the NSIS and Kenya's Central Intelligence Department, or CID.

The report said that none of several investigations by various officers has been conclusive and that some leads require further investigation "because it appears some powerful forces as it were are hell bent in defeating this investigation."

Source: www.wnd.com...

The quest for the truth continues. It's good to see that some people will not accept or mistake empty, blanket denials as proof that the evidence regarding this issue doesn't exist. It obviously does, but as the article points out, there are forces relentlessly working to hide and suppress any evidence and facts related to the truth of Soetoro/Obama's birth and his constitutional qualifications to be President of the US of A.

Once again, more good news that people are waking up and examining the facts and evidence for themselves -

WND Exclusive A QUESTION OF ELIGIBILITY Birth certificate book a New York Times best-seller! Also makes USA Today, Wall Street Journal, Publisher's Weekly lists

WASHINGTON – It's the kind of news the Obama administration dreads: The book that caused such a sensation even before its official launch that the White House felt pressured to preemptively release the president's purported birth certificate – Jerome Corsi's Jerome Corsi's "Where's the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama Is Not Eligible To Be President" – is now officially a New York Times best-seller.

It debuts today on the Times nonfiction list at No. 6 – joining virtually all the other top bestseller lists this week, including USA Today, the Wall Street Journal and Publisher's Weekly.

Source: www.wnd.com...

reply to post by ShakaDoodle

Once again, more good news that people are waking up and examining the facts and evidence for themselves -

Good news for those selling that book yes. Bad news for the people who believe in it, for once again, you are experiencing cognitive dissonance.

And to throw salt in the wounds of all Americans, especially the veterans and soldiers on Memorial Day.....Obama go places a wreath in the morning then off to golf for the remainder of the day. No other Western leader would ever be seen dead doing that! Bloody disrespectful if you tell me!!!

______beforeitsnews/story/676/499/Barack_Obamas_decision_to_play_golf_on_Memorial_Day_was_disrespectful_and_hardly_presidential.html

Originally posted by bluemirage5
And to throw salt in the wounds of all Americans, especially the veterans and soldiers on Memorial Day.....Obama go places a wreath in the morning then off to golf for the remainder of the day. No other Western leader would ever be seen dead doing that! Bloody disrespectful if you tell me!!!

______beforeitsnews/story/676/499/Barack_Obamas_decision_to_play_golf_on_Memorial_Day_was_disrespectful_and_hardly_presidential.html

edit on 31-5-2011 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)

It doesn't throw salt in any wounds unless someone is apt to make an issue out of nothing. That typically happens with those not from the US to begin with. We would have been offended if he had done NOTHING, but not for this.

reply to post by bluemirage5


Yes, it speaks volumes as to the depth of his sincerity and faithfulness to true American values and principles.

The sad part is, Soetoro/Obama, despite his hollow words which might indicate the contrary, has displayed the same anti-American behavior repeatedly, and still, there are people who unashamedly attempt to defend and support him. Actions speak louder than words and once again, Soetoro/Obama has failed to set an honorable example, rather he himself has degraded and debased his own public image as President, for all the world to see.

Originally posted by ShakaDoodle
reply to post by bluemirage5

 

Yes, it speaks volumes as to the depth of his sincerity and faithfulness to true American values and principles.

The hell it does.

It spits in the face of all Americans and American value system to incessantly cause uproar over indistinct evidence.
To call every authority figure with overwhelming credentials and proven track records and toss them out the window as though they were meaningless into question.
To claim that he has a higher level of authority over the authenticity of a document that has inherent problems (the internet, naturally occurring digital anomalies), and profess himself some "expert" because his (perhaps only) efficacy is with a piece of software whose outcome is highly debatable.

And those who support his baseless claims are equally as guilty.

Half of the people in what we call the "third world" have their voices stifled, the OTHER half know precisely when the time is to actually SHUTUP, such that the rest of the world doesn't see them the way they do us right now, as weak and weak minded because we can't even come to a concensus on who/how to lead us.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Wow, you really want to make a point about me personally, don't you.[/quopte]

I do not "want" anything about you. I have noticed a lot of posters on ATS feel that they have people respond to them because they think they hit a nerve, are super popular, or the envy of others just for existing. Sorry no.

Yes, I CHOOSE who I trust and who I don't. Not you, ME, I MAKE MY OWN INFORMED CHOICES.

If you don't like it, tough.

I never really said anything about whether or not I like it. I was just pointing out the obvious. Grahag did a perfect job explaining to you what the problem is. You have no real standards. When it comes to believing someone, you are willing to dismiss 100s of people in positions to know and confer with each other all while practically hurting yourself to believe some crazy claim from a stranger that claims to be a young girl. If those are your standards, that is your right. I also have the right to point out how that kind of takes you out of the running for top 100 people with capable abilities of perception and a fair application thereof.

Read Grahag's post because I see you have trouble understanding what I said. He put it perfectly.

Originally posted by ShakaDoodle

It debuts today on the Times nonfiction list at No. 6 – joining virtually all the other top bestseller lists this week, including USA Today, the Wall Street Journal and Publisher's Weekly.

Source: www.wnd.com...

Can you tell me why not one single birther on ATS has been able to give just one page number on which to find even a single fact in Corsi's book? There must be a really good reason that here on ATS, no birthers are quoting the book or pointing out where all the damning facts are. Just give me one.