Impeach Obama?! New vid lays out a pretty good case.

reply to post by spoor


i'll pretend i'm talking to my child to make it easier, a lead is called a lead because it leads you to other poinnts of investigation, which could to out to be nothing, something usefull or more leads to other points of investiagtion which in turn could turn out to nothing, something useful etcetcetc..... The lead dosn't need anything truthfull but hopefully contains a pointer in the direction of the truth. Get it.

Originally posted by crikeyoioioi
Get it.

Yes, I get it. You lied when you claimed Obama spent money covering up his past. nothing new there, birthers are always telling fibs!

reply to post by spoor


from that response and the rest of your substanceless unconstructive and soley arguementative replies to my posts people will see you for what you are, a bias, uneducated birther with no idea and no capacity to debate. Goodnite for now, peace love and tolerance.

Edit: It's always a joy to see a thread where the Birthers battle the Paid Obamatrons!

reply to post by Kitilani


not on earth, who made that statement lol, not in american or american soil, planty more statement and docs from non american soil that will surface. Not my job to disclose any hard evidence but it will come, imagine trying to keep everyone you studied with quiet, you couldn't. Even if i presented multiple statement or photo's they'd be debunked so easier to leave it to a credible source. I could show a video years old of a large group of people celebrating saying BO made it, he's in the US and running for the election, did you see &@/*=& news today. And you'd say it was recent, paid for, setup etc...

Originally posted by crikeyoioioi
reply to post by Kitilani

 

not on earth, who made that statement lol, not in american or american soil, planty more statement and docs from non american soil that will surface.

Right you said USA and not Earth, my apologies. Too bad you still cannot back it up.

So I have to ask again. How do you respond to those links proving that claim is complete BS? Can you answer that question?
You already said he spent money to hide his past and now you are claiming you cannot prove that. Please lay all your lies out for us.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Edit: It's always a joy to see a thread where the Birthers battle the Paid Obamatrons!

edit on 3/7/2011 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)

Which posters are "paid Obamatrons" and what evidence do you have to support your accusation? I ask because I would love a check for posting on ATS and I want to know how to make that happen. Or are you lying too?

Birthers will contribute to Obama getting reelected. Them and the republican negativity machine. Instead of offering alternative, all they do is bash, bash, bash and bash. And this is exactly why they will loose. Again.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by citizen3273676
that i said it took way too long for a birth cert?

Funny how previous Presidents STILL have not shown their birth certificates, but you only demand one from Obama....

Why is that?

i said that . that obama spent way too much money keeping his records private?

How about showing us all how Obama had to spend money to keep his private records private?

i said that. my point was a candidate much less a president has no right to privacy

Yet Obama is just keeping the same records private as previous Presidents, and where does it state that a President has no right to privacy?

[/quote
you know what i demand all presidents be american born like the constitution says. dont tell me you know what i only demand. if there is any question of american birth then a birth certificate would prove so.point is when ANY one who applies to run for president should have to prove eligibility and if any american citizen wants to see documented proof then it should be on file dated etc.
if obama spent one dollar sealing his records or hiding information about his past then he spent too much money (see below)
as far as privacy(i wish our privacy was as protected as obamas) no president or candidateshould ever expect any. if your opposition wont check or the press wont then any voter can. if you try and join the cia they will interview people all the way back to your kindegarden teacher they will investigate you in an very invasive manner you will give up your rights to privacy (voluntarily) in order to qualify for the job. theres alot of jobs far below president that require you to allow an ivestigation into your information that would normaly require a warrant. hell most people have to pee in a cup. can we see the results of any elected officails drug tests do they even take one?


any way you skipped the meaning of my post twice now i think you just try and start arguments and you dont have a point. third time... my point has allways been that i think obama should be impeached for lying repeatedly to the american public go to you tube and search the words obama and lying. you skipped this the main part of all my posts this thread every time and seem to want to start a fight about my begining statements that were just stating that i thought it took too long too see the bc i dont think any candidate has a right to privacy and i think we have more of a case to impeach him for lying obama is a liar. actor, scam artist on pace to shatter GWs all time record for sh#tiest prez eva.

Originally posted by Adonsa
Greetings, UcDat,

Well, it's common knowledge that barry hussein soetoro (alias barrack obama, alias Harrison J. Bounel, alias roman obama) is nowhere near eligible on many counts. Cass Sunstein, other czar's and their employees and the Apollo Alliance have their heads in the sand (or they're too intoxicated with Communist ideology) if they haven't figured out the obvious by now.

Nevertheless, it's always expected to note that Cass Sunstein and his staff members appear to police any website where anyone questions "the one!"


[quote="samsson1950 from yahoo"]

At the time Barry moved to Indonesia and was adopted/identified as an
Indonesian citizen as indicated on his Indonesian school records (also
indicating his religion as muslim),Indonesia did NOT recognize dual
citizenship with the U.S! Even if he was a "natural born" U.S. citizen
he would have lost that status when adopted by his Indonesian father
Lolo Soetero.

What a load of crap!

Why doesn't it ever occur to you people that what Indonesia thinks doesn't matter at all to what the US State Dept. thinks? How is it you people miss that simple fact over and over again?????
Are you too lazy to fact check anything you're spoon fed, or are you just not capable?
Go check the State Dept web site and see what they say about how a US Citizen actually loses their citenzenship and then get back to us and explain how Indonesia can override that?

Won't even bother with the rest of your comment since it was based on stupidity to begin with.

This claim has been debunked so many times over the years and yet it keeps popping back up. What? Did you think we'd just forget about it and say "Wow! They've got a point" when we heard it for the 7th time?

reply to post by MasterAndrew


Excuse me Master Moron do you know what HUSSEIN is in english ? Its JOSEPH or Jose in spanish. GO back to your hole.

Here is a copy of President Obama's birth certificate via The White House. It is the long form. He was born in America.

whitehouse.gov...

reply to post by caladonea


To be fair, we can only really discuss the validity of that now once we see all the Republican candidates birth certificates and judge the validity of them all. Maybe the flaws birthers think they found in a PDF they downloaded will be apparent in the other releases. I mean, I am sure the birthers will be demanding those. I know they do not want anyone to think they just singled out Obama for some crazy reason.

Has anybody figured out how he has a Connecticut Social Security number yet?


How did Obama fly into Pakistan in 1981 when no one with a US Passport could have flown in there? What countries passport did he have? No Americans were flying into Pakistan in 1981.

Who exactly owns Obama's house? Some Judge actually owns it? It's changed hands how many times and how many loans were illegally taken out on the same house in a couple years?

He must have given his nuts to Hillary for her to not be going after him...she probably OWNS that guy for life knowing all his secrets...in essence making Hillary Clinton technically our ruler and calling the shots right now.

Originally posted by Pervius
Has anybody figured out how he has a Connecticut Social Security number yet?

The SS admin says that their numbers are not meant to be taken as geographical indicators and the zip code for his birth place is only one number juxtaposed from the zip code in CT his SSN was issued from.

How did Obama fly into Pakistan in 1981 when no one with a US Passport could have flown in there? What countries passport did he have? No Americans were flying into Pakistan in 1981.

That is not true. There was a travel advisory but no ban in effect at that time.

Who exactly owns Obama's house? Some Judge actually owns it? It's changed hands how many times and how many loans were illegally taken out on the same house in a couple years?

That would have what to do with this? Is it as factual as your first two "questions?"

He must have given his nuts to Hillary for her to not be going after him...she probably OWNS that guy for life knowing all his secrets...in essence making Hillary Clinton technically our ruler and calling the shots right now.

What about McCain and Palin then? Why did they not go after him? Why are none of the Repubs now going after him? If he had to do something to get Hillary on his side then he would have had to do the same for them, right? Or are you suggesting McCain and Palin were more on his side than Hillary was already?

Any impeachment effort if started now will only kick him out after his term is up.

We've lost four years to this incompetent president. It will take the next eight years to undo his appointments and damage he's caused to our country. Some of the economic damage may not be repairable, and much of the wasted tax dollars will never be recovered.

Undermine Obama 2012! Quietly undermine any company or organization that supports Obama. Undermine Chicago politicians, every single one of them is corrupt.

Im surprised that the usual Birthers are not here yet. Beezer, Boon Dock Saint, Anon 72 and the rest of the usual people who support the birther conspiracy. This thread about the birther issue had already been resolved. Everyone already knew Obama's father was from Kenya when he was running and no one made an issue about his elgibility to be President. Mccain and Clinton would have brought it up during their campaigns if it was actually an issue. But fortunately they can read and understand what the law says concerning Obamas elgibility. He is elgible and if he was not he would not be President. Its that simple.

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
Can you find any case law quoting a U.S. Supreme Court Justice's opinion that it only takes one American parent to be a natural born citizen?

Why just one Justice’s opinion when you can have a whole case ruling that anyone born in the United States, regardless of the parents’ citizenship, is a natural born citizen? United States v. Wong Kim Ark settled this 113 years ago.

Birthers are either too ignorant to understand the explicit language of Wong Kim Ark or purposely pretend it doesn’t say what it clearly says.

I have provided previously in this thread Justice Scalia's opinion that it takes 2.

Did you even read the article you cited? The article was written by Lawrence B. Solum, and it mentions Justice Scalia as being a “new originalist” and cites Scalia on original meaning. Not once is Scalia quoted in regards to the natural born citizenship question.

I expect you to acknowledge and correct your mistake.

Originally posted by aptness
Why just one Justice’s opinion when you can have a whole case ruling that anyone born in the United States, regardless of the parents’ citizenship, is a natural born citizen? United States v. Wong Kim Ark settled this 113 years ago.

Birthers are either too ignorant to understand the explicit language of Wong Kim Ark or purposely pretend it doesn’t say what it clearly says.

And people argued it back then also, the Constitution does not define it but the Naturalization Act of 1790 did... "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States"

problem?

reply to post by ohhwataloser

What is the relevance of your post?

Why are you citing to me a provision of a statute that concerned births outside the United States 108 years before to the Wong Kim Ark decision?