It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility Dama

page: 27
64
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
I do not have to be a constitutional lawyer to stand up for my country...we the people are the government and will not just sit back and trust lawyers and politicians to take care of it.
That is what being an American means...and just because Obama, his handlers and his followers got away with this doesn't make it right.

PS the founding fathers did not follow Traditional English law..they set up their own.
They purposely put Natural Born in the presidential requirements for a reason, not just for the fun of it....they did not want anyone who could be claimed by another country as president.....logic...go figure.




posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Best do more research and rely less on your "gut".

The history of the phrase and it's inclusion is not hard to discover.

And it's not what you believe it to be.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


www.federalistblog.us...

They appear to do a lot of work and I have used references from them in the past, they appear legit and accurate on everything I have checked

There is also this references;

In September of 2008, the Michigan Law Review published an article by Lawrence Solum, the John E. Cribbet Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, entitled, “Originalism and the Natural Born Citizen Clause”. The article focused upon the issue of whether John McCain was eligible to be President despite his birth in Panama. The article did not even mention Barack Obama. The direct citation is Michigan Law Review: First Impressions Vol. 107:22 2008.

The opening paragraph of Solum’s article states:

“What was the original public meaning of the phrase that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States? There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.’” www.michiganlawreview.org...

According to this reference, there is general agreement that the core meaning of the natural born citizen clause = born in the US to parents who are citizens. According to Solum back in September 08, anyone who doesn’t fit that description, like McCain, falls into a “twilight zone” of eligibility. This interesting choice of words mimics the US Supreme Court’s “doubts” expressed in Minor v. Happersett:

“At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...

Solum’s definition of the core meaning of natural born citizen seems to be taken directly from the SCOTUS in Minor. Solum then goes on to analyze McCain’s eligibility and concludes that there is no clear answer as to whether McCain was eligible to be President.

If McCain's eligibility was in question by professors of law, how is Obama's not when he held dual citizenship by right of birth until the age of 22?



edit on 15-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jameela
I agree that Obama is not eligible to be president according to the natural born laws, because his father is from Africa and not a citizen.

The birth certificate was shown, and this is fine he was born of an American mother on american soil, but this does not make him natural born.

That's all you need to be considered "natural born," whether or not the father is foreign born, a foreign national, etc. makes no difference. I've linked to the case law on this twice already in this thread and I've quoted from the case extensively as well. The only thing that could have hindered his status as a "natural born" citizen is if his dad was either an ambassador from a foreign land, or if his dad was part of an invading army on American soil. Neither of these things are the case, so he is natural born by virtue of being born on American soil.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifeInDeath

Originally posted by Jameela
I agree that Obama is not eligible to be president according to the natural born laws, because his father is from Africa and not a citizen.

The birth certificate was shown, and this is fine he was born of an American mother on american soil, but this does not make him natural born.

That's all you need to be considered "natural born," whether or not the father is foreign born, a foreign national, etc. makes no difference. I've linked to the case law on this twice already in this thread and I've quoted from the case extensively as well. The only thing that could have hindered his status as a "natural born" citizen is if his dad was either an ambassador from a foreign land, or if his dad was part of an invading army on American soil. Neither of these things are the case, so he is natural born by virtue of being born on American soil.


There seem to be too much question on the topic, even from Supreme Court case law.. for me to believe that the framers intended it to be anyone born in the united states.. old laws especially are very paternal and not maternal... everything comes from your father, most especially well over 100 years ago, the time when this was written..

and note also the difference between citizen and subject in English case law...

It may not be a very clear issue, but I do not believe the framers had in mind children born to foreign national fathers on American soil!


edit on 15-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
PS the founding fathers did not follow Traditional English law..they set up their own.
They purposely put Natural Born in the presidential requirements for a reason, not just for the fun of it....they did not want anyone who could be claimed by another country as president.....logic...go figure.

You are actually wrong about that, they did follow English Common Law, as do we to this day. That is why not only Wong Kim Ark, which I have cited, but countless other legal cases throughout American history refer back to English common law, and why every law student in America is trained in English common law in law school. It's one of the foundations of our legal system.


Originally posted by Jameela
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


www.federalistblog.us...

They appear to do a lot of work and I have used references from them in the past, they appear legit and accurate on everything I have checked

There is also this references;

In September of 2008, the Michigan Law Review published an article by Lawrence Solum, the John E. Cribbet Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, entitled, “Originalism and the Natural Born Citizen Clause”. The article focused upon the issue of whether John McCain was eligible to be President despite his birth in Panama. The article did not even mention Barack Obama. The direct citation is Michigan Law Review: First Impressions Vol. 107:22 2008.

The opening paragraph of Solum’s article states:

“What was the original public meaning of the phrase that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States? There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.’” www.michiganlawreview.org...

According to this reference, there is general agreement that the core meaning of the natural born citizen clause = born in the US to parents who are citizens. According to Solum back in September 08, anyone who doesn’t fit that description, like McCain, falls into a “twilight zone” of eligibility. This interesting choice of words mimics the US Supreme Court’s “doubts” expressed in Minor v. Happersett:

“At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...

Solum’s definition of the core meaning of natural born citizen seems to be taken directly from the SCOTUS in Minor. Solum then goes on to analyze McCain’s eligibility and concludes that there is no clear answer as to whether McCain was eligible to be President.

If McCain's eligibility was in question by professors of law, how is Obama's not when he held dual citizenship by right of birth until the age of 22?



edit on 15-4-2012 by Jameela because: (no reason given)

Leaving aside Obama's eligibility for a few moments, I've never understood the issue some have had to McCain's eligibility at all. McCain was born at the Coco Solo Naval Air Station within the Panama Canal Zone, which at the time was an unorganized U.S. territory. It was American soil. We owned it as much as we own other territories around the world. No, it was not a part of the then 48 states, nor Puerto Rico, but was still a part of the U.S.

Now, back to Obama, dual citizenship cannot and should not be a bar to anyone holding Presidential office for the simple fact that it is not something the U.S. government has any control over. A foreign state has the right to claim any criteria for its own citizenship status it wants. It could, if it wanted to, pass a law that says "all U.S. Citizens with a first name that begins with the letter "B" are now also citizens of the nation of Fredonia." Should such a law, passed by a foreign state then preclude ALL U.S. citizens whose names begin with a "B" from ever holding the office of the Presidency? No, obviously that would be silly. So foreign citizenship status should not be a bar to high office.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Jameela
 


Much of that info is incorrect.

Read this:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

The Vattel argument has been debunked, because there was not an English translation that used the phrase, "natural born citizen" in print at the time of the writing of the constitution.

On top of that, this is from the Georgia constitution, from 1732:

"Also we do for ourselves and successors declare by these presents that all and every the persons which shall happen to be born within the said province and every of their children and posterity shall have and enjoy all liberties franchises and immunities of free denizens and natural born subjects"

Why? Google "Jus Soli" to find out.



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
All birthers should read this:

www.state.gov...

What it says is that the 14th Ammendment is based on the principal of Jus Soli, which means citizenship is granted based on where you are born ad is unrelated to the status of your parents.

The colonies and then the states all had this sort of language in their constitutions and it was the understood definition of, "Natural Born Citizen".

Only birthers question this, as a rule, but it doesn't matter, as the law of the land, based on the concept of Jus Soli, as written in the 14th ammendment, and as clearly stated in the linked government document, is that if you were born in the US you are a Natural Born Citizen.

Click the link and read it for yourself. That's a .gov website.
edit on 15-4-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by reeferman
reply to post by bknapple32
 


Apparently you do not live by your signature's quote..

"If you cant explain it simply you dont understand it well enough."- Albert Einstein

its fraud.

simple enough..

he is ineligible..

simple enough..

the documents signed to put him on the ballot were criminal acts..

simple enough..


Evidence??? Simple question.....



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by reeferman
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


what the hell..

i cant believe this B$..

New Jersey is under the same rules for a Presidential Candidate..

it does not need be in their Laws..

for it is in the Constitution itself..

now because someone unidentified placed the fraudulent picture on the OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE website the

charges of fraud fall on them? ITS OBAMA ADMINISTRATION and was done so under HIS orders..

seriously.. my GOD..

I can't be the only one completely outraged by this..

disgusting flagrant abuse of power & slimy tip toeing around the fact it is a lie and he is/was ineligible..

TIME TO STORM THE GATES AMERICA & TAKE BACK TRUTH JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY.


ps I dont want to here any B$ racial flack.. my children are of mix race & I voted for "Change We can believe in"

yes we can ... became no we cant..


You do realize this was a hoax thread right??? Try reading the article instead of my sig...



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
I do not have to be a constitutional lawyer to stand up for my country...we the people are the government and will not just sit back and trust lawyers and politicians to take care of it.
That is what being an American means...and just because Obama, his handlers and his followers got away with this doesn't make it right.

PS the founding fathers did not follow Traditional English law..they set up their own.
They purposely put Natural Born in the presidential requirements for a reason, not just for the fun of it....they did not want anyone who could be claimed by another country as president.....logic...go figure.


Just because you think you are standing up for your country does not make you right in this case. When it comes to the law, the birthers are on the wrong side of the argument. And thats why Obama will remain in office..



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 





When it comes to the law, the birthers are on the wrong side of the argument. And thats why Obama will remain in office..


Obama will stay is office because any people who might be able to change that are gutless wonders.
You think lawyers like Van Irion are idiots? Our political system is corrupt and getting worse by the day. We sold our Constitution when Obama won the Presidency.

libertylegalfoundation.org...



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Delusional disorder is characterized by the presence of recurrent, persistent non-bizarre delusions .

Delusions are irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, that are highly resistant to change even when the delusional person is exposed to forms of proof that contradict the belief. Non-bizarre delusions are considered to be plausible; that is, there is a possibility that what the person believes to be true could actually occur a small proportion of the time.


Read more: Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults www.minddisorders.com...

--Off Topic, One Liners and General Back Scratching Posts--


edit on Mon Apr 16 2012 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
reply to post by bknapple32
 





When it comes to the law, the birthers are on the wrong side of the argument. And thats why Obama will remain in office..


Obama will stay is office because any people who might be able to change that are gutless wonders.
You think lawyers like Van Irion are idiots? Our political system is corrupt and getting worse by the day. We sold our Constitution when Obama won the Presidency.

libertylegalfoundation.org...


Yet not one shred of proof that hasnt been debunked exists to prove your point? Why? Cause he was born in Hawaii and is a legal US Citizen



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 


Those of us paying attention knew Barry Davis Obama was not constitutionally-eligible well before the the 2008 vote. The Obama drones and the ineffectual MSM turned on the light for me: WHAT A WICKED WORLD. I knew then evil was real and if evil was real so was "good."

I turned to the King James 1611 bible (don't read any other version--they are all corrupt including the "New" King James) and started reading the RIGHTEOUS words of God and have never looked back. I was racing down to the pit of hell and Jesus Christ saved me (for some reason....I didn't/don't get it). I was as wicked a sinner as there could be. I had broken ALL of God's 10 commandments and he still drew me in and saved my worthless self. Thank you Jesus. God is good.

The Dems are wicked. The Repubs are wicked. The so-called libertarians are wicked (yes Freemason/Rosicrucian Ron Paul is in on the globalist luciferian plan too).

Dems/libs whining about the evil Repubs/concervs/neocons.
Repubs/conservs whininig about the Dems/liberals.
Libertarians whining about everyone.


The point is to keep you distracted, fighting amongst yourselves WHILE THE GLOBALIST AGENDA CONTINUES UNDER FULL SATANIC STEAM. Look back to Nixon and what has happened. Carter. Reagan. Bush. Clinton. Bush. Obama. They flip-flop terms between Dems/Repubs to make you think you have a voice. YOU DON'T. They are ALL on the same team. Look back: we are closer than ever to WW3 and the coming one world government. The president of the U.S. is a PUPPET. They are all related in their bloodlines. They are all WICKED.

Even better (for satan), satan has you mocking Christianity thinking some steenkin' "aliens" are going to save you.

TURN OFF THE TV YOU FOOLS.

We are all appointed once to die.....today or tomorrow may be your last day.

Draw nigh to the Lord .....

Rev 3:20 Behold, I [Jesus] stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Please see the salvation link at the website below....I pray that you do.....

P.S. The U.S. president is president of the United States Corporation. He does not need to be constitutionally-eligible to be president of this corporation. See how deceived we have all been?

edit on 4/15/2012 by DissentFromDayOne because: none given



posted on Apr, 15 2012 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 

The only logical conclusion is: Team Obama, produce the "genuine article (BC)" if it exists or be prepared to answer to conspiracy to commit forgery charges. This would be a good time for a birth certificate from Kenya to appear.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
Team Obama, produce the "genuine article (BC)"


They have, but you ignore them!


This would be a good time for a birth certificate from Kenya to appear.


They already have appeared, and are fake, unlike the ones Obama got from the state of Hawaii, where he was born!



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   


7 FAM 1111 INTRODUCTION (CT:CON-314; 08-21-2009) a. U.S. citizenship may be acquired either at birth or through naturalization subsequent to birth. U.S. laws governing the acquisition of citizenship at birth embody two legal principles:

[b(1) Jus soli (the law of the soil) - a rule of common law under which
the place of a person’s birth determines citizenship. In addition to
common law, this principle is embodied in the 14th Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution and

(2) Jus sanguinis (the law of the bloodline) - a concept of Roman or civil law under which a person’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of one or both parents. This rule, frequently called
“citizenship by descent” or “derivative citizenship”, is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through
statute. As U.S. laws have changed, the requirements for
conferring and retaining derivative citizenship have also changed.


www.state.gov...

To recap:

The concept of citizenship based on where our born, not based on your parents nationality, "is embodied in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution". The concept of your nationality being based on, "the citizenship of one or both parents" is, "NOT embodied in the U.S. Constitution".

www.state.gov...

That's from This Section:
7 FAM 1110 ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES

From the document:

U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7 - Consular Affairs

From this .gov website:

www.state.gov...

It is what every judge has said, since the 14th Amendment and what 99% of them said before that, as it was based on the laws in all of the states/colonies which explicitly stated this.


edit on 16-4-2012 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Just remember, now that the precedent has been achieved, the next uneligible president elected may not be on the side of those that allowed Obama in to office. Good luck.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
Just remember, now that the precedent has been achieved, the next uneligible president elected


Funny how you still havent realised this thread is a hoax, and the heading of it was just a birther lie....



new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join