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: 4
64
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by jerryznv
 


OK you lost me....propaganda?

There was a trial in NJ about O's eligibility to be on the ballot...his lawyer said his bc being forged has no baring on his place on the ballot.


Your right...I did lose you...sorry!

I had two post's when I lost you...and they seemed to be understood well enough...so...maybe you might want to just grab a hold of my belt loop and follow me through this thread!


edit on 14-4-2012 by jerryznv because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Article II of our Constitution has a lot to say about how a would-be President is born. "Natural born Citizen" status requires not only birth on U.S. soil but also birth to parents who are both U.S. citizens by birth or naturalization. This unity of jus soli (soil) and jus sanguinis (descent) in the child at the time of birth assures that the child is born with sole allegiance (obligation of fidelity and obedience to government in consideration for protection that government gives (U.S. v. Kuhn, 49 F.Supp.407, 414 (D.C.N.Y)) and loyalty to the United States and that no other nation can lay any claim to the child's (later an adult) allegiance and loyalty. Indeed, under such birth circumstances, no other nation can legally or morally demand any military or political obligations from that person. The child, as he/she grows, will also have a better chance of not psychologically struggling with conflicted allegiance and loyalty to any other nation. Unity of citizenship and allegiance is based on the teachings of the law of nature (natural law) and the law of nations, as confirmed by ancient Greek and Roman law; American, European, and English constitutions, common and civil law, and statutes; and Vattel's, The Law of Nations, all of which the Founding Fathers read and understood. These sources have taught civilizations from time immemorial that a person gains allegiance and loyalty and therefore attachment for a nation from either being born on the soil of the community defining that nation or from being born to parents who were also born on that same soil or who naturalized as though they were born on that soil. It is only by combining at birth in the child both means to inherit these two sources of citizenship that the child by nature and therefore also by law is born with only one allegiance and loyalty to and consequently attachment for only the United States. Our Constitution requires unity of U.S. citizenship and allegiance from birth only for the Office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military, given the unique nature of the position, a position that empowers one person to decide whether our national survival requires the destruction of or a nuclear attack on or some less military measure against another nation or group.
reply to post by spoor
 



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by timetothink
His lawyer admitted he is not "natural born" according to constitution but that it doesn't matter because he is already on the ballot...

We are in the twilight zone...right?


Only because you keep making up things she never even said...

Why do you keep doing that?

It looks like birthers are getting desperate!
edit on 14-4-2012 by spoor because: (no reason given)

All the attorney admitted is that an online version of his birth certificate is not legally accepted proof of birthplace. It has nothing to do with being "forged" or even the President. If any of us scanned our birth certs and posted them online, there is no court in the nation that would accept that downloaded document as legal proof of anything.

People like to misrepresent words when it fits their agenda

edit on 14-4-2012 by TurkeyTots because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


If you cant be civil....

Then dont ask me questions...you are the one who is lost in this thread



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
To the dead brain:


She argued that it was not relevant to being placed on the ballot whether Mr. Obama is a “natural born Citizen,” where he was born, and whether he was born to U.S. citizen parents. She said that no law in New Jersey obligated him to produce any such evidence in order to get on the primary ballot.



Why wouldn't her retort be: "We already PRODUCED the evidence" ??


Go on.
Keep supporting this liar. This fraud. This man who is running this country down the toilet and who PROMISED transparency. The ONLY thing that's transparent is his inability to do what is asked.
He works for us. We're his bosses.
The minion.....ya know, the schleps who are scrounging up money to buy $4.10 gasoline and $3.00 heads of lettuce.
He has to answer to us! (while he doesn't take a pay cut like a decent president SHOULD do right now)



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink

Article II of our Constitution has a lot to say about how a would-be President is born. "Natural born Citizen" status requires not only birth on U.S. soil but also birth to parents who are both U.S. citizens by birth or naturalization.


Again you just make things up, article 2 actually states....


No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;

www.law.cornell.edu...

You must have a special "Birthers issue" of the US Constitution!



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 



Hill conceded this point after Apuzzo tried to call Brian Wilcox, an expert document analyst. He was ready to show that no one could rely on the PDF file as a substitute for a hard-copy long-form birth certificate. But Judge Masin said at once that neither he nor Secretary of State Kim Guadagno had ever seen a birth certificate, whether on paper, as a PDF file, or on the Internet. He told Apuzzo that calling Wilcox would be “premature.”

Then Masin turned to Hill and asked her directly:

[color=gold]Is it your legal position that the document on the Internet is irrelevant to this case?

Hill replied, “Yes.” Masin then asked:

[color=gold]And indeed you concede that Mr. Obama has not produced an alleged birth certificate to the Secretary of State.

Hill at first said, “It has been released nationally,” but then admitted that she did not know personally that Obama had given any such document to the Secretary of State, nor did she intend giving such a document to the court today. But she also argued, after Judge Masin asked her repeatedly, that Obama need not produce any evidence at all.



edit on Apr-14-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
i]reply to post by xuenchen
 


Thanks for posting. If I was Secretary of State, I'd be ashamed to sign a document that spelled endorsing "indorsing" twice.


I saw that too but thought perhaps that was the Old Queen's English way of writing it in court.

What twits.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by jerryznv
 


If you cant be civil....

Then dont ask me questions...you are the one who is lost in this thread



Okay...well then I will respectfully let you offer up your opinion...as I reserve mine!

So might I ask....do you have an official opinion on the authenticity of this report?

Or does that make me not civil?



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
To the dead brain:


She argued that it was not relevant to being placed on the ballot whether Mr. Obama is a “natural born Citizen,” where he was born, and whether he was born to U.S. citizen parents. She said that no law in New Jersey obligated him to produce any such evidence in order to get on the primary ballot.



Why wouldn't her retort be: "We already PRODUCED the evidence" ??


Go on.
Keep supporting this liar. This fraud. This man who is running this country down the toilet and who PROMISED transparency. The ONLY thing that's transparent is his inability to do what is asked.
He works for us. We're his bosses.
The minion.....ya know, the schleps who are scrounging up money to buy $4.10 gasoline and $3.00 heads of lettuce.
He has to answer to us! (while he doesn't take a pay cut like a decent president SHOULD do right now)

She wouldn't say that because they HADN'T produced legally acceptable evidence of it. To say that would be lying. An online document is not legally acceptable evidence. Period.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Alexandra M. Hill is an honors graduate of Georgetown Law School.

www.genovaburns.com...

This gives her considerably more traction as a lawyer than Orly Taitz.



I notice that nobody has actually provided her exact words regarding the internet image of the Obama b/c. What she did say was that, up to now, nothing requires Obama to provide his b/c to the State of New Jersey in order to get on the ballot. I seriously doubt that she used the word 'forgery'.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 


You said this:


Well written...seems legit...what are the chances of this being a campaign push? Just saying...thing are heating up in the Republican race...maybe this could be underground propaganda! I am no Obama supporter...and I would love to see him go...but I have to consider this might be something other than what is seems to be!


I said this:




reply to post by jerryznv The trial did happen and that was the lawyers defense, still no word on the decision from the judge.


you said this:




This is the first of this I have heard....do you have a link? I am talking about this being propaganda from the republican party...I wasn't aware of an trial about that!


Why would you say this is the first you heard of it when that is what the thread is about?? The link is in the first post....I replied to you that it is NOT propaganda...

Answered you without being rude...see how that is done?



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
And indeed you concede that Mr. Obama has not produced an alleged birth certificate to the Secretary of State.


How many previous Presidents have given copies of their birth certificates to every secretary of state? Or even been asked for them?



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
If this is true, it will be Obama's big G-U-L-P on his way back to 7-11 !!!








Now that was funny. Mean. But funny!



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
Answered you without being rude...see how that is done?

I think you mean "without being rude until the last line".



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


Just because you get away with something for 3 1/2 years doesn't mean it's legal...it means people are letting him get away with it..quit the racist bull#...its all you ever say....boring.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shoonra
I notice that nobody has actually provided her exact words regarding the internet image of the Obama b/c.


if they had done that it would mean this thread would have been moved to the "hoax" bin, as the headline claim is just a hoax!



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate
Signs affidavit declaring long-form, hospital-generated document absent

Just thought I would add this,
www.wnd.com...



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by spoor
 


I like how you edit my quotes also....learn that from Ayres and the Weatherman?

The whole quote was from the lawyers website......who fights for the constitution and is the lawyer involved in the case in this thread....grow up already.



posted on Apr, 14 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bigfoot12714
Does anyone think it may be dangerous to remove this president with all the racial tension in our country right now? This could be the tipping point...



Makes one wonder.

But do you really think this is racial thing? I mean, really?

I'd be this pissed off if Bush did the same thing. Or Clinton. Or Ron Paul.

The POTUS, above and beyond anyone else in this entire country, are supposed to be exemplary role models.
Lying about your birth place ain't a good start (neither is staining your interns dress or lying about weapons of mass destruction but this by far....tops them all)



new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join