• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Electoral College Wants Proof of Citizenship?

Mike

Well-known member
Vice presidential Candidate Wiley S. Drake Sr. to file in court asking to
de-certify Barack Obama because he has refused to release proof of being a Natural Born Citizen, thereby disqualifying Obama in his bid for the Office of President.

The recent Lawsuit in Washington State demanding their Secretary of State to vet the citizenship credentials of Barack Obama has spawned a slew of similar suits with new lawsuits filed and/or prepared in WA, FL, NC, CO, CA, OH, FL, CT, GA, TX, MI. Related lawsuits HI, US District.

As part of this effort, this group of citizens from states across the union made an outreach to the whole presidential slate asking each candidate for president and vice president to offer up a certified copy of their birth certificates and any related candidate declarations to be placed in a library made available to the public via a non-partisan web site.

At least one VP candidate Wiley S. Drake Sr. went the next step and agreed to file a lawsuit of his own to demand the disqualification of Barack Obama unless he can prove status as a ”Natural Born Citizen” as the constitution and federal statues demand and define.

In another unrelated action, though also aimed at forcing Obama to release proof or step down, 24 potential Electoral College electors are filing action Monday morning in court also demanding proof. A call is herein being issued to any elector in any state, especially democrat electors who would like to join that effort. Electors interested in adding their name to this lawsuit can contact Mr. Marquis who will put you in contact with the attorney handling that case.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Sandman said:
Oh where ohwhere can all the libs b. Oh where ohwhere can they be?

Mike this is like sticking needles under their finger nails. Come on in libs and saddle up. Surely the old judge or fff kolo or alice want to weigh in?

They'll just claim that it isn't important (which by default would mean the Constitution also isn't important as being a citizen is a Constitutional requirement) or they'll claim that he has already provided one (which ignores the fact that he provided only a Certificate of Live Birth, which is NOT a birth certificate.)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Could get interesting if for some reason Obama couldn't be seated....Besides tearing the country apart- probably into total rebellion- the Democrat controlled Congress/electoral college could pick Joe Biden-- or give you Repubs your wish to have the most Liberal member of Congress as President- Nancy Pelosi... :wink: :lol: :lol:
 

fff

Well-known member
Oh, I figure that Obama will take lessons from the Bush Administration and 1. be too busy to respond for a while. 2. Subpoena? Nobody who's anybody responds to those things anymore. Look at Harriet Myers, etc. and after Jan 20, it'll be a national security or executive privilege issue. Surely these ringwingnuts wouldn't expect Obama to do anything that the Bush Administration refused to do while they were in office? That would be......well, hypocritical. :lol:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Could get interesting if for some reason Obama couldn't be seated....Besides tearing the country apart- probably into total rebellion- the Democrat controlled Congress/electoral college could pick Joe Biden-- or give you Repubs your wish to have the most Liberal member of Congress as President- Nancy Pelosi... :wink: :lol: :lol:

Yes, there would be a hell of a mess. I'll guarantee you that Democrats will be looting, setting fires, destroying property, etc.... typical liberal reactionary measures - and all because Maobama and the DNC tried to pull off a grand fraud.

I don't see how Biden will have any claim, he's not the VP until Chairman Maobama is sworn in. There will have to be a new election, and the bill should be sent to the DNC.

However, we could all forget about this if we could see a valid birth certificate.... Why can't we?
 

Larrry

Well-known member
If blahblah is declared ineligible then these electoral votes would have to vote for another candidate that ran. In that case McCain would most likely come away with a landslide or unanimous electoral win much to the chagrin of the libs
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
fff said:
Oh, I figure that Obama will take lessons from the Bush Administration and 1. be too busy to respond for a while. 2. Subpoena? Nobody who's anybody responds to those things anymore. Look at Harriet Myers, etc. and after Jan 20, it'll be a national security or executive privilege issue. Surely these ringwingnuts wouldn't expect Obama to do anything that the Bush Administration refused to do while they were in office? That would be......well, hypocritical. :lol:

Defending Obama's stonewalling after blasting Bush would be.... well, hypocritical. Why doesn't he just bring a cert? Why did he lie about providing one? Why did he shut up the eyewitnesses who saw him born in Kenya? Why did he provide the cert that wasn't to an Annenberg group instead of an unbiased group? So many questions..... so many red flags....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Yep- folks-- for all of you that have e-mailed me in the last few days about Sandman being Frankie reincarnated-- you appear to be right.... :wink:
 

fff

Well-known member
Sandman said:
fff said:
Oh, I figure that Obama will take lessons from the Bush Administration and 1. be too busy to respond for a while. 2. Subpoena? Nobody who's anybody responds to those things anymore. Look at Harriet Myers, etc. and after Jan 20, it'll be a national security or executive privilege issue. Surely these ringwingnuts wouldn't expect Obama to do anything that the Bush Administration refused to do while they were in office? That would be......well, hypocritical. :lol:

You friggin libs are all alike mock the frame work of this country. You are a joke of the highest degree. How many years has it been since you sold your soul to the devil? you see you want to pass all this of as a joke just for the comfort of protecting your vote and your self will. Let me tell you something some people truly treasure what this country was founded on and care that we not sell out.

Do you relaize not one act performed by him will be official have you heard of the world courts and such. You are a babbling unstable lonely old lady thats for sure. I bet you can count all your friends and associates with out raising the first finger being as you have none.

:lol: :lol: World courts? I hope Bush is hauled before the "world courts" for war crimes. But that's probably too much to hope for.

For those of you clinging to your last shred of hope:

In Ohio, for example the judge (magistrate) said:

“(Neal) presented no witnesses but himself. From that testimony, it is abundantly clear that the allegations in [Neal]’s complaint concerning “questions” about Senator Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen” are derived from Internet sources, the accuracy of which has not been demonstrated to either Defendant Brunner or this Magistrate … Given the paucity of evidence… this Magistrate cannot conclude that Defendant Brunner has abused her discretion in failing to launch an investigation into Senator Obama’s qualifications to hold the office of President of the United States. ” See:
http://www.oxfordpress.com/hp/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/10/31/ws103108obamasuit.html

In Virginia, which was just ruled on Monday, the judge went further and said that the certificate of live birth was good proof that Obama was born in Hawaii, and there was NO proof presented that he was born anywhere else.

The Court made the following findings:

1. The Certification of Live Birth presented to the court is unquestionably authentic.

The court noted that the certification had a raised seal from the state of Hawaii, had a stamp bearing the signature of the registrar of vital statistics. The court found “wholly unpersuasive” any of the internet claims that the birth certificate was altered in any way. Furthermore, the document itself was accompanied by an affidavit from the State Health Director (of Hawaii) verifying that the document is an authentic certification of live birth. The court held that there could be no doubt that the document was authentic unless one believed that the state of Hawaii’s health department were in on an elaborate and complex conspiracy – and that there is not a shred of evidence that this is the case.

2. The Certification of Live Birth establishes that Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen.

The affidavit of the State Health Director states that the information on the CLOB is identical to the information on the “vault” copy of the birth certificate, and that both documents establish that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu. The Court noted that the CLOB is valid for all citizenship purposes. The court noted our argument that the COLB is not valid for determining citizenship, but referred us to Hawaiian law that states otherwise. “There is no difference between a certificate and a certification of live birth in the eyes of the state. For instance, either can be used to confirm U.S. citizenship to obtain a passport or state ID.” The court found that Hawaiian law makes the COLB valid for all purposes with the exception of determining native Hawaiian heritage for certain state and federal benefits. The court held that if Mr. Obama were born elsewhere and the birth registered in Hawaii, the “place of birth” line on the COLB would reflect that fact. The court stated that there could be no doubt that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii and that any argument to the contrary was fanciful and relied on completely unsubstantiated internet rumors.

3. For that reason, 8 U.S.C. §1401(g), which at the relevant time provided as follows:

“The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: ***(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:…..
is irrelevant to this matter, as Mr. Obama was conclusively born in Hawaii.

4. Mr. Obama did hold dual citizenship in the U.S. and Kenya until he became an adult. When Barack Obama Jr. was born Kenya was a British colony. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children: “British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.” In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UK. Obama’s UK citizenship became an Kenyan citizenship on Dec. 12, 1963, when Kenya formally gained its independence from the United Kingdom. The court noted that Chapter VI, Section 87 of the Kenyan Constitution specifies that:

1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963…

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.
Thus the court held that as a citizen of the UK who was born in Kenya, Obama’s father automatically received Kenyan citizenship via subsection (1). So given that Obama qualified for citizen of the UK status at birth and given that Obama’s father became a Kenyan citizen via subsection (1), thus Obama did in fact have Kenyan citizenship in 1963.

However, the court further held that the Kenyan Constitution prohibits dual citizenship for adults. Kenya recognizes dual citizenship for children, but Kenya’s Constitution specifies that at age 21, Kenyan citizens who possesses citizenship in more than one country automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship unless they formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya. The court held that there was no evidence that Mr. Obama has ever renounced his U.S. citizenship or sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4, 1982.

The court held that there was no legal requirement that Mr. Obama renounce his Kenyan citizenship or affirm his U.S. citizenship in order to maintain his status as a natural born citizen.

5. Mr. Obama did not lose his U.S. Citizenship based on the acts of his parents, including adoption by an Indonesian citizen. The Court held that no action taken by the parents of an American child can strip that child of his citizenship. The court cited to the 1952 Immigration & Nationality Act, Title III, Chapter 3, Sections 349 and 355, which was in effect in the late 1960s when Obama went to Indonesia, and which stated that a minor does not lose his US citizenship upon the naturalization of his parents or any other actions of his parents, so long as the minor returns to the US and establishes permanent US residency before the age of 21. Thus the adoption of Obama did not serve to strip him of his U.S. citizenship. The fact that Indonesian law does not allow dual citizenship is irrelevant, as U.S. law controls. Furthermore, the Court held that traveling on a foreign passport does not strip an American of his citizenship. The Court noted first that there was no evidence that Mr. Obama traveled on an Indonesian passport (Mr. Berg and others we reached out to for evidence never provided any evidence of this claim or any other of the claims we could have used some proof of.) Nonetheless, the court held that such travel does not divest an American of his citizenship.
 
Top