Time To Tell The Truth

Natural Born Citizen 

(Obama is not one of these)

• A. U.S. Const. 14th Amend., Sec. 1      

•   
• B. U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) 
•  
• C. Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)

• A. U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)    

•  
• B. Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)

It has nothing to do with whether Obama is a citizen or not.  It has to do with the qualification of a citizen if they want to be President of the U.S.  The term in the Constitution is “natural born Citizen”.  There is a difference.  Different lawmakers over the years have tried to amend this requirement 26 different times.     "natural born" means that BOTH parents must have been U.S. Citizens at the time of the child's birth and for the child to have been born on U.S. Territory.

Up to today, every President of the U.S. has been a "natural born Citizen", besides the founding fathers who had to "grandfather" themselves in because when this country was born, no person had parents "born in the U.S.".  

Obama campaigning for his cousin in August 2006.

************  News Flash that did not get reported  **************

The current 110th Senate, including Obama and Clinton, clearly understand that BOTH parents must have been U.S. Citizens in order for a candidate to be a "natural born Citizen" and eligible for President Of The United States (POTUS).

April 10, 2008 Senate Resolution defining their understanding of "natural born"

here's the actual link:   http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200804/041008c.html

This is so important that a new page has been dedicated to this item alone and it was added as legal reference D in the chart above.  See Proof of the Truth page on this site. 

Proof of the Truth

Yes, the subject is "McCain's natural born status",

but the same standard applies to Obama.

This is so profound, we can ignore everything else!

Will the Senate now ignore one of their own resolutions?  They did.

Will the Senate now apply another standard to Obama?  They did.

Proof of the Truth

This is supporting and defending our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.  Allowing this exception to our Constitutional requirement for POTUS would set a frightful precedent.  It would make way for just about any foreigner with allegiance to other countries to come in and become POTUS.

As Beckwith states on his site www.TheObamaFile.com, The Law of Nations and Rule of Law concludes:

"All U. S. military personnel and every other American under oath to protect and defend the

 U. S. Constitution will be duty bound to remove the fraudulent usurper.  This situation is

 REGARDLESS of votes, electors, media blackouts, high profile embarrassments, state court

 decisions, supreme court actions or inaction, birth certificates real or forged, or any other

 documents -- Obama can NOT LEGALLY BE The US President."

Obama has already told the truth.

Obama has admitted he is not a "natural born Citizen" as required by the Constitution to be President by admitting his father was a Kenyan Citizen; not an American.

The problem is that the DNC, the Federal Election Committee, every Secretary of State, every Electoral College voter, every News Media in the U.S. and now the Congress hasn't acted on what Obama has admitted to and do what they are supposed to do which is disqualify him as a candidate.  The question now is will the Supreme Court justices do the same?  Why did 8 of the 9 Justices meet with Obama and Biden privately before the inauguration?  This is against all legal precedent and judicial conduct.  No judge is supposed to meet privately with a defendent without attorneys present. 

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents (plural) who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

(emphasis added)

This eligibility requirement apparently is one of the changes Obama beleives needs to be made.  The Constitution has brought us this far and we need to uphold it.  26 times different lawmakers have tried to change the eligibility requirement of "natural born Citizen" of the U.S. Presidency but all have failed. 

The last two times was in Jan 2005 and April 2005 so there are current Senators in office, including Obama, that know this is a problem with Obama's eligibility.  It is their duty to uphold the Constitution as they swore to do and object to the Electoral College votes for any candidate that does not meet all three eligibility requirements for POTUS. 

There is a time and place for objecting to a Presidential candidate and it is when the President of the Senate opens up the Electoral College votes, reads them outloud for a count, and when Congress votes to certify them.  Any and all Senators and House Members have a duty to object to any and all Electoral votes that do not meet the eligibility requirement.  Yes, it is a shame that the DNC did not do their duty in vetting the candidate before it got to this point.  Now it is a shame that not even two members of Congress were willing to stand for the Constitution and challenge a single Electoral College vote.  The president of the Senate, Cheney, did not even ask if there were any objections!

June 2006 taxpayer paid trip to Kenya where Obama campaigned for

his cousin Raila Odinga

to become President of Kenya

Original Vault copy of birth certificate

Obama/Dunham marriage license

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license

Soetoro adoption records

Punahou School records

Selective Service Registration

Occidental College records

Passport from Pakistan he traveled on in the 80's

Columbia College records

Columbia thesis

Harvard College records

Harvard Law Review articles

Baptism certificate

Medical records

Illinois State Senate records

Illinois State Senate schedule

Law practice client list

University of Chicago scholarly articles

His practicing of his Islamic faith as late as June 2006? 

His web-site claims he has never practiced the Islamic faith.

Perhaps he is practicing Al Takeyya which allows a Muslim to lie if they are infiltrating their enemy's government in order to destroy it.

Three 2008 Presidential Candidates were not eligible.

Non-binding Senate Resolution on "natural born Citizen" April 10, 2008.

"support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; and bear true faith and allegiance to the same..."

"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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

Candidates for POTUS must prove that they meet the three Constitutional prerequisites for the office of President.

The candidate known as Barack Hussein Obama II has yet to prove, using a certified long-form Birth Certificate, (which would simply show the nationality of his father) that he meets the “natural born Citizen of the United States” prerequisite.  Electors and Congress have a sworn obligation to support and defend our Constitution…that includes certifying that Obama is a natural born Citizen and never relinquished his U.S. Citizenship when he went to Indonesia to attend school at an early age.

If the candidate known as Barack Hussein Obama II cannot prove he meets the Constitutional pre-requisites, then the Electoral College and/or Congress should support and defend the Constitution of the United States by refusing to elect this man President Elect and then President of the United States. 

Update: Congress wasn't given the chance to object because the President of the Senate (Dick Cheney) at the time of counting the electoral votes did not ask if there were any objections even though it is required by law for him to do so.  He also would not recognize one of the Congressmen who was waving his arms trying to get recognized to make an objection.

Obama says he idols Malcolm X who said:

"You will never get real freedom and recognition between black and white people in this country without destroying the country, without destroying the present political system, without destroying the present economic system, without rewriting the entire constitution. It will be a complete destruction of everything that America supposedly stands for."

 

Calling for “destroying the present political system” and “rewriting the entire constitution” made Malcolm X a domestic enemy of the Constitution of the United States. 

The candidate known as Barack Hussein Obama II says:

"Only Malcolm X’s autobiography seemed to offer something different. His repeated acts of self-creation spoke to me. The blunt poetry of his words. His unadorned insistence on respect.  He promised a new and uncompromising order, martial in its discipline."

 

Obama has already said that he wants to change the Constitution.  He's already said it is an imperfect and flawed document.

Obama has also said:

"But my journey is part of a larger journey - one shared by all who’ve ever sought to…bring an Empire to its knees."

Does anyone reading this want to bring this empire to its knees?  What other empire would he be speaking of?  Does anyone see the "foreign or domestic threat" yet?

Obama introduced himself to a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin in July 2008 as a "citizen of the world".  Our constitution doesn't call for a "citizen of the world" to be our president.  It calls for a "natural born Citizen" of the United States of which Obama is not. 

A Citizen of the World can't serve as our POTUS, because many parts of the World want to destroy the U.S. specifically the part of the World that his father, his cousin Raila Odinga and all of his family members come from.

Wake up O Sleeping Nation, Wake Up.

Public Law 110-430 changed the date of the electoral vote in Congress in 2009 from January 6 to January 8. This date change is effective only for the 2008 presidential election.

The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes (Congress may pass a law to change the date). The President of the Senate is the presiding officer. If a Senator and a House member jointly submit an objection, each House would retire to its chamber to consider it. The President and Vice President must achieve a majority of electoral votes (270) to be elected. In the absence of a majority, the House selects the President, and the Senate selects the Vice President. If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State would be counted in Congress.

There's the answer:

On January 8, 2009,

it only takes one Senator and one House member

to jointly submit an objection to the

President of the Senate

that the candidate,

Barack Hussein Obama II,

does not meet the eligibility requirement

of "natural born Citizen" as required by

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5

of the U.S. Constitution.

Barack Obama

Barack Hussein Obama

Barack Hussein Obama II

Barack Hussein Obama Jr

Barry Obama

Barry Soetoro

Barack Soetoro

Barack Hussein Soetoro

Barry Hussein Soetoro

Barrack Soetoro

Barack Dunham

Barack Hussein Dunham

Barry Dunham

No wonder he can't find his original birth certificate.

Wait a minute, didn't he affirm on his Illinois Bar application that he has never used another name besides Barack Obama?

Isn't that perjury?  Isn't that grounds for disbarment?  Is that a felony?  Felons are not allowed to serve in the Executive branch. 

It appears that Obama

has created his own government entity.

Look at Wikipedia's definition of the ".gov"

top-level domain and who can use it.

Wikipedia - .gov

He has done a good job of "branding".

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

.gov (pronounced “dot-gov”) is a sponsored top-level domain restricted for use by government entities in the United States of America. The .gov domain is administered by the General Services Administration (GSA), an independent agency of the federal government. The URL for registration services is http://www.dotgov.gov [1]

The U.S. is the only country that has a government-specific top-level domain in addition to its country-code top-level domain, due to the origins of the Internet as a US Federal Government-sponsored research network (see NSFNET and ARPANET). Other countries typically use a second-level domain for this purpose, e.g., .gov.ar for Argentina, .gov.au for Australia, .gc.ca for Canada, .gouv.fr for France, .gov.in for India, .gov.my for Malaysia, .govt.nz for New Zealand, .guv.ro[1] for Romania, .gov.uk for the United Kingdom, .gub.uy for Uruguay, .gov.za for South Africa.

Some U.S. federal agencies use .fed.us rather than .gov. The Department of Defense and its subsidiary organizations use .mil. Some U.S. governmental entities use other domains, such as the use of .com domains by the United States Postal Service (which uses both usps.gov and usps.com for the same location, although it only advertises the .com version) and the United States Army’s recruitment website (goarmy.com, this trend is repeated at the recruitment websites of the other branches of the U.S. Military).

Additionally, some technically private organizations having some formal association with the federal government make use of .gov, such as the quasi-public Federal Reserve System.[2]

All governments in the U.S. are allowed to apply for use of .gov, such as atlantaga.gov for the city of Atlanta, loudoun.gov for the county of Loudoun, Virginia and georgia.gov for the U.S. state of Georgia. This was not always true; under an earlier policy, only federal agencies were allowed to use the domain, and agencies beneath cabinet level were required to use subdomains of their parent agency. There is a lack of consistency in addresses of state and local government sites, with some using .gov, some .us, some using both (the Commonwealth of Virginia uses both www.state.va.us and www.virginia.gov for the same location) and still others in .com, .org or other TLDs.

The Story Behind www.Change.gov

 Even in this youthful picture, he seems to say,

"I've got this whole thing figured out."

At the age of 10, he wrote a paper "I want to be a president."

He helped his cousin try to become President of Kenya in 2006.  They failed but his cousin forced his way into becoming Prime Minister of Kenya in April 2008.

And in his adulthood, he seems to say,

"I am above the Constitution."

Click the link below and listen for yourself what

Barack Hussein Obama II has to say about the

U.S. Constitution of which as Senator

has already taken an oath to uphold and protect.

How can he have taken the Oath as Senator and soon to take the Oath of Office of president when he recently made the following statements?

Click the link below and listen for yourself...

Obama says Constitution is an imperfect and fundamentally flawed document

Five man Framing Committee presenting their draft to Congress

 Does that sound like something a U.S. President should say?

American Citizens need to wake up.

They need to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

While every President and Vice President to date (as of 2008) is widely believed to have been a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution in 1789, or else born in the United States, there have been some presidential candidates who were either born or suspected of having been born outside the U.S. states.^[18] This does not necessarily mean that they were ineligible, only that there was some controversy (usually minor) about their eligibility, which may have been resolved in favor of eligibility.^[19]

• Chester A. Arthur (1829-1886), 21st president of the United States, might have been born in Canada.^[20] This was never demonstrated by his political opponents, although they raised the objection during his vice-presidential campaign. He was born to a U.S.-citizen mother and a father from Ireland who was eventually naturalized as a U.S. citizen. Arthur was sworn in as president when President Garfield died after being shot.

• George Romney (1907-1995), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather had emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's monogamous parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States with him in 1912. Romney never received Mexican citizenship, because the country's nationality laws had been restricted to jus-sanguinis statutes due to prevailing politics aimed against American settlers.^[21]

• Barry Goldwater (1909-1998) was born in Phoenix, in what was then the Arizona Territory. During his presidential campaign in 1964, there was a minor controversy over Goldwater's having been born in Arizona when it was not yet a state.^[20]

• Lowell Weicker (1931-), the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France to parents who were U.S. citizens. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.^[22]

• Róger Calero (1969-) was born in Nicaragua and ran as the Socialist Worker's Party Presidential Candidate in 2004 and 2008. In 2008, Calero appeared on the ballot in Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Vermont.^[23]

• John McCain (1936-), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and was the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents.^[24] In March 2008 McCain was held eligible for Presidency in an opinion paper by former Solicitor General Ted Olson and Harvard Law Professor Laurence H. Tribe.^[25] In April 2008 the U.S. Senate approved a non-binding resolution recognizing McCain's status as a natural born citizen.^[26] In September 2008 a Federal District judge said obiter that it was "highly probable" that McCain was a natural born citizen of the United States owing to the citizenship legislation existing at the time.^[27][28] These views have been criticized by Gabriel J. Chin, Professor of Law at the University of Arizona, who claims that McCain was at birth a citizen of Panama and was only retroactively declared a born citizen under 8 U.S.C. § 1403.^[29]   His birth certificate says he was born at Colono Hospital in Colono; not on the Naval Air Station.

• Barack Obama (1961-) was possibly born in Honolulu, Hawaii to a U.S. citizen mother and a father from Kenya who was not a U.S. citizen. Before and after the 2008 presidential election, which Obama won, the argument was made that he was not a natural-born citizen. On June 12, 2008, the Obama presidential campaign launched a website to counter what it described as smears by his opponents^[30][31], including these challenges to his eligibility. The most prominent issue raised against Obama was the assertion that he was not actually born in Hawaii. At least one lawsuit conceded that he was a citizen by virtue of birth in Hawaii, but argued that he was nevertheless not a natural-born citizen because of his entitlement to dual citizenship (through his father) at birth. As of December 16, 2008 no court has agreed with any of these challenges.  There are cases scheduled for conference at the Supreme Court.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has never specifically determined the meaning of "natural born Citizen," they have occasionally considered the matter in passing.

• Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857): In regard to the "natural born citizen" clause, the dissent states that it is acquired by place of birth (jus soli), not through blood or lineage (jus sanguinis): "The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, 'a natural born citizen.' It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth." (Much of the majority opinion in this case was overturned by the 14th Amendment in 1868.)

• Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872): The Court discussed the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: "the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign states, born within the United States."

• United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898): It was held that a person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. to non-citizens who "are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity" is automatically a citizen, per the Fourteenth Amendment. The majority also mentioned what the situation was prior to the Fourteenth Amendment and the U.S. Constitution, by quoting Emerich de Vattel: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights." Dissenters in Wong Kim Ark wrote: "it is unreasonable to conclude that 'natural born citizen' applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances; and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay, or other race, were eligible to the presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not."^[13] The majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark did not explicitly disagree with this comment of the dissenters, and instead merely observed that: "The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words [citizen and natural born citizen], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.'"^[13]

• Perkins v. ELG, 307 U.S. 325 (1939): The U.S. Supreme Court concluded that Marie Elizabeth Elg who was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized in the United States, had not lost her birthright U.S. citizenship because of her removal during minority to Sweden and was entitled to all the rights and privileges of that U.S. citizenship. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the decree that declared Miss Elg "to be a natural born citizen of the United States."

• Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964): The Court voided a statute that provided that a naturalized citizen should lose his United States citizenship if, following naturalization, he resided continuously for three years in his former homeland. "We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native-born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the 'natural born' citizen is eligible to be President."

• Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971): Reviews the history of citizenship legislation and of the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause.

• Slaughterhouse Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872): The Court discussed the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: "the phrase 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign states, born within the United States."

Three United States District Courts have ruled that private citizens do not have standing to challenge the eligibility of candidates to appear on a presidential election ballot:

Robinson v. Bowen, 567 F. Supp. 2d 1144 (N.D. Cal. 2008);

Hollander v. McCain, 2008WL2853250 (D.N.H. 2008);

Berg v. Obama, 08-04083 (E.D. Pa. 2008)^[14].

In dicta in each of these cases, it was also opined that if the plaintiffs did have standing, the likelihood of success on the merits (which is part of the legal test for the issuance of a preliminary injunction) would be low. The opinion in one of the cases also cited to a statutory method,^[15] by which the eligibility of the President-elect to take office may be challenged in Congress.

More than two dozen proposed constitutional amendments have been introduced in Congress to relax the restriction.^[32]

Two of the more well known were introduced by Representative Jonathan Bingham in 1974, to allow for Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to become eligible,^[33] and the Equal Opportunity to Govern Amendment by Senator Orrin Hatch in 2003, to allow eligibility for Governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger.^[32] The Bingman amendment would have also made clear the eligibility of those born abroad to U.S. parents,^[33] while the Hatch one would have allowed those who have been naturalized citizens for twenty years to be eligible.^[32]

^{In 2005, two amendments to the Constitution of the United States were proposed to permit persons having been citizens of the United States for many years but not being natural-born citizens to hold the Office of President. Neither bill got any further action beyond that year.}

^{H.J.RES.2, introduced on January 4, 2005, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI-14) and cosponsored by Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA-27), would require 20 years of citizenship for naturalized Americans to be eligible to hold the Office of President.[6]}

^{H.J.RES.42, introduced on April 14, 2005, sponsored by Rep. Vic Snyder (D-AR-2) and cosponsored by Christopher Shays (R-CT-4), would require 35 years of citizenship for naturalized Americans to be eligible to hold the offices of President and Vice President.[7]}

Is it possible to have an ineligible President Elect? 

Section 3 of the 20th Amendment to U.S. Constitution states what happens if there is an ineligible President Elect.  So apparently in 1933, Congress and the People of the U.S. foresaw that it was possible to have an ineligible President Elect and passed the 20th Amendment to ensure an ineligible candidate for President Elect could be dealt with.

If Obama is certified on January 8, 2009 by Congress and becomes the President Elect and then on January 20th becomes President and is later proven not to be a "natural born Citizen", the nation will be in what is called a Constitutional Crisis.  Everything he does in office is invalid; treaties, appointments, Executive Orders, all congressional bills signed, etc... 

Just take Obama's word that his father was not a U.S. Citizen and do what is right.  Congress should have declared the Electoral Votes for him as invalid.  The same holds true for McCain and Calero.

Congress and the States need to stop wasting the time and money of taxpayers and putting this country into this situation.  They need to pass a law that only permits eligible candidates to be on a ballot.  It is not rocket science.