Search this Topic:
May 20 11 5:53 PM
May 25 11 6:30 PM
FOR PROOF THAT THE SIGNITURE IS A FORGERY.
Jun 5 11 9:40 AM
Recall how I was the first to predict that Obama will not finish his term.Now you have two items leading to an indictment for fraud. A fraudulent birth certifcate and a fraudulent social security number.The White House counsel resigns and there isnt a single news item mentioning his sole task was to prevent revelations about the birth certificate. His resigning means that supposedly he can not be deposed because he now reverts back to being the lawyer.Biden will be replaced by Hillary Clinton as VP. Probably with 6 months to go.The Democratic Party will pull another Lautenberg ie replacing a terribly flawed candidate with a new one at all costs.Obama critic coming closer to Social Security records?
Judge advances FOIA dispute over application for Connecticut number
Much information has been reported – and much more still is being sought – about Barack Obama's original birth documentation, and whether it reveals his eligibility to be president under the Constitution's requirement those in the Oval Office be a "natural born Citizen."
But under the radar of most new organizations a case has been moving forward in Washington, D.C., through which California attorney Orly Taitz is seeking the original application for Obama's Social Security number, a document that could reveal a multitude of factors about the president's early life.
U.S. District Court Chief Judge Royce Lamberth this week rejected a defense concern over procedure in the dispute, and Taitz told WND today the case has moved into discovery and she can issue subpoenas to those holding the documentation she is seeking.
Corsi says move 'marks beginning' of end of Obama eligibility cover-up
Corsi said he believes the scenario developed this way:
Obama and Valerie Jarrett wanted to continue the stonewalling strategy they had used since 2008, relying on the short-form Certification of Live Birth and having Hawaii DOH claim that long-form birth certificate copies were no longer available, not even to Obama.Obama and Jarrett had planned to use the forged birth certificate as an October surprise, just prior to the November 2012 election, if the pressure on Obama's eligibility remained an obstacle to his reelection.But this strategy was overruled by White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley. He determined that a birth certificate, if it existed, had to be released now – to prevent the issue from gaining momentum.
"I believe both Daley and Bauer believed until recently that Obama was telling the truth and that the birth certificate was really there in the Hawaii DOH," Corsi said. "But when they realized that the last-modified date stamp on the computer file of the Obama birth certificate – put up on the White House website on April 27 – was that very same morning, it contradicted the idea the file was an earlier scan of the original Obama birth certificate in the Hawaii vault log book. What modifications to the file were being made at the White House? Was the file originally created at the White House? Why wasn't the file made and closed in Hawaii where the scan of the original document was supposedly made? Bauer realized the White House was lying to say a scan of the original document was being released."
Corsi said he's convinced that now top White House operatives such as Daley and Bauer believe there is no document in the Hawaii Department of Health that can withstand forensic analysis.
He said the legal challenges to a specific document that has been made public could be harder to deflect than a lawsuit generally alleging an ineligibility on Obama's part.
Corsi also said he believes top operatives in the Democratic Party "have concluded that if Obama does not kill the birther issue soon, he may have to resign – with the likelihood that Hillary Clinton will be elevated into the DNC presidential candidate in 2012."
Corsi suggested Republicans also are staying away from the "birther" issue because they have reached the same conclusion – and the RNC does not want "to have to face Hillary in the 2012 presidential election in the wake of an Obama resignation."
"What forced the release of the birth certificate on April 27 was the coming publication of the [Where's the Birth Certificate?] book," said Corsi.
Jun 6 11 12:08 PM
Jun 6 11 1:45 PM
Jun 8 11 5:59 PM
Jun 8 11 6:06 PM
Jun 8 11 6:33 PM
Jun 9 11 12:57 PM
Jun 9 11 1:21 PM
Jun 11 11 3:16 PM
Jun 12 11 10:16 AM
Jun 14 11 7:22 AM
Recall the pathology's principal symptom is it wont allow its victims to accept categorical proof of that which blows up their beliefs. - marceltry applying your above sentence to your refusal to accept the conclusion of the two supreme court judges who AGREED WITH YOU on the merits of the wong kim ark case - that the decision meant that wong kim ark was a natural born citizen eligible to be president despite having two parents who were not (and never could become) citizens...once you are able to say, "i was misled by some crazy right wing bloggers who argued that citizenship is conferred by the father and now that i examine the facts of the 1898 decision, i see that i was incorrect", THEN i'll be able to consider you as not in the grip of your pathology and move on to a rational discussion of this new "evidence" (such as it is)...
Jun 14 11 8:06 AM
Obama forgers admit they produced phony documents
Obama forgers admit they produced phony documents
Radical supporters of president 'punked birthers'
Posted: June 13, 20118:00 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi© 2011 WND
NEW YORK – Radical supporters of Barack Obama have openly admitted to forging Obama birth certificates, going so far as to identify themselves by their usernames to claim responsibility on Internet blogs.
They have described their activities as satire, a tactic designed to deflect criminal charges that might otherwise be filed against them for producing fraudulent official government documents.
As WND has reported in a three-part series, published here, here, and here, scanner expert Doug Vogt has filed criminal charges with the FBI, alleging that the Obama birth certificate released by the White House April 27 was fraudulently created
Jun 14 11 8:56 AM
Jun 14 11 12:06 PM
Your supposed rock of Gibraltar immovable stone of truth has already been placed in its proper perspective. It is iorrelevant to the qualifications for Commander inC hief no matter what any judge or courts aid because said court has ZERO jurisdiction over qualifications for commander in chief. - marceli'm beginning to believe that your pathology has affected your sanity... of COURSE the supreme court is the final interpreter of the constitution... if not them, then WHO?The House of representatives can remove from judicial overview any area of law they vote to do so. I have explained this to vicitms like yourself several times but the pathology blinds you to my statement. Qualification for CIC isnt a constitutional issue. If the court oiutlawed background checks as unconstitutional it wouldnt stop background checks. Whats interesting is there was ZERO background Check on Obama. Martial law isnt included as constitutional in the law because it violates all sorts of normal interpretations of privacy and freedom. But it IS covered and allowed as an emergency measure under the constitution. Internment camps were approved by the Supreme Court AND the ACLU in WW2....don't you remember 2000?... the supreme court determined who would be the freakin' president... Thats because it was asked to do so. The Florida Supreme Court (liberal majority) INTERVENED in spite of not being asked. That is whay the USSC ruled. Liberals hated the decision and refuse to recognize it. Exhibit A of how liberals , immersed in their pathology do not recognize things courts pass they dont like. Neither does Obama. see Obamacare and his plant on the court who researched how Clinton could evade congressional oversight and even funding restrictions. This is what liberals do.BTW listen to all those people who want Clarence Thomas recuse himself from anticipated Obamacare cases because of his wifes lobby connection but they want the gay judge who refused to reveal his live in relationship that benefits him personally financially to stay in the judges seat here in calif.none of your right wing loonies have raised the kind of challenge to obama's qualifications in light of his parent's A) non-citizenship (father, not in dispute) or B) mother (according to marcel, not old enough to confer citizenship)... You are absolutely correct. So far. The evidence is overhwelming now that fraud has been committed. Notice, literally, today Obama is quoted as saying his family would be "absolutely cool" with only one term. There is no doubt they know he is exposed and furthermore I will pedict again he will NOT run for reelection. Hillary will be somehow placed into position to run. They will be torn between giving her enough time to get on official ballots but not enough time for the Republicans to switch grears to expose her as another Alynskiite. This has been the plan all along. There was talk of Cuomo replacing The Village Idiot as Veep. That stopped the day Obama released the fraud doc.as for B), you consistently refuse to cite any law, guideline, rule or regulation enshrining this doctrine and as to A), the wong kim ark case, ALREADY decided by a previous supreme court, decided this issue ("natural born")...I have but you refuse to acknowledge that I have. You still havent even commented on what is now about 100 proven details indicating forgery. - marceland i won't, not until i know i am debating someone not TOTALLY in the grip of his pathology... in this case, that means acknowledging the role of the supreme court and the precedent set in the wong kim ark decision...Wong Kim, at best, referes to qualifying to getting food stamps and other freebies. Like college tuition for illegals.
Jun 14 11 4:34 PM
Jun 16 11 9:29 AM
Wong Kim, at best, referes to qualifying to getting food stamps and other freebies. Like college tuition for illegalsbullshit - you are just making that up... there WERE no such things as food stamps in 1898... and it had nothing to do with "rights of illegals"... i have provided you with links to the decision and the dissent... you just make these wildly innacurate claims and provide NOTHING... the wong kim ark case was very simple... he was born here of two parents who were not citizens... he went to china and upon his return, he was admitted back into the country, his citizenship recognized... a few years later (after the passage of the chinese exclusion act) he visited china and this time, upon his return, he was denied entry, based on the act... when it got before the supreme court, two justices made your argument, that ark was never a natural born citizen, because his parents were neither one of them citizens (nor, bacause of the act, could they ever BECOME citizens) and so, he could be denied re-entry at that later time... the other six judges said, "no", that ark was a natural born citizen at birth, simply by dint of place of birth and he could never lose that citizenship (unless he renounced it)... harlan and the chief justice wrote in their dissent that they were dismayed by their colleague's interpretation, as that elevated ark to a natural born citizen who could be president, whereas a child born of two united states citizens who happened to be overseas at time of birth, could never acceed to the office of president...and that is the case, marcel... if you say differently, CITE something - some academic scholar who, after 1898, defines the parameters of that case and the results of it's decision differently... don't just make stuff up about food stamps (it really makes you look pathologically ignorant)... I embolded the section in your own response. THAT is what that case your position relies on entirely was about. Reentry to the country. I will say it one more time. Its too bad you want to take my reference to food stamps literally but such responses reveal a symptom of the pathology; sifting through the facts only to select one and then re-interpret it customized to what you want it all to be about. To take an anaolgy as fact and then create arguments afgaisnt the fact you reinterpreted. To do that is a symptom. This may come as a shock, but because you are simply a citizen doesnt mean you would be entitled to be head of the CIA or CIC. Certain positions related to national security and a whole bunch of other things have specific parameters to enable elligibility for consideration. Commander in Chief of all the armed forces is one. Get over your WongKim fixation as being all that matters when giving someone the power to order the air force to attack Libya.[special note- the Libya conflict wasnt happening at the time of the WongKim case] Its up to you to get that regardless of the definition of citizen it isnt what was considered Natural Born at the time of the Constitution. Our entire disputing of the facts in this item boils down to your view that a person who has to sue to be able to reenter the country is certainly elligible, the very next week, to be granted top security clearence. Now deny you are saying just that and you accomplish the Pathology trifecta. You wonder why he have a traitor as president dissing every ally and giving billions to every enemy? Its because the people that put the dictator in power didnt think where he came from and what he believed didnt mean very much.The House of representatives can remove from judicial overview any area of law they vote to do sowhat are you TALKING about?... the house CAN impeach federal judges (and they break ties in elctoral college deadlocks and they have a lot of control over revenue bills)... but it mis LUNACY for you to assert that the house can remove cases from judicial review... go ahead, try to provide a link to THAT (which you are simply making up)...
How Congress Checks the Supreme Court:
Senate approves federal judges, including Supreme Court justices (Advise and Consent Clause)
Impeachment power (House)
Trial of impeachments (Senate)
Power to initiate constitutional amendments (to undo supreme court decisions)
Power to set courts inferior to the Supreme Court
Power to set jurisdiction of courts (they can tell a court that they can not hear a case on a certain topic, which includes changing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court)Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_does_Congress_check_the_power_of_the_US_Supreme_Court#ixzz1PS2MCq1W Qualification for CIC isnt a constitutional issueare you insane?...No. See above. it is the very constitution itself which attempts to specifically DEFINE who can be president (and how it differs from less restrictive requirements for senate and even LESS restrictive requirements for the house)...
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.And where they got the definition for what that meant came from the places I linked. it is true that they failed to define "natural born" clearly, and chester alan arthur was challenged because his father was an irish citizen until he was 14... but it was decided (though not in a supreme court decision - arthur's opponents thought they would lose and set a precedent) that he was eligible, and the wong kim ark case made it quite clear that one did not need to have EITHER parent be a citizen so long as one was born on u.s. soil to be a natural born citizen (they USED those words - said nothing about tuition or food stamps)...Here we have the boiling down of the issue. I say that when the Constitution was written, the founders operated on certain specific premises from certain specific sources to define the meaning of key terms.. A court a hundred years later eyeballed the issue without referring to those specific sources. They didnt because the issue at hand didnt involve what I addresss above, namely CIC eleigibility.you are just making this up...
Jun 16 11 2:22 PM
Jun 20 11 8:39 AM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.