2008 Election, Barack Dunham, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Barry Dunham, Barry Soetoro, capitalism, Chicago Tribune, Columbia University, Currency and Currencies, D.c. press club, Dr. Ron Polarik, Electoral College, Electors, Finance, fraud, Free Speech, gold, Harvard Law School, hawaii, id theft, Indonesia, Indonesian Citizenship, Investing, investments, janet porter, Joe Biden, John McCain, Latest News, legal documents, Markets, name change, natural born citizen, Oath of Allegiance of the President of the United State, Occidental College, Phillip Berg, Politics, poser, Presidential Election, Sarah Palin, socialism, Stocks, Today, treason, u.s. constitution, U.S. Dollar, Uncategorized, voter fraud, we the people foundation; faith2action
Obama, DNC elude citizenship lawsuit deadline
Solicitor general’s office dodges questions about birth certificate complaint
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
While the Federal Election Commission waived its right to respond to the complaint on Nov. 18, the solicitor general’s office is refusing to say whether the waiver was also filed on behalf of Obama and the DNC.Berg filed his petition on Oct. 30, and according to procedure, a response from the defendants was due today. But when WND contacted the U.S. Supreme Court and the solicitor general’s office, officials referenced the FEC’s waiver and dodged any questions about Barack Obama and the DNC filing separate responses.
America’s Right blogger and legal writer Jeff Schreiber has followed the case closely.
“There are a number of reasons why the respondents here would choose not to respond,” Schreiber speculated. “First, because the court only grants between 70 and 120 of the 8,000 or so petitions it receives every year, perhaps they just liked their odds of Berg’s petition getting denied. Second, because they have made arguments as to Berg’s lack of standing several times at the district court level and beyond, perhaps they felt as though any arguments had already been made and were available on the record. Or, perhaps the waiver shows that the FEC and other respondents do not take seriously the allegations put forth by Berg, and did not wish to legitimize the claims with a response.”
But one thing that is not clear is whether the FEC is filing for itself or on behalf of all respondents, he added.
FEC attorney Gregory G. Garre is listed as the only name under “Attorneys for Respondents.” There are no additional attorneys listed for Obama or the DNC – and the waiver was filed by “respondents Federal Election Commission, et. al,” suggesting the response was on behalf of other defendants as well.
Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. and thus a “natural-born American” as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution? If you still want to see it, sign WND’s petition demanding the release of his birth certificate.
“As it were, the FEC’s attorney, Gregory Garre, is with the Solicitor General’s office, and does not represent Obama or the DNC,” Schreiber wrote. “While attorneys acting on behalf of a group of defendants or respondents is not necessarily rare, the difference here is the involvement of the Solicitor General’s office, a federal office.”
|Court documents show the Federal Election Commission waived its right to respond on Nov. 18.
Berg told America’s Right he was taken aback when he learned that the FEC – a federal regulatory agency – had filed the waiver.
“I’m surprised because I think they should take the position that the Supreme Court should grant standing to us,” he said. “I think they have a responsibility not only to Phil Berg, but to all citizens of this country, to put forth a sense of balance which otherwise doesn’t seem to exist.
“However, if this was filed by the FEC on behalf of the DNC and Barack Obama too, it reeks of collusion,” he said, noting that the attorney from the solicitor general’s office should be representing federal respondents and not the DNC or Obama.
By Bob Unruh
© 2008 WorldNetDaily
He explained to WND his four months of research on the images, including nearly 1,000 test images using actual scans and photographs of real certifcates, reveal there are several “giveaways” on the image itself. For example, the document has gray and white between the lettering, not green pixels as the rest of the background document, suggesting someone cut-and-pasted or typed new information that was embedded on top of the background.
Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. and thus a “natural born American” as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution? If you still want to see it, sign WND’s petition demanding the release of his birth certificate.
Also, Polarik said although the Obama form has a border and seal from 2008, it purportedly was obtained in 2007. He said the seal does not match seals on other documents from 2007, but does match those from 2008. His full report is posted at Polarik.blogtownhall.com.
In Polarik’s view, there has to be a significant reason for a political candidate and campaign to go to such lengths.
“Obviously, there’s something very critical to hide, or they wouldn’t have spent the million dollars in legal fees to prevent the release of his original birth certificate,” Polarik told WND.
“It’s a scary thought to have someone who essentially begins his presidency as a criminal,” he said, because the use of a faked document as identification is, in fact, a crime, he noted.
“It would be hard to perform as president from behind jail cell door at Leavenworth,” he said.
The video has Polarik’s face and voice disguised and he confirmed in talking with WND that he’s using an assumed name because of the threats he’s reported receiving.
Polarik said the issue of the birth location is a “chink” in Obama’s armor, but the Democrat also has declined to release information about his college years, about his selective service and about his passports, including on what nation’s passport he traveled to Pakistan two decades ago when it was illegal to go there as a U.S. citizen.
Polarik describes his findings and conclusions on the video.
WND columnist Janet Porter has written extensively about the birth certification issue.
“Look, we’re not asking for the world here. Neither is the Constitution. Some pretty basic requirements like being 35 years old, having 14 years residency in the United States, and being a natural born citizen. When Senator John McCain was questioned about it, he showed his birth certificate without hesitating. When Barack Obama was asked by courts including the U.S. Supreme Court, he ducked and hid behind the right to privacy,” she writes.
“Ironically, when Obama was running for the State Senate, he won by disqualifying every candidate who ran against him in the primary, including a guy who had been through a nasty and salacious divorce. Even though he had a small child who could be hurt by the information being made public, a court decided that the public’s right to know; outweighed this poor fella’s right to privacy, and he backed out. Obama clings to the ‘right to privacy’ regarding his own qualifications, just not his opponents.”
She also noted the issue won’t go away, and recommended a visit to ObamaForgery.com to review what’s happening.
“These are the facts,” she wrote. “The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen. Obama’s grandmother said she was there when Barack was born in Kenya. Obama refuses to release his original birth certificate. Instead of a birth certificate, Obama’s campaign posted a certification given to those born abroad. Experts have called even that document an ‘obvious forgery.'”
“Our Constitution still matters,” she said.
Her group, Faith2Action, is working on funding for the purchase of time for a new television ad on the issue.
In the Philadelphia Bulletin, constitutional lawyer Edwin Vieira said a multitude of problems could result.
“Let’s assume he wasn’t born in the U.S.,” Vieira told the newspaper. “What’s the consequence? He will not be eligible. That means he cannot be elected validly. The people and the Electoral College cannot overcome this and the House of Representatives can’t make him president. So what’s the next step? He takes the oath of office, and assuming he’s aware he’s not a citizen, then it’s a perjured oath.
“He may have nominated people to different positions; he may have nominated people to the judicial branch, who may have been confirmed, they may have gone out on executive duty and done various things,” said Vieira. “The people that he’s put into the judicial branch may have decided cases, and all of that needs to be unzipped.”
“Let’s say we go a year into this process, and it all turns out to be a flim-flam,” he told the newspaper. “What’s the nation’s reaction to that? What’s going to be the reaction in the next U.S. election? God knows. It has almost revolutionary consequences, if you think about it.”
He continued, “[The birth certificate], in theory, should be there. What if it isn’t? Who knows, aside from Mr. Obama? Does Russian intelligence know it isn’t there? Does Chinese intelligence know it isn’t there? Does the CIA know that it isn’t there? Who is in a position to blackmail this fellow?”
Vieira expressed confidence Obama eventually will be forced to produce documentation.
“Let’s assume that an Obama administration passes some of these controversial pieces of legislation he has been promising to go for, like the FOCA (Freedom of Choice) Act,” he told the newspaper. “I would assume that some of those surely will have some severe civil or criminal penalties attached to them for violation. You are now the criminal defendant under this statute, which was passed by an Obama Congress and signed by President Obama. Your defense is that is not a statute because Mr. Obama is not the president. You now have a right and I have never heard this challenged, to subpoena in a criminal case, anyone who has relevant evidence relating to your defenses. And you can subpoena them duces tecum, meaning ‘you shall bring with you the documents.'”
A conference among the justices is scheduled Friday on a New England challenge to Obama’s eligibility.
“The case is brought by Leo C. Donofrio against Nina Wells, the New Jersey secretary of state, and questions whether Obama is a ‘natural-born citizen’ as required by Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution,” Farah reported.
“It would seem a simple matter to resolve,” he said. “Barack Obama could have put this issue to rest long ago by producing a complete birth certificate from Hawaii. Instead, he has chosen to stonewall the matter, citing a website post of what can only be characterized as a partial representation of a birth certificate – one that has been criticized as a forgery.
“Meanwhile, some of Obama’s own Kenyan relatives claim to have been present at his birth in Mombasa. This controversy, which some have dismissed as frivolous, is as serious as the literal meaning of the Constitution itself.”
The nation’s Electoral College, the process through which Obama is to be formally voted as the next president, will meet Dec. 15, and his inaugural is scheduled Jan. 20.
Meanwhile, more than 125,000 have signed WND’s petition seeking full disclosure of Obama’s information.
The petition cites the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that no one can be sworn into office as president without being a natural born citizen. It also asserts there are questions about Obama’s reported Hawaii birth, that the Democrat has refused repeated calls to document his birth, that judges have declined to require him to shed light on the issue and that Hawaii – at the time of Obama’s birth – allowed parents whose children were born in other locations to register the birth there.
One of the most often asked questions regarding whether or not Barack Obama meets the constitutional requirements for the office of president is: “Why hasn’t the ‘mainstream’ media covered this?” Good question.
Well, one thing we found out in the last election is there isn’t anything “mainstream” about the “mainstream” media. There is no longer any doubt about their pro-Obama bias – even the Washington Post came out and admitted it. If it weren’t for WorldNetDaily, a few radio talk shows and some blogs, we wouldn’t even know about the constitutional crisis we’re in. Interestingly, these are the first things on the chopping block in an unchecked Obama administration.
Look, we’re not asking for the world here. Neither is the Constitution. Some pretty basic requirements like being 35 years old, having 14 years residency in the United States, and being a natural born citizen. When Sen. John McCain was questioned about it, he showed his birth certificate without hesitating. When Barack Obama was asked by courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, he ducked and hid behind the right to privacy.
Ironically, when Obama was running for the Illinois Senate, he won by disqualifying every candidate who ran against him in the primary, including a guy who had been through a nasty and salacious divorce. Even though he had a small child who could be hurt by the information being made public, a court decided that the public’s “right to know” outweighed this poor fella’s right to privacy, and he backed out. Obama clings to the “right to privacy” regarding his own qualifications, just not his opponents.
The second most-asked question about Obama’s citizenship is: “Don’t you think someone would have found out the answer to these questions before now?” Also an outstanding question. Phil Berg, whose case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, not only filed suit in August but also copied Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean on the matter before Obama was chosen as the nominee. I would have thought that something as important as whether a potential nominee is qualified to serve in office might be worth a question or two prior to the party’s selection. But that information was ignored, and now they’re just hoping it will all go away.
It won’t. Not until Obama comes forward with the proof that the American people want and the Constitution demand.
But what can an ordinary citizen do to defend the Constitution? Instead of sitting on the sidelines wringing our hands, we can do something about it. If the “news” channels won’t cover what may be the biggest story of our lifetime, I say, let’s buy it. Help put this television ad on the air – watch it at ObamaForgery.com:
Heard the rumors about Barack Obama’s citizenship?These are the facts:
The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen.
Obama’s grandmother said she there when Barack was born in Kenya.
Obama refuses to release his original birth certificate.
Instead of a birth certificate, Obama’s campaign posted a certification given to those born abroad.
Experts have called even that document an “obvious forgery.”
Obama attended school in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro, when only Indonesian citizens were permitted to attend.
Obama’s school records list his father as Lolo Soetoro and Obama’s citizenship as Indonesian.
Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 when it was illegal to enter as a U.S. citizen.
Sixteen lawsuits in 12 states and two cases before the Supreme Court now challenge Obama’s citizenship.
Fact: Our Constitution still matters.
Illuminati Pictures, who produced the video of expert Ron Polarik, produced this ad that raises as many of the facts regarding Obama’s citizenship as one can fit in 60 seconds. Let’s let America hear them and add their voice to the 120,000 who signed the WND petition in the last few days.
Go to http://www.faith2action.org/ and watch the ad. Any Web donation to Faith2Action from now until Dec. 15 will go directly toward airtime to place this ad on television. How much is it going to take? Well, $12,000 buys a national 60-second ad on Fox News between 5 and 6 p.m. I say let’s buy a few of those and publicize it so the rest of the world finally hears about the constitutional crisis we’re in. Then, the Bill O’Reillys, Sean Hannitys and Rush Limbaughs may decide to cover the story of the century.