Joe Arpaio's "Birther" Friends Quiz Arizona Politicos on Obama Eligibility, Nobody Cares

Categories: Birthers (sigh)
salmon-birther.jpg
YouTube
Matt Salmon, attempting to explain how few shits he gives about the president's birth certificate.
It looks like sympathizers to Sheriff Joe Arpaio's "birther" movement are still looking for politicians to support the Obama's-from-Africa conspiracy theory, and it's still not working.

That's really not all that surprising, but the way Arizona politicians are issuing their awkward responses to "birther" inquiries makes you wonder why anyone would want to let people know that these exchanges ever happened.

You're really not supposed to call constituents crackpots in response to their questions, so people like Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl are being tactful in their responses to whether unicorns are real the president was born in Africa and brought over to the United States in anticipation of his presidency a few decades down the road.

This series of awkward interviews and letters is brought to you by the "Western Journalism Center," the parent of World Net Daily -- the same World Net Daily that was soliciting donations to Arpaio's "birther" fund, and the same World Net Daily that Arpaio comrade Jerome Corsi calls home.*

First up was Senator Kyl, who responded to the "birther" inquiry in letter form.

Kyl notes how "Sheriff Arpaio stressed the preliminary nature" of the findings at his big announcement at the beginning of March.

Therefore, how could Kyl possibly draw a conclusion if the investigation's not over?

Well played, Senator.

Kyl also notes that the whole birth-certificate thing has already been taken on in failure a few times, and the issue's never gone anywhere in the courts.

"Western Journalism Center" writer Tom Ballantyne Jr. didn't like that rejection, and wrote a really pissy open letter to Kyl -- which can be found here.

How about Congressman/Senate candidate Jeff Flake?

Ballantyne decided to set up the "birther" question for Flake at a tea party meeting.

Flake, not too hip to far-right-wing nuttery, said he believes Obama's a citizen, and called the whole thing a "distraction."

The grumbling and mumbling tea party members did not like that one bit, as you can see in this video.

Then it was Congressman-turned-lobbyist-turned-Congressional candidate Matt Salmon's turn.

It looks like Ballantyne caught Salmon in a parking lot for this one, and as Ballantyne's rambling on to Salmon about fake birth certificates, a man who appears to be a Salmon campaign staffer asked if the camera was rolling -- presumably so Salmon didn't become a mockery for saying anything that could be perceived as remotely close to support for the "birther" issue.

Salmon hung around for 10 minutes for this one, as he put it as delicately as possible that he's not in on the conspiracy theory -- video here.

Lastly, there's Senator McCain.

McCain's response came in letter form, and he (or a staffer) didn't even pretend to give a shit about Obama's eligibility.

The letter just quoted the Constitution's section on presidential eligibility and said thanks for the input.

Again, Ballantyne got really upset that no one would listen to him and issued another angry open letter.

Of course, like the other players in Arpaio's "birther" brigade, Ballantyne has a book to sell you, which makes Arpaio look more like a book fair manager than a person who's overseeing an alleged "investigation."

*Joseph Farah disputes calling World Net Daily a subsidiary of the "Western Journalism Center." See his comment (and the comment after that) below, or by clicking here.



Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
121 comments
Bobby
Bobby

nobody cares. correction. Only leftist trailtors don't care if the president of their country is legit or not. Everyone else does care.

dsagasdg
dsagasdg

2012 comes, in order to thank
everyone, characteristic,

novel style, varieties, low price
and good quality, and the low sale price.

Good news: this website (http://lnk.co/IJ51O ) we has been updated and add products and many things they abandoned their increases are welcome to visit our website. Accept cash or credit card payments, free transport. You can try oh, will make you satisfied.

 

http://lnk.co/IJ51O

 

http://lnk.co/IJ51O

 

http://lnk.co/IJ51O

 

phylax
phylax

The issue is no longer where Obama was born, but whether or not the birth certificate and his selective service registration are forgeries.  There is substantial evidence that they are forgeries. 

Clarity
Clarity

According to this Birth Certificate, 
http://imgur.com/7Hpet the Sheriff
is NOT an American Born citizen!

If it's real what a revelation that would be!

Oh My!

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

I am sorry, I can't vote for Mitt Romney or Barack Obama. You see, I take my pledge to support and abide by the Constitution seriously; as I am sure we all do.
The Constitution says you have to be born within the jurisdiction of two United States citizen-parents to be a natural born Citizen. While Mitt Romney was certainly born within the jurisdiction, George, Mitt's father, as far as the documentation I have been able to collect, was not. He was a Mexican citizen by birth.
I have ask the Romney campaign for any evidence at all that would suggest George had gone through any type of naturalization process prior to Mitt's birth. None have been forthcoming. As it stands right now, neither Obama nor Romney are eligible to take the oath of office for the presidency of the United States if elected.
But of course, the Constitution was written for the little people. The political elite need not concerns themselves with such insignificant trivia.

ex animo
davidfarrar

katahdin
katahdin

Correction. Country-loving patriots accept the reality that Barack Obama is our legal president.
Unpatriotic conservatives willfully spread vicious lies about our president, because they don't love America.

Jn Brown
Jn Brown

bla bla bla they are not.  what is your next "issue"?

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

There is exactly NO evicence of such. Your CCP never bothereed to obtain the original documents. In fact, they never even ATTEMPTED to obtain them.

Jim
Jim

Actually, there is substantial evidence that they aren't forgeries.  The BC was vouched for by the state of Hawaii, and the SSR was taken from a birther site so the authenticity of the CCP investigation is useless...since they can't say for sure that it is even the President's SSR.  Sloppy investigations, I mean fiction novels, are not proof of forgery.

Suprsnips
Suprsnips

If that is really Arpao's b.c, what's the problem, he's not trying to be President.

katahdin
katahdin

By all means, if you can't vote for either of them, stay home on election day.

subsilentio
subsilentio

How has your bullshit worked out for you in court you stupid loser?  Oh, it hasn't.  Enjoy your continued existence as a stupid fucking loser.

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

"born within the jurisdiction of two United States citizen parents"?

That's a new one, even for a birther. Please enlighten us all on where in the US Constitution we can find this clause. I won't hold my breath.

Parents now have "jurisdiction?  I'm going to be chuckling over that one all day long.

phylax
phylax

Arpaio asked for the original selective service card and was refused. All of these questions - and more - go back to 2008, before Obama was nominated. As Obama says, "The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with somethin' to hide." A person who pays lawyers big bucks to keep his records hidden, clearly has something to hide. He was pushed into a crude forgery because Donald Trump was making it an issue and Jerome Corsi's book was about to be released.

Laughing it off, just doesn't cut it. Obama has behaved dishonorably simply by allowing the controversy to continue by his refusals to release records.

On curious thing is that the most active person in pursuit of Obama's records has been Orly Taitz, a Moldovan Jewess, Israeli citizen, and personal friend of Benjamin Nethanyahu. It would appear that the Likud Party has used blackmail to get Obama to act like a neo-con - outdoing George Bush and to reneg on his promises to end the wars, close Guantanamo, and restore habeas corpus.

testify
testify

he is an illegal immigrant....

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

Absolutely not.

Nobody is staying home on election day. We got a job to do in Congress, just like in 2010.

ex animo
davidfarrar

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

Perhaps a better way to put it: a natural born Citizen is a person born of two United States Citizen parents within the jurisdiction.

ex animo
davidfarrar

Jn Brown
Jn Brown

like the poor,  the ignorant are with us always

Truconserv
Truconserv

Okay - now I understand, you are playing to be a birther to make real birthers look bad.

Cool, I'm down with that.  Go on, player, get your troll on!

Truconserv
Truconserv

You do realize that you sound insane, don't you?  Quiet insane.

I belong to Mensa.  Have a several degrees, including a Juris Doctor, and I have no clue what the hell what you wrote, if true, has to do with anything.

Seriously, you're more tin foil than any other birther I've encountered.

Please expound on this theory - it's guaranteed to make you sound even worse.

phylax
phylax

She is a personal friend of Benjamin Netanyahu - are you suggesting that he is stupid?

katahdin
katahdin

I refuse to believe that Likud Party could be so stupid as to assign any important task to a raging incompetent narcissist like Orly Taitz.

phylax
phylax

The racism "argument" is no argument at all and you refer to "you people" as if you know to whom you speak. I voted for Eldridge Cleaver on the Peace and Freedom Party ticket in 1968. That Black man did not appear on the ballot in California because he was judged to be ineligible under the requirements of the Constitution. I don't know who you think my "own" politicians are - but I have never voted for a Republican in nearly fifty years of voting.

Obama is a fraud. He hasn't kept any of his promises. He appears to be subject to blackmail by the Israel's Likud Party and that is why he has done nothing to alter the foreign policy of the Bush neo-cons.

phylax
phylax

Orly Taitz is an agent of the Likud Party of Israel.

phylax
phylax

If there were no questions before he was nominated why did Nancy Pelosi as Democratic National Convention Chairman create and sign two separate, differently worded affadavits certifying that Barack Obama was nominated for the office of Preseident of the United States? Both were signed, both were notarized, and one version was sent to the State of Hawaii while the other was sent to all other states. The difference between the two affadavits was that the one sent to Hawaii made reference to Obama's qualification under the Consitution to serve as President - she wrote the words, "legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution". Those words do not appear in the other version sent to the other 49 states.

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

And  no, the questions did not start before he was nominated.

You people really wear me out.  You simply can not stand that a black man is in the White House. No amount of facts will ever persuade you as your argument is completely and totally built on prejudice and emotion.

Little wonder that even your OWN politicians will not give you the time of day.No one with even two functioning brain cells should.

Luckily, the eternally ignorant and stupid are in a minority and can't influence elections in any meaningful way.  

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

Yes, Arpaio asked for the SSN card 3 weeks AFTER he had his press conference. He was rightfully refused as he had absolutely no legal right to it.

Theres's nothing "curious" about Orly. She is convinced that Obama is a muslim and has gone weel out of her way to defame any muslim she has ever encountered on her blog. with Orly, the hatred of Obama isn't actually about race. It's about what she believes to be his religion.  

katahdin
katahdin

The fact that being born in the US is sufficient to make a natural born citizen is settled law. No court will ever find otherwise.

a
a

What precedent?

He lists it right there in his decision.

"See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03(1898)"

and

Minor v. Happersett?

"does not hold otherwise"

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

What precedent is that? 

ex animo
davidfarrar

a
a

And this judge (Judge Gibney, Jr.),

"Specifically, Mr. Tisdale cites Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and Ron Paul as ineligible to appear on the ballot, on the grounds that each had at least one parent who was not a citizen of the United States."

"The court rules that the Complaint does not state a claim upon which relief may be granted.  The eligibility requirements to be President of the United States are such that the individual must be a “natural born citizen” of the United States and at least thirty-five years of age.  U.S. Const. art II Section 1.  It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.  See, e.g. United States v. Ark, 169 U.S. 649,
702 (1898)"

a
a

It isn't just "this judge", it is also this judge  (Judge Richard Gordon);

"Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 702-03(1898) (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV); Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678,684-88 (Ind. App. 2010) (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett ,88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise."

He also disagrees with you and Mario.

a
a

"Minor's so-called: "dicta" is self-sustaining"

That's gibberish.

The Supreme Court in Cohens v. Virginia 100 U.S. 1.

"It is a maxim not to be disregarded that general expressions, in every opinion, are to be taken in connection with the case in which those expressions are used. If they go beyond the case, they may be respected, but ought not to control the judgment in a subsequent suit when the very point is presented for decision. The reason of this maxim is obvious. The question actually before the Court is investigated with care, and considered in its full extent. Other principles which may serve to illustrate it are considered in their relation to the case decided, but their possible bearing on all other cases is seldom completely investigated.”

What is the question before the Court in Minor?  It is spelled out in the first paragraph.  And it is the only question they considered.

The Minor discussion of citizenship is dicta and not binding on the lower courts.

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

You see; nothing but dictum.

ex animo
davidfarrar

subsilentio
subsilentio

And a natural born loser is someone born to your mom.  Loser.

mirele
mirele

*headdesk* As has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over again, ad nauseum, ad infinitum, you do not understand what "natural born citizen" means. To be blunt, it doesn't mean what you think it means, and the judge who heard your cray-cray mess of a case agreed.

Really, you could accomplish so much more if you'd give up this absolute insanity masquerading as a constitutional challenge and did something more useful, like take up bowling. Or knitting. Or thousands of other more fulfilling activities. Both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are natural born citizens under the Constitution and you just need to move along with your life and stop tying up our court system with your insanity.

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

Not in the least. Far from it!. 
Judge Masin's statements in this regard  were just that on the face of it. Minor's so-called: "dicta" is self-sustaining i.e. a person born of two citizen-parents, thus having one allegiance from birth to support and abide by the US Constitution is a natural citizen, a citizen that requires no law or statute, just by the ipso facto pledge of the two citizen-parents, and their citizen-parents before them.

ex animo
davidfarrar

a
a

You mean like the dicta in the Minor decision

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

doh! It does, indeed, make you a citizen; but not a A2S1C5 nbC.

ex animo
davidfarrar

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

Judge Masin's footnote #2 here, without accompanying law, can only be considered obiter dictum.

ex animo
davidfarrar

FiscalSanity01
FiscalSanity01

Exactly correct.   The COLB is the legal document for proof of birth in Hawaii.  Hawaii confirmed it.  All other States must constitutionally accept it.  The PDF file has the same information, but it is not the legal document.   The COLB was sent by Hawaii, precisely because PDF's are too easy forge.

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

"
Wong Kim Ark more directly addresses the issue of who is “natural-born” although it is acknowledged that neither of these cases involved the use of the term in connection with a presidential candidate and the unique Constitutional requirements for holding that office."

So, according to this judge: there is nothing in the Constitution or any Act of Congress which suggests that the English common law continued to have any effect on the national level except for this one little clause. 

It would seem to me Mr. Apuzzo's statement either stands by itself or it doesn't. 

If this point can't be addressed here; I will have to go somewhere else -- although I have been impressed with the responses here.

ex animo
davidfarrar

Aznative818
Aznative818

Hey Bozo, my mom was born in Italy and my Dad was born in Russia, I was born in Phoenix, Old St Joes, that makes me a united states citizen, doh.

a
a

David - here is the Judge Mahili's decision:
 
"For the purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States.  Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny (sic), he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen."
 
And if he is Constitutionally eligible in Georgia, he is Constitutionally eligible in the rest of the states.

There is your proof.

a
a

"And yet in my Georgia challenge, Judge Malihi did decide Obama had to "prove" he met his Constitutional qualifications."

And what was Judge Malihi's decision about President Obama's eligibility?

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

And yet in my Georgia challenge, Judge Malihi did decide Obama had to "prove" he met his Constitutional qualifications.

I agree, the Wong case is exactly the decision the US Supreme Court must address. Allowing anyone who happens to be born within the jurisdiction, irrespective of their parents' citizenship (using English common law), is NOT a "stronger check" against foreign influences affecting the Commander in chief of the US military, but a weaker one, and is, therefore, unconstitutional. While the legal precedent set in Minor, does reflects the true definition of a “natural-born citizen” as provided by Emer de Vattel in his "The Law of Nations."

Lastly, Mr. Obama does have to prove he has met his qualifications: See Supreme Court case: Bute v. Illinois, 333 U.S. 640, 653 (1948)

The “burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States * * * is upon those making the claim.”  And if each of the General Government’s powers must be proven (not simply presumed) to exist, then every requirement that the Constitution sets for any individual’s exercise of those powers must also be proven (not simply presumed) to be fully satisfied before that individual may exercise any of those powers. 

ex animo
davidfarrar

Suprsnips
Suprsnips

If he's so fucking legit, then why does he go to such extremes to hide it?

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

David, this is not a surprise admission in any way, shape or form. It's what reasonable people have said all along. Apuzzo was "stunned" because he is an idiot. No, things you pull off the internet are not "evidence". Everyone but birthers new that.

And you'll note that regardless of Apuzzo's misplaced confidence, he was found to have no substantive evidence and his legal arguments were wrong. If you need a lin to the ruling, here it is. http://www.scribd.com/puzo1/d/...

a
a

It was not a surprise to the people with any intelligence.  The pdf is not the Birth Certificate.  The two certified copies and the COLB from 2007 created by the DOH and sent to President Obama are birth certificates.

That's why the judge and the defendants counsel don't care about the pdf.

a
a

That have in several used the Ankeny decision which is based on Wong Kim Ark.

a
a

"I think the confusion comes from the fact that a person born within the jurisdiction of one of the states, by English common law, was a citizen of that state. But as far as the national government is concerned, and, specifically, what was in the minds of the delegates to the 1789 Constitutional Convention"

Judge Masin in New Jersey specifically addressed that point and told Mr. Apuzzo he is wrong.

Here is Footnote 2 from yesterdays decision:

2. The Wong Kim Ark decision was preceded by Minor v. Happersett, 88 (21 Wall.) U.S. 162, 167, 22L.Ed. 627 (1874), where the Supreme Court stated that while the Constitution did not say “in words” “who shall be natural-born citizens” there were “some authorities” who held that “children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents” were citizens. The Court concludes that it was not necessary to decide that issue in Minor. Wong Kim Ark more directly addresses the issue of who is “natural-born” although it is acknowledged that neither of these cases involved the use of the term in connection with a presidential candidate and the unique Constitutional requirements for holding that office. Nevertheless, the Wong Kim Ark ruling certainly goes very far in defining the term and its meaning in this country. And the decision does not suggest that the common law rule identified therein only applied at the state level and not on a national basis, as counsel here claims.

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

A surprise admission

About two-thirds of the way through the hearing, Hill admitted in open court something that no lawyer for the Obama campaign has ever admitted. Obama never furnished a true copy of his birth certificate to the New Jersey Secretary of State. Furthermore, the PDF file that the White House has served to the Internet since April 27, 2012, is not relevant to the case in any way.

Hill (Obama's attorney) 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:
Is it your legal position that the document on the Internet is irrelevant to this case?
Hill replied, 

"Yes." Masin then asked:
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.

Apuzzo told this Examiner during a recess in the hearing that this was the most stunning thing that any lawyer for Obama had ever admitted, in an Obama eligibility case or in any other case. When the hearing finally adjourned at 12:30 p.m., Apuzzo was confident of prevailing on this point. He observed that Hill, after objecting to everything that Apuzzo tried to introduce into evidence, offered no evidence on her own behalf and even admitted that the infamous PDF document was legally worthless.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Obama eligibility: NJ ALJ says Obama need not prove eligibility - Newark Essex County Conservative | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/essex-...

ex animo
davidfarrar

Jim
Jim

And, as recently and repeatedly explained to Apuzzo, he is wrong.  In fact, he was told the exact same thing yesterday in NJ.  So, obviously, the courts totally disagree with you.

twinxx
twinxx

That little fantasy took another beating down in NJ yesterday. 

Mario Apuzzo got his ass whipped by someone only a year out of Law School.

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

Mitt Romney insists all of his family that came back from Mexico in 1912 were, somehow, still US citizens. Mitt isn't relying on the Wong decision. 

I have read the decisions you have kindly offered (correction update: I haven't studied them in depth yet). Again, I fail to see in your list of decisions where the US Supreme Court has ruled that anyone born within the jurisdiction was an Article ll, Sec. l natural born citizen. 

I did notice that you somehow forgot to list the only US Supreme Court decision that establishes the two citizenship-parent precedent in Minor vs Happersett 1875 Page 88 U. S. 163 decision. This decision established a natural born citizen as a person born of two United States citizen-parents within the jurisdiction. That this citizen was as much a citizen before the 14th Amendment as after the 14th Amendment. And that the doubts as to this type of citizen was less than any other type of citizen. Did you not know this?

I think the confusion comes from the fact that a person born within the jurisdiction of one of the states, by English common law, was a citizen of that state. But as far as the national government is concerned, and, specifically, what was in the minds of the delegates to the 1789 Constitutional Convention...as Mario Apuzzo recently explained:  "... there is nothing in the Constitution or any Act of Congress which suggests that the English common law continued to have any effect on the national level (after the American revolutionary victory)."  In this regard then, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention would have adopted the definition of a “natural-born citizen” as provided by Emer de Vattel, stated in his work: "The Law of Nations", as the national government's American common law definition of a Constitutional natural born Citizen.

ex animo
davidfarrar

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

Why don't you try reading the decisions and then get back to us?

davidfarrar
davidfarrar

As far as I know, neither Mitt Romney and/or Barack Obama have stated they are relying on the Wong Kim Ark case to justify their inclusion as a "Natural Born Citizen". As you may well know, the Wong Kim Ark case simply established US citizenship, not an 
 Article II, Section l natural born Citizen.  The US Supreme Court has yet to address this particular issue directly.

ex animo
davidfarrar

NeedACleverName
NeedACleverName

Still incorrect.

Here's an incomplete listing of all instances in which the courts have rejected that idea:

Ankeny v. Daniels, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (citing Wong Kim Ark to
hold that " persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural
born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship
of their parents”) transfer denied 929 N.E.2d 789 (Ind. 2010); Farrar et
al v. Obama, OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-1215136-60-MALIHI (Feb. 3, 2012) (Ga. Office of
State Admin. Hearings) (citing Wong Kim Ark and Ankeny v. Daniels to conclude
that Obama is natural born citizen by virtue of his birth in the United States);
Purpura and Moran v. Obama, OAL DKT. NO. STE 04534-12 (April, 10,
2012)(citing Ankeny and Wong Kim Ark to conclude that "[t]he petitioners’ legal
position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus,
accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a
“natural born Citizen” regardless of the status of his father"); Allen
v. Obama et al, No. C20121317 (Ariz. Pima County Super. Ct., Mar. 7, 2012)
(order dismissing complaint)(citing Wong Kim Ark to conclude “this precedent
fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the
Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President");
Tisdale v. Obama, No. 3: 12-cv-00036-JAG (E.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2012) (order
dismissing complaint) (concluding that “It is well settled that those born in
the United States are considered natural born citizens”); Jackson v.
Obama, 12 SOEB GP 104 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer recommendation) (Obama’s
birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility for office as a “Natural
Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Bd. of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012);
Freeman v. Obama, 12 SOEB GP 103 (Jan. 27, 2012) (hearing officer
recommendation) (Obama’s birth certificate “clearly establishes” his eligibility
for office as a “Natural Born Citizen”), objection overruled (Ill. State Board
of Elections, Feb. 3, 2012); Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63, 66
(“Those born ‘in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof’
have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the
time of the founding and thus eligible for the presidency”).\

h/t ballantine

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...