The List of Obama Facts (vs Obama Falsehoods)
July 10, 2012 1 Comment
The Obama List
The facts of the current situation regarding Obama’s presidential eligibility and pdf. image of a Certificate of Live Birth distill down to these:
1. Barack Obama, knowing in advance the
Constitutional requirements for the office of the President, ran for and won the election for President, -knowing full well that he was not eligible for the office.
2. His eligibility for that office has never been established by any Constitutionally assigned authority, nor by the Supreme Court, nor by Congress. The State of Hawaii initially declined to certify that Obama was Constitutionally qualified to be President.
3. The Constitution requires that
no person shall be eligible for the office of the President EXCEPT a natural born citizen.”
4. A natural born citizen, while not defined in the Constitution, is one born as a U.S. citizen by virtue of birth to citizen parents.
5. Barack Obama only fulfills half of that requirement since his father was not an American.
6. Obama is President, not constitutionally, but officially, having been the winner of the election, and having been sworn in by the Chief Judas of the Supreme Court, and passively accepted by a Senate that shirked its responsibility.
Unconstitutionally serving as President is not a crime since there is no law covering the election of one who does not meet the description of what a natural born citizen is.
7. While Obama is not illegally serving as
President, his attempts to deflate suspicions about where he was actually born led him to release two digital images on the internet that are representations of official Hawaiian documents.
8. Simulations of official government documents are known as frauds. It’s a criminal offense to create and present publicly an illegitimate counterfeit of an official identity document or vital record for purposes of fraud but what the Obama posted online was not a document but just a nine-layer pdf digital image.
Images of digital imitations of official government identity documents are not released by state governments since they cannot be signed nor stamped nor physically inspected to ascertain their authenticity.
10. The digital image of a Certificate of Live Birth released by the White House is a demonstrable fake, and has not been, and cannot be certified to be an official Hawaiian government creation since it’s nothing more than an image, -a counterfeit image concocted by an unknown person on behalf of President Obama but with his only connection to it being through his lawyers, thus providing him attorney-client secrecy and plausible deniability. It is not a legal creation of the Hawaiian government.
12. Obama has not released a photo or scan of a real Certificate of Live Birth (which is normally created at the time of ones birth) even though he should possess the one which he would have used all of his adult life for various forms of proof of identity.
13. A sitting President has resorted to facilitating the creation and release of a counterfeit birth certificate image, thereby committing a fraud against the American public for the purpose of preventing the release of his real birth records. No Hawaiian official has certified that what his archived original 1961 birth record reveals is faithfully presented in the White House birth certificate pdf image.
So we have a legal President who committed no crime in running and winning office, even though he was not Constitutionally eligible, who resorted to deceptive and illegal means to shore-up his legitimacy in the face of widespread suspicion regarding his place of birth. In presenting online to the public a birth certificate image, he quieted the suspicions and now all national entities, governments, courts, and the media have swallowed his misrepresentations hook, line, and sinker, -and are incapable of even a hint of doubt, (that would be disloyal!).
No one can say that the information contained in his pdf birth document image is false except those in Hawaii who have seen whatever it is that is in their archives. But they are not talking because they support Obama completely, and are barred from revealing information of personal records. The governor’s people searched high and low for Obama’s original Certificate of Live Birth but were unable to find one, -nor was any hospital able. That would be a logical reason to resort to creating a computer-manufactured fake.
The False Obama List (by PhoxarRed -a big time obamunist apologist, justifier, obfuscater, and facts distorter)
1. “Barack Obama’s Presidential eligibility has never been denied by any Constitutionally assigned authority.” You conveniently forgot to mention that none exists and no official forum exists to refute a claim of eligibility.
2. “…a ‘natural born citizen’ which,..is almost universally interpreted as being born in the United States.”
Your mythical universal interpretation is an outright misrepresentation since it omits the requirement of birth to citizen parents.
That was precisely the definition that was in the minds of the framers and only their view is of significance. Since Obama had an alien father, he is only a citizen, but not a natural born citizen anymore than the off-spring of a horse and a zebra is a natural born horse.
3. “Obama committed no crime whatsoever in assuming office since he meets the accepted description of what a NaturalBornCitizen is.” TRUE, but that which is commonly accepted is no more correct than any number of other common misconceptions.
4. “Presidents are not obligated to release a photo or scan of a real Certificate of Live Birth”.
TRUE, but candidates with alien fathers and doubtful US birth have a very real obligation to the electorate to put forward acceptable proof that they were at least born in the United States (even though that’s irrelevant to natural citizenship and presidential eligibility).
5. “Obama released two digital images on the internet displaying the same birth date and place as Hawaii officials reported his official Hawaiian documents display.”
Almost true, but only when restated accurately. Hawaii officials reported his official Hawaiian documents display the same info as the White House images, but we have no way of knowing that they are not lying or if the Hawaiian digital records themselves have been never been edited by fraudulent alteration. When Hawaiian officials use the word “document” they leave its meaning deliberately undefined. They could mean a variety of things, including: the original hospital vital record, a replacement version of the original in cases of adoption, their microfilm image of it, the digital capture of that image, and their digital database information gleaned from the microfilm image. All of these various formats can be called “documents” when in fact only the original hospital vital record is an actual document. All the rest are merely forms that represent it.
All of the digital forms are subject to alteration with an image editing program and a word processor, especially the short form Certification of Live Birth since it’s purely a digital document and does not represent how the original appeared. So when officials talk about the information in their document they are really referring to the only form of record that they examine and deal with since they went “all digital”, and that is a digital record in their data-base that’s viewed on their desktop monitors.
Of course what they fail to tell you is that no one, and I mean absolutely no one, will verify that the information in that digital record is proven to be identical to the original record, nor to the microfilm image. Their digital record has been altered to show the same thing as what the counterfeiter put into the long form pdf image released on the White House server. So they are not lying when they say that it is the same information. Their hands are apparently clean, -there’s no trail leading back to anyone so they can’t be charged with falsifying an official state record or state certification.
The only way to uncover the truth would be to physically enter the building unannounced and confiscate the original record and the micro-film image of it. They would show something that is not in the digital record that appears on their computer monitors. We need a competent version of the Watergate burglars to make a stealth entrance, acquire the originals, and send copies to Wikileaks. The White House clearly loves leaks of classified information that make Obama look like a foreign policy tough guy, -I wonder how fond they would be of a leak of his original birth record?
6. “The White House never claimed the reproduction they displayed was an official Hawaiian document and Hawaii does not claim it is a forgery.”
Very clever obfuscation. The truth is that the White House never claimed it was NOT an official Hawaiian document and Hawaii does not claim it is NOT a forgery.
7. “White House digital imitations. ..could never be viably used fraudulently, and so have no conceivable illegal use.”
Illegality is not dependent on their use but on their very existence, -together with their use to pretend they are official legitimate representations of official documents. They are Photoshop frauds so they have no legitimacy. Which proves that Obama ordered the creation and release of counterfeit images pretending to be something they are not, namely a scan of an actual Hawaiian certified birth certificate.
8. “The Constitution…provides as a qualification for the offices of President and Vice-President that the person elected must be a native-born citizen. “You pompous windbag. The Constitution says NOTHING about the President being native-born.That is pure fiction springing from a false assumption that since 97%(+/-) of native born per- sons are natural born citizens that we can therefore just round that figure off to 100%. But alien mothers, even back then, whether immigrants or non-immigrants, gave birth in the United States to children with alien fathers, but such children do not and did not meet the description of a natural born citizen.
Repeating an error ad infinitum does not make it true, even if it is 99.99% true. Rat poison is 99.99% pure wholesome food, but you better not call it that.
“Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Baumgartner v. United States, 322US 665, 673 (1944)”
Again with the unsupportable conflation of native citizen and natural citizen. But in a literal sense, your statement is accurate without you even grasping why. It’s because a native citizen is one who was born of natives, -not one simply born within the native’s territory. A native member is one born to members. The son of George Armstrong Custer of the Seventh Cavalry, if born on the land of the Sioux nation, would not have been a natural born Sioux nor eligible to serve as their chief because he would not have been born to native Sioux members.
You must have a mental block about the Wong Kim Ark decision because the Elk decision is distinctly apart from the wording of the 14th Amendment’s description of who is born as a citizen. “Native Americans”, as sovereign nations, gave birth to children who were under the jurisdiction of their tribe, not the United States. Therefore they were not U.S. citizens regardless of their native birth.
But Wong Kim Ark was not born under a separate sovereignty since his father was a legal permanent U.S. resident, and as such they were both subject to U.S. jurisdiction, regardless of his Chinese status as a subject of China.
The U.S. government did not recognize the authority of China over Chinese permanent U.S. residents. Hence the court was bound by their understanding of the wording of the 14th Amendment. And they interpreted subjection to U.S. jurisdiction as existing in all cases of permanent residency, even though that subjection was not official, nor necessarily permanent.
Then you made it worse by writing: “the Unit- ed States has uncontested jurisdiction over that
child at birth [a stateless one born of parents with no nationality], and so that child is a
“Natural Born Citizen” owing allegiance for it’s protection to no other nation than the United States.”
Wow! You just make up your own separate reality and your own “facts”, unsubstantiated by anything. The term “natural born citizen” has no
connection to such a child nor its citizenship.
You are unable to provide any basis for such a presumptuous error. You know full well that the concept of a child owing allegiance is a totally absurd concept, and the protection of the US is irrelevant to the issue of who is and who is not a natural born citizen.
NOTHING is at all connected to it except the universal description of one born into the nation
of which its parents (plural) are citizens. No
other subject or concept determines, alters, or defines who is a natural born citizen. So don’t drag them out and run them up the flag pole expecting anyone with a brain to salute them.
You won’t and can’t tell us what you think about that principle because you don’t think. You just regurgitate the conclusions of men you revere as authorities.
You haven’t, and are incapable of, providing a single original thought to defend your definition of NBC. Because it’s something you can’t ex- plain with any rational argument. You simply take it as an article of faith in the “correct” wisdom of fallible men. Men who based their conclusions on the simple fact that 97-99 % of native born persons are also natural born citizens, even though they almost total overlap does not result in the two terms being synonymous. Obama is an alien-fathered legal statutory citizen of the U.S., not a natural citizen, and is therefore an unconstitutional President.
by a.r. nash july 2011