CITIZEN ASKS STUDENT ORGANIZATION TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION IN REGARD TO PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY
by Kathleen Gotto
(Nov. 27, 2011) — The following letter was sent to the president of the student organization, Colorado Election Law Project (CELP), at the University of Colorado Law School:
Dear Ms. Lennon,
I have contacted both the Colorado Secretary of State and Attorney General Suthers for information on how I can register a protest against an ineligible person running for U.S. president in the 2012 elections. The SOS (see below) said to contact the AG; however, Mr. Schler (the individual I spoke with in the SOS office) stated that it was the two political parties which were responsible for certifying their candidates. In 2008, Nancy Pelosi sent Hawaii one certification attesting that Mr. Obama met the constitutional requirements to be on the ballot, but omitted the constitutional eligibility part in the Democratic certification to the other states. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=109363. Very curious. Why would Ms. Pelosi and the Democrats issue two different certifications for the President and Vice President nominations? As a registered “Unaffiliated” voter, I just want answers and resolution to this issue.
After not receiving a reply from AG Suthers, I called his office last week to get a response to my inquiry below. “Mike”, who I believe works in AG Suthers’ office (the operator said she couldn’t give that information), told me to contact the Secretary of State and to look up Title 1. I have been bounced between the AG and the SOS and am very frustrated with our elected officials being unwilling to ensure Colorado voters are not disenfranchised in 2012 as we were in 2008. To wit, that a person who was constitutionally ineligible for the office of U.S. President was nonetheless allowed to be on the ballot and was subsequently elected. Our Constitution at Article II, Section I, Clause 5, stipulates among other qualifications the requirement for an individual to be a “natural born Citizen”. Case law has already affirmed what constitutes a natural born citizen in: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/minor-v-happersett-is-binding-precedent-as-to-the-constitutional-definition-of-a-natural-born-citizen/ Mr. Obama, by his own public admission, was born subject to the British Crown through his father, a Kenyan national; hence, he does not meet the Constitutional requirement of a natural born citizen. It is not enough to have just one U.S. citizen parent. Minor v Happersett settled that question once and for all.
My sense from the discussions I had with the individuals I spoke with in both the SOS and the AG offices, was that there very well could be partisan influence in refusing to help ensure Coloradans are not again disenfranchised. When I came across your CELP endeavor, I thought, “well, maybe students who care about our Constitution and the rule of law will do what no one else has had the courage to do.”
One last thing. Ms. Lennon, I am part of a large group of professionals who, like myself, have been investigating this issue of a constitutionally ineligible person elected to the highest position in our executive branch for the last three years. We have backgrounds in writing, publishing, film production, law, real estate, investigations, medical field, retired military, and retired federal employees, to name just a few. Should you decide to take this issue head-on, my group will be of enormous assistance to you and your team. We likely could provide you any documentation you may need in pursuing a resolution to this problem.
I await your soon reply.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Gotto
——————-
Editor’s Note: The office of the Colorado Secretary of State is here. Attorney General Suthers’s website is here.
“From the case of Schneider V. Rush in 1964:”
This and S. Res 511 make the case for the difference between natural born citizen and natural citizen of Amendment 14. Note that A14 is used by the libtards against the opinion in Minor, to justify Obama’s legitimacy, i.e. they “certify” Obama based on A14.
When we challenge the SOS on Obama’s eligibility, I think we need to be brief but deep in referenced factual evidence. I think things such as S.S. numbers and forged B.C.’s are irrelevant. The challenge must be succinct in order for it to be read. We are challenging PBO’s status as a natural born citizen, period.
The legal precedent (including a resolution he co-sponsored) says he must have
been born from citizen parents, he verified he wasn’t. End of story.
I have just received the statutes which describe fiduciary responsibilities of elected officials and penalties for non-compliance/misfeasance. My great concern is that the challenge will just get blown off for some obscure reason. Placing all this verbiage in the challenge will add two pages but may get enough attention for the SOS to act. Recall that the citizen habeas writ for Fitz was blown off for lack of standing. Who has more standing than a representative of the creators of the Constitution?
Also consider that primaries have been moved up in many states such that passage of eligibility legislation will not take effect until after the need. A ballot challenge is our only hope of keeping PBO off the ballot at this late date.
Kathleen, See if you can find the notary that signed the certifications. I tried but my mail was returned as undeliverable. Perhaps you could have better luck. It is my contention that the separate Hawaii certification is a forgery. So my question to Shalifa Williamson is “Did you sign both of these certificates or just one?”
I am getting the same runaround in GA.
My strategy is to file an FOIA for Obama’s DNC certification, certified mail in the morning, give that three plus three days to be acted on and then use whatever comes out of that, if anything, as substantiation to file a complaint for investigation.
Our statutes specify the SOS is responsible for qualifying the candidate. The statute defers to the party for president; however, if the party doesn’t state qualifications, which the DNC has not been doing, then it falls back to the SOS.
The complaint will be blast emailed to the local grassroots folks and the grassroots leaders and GOP chairs in North Georgia. Neither the SOS or A.G. will act unless they feel political pressure, I am sure.
I have a one-page cover letter on five pages of data. The data simply shows the Minor opinion and the statement from S. Res 511 that qualified McCain, i.e., he was born of American citizens. I then show the FactCheck date which clearly states that Obama’s reputed father was a British citizen and this was backed up by concurrence of Obama’s Fight the Smears website.
Precedence to back up the Constitution and data to show Obama does not meet the requirements. No S.S. questions, no B.C. B.S, just straight requirements and were they met, yes or no.
Someone mentioned this Supreme Court decision in another thread here. Is this not important also?
Have I just missed this Supreme Court case? I had never seen this mentioned before:
http://supreme.justia.com/us/377/163/case.html
From the case of Schneider V. Rush in 1964:
Quote:
“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. Art. II, § 1.”
Seems odd to me this has not been quoted more, though maybe I just missed it. Granted it doesn’t say what natural born is, but it definitely makes a distinction that natural born stands alone.
Zeb,
Exactly! since DNC refuses to do its job of vetting soetoro/obama, the states’ SOSs must do their job in ensuring the candidate is constitutionally eligibile to be POTUS!
And no need to address any other issue except the ‘Disqualification factor’ – soetoro/obama is not qualified due to his inherited British citizenship from his Brit father. Soetoro/obama himself ‘resolved’ in Resolution 511 that he, unlike McCain, was NOT born to 2 USA citizen parentS therefore soetoro/obma is NOT natural born citizen!
Thank you for your persistence and for your fact finding mission. Keep up the good work. May you be an inspiration to others to pursue the same.
Excellent letter Kathleen, If, when Sheriff Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse release the findings of their investigation, our representatives in government refuse to defend the constitution then it shall fall upon ‘We the People’ to take up the arms that we were given the right to keep and bare for the specific reason of being prepared to defend our freedom from any who would take it from us. George Washington said, “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” H.L Mencken wrote in the Baltimore Sun; Aug. 19, 1935 in his article, “The Constitution”: “Every right that anyone has today is based on the doctrine that government is a creature of limited powers, and that men constituting it become criminals if they venture to exceed those powers.”
Remember well that “After his election,…” “…, Obama held a secret meeting with eight of the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court–from which no public information was released. The meeting was held even though there were legal challenges in which Obama was a defendant pending before the Supreme Court at the time. The attorneys for the plaintiffs never were told of the meeting or invited to participate in what critics have described as extrajudicial contact between the court and a defendant.” (What Did Congress Know About Natural-Born Citizens? 07/01/11; By Bob Unruh. worldnetdaily.com.) Pray for our country and clean your weapons and ammunition.
While Ms. Gotto has written a circumspect, yet persuasive letter, it is diminished somewhat by the omission of the mention of John McCain’s ineligibility, which was an equal assault on the Constitution and the rule of law. This unfortunate omission may lay seeds of doubt about Ms. Gotto’s motivations in singling out Obama, at least in the hyper “racism”-sensitive, PC indoctrinated minds of most of today’s college students.
We must remember that even an unintentional assault on any of these sorts of pillars of PC progressivisms floods many a liberal young skull with mind-numbing emotion that washes out all logic and rational thought. Of course, Obama truly is a premeditated usurper who is wrecking heretofore unimaginable damage on our republic, so I applaud Ms. Grotto long and loud for her creative idea of contacting this student group. Her well written letter is much more than most do and action always trumps waiting for perfection. Kudos to Ms. Gotto and best wishes of success in inspiring the young legal minds of the Colorado Election Law Project.
“Even Senate Resolution 511, passed in 2008 to declare that John McCain was a natural-born citizen, specified a natural-born citizen would have to be born of two U.S. parents. McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone was regarded by the Senate as an exception that the Founders would have supported. The Senate reasoned that a person should not be disqualified from running for president because the parents were serving in the defense of the nation,” “Dr. Jerome Corsi said. “AMONG THE SPONSORS OF THAT STATEMENT WAS A JUNIOR SENATOR NAMED OBAMA. THE RESOLUTION INCLUDES TWO REFERENCES TO “AMERICANS” OR “AMERICAN CITIZENS” AS PARENTS.” (Statements Suggest Doubt About Obama Growing. By Bob Unruh, 07/02/11. worldnetdaily. Emphasis added by me.) Abrogate the illegal election of the ineligible criminal NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!! The cadence often called by America’s elite 101st Airborne Infantry Division in which the American hero, Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, a surgeon, served is: “Pick-up your weapon and follow me; I am the Airborne Infantry!
Great letter Kathleen……thank you and good luck on getting CELP to take action on the most important issue in America.