er_giveaway_banner.jpg (39000 bytes)

Associated Press Reports Presidential Requirement as “Native-Born Citizen” pb

WHY DO SO MANY CONFLATE “NATIVE-BORN” WITH “NATURAL BORN?”

by Sharon Rondeau

What was the Framers’ intent by including the “natural born Citizen” clause?

(Dec. 18, 2012) — Three of Arizona’s 11 electors on Monday reportedly expressed doubts during the election ceremony that Obama is eligible to serve as president, with the Associated Press reporting one of the constitutional requirements as “native-born citizen.”

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to be 35 years of age, a resident within the United States for at least 14 years, and a “natural born Citizen.”  Many scholars and constitutional attorneys have stated that the Founders’ intent in including the term was to assure allegiance to the United States by the candidate having parents, or at least the father, citizens of the country prior to the candidate’s birth.  A former Democrat Secretary of State had claimed that a challenger to President Woodrow Wilson in 1916 was not a natural born Citizen because his parents, and specifically his father, were British citizens at the time of his birth on U.S. soil.

Also at issue is whether or not Obama, who admitted having dual citizenship at birth on his now-defunct “Fight the Smears” website, could be considered a “natural born Citizen.”

Several Secretaries of State had contemplated omitting Obama’s name from their respective state ballots when ballot challenges were filed raising questions of Obama’s birthplace, Social Security number and other open questions.  Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett, who will be testifying about his state’s election process on Wednesday to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, had waited more than two months for a response from Hawaii regarding whether or not its Department of Health could verify the information on the image presented to the public in April 2011.  Bennett said on Monday that he “did not share the views” of the three electors who voiced concerns about Obama’s eligibility.

Cold Case lead investigator Mike Zullo had stated prior to the election that Bennett was making a mistake by accepting Hawaii’s affirmation of the information on Obama’s purported long-form birth certificate.  At the March 1 press conference held by Zullo and Arpaio, they stated that they knew the type of computer and time frame during which the image was uploaded to the White House server and were seeking the people in the chain of command who “gave permission to upload the file.”

Hawaii has been unresponsive to The Post & Email regarding Arpaio’s investigation and press conferences but had reportedly written an op-ed which was widely circulated by the Associated Press and other mainstream outlets.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach had considered leaving Obama’s name off of the ballot there until an objector withdrew his challenge because of alleged intimidation.

Presidential candidate Cody Robert Judy and Democrat registered voter Michael Voeltz have open cases challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility.  Judy’s case is pending with the U.S. Supreme Court, while Voeltz’s case has been refiled in Florida.  His attorney, Larry Klayman, also has a case filed in Alabama.  Last week, Atty. Orly Taitz filed a case in California asking for a stay of the certification of the electoral votes and was given seven days to submit evidence to the court.

Taitz also has a pending case in Mississippi in which Obama, Obama for America, and numerous other defendants have been accused of racketeering and fraud.  Taitz has told The Post & Email that the attorneys representing Obama and the Democrat Party of Mississippi have intimidated all of the plaintiffs on the case, resulting in two of them asking to have their names removed.

As the electors were casting their votes on Monday, a criminal complaint against them was awaiting funding to be officially filed, although a notice was sent to “proper officials” contending election fraud and ineligibility on the part of the Obama campaign.  Numerous examples of fraud and election fraud have been reported but not acted upon by the FEC, Secretaries of State, governors, or attorneys general.

Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigated the long-form birth certificate image presented to the public on April 27, 2011 claimed by Obama to be a certified copy of the document held by the Hawaii Department of Health and announced in two press conferences that it was a “computer-generated forgery.”  Arpaio received death threats after launching the investigation, but the perpetrator was located and apprehended.

Others have received death threats for investigating Obama’s background, but the authorities have taken no apparent action.

In 2008, Sen. John McCain was “declared” by the U.S. Senate, through Senate Resolution 511, a “natural born Citizen” because he was born to two U.S. parents, although in the Panama Canal Zone.  Obama was not held to the same standard, and after his inauguration, the Congressional Research Service issued several memoranda obscuring the fact that parental citizenship had historically been a determining factor in whether or not a person was a “natural born Citizen.”

Regarding questions of birthplace, Obama has apparently reported it to be both Kenya and Hawaii over the course of his lifetime.  His literary agent had published a biography in print for more than 16 years stating that he was born in Kenya which had been uncontested, but in 2007 Obama asserted that he had been born in Hawaii.  There is evidence that Obama was or became an Indonesian citizen during his youth.  His school, medical and college records have never been released.  In a California court case, an attorney for Occidental College stated that “Courts do not like to rule on things that do not exist.”

Real estate mogul and television personality Donald Trump has hypothesized that Obama attended college as a foreign student, which would have meant that he claimed foreign citizenship in order to gain access to foreign scholarship money.  An offer of $5,000,000 to a charity of Obama’s choice made by Trump shortly before the election was ignored.

Some researchers have made the claim that “Barack Hussein Obama” is a “synthetic identity” and that Obama is actually the son of Malcolm X and Jo Ann Newman of New York City.

Later in the AP article, the constitutional requirements of president are correctly quoted, including the term “natural born Citizen.”  A native-born citizen is believed to refer to a person born on U.S. soil under the provisions of the 14th Amendment.  After the 2010 midterm election, questions over the American citizenship of “anchor babies” whose parents owe allegiance to another country arose with some members of Congress.  There is no mention of the term “native born citizen” in the U.S. Constitution or Bill of Rights.

On December 7, Carl Gallups of the YouTube PPSimmons Channel had reported that breaking news could be on the horizon regarding the Arpaio investigation before the January 6, 2013 Congressional certification date.

Print Friendly

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: National

6 Responses to Associated Press Reports Presidential Requirement as “Native-Born Citizen” pb

  1. Loggia

    Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 7:06 AM

    AP is then covering for NYS which has changed Constitutional Language on its Board of Elections Website, stating that one need only be “born a citizen.”

    However, one could be “born a citizen” in TIMBUKTU if one’s parents are American, but that person would NOT be able to be president.

    So the AP and NYS are playing “fast and furious” with our Constitution and are reprehensible in their deceit.

    Or is “TAQIYYA” now a national sport?

  2. Jedi Pauly

    Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 7:06 AM

    I wonder, with what government are they going to file criminal charges with? The government is now foreign. It is both foreign in its nature to the one created by the Constitution, which is not a religious government like the one we have now since 2008, and it is foreign as to the source of authority for the President. That is what we have now since 2008. Since the government is now completely foreign, where are you going to file your criminal charges? With the foreign government? What good does that do? It seems to me that you would have to create a new native government who has jurisdiction to take such a criminal complaint and do something with it. Congress and the courts have already determined that they, and not Nature (citizen father), are the source of authority for who qualifies and who will determine the form of government without the consent of the People. The native government created by the Constitution is gone. The courts no longer are part of the native government that was created. That was changed by Congress in 2008 when they accepted Obama. Now those courts belong to a government that is both foreign to the Constitution and foreign to the source of authority for the President which is now Congress and foreign male fathers instead of Nature and native fathers. So I think there are massive jurisdictional problems with the idea of filing criminal charges.

  3. DOTK

    Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 6:00 PM

    I forgot to add that the presumption of “native born” per Obama is based solely on a birth on US soil. To date Obama has not been able to provide any UNTAMPERED-with or unaltered documentary evidence of even a native birth on US soil. Neither has any hospital been willing to admit that Obama was born within its confines on US soil. Thus, he may not even be able to squeeze out what amounts to a native birth. That Obama can’t even manage what is such a simple thing for 99.9% of us tells us all we need to know. Most likely not even a mere citizen but definitely never a natural born citizen.

  4. DOTK

    Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM

    This link is from the Way back Machine’s archives of June 2oo8 the regarding Fight the Smears.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20080619001215/http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert

    It states that Obama is a 14th amendment (created) citizen. Anyone who receives a citizenship artificially via some statute has not received that citizenship naturally at birth through jus sanguinis combined with jus solo, blood and soil.

    Obama not a natural born citizen, not then, not now. Not ever!
    ———————-
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: Thanks!

  5. Laura Gutman

    Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 12:19 PM

    The press uses the term “native-born” to confuse and misdirect the attention of our ignorant population. It is a means of protecting The One from attention to the fact that the Constitutional term is “natural born”, and he does not qualify. Since there is no definition of “native born”, our traitorous press can make up any definition that is useful to their goal of protecting The One from scrutiny. Worst of all, this scheme is working very well. Almost nobody has the guts and stamina to actually look into the real definition of the qualifications to be POTUS and demand that the documentation of his life’s story be thoroughly aired in court. Therefore, as usual, The One gets away with another fraud and crime.

  6. Martha Trowbridge

    Tuesday, December 18, 2012 at 11:03 AM

    To answer your rhetorical question: aka “Obama” fears that one of the lawsuits may DISQUALIFY HIS INAUGURATION.

    So the STATE RUN MEDIA are busy spewing their evil propaganda.

    The good news is: he’s SCARED!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>