Letter to Trump Alleges Obama’s Two-Time Usurpation of the Presidency Meriting Investigation

“IT IS A MORAL IMPERATIVE”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 17, 2017) — On Monday morning, New York State citizen Robert Laity wrote a letter addressed to President Donald Trump  asking him to take action on an issue which Trump himself raised in early 2011 as he considered a run for the presidency the following year.

In January 2011, Trump, then a high-profile real estate mogul, began to demand that the White House release Obama’s detailed, or “long-form” birth certificate allegedly held by the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH).  Since entering political life in 1995, Obama claimed he was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, although earlier and later versions of his biography state that he was born in Kenya or Indonesia.

Trump questioned whether or not Obama was eligible to the office based on his claim, without verifiable proof, of a birth in the United States.  At the same time, Trump released both his “short-form” and more detailed “long-form” birth certificates showing that he was born in Queens, NY on June 14, 1946.

On June 12, 2008, an image appeared at The Daily KOS and several other websites said to be Obama’s official birth certificate but lacking a registrar’s official seal and a signature. In May 2009, then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs insisted that the image represented Obama’s “birth certificate” as he laughed off a question from WND’s Les Kinsolving as to why Obama did not release his “long-form” birth record.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born Citizen,” a term the Framers did not precisely define. While some contend that a birth on U.S. soil is sufficient to be “natural born,” others say that the designation indicates a higher level of citizenship and allegiance than simply the term “citizen.”  That view requires that the individual’s parents also have been U.S. citizens at the time of his birth in order to render him an eligible presidential candidate.

The relevant Article II clause reads:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The phrase “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,” is often called the “grandfather clause,” meaning that while the Framers knew that they themselves were not “natural born Citizens,” they were making an exception in favor of their eligibility so that the new nation would not have to wait 35 years for a child to be born to newly-minted U.S. citizens resulting from the American Revolution.

The final statement in the Declaration of Independence reads, “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

The first to sign was John Hancock of Massachusetts.  All who signed knew that they could be arrested and hung for treason against the British Crown.

Trump was not the first to question Obama’s eligibility for the presidency.  After Obama announced his candidacy on February 10, 2007, many Americans questioned whether or not he is a “natural born Citizen” given the variations in his life story put forth by credible sources such as the AP and NPR which said he was born in Kenya.

On December 19, 2007, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews told his audience that Obama was “born in Indonesia.”

Citizen letters to congressmen, presidential electors, governors, attorneys general, judges, and district attorneys fell on deaf ears, and Obama was swept to victory in 2008 amid his message of “hope and change.”

Included in his campaign rhetoric was the promise to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”

After approximately three months of pressure from Trump, on April 27, 2011, the White House released what it said was a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s original birth record from Hawaii at whitehouse.gov.  Within hours, however, the image was declared fraudulent by several experts who went on the record with their analyses. The White House made no response.

In early 2009, a citizen of Tennessee, LCDR Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III (Ret), attempted to approach his local grand jury and a federal grand jury about Obama’s questionable eligibility and alleged treason but was spurned and incarcerated on multiple occasions. His initial petition to the Monroe County grand jury alleging by criminal complaint that Obama had usurped the presidency by “force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, dissembling, and deceit” was used as a basis to convict him of “aggravated perjury” in June 2014.

Fitzpatrick nearly died from an infection while in Tennessee state prisons between August 2014 and October 2016.

Laity and Fitzpatrick both received visits from the U.S. Secret Service as a result of their claims made against Obama.

In his letter to Trump, Laity asserted that “Barack Obama is not an Article II, Sec. 1 (USConst) ‘Natural Born Citizen’…You were correct all along.  Obama was NOT eligible to be President and never was the bona-fide President,” then referred Trump to his Constitution Day 2010 letter published at The Post & Email titled, “There is no President Obama.”

Over the course of a 5+-year criminal investigation into the long-form birth certificate image, the media ridiculed and scorned the messengers consisting of Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joseph Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse lead investigator, Mike Zullo.  The media continued its blackout when on December 15, 2016, Zullo revealed that two well-respected forensic analysts agreed that the long-form image could not possibly represent a real, paper document.

Zullo has said that the image was released to the public “with the intent to deceive” and that it constitutes “the foundational lie of this (Obama’s) presidency.”

Laity concluded his letter with “I trust that you will agree that this matter must be addressed. It is a moral imperative.  I await your response.”

Laity’s letter can be read in its entirety here:  Letter to President Donald J. Trump, Sr. regarding Barack Obama’s usurpation

36 Responses to "Letter to Trump Alleges Obama’s Two-Time Usurpation of the Presidency Meriting Investigation"

  1. Robert Laity   Friday, July 21, 2017 at 4:32 PM

    Believe it or not this letter JUST GOT DELIVERED by registered US Mail today to Jeff Sessions. Trump JUST received it only a couple of days ago. The original was mailed IN APRIL and was re-mailed,by registered mail, because of claims of non-receipt.

  2. Robert Laity   Saturday, April 22, 2017 at 9:29 PM

    Philo, As I said, I consulted a Marine Judge Advocate on this matter. The fact that the US has been engaged in war in Afghanistan and Iraq for over (15) years belies your assertion that we are not “in time of war”. Congress has been paying to engage in war and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have been called “Wars”. BTW, the Constitution does NOT require that a “Declaration of War” be in writing. I reviewed Averette with the JAG Officer. Obama IS covered by the UCMJ under S906A106 in that HE falls under the category of “ANY Person…”. ,that includes Civilians. Contractors are civilians also. They too are covered under federal statute.

  3. Philo Vance   Friday, April 21, 2017 at 1:07 PM

    Mr. Laity

    The President of the United States is not a member of the military. Even as Commander in Chief he is comsidered a civilian. The U.S. Military Court of Appeals ruled in U.S. v. Averette, 19 USCMA 363 that military courts had jurisdiction to try civilians only “in times of war” means congressionally declared wars. Thus Averette a civilian could not ne tried ny a military court because the Vietnam War was not a war declared by Congress.

    As to security clearances, both the president and vice-president are exempted from security clearance requirements under the 1995 Executive Order number 12968.

  4. Robert Laity   Friday, April 21, 2017 at 6:23 AM

    Reality Check, It looks like you need some remedial instruction regarding the U.C.M.J. with regard to espionage during war time. Spies are not normally in the Armed Services of the United States. Spies are in most cases, foreign agents and/or even domestic enemies.

    In the case of espionage during time of war the U.C.M.J. covers “ANY person…” military OR civilian who:

    “during time of war is found lurking as a spy or acting as a spy in or about ANY place, vessel, or aircraft within the control or jurisdiction of ANY of the armed forces,or in and about ANY shipyard, ANY manufacturing or industrial plant, or in and about ANY other institution engaged in work and aid in the prosecution of the war by the United States, or elsewhere, SHALL BE TRIED BY A GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL or by a MILITARY COMMISSION and on conviction SHALL BE PUNISHED BY DEATH” http://www.ucmj.us/sub-chapter-10-punitve-articles/906-article-106-spies I don’t make “stupid statements”. I thoroughly research what I say before I say it. Obama usurped the Presidency during time of war. That alone makes Obama a spy under 10USC, UCMJ Section 906, Article 106. Just to be absolutely sure, I personally consulted an active duty Marine Judge Advocate. ANY person, regardless of status in the military or civilian can be court-martialed in time of war for espionage. Hillary Clinton beware also.

  5. bob strauss   Friday, April 21, 2017 at 12:43 AM

    MINOR v. HAPPERSETT REVISITED.

    …the only time the US Supreme Court ever did define the class of persons who were POTUS eligible under Article 2 Section 1 was in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), wherein it was held:

    “The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.

    https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/minor-v-happersett-revisited-2/

  6. thinkwell   Friday, April 21, 2017 at 12:18 AM

    @ RealityCheck,

    You are a non-serious bald-faced liar. Aka obama (whatever his real name is) is an undeniable narcissist. There is no way he was unaware of his bio as presented for over 15 years and through several revisions by his publicist. Bios are typically written by the author, not the publicist. Your excuse making is so lame that it is clear that you are a kool-aid drowned obot.

    Your best defense (if you had any sense at all) would be to claim that aka obama is a proven, pathological liar and that he just lied about his nativity story in order to appear more exotic to sell more books. Note that even though I believe aka obama should be put to death per the rule of law for his crimes and treason, I believe his claims of a Kenyan birth could, in fact, be total lies, but I do not believe for a moment that he did not knowingly make such claims.

  7. Philo Vance   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 11:16 PM

    @Mr. Check,

    While I believe that the RC referred to in Mark Gillar’s comment is you, the blog was not yours but the other guy – August, 2013.

    Second, I would like to point out that it was Pamela Geller’s site Atlas Shrugged that first identfied that the short form birth certigicate image posted on Fight the Smears had a seal. One of her readers adjusted the image contrast and was snle to see it.

    BTW, it was Pixel Patriot who first showed that the April 27th, 2012 pdf also has a seal. He applied a color filter to the pdf and the seal necame visible.

    Credit where credit is due.

  8. Jeffrey Harrison   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 9:04 PM

    Philo, your hunches and insights are understandable to lead you to your conclusions. Both
    Zullo and Arpaio have many years in Law Enforcement and Criminal Investigation. We only
    see things from our view.

    I as a basic level volunteer with Mike Volin, have perhaps a slight insight of the investigation.
    I can’t expand on that, but I can say that I trust Zullo and Arpaio did what they could with
    the resources and the time they had at hand. And who knows what additional info and
    evidence they may reveal in the future.

    They have timed things as best as they could have. Arpaio and Zullo weren’t looking to investigate Obama, this issue found them. Both paid a price in time, talent, treasure and being mocked…

    All that they revealed would have put “average joe citizen” in jail. Neither the media or government officials took a look at Arpaio’s evidence and investigation.

    It wouldn’t surprise me that perhaps Arpaio still has info and evidence yet to be revealed,
    although I have no proof. In the mean time, I will still support Arpaio to the end.
    officials defended the law or Constitution…

  9. Reality Check   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 8:27 PM

    I would like to address a few comments here.

    First Brian Reilly is correct. Mike Zullo presented nothing of value at the 12/15/2016 so called “press conference”. I put press conference in quotes because if you take no questions it isn’t a press conference. If Zullo wants to be taken seriously by the mainstream media confining his interviews to Carl Gallups show on a peanut whistle station in Florida and nut job Alex Jones show doesn’t really help his credibility with the media.

    I also should point out that Zullo has been wrong on almost every point so why should we believe any of this “new” but not really new “evidence”? Everything he pushed at the first to pressers has been debunked. Zullo has admitted that Forlabs agreed with me that the LFBC PDF file was originally scanned on a Xerox WorkCentre. He was wrong on the race codes. He was wrong on how the birth certificate numbers were sequenced.

    Even what was presented at the 12/15/2016 presentation in the fuzzy video can be seen to be nonsense. Things that were supposedly copied from the Ahnee certificate are not identical.

    I don’t think Gillar made those comments on my blog. I cannot find them. However, trying to measure angles of a stamp on a marginal resolution image is folly. Irey tried to do that with the text near the binder of the LFBC PDF and just arbitrarily drew lines to try to represent the angle of the letters. He forgot that with a typewriter there is a variation in the vertical spacing of the letters especially in capital letters where the key can strike the ribbon while the platen is still in motion.

    If Zullo’s theory is that the date stamps were copied over from the Ahnee certificate then the forger had to change the date but didn’t do the trivial step of rotating the angle of the copied image. And Zullo wonders why no one will take him seriously?

    As far as Birthers working for Obama that’s a hoot. However, I need to point out that Mr. Reilly was a Birther for over 4 years himself.

    I am not surprised that Laity got a visit from the Secret Service. He has written that Barack Obama should be executed because he is a traitor and should be tried for treason under the UCMJ. TO begin with the president isn’t subject to the UCMJ. Making that kind of stupid statement on the the Internet will usually earn you a visit from the guys in suits.

    Sharon, you said in the article “Since entering political life in 1995, Obama claimed he was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, although earlier and later versions of his biography state that he was born in Kenya or Indonesia.”. That is a complete falsehood. No version of Obama’s biography ever said that. A publisher’s assistant made an error on a brochure. She has admitted the error.

    You said “On June 12, 2008, an image appeared at The Daily KOS and several other websites said to be Obama’s official birth certificate but lacking a registrar’s official seal and a signature.” Of course you failed to state that subsequent high resolution images of the birth certificate were published by Factcheck.org and other sites that showed the seal and signature quite plainly.

    And my favorite: “After approximately three months of pressure from Trump, on April 27, 2011, the White House released what it said was a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s original birth record from Hawaii at whitehouse.gov. Within hours, however, the image was declared fraudulent by several experts who went on the record with their analyses. The White House made no response.”

    So just who were these experts? Had they ever examined a single document before? What were their credentials? Or were they just a bunch of amateurs who downloaded (a probably pirated) copy of Adobe CS2 and saw the PDF had layers? The actual experts hired by WND did not conclude it was a forgery. One of those amateurs, Albert Renshaw who was a mere 16 years old at the time now has recanted his analysis and said he was fooled by a compression algorithm.

    Even Zullo doesn’t stand by those analyses and admits the evidence he presented at the first two press conferences was wrong.

    I am sure you will not approve this comment so I made a copy to publish at my blog. Unlike you I allow open discussion unless someone gets goes completely off the rails and is an obvious troll. You are welcome to comment at my blog at any time and I would even consider publishing a rebuttal article if you would car to send it to me. I have nothing to fear from open discussion because I know I have the truth on my side.

  10. Philo Vance   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 4:37 PM

    That’s what he told Gallups on one of the recent shows. It’s wait for the right time, we only have one shot at this.

    They’ve known this “new” evidence since 2013. Why wasn’t any of it included in the Sheriff’s kits? Wouldn’t it have been helpful if Mike Volin had this evidence when he went to Washington?

  11. Sharon Rondeau   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 1:37 PM

    How do you know?

  12. Philo Vance   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 12:38 PM

    Mr. Reilly,

    I don’t completely buy your stated readons for lraving the CCP, but I do agree with you on this point – the December prrsd conference presented no new evidence. The comparison between the two birth certificates was done several years ago. It was only announced in December to make it appear that they had something new.

    Here is what Mark Gillar wrote in August, 2013 on the website that found the Xerox scanning evidence.

    “The two August date stamps were lifted directly off another birth certificate. Yes, the day was changed, but everything else is identical including the angles of both stamps. Tell me RC, what are the odds of two hand-placed stamps on two separate birth certificates having the exact same exact angles? Did the forger get lazy or is it just that all capturing tools would have preserved the original angles”

    They knew about it in 2013 but announced it on 2016 like they had only just discovered it.

    Zullo has not given Congress the Hayes report or the Forlab report. Will he ever show it to anyone?

  13. Robert Laity   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 7:19 AM

    In Minor v Happersett, USSCt. (1875) the court unanimously agreed that a “Natural Born Citizen” is one born IN the U.S. to parents who are both citizens themselves.

  14. Robert Laity   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 7:16 AM

    Further debate on this is not needed since the US Supreme Court unanimously agreed in 1875 that an NBC is one born IN the U.S. to parents who were both U.S. citizens themselves.

  15. Brian Reilly   Thursday, April 20, 2017 at 1:44 AM

    Bob68
    “After Sheriff Arpaio and Mike Zullo’s last news conference in December, 2016 almost all of the Obama defenders have stopped saying Obama was, “born in Hawaii”, and changed to, “born in the U.S.A.”. This is in spite of the fact his claimed birth certificate, which they say is authentic, says he was born in Hawaii. Even the most ardent Obots are now admitting the BC posted as Obama’s legitimate one is a proven forgery, and their change of wording is an admission of that knowledge.”

    The December 15, 2016 Zullo & Arpaio third presser was another dud. No written reports to read from the forensic analysts. No questions allowed from the press. No forensic analysts to present their findings. No new information taken to the Maricopa County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. No new information taken to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Phoenix. The Cold Case Posse was closed. Arpaio was soundly rejected by the voters of Maricopa County. Zullo was made ineligible for reassignment to other MCSO Posses. And finally, Arpaio is facing a criminal trial in June. One could almost speculate that Birthers most certainly must have been working for the Obama Administration, diverting our attention from real issues, while insisting that we focus on delusional fantasies. Great job Birthers! (Don’t expect this to get published on the Post & Email because it doesn’t fit the Birther narrative.) Maybe Sharon will do an investigation into whether Mike Zullo is still driving a car with “G” marked government plates, and what did he do with all of our contributions?

  16. Jeffrey Harrison   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 6:42 PM

    Dear Bob68,

    Thanks for your home-work about Natural Born Citizen. I tried to google the World Book Encyclopedia 1958 to find your noted definition and had a hard time and got “Missing: 1958
    book”. (on a handful of articles)

    I in no way doubt your findings. Thank the Good Lord that some copies of the 1958 Encyclopedia still exist in hard paper book form. That they can not delete this. Nothing like old paper back (book) technology. This is dated and difficult to delete or dismiss.

  17. Philo Vance   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 5:49 PM

    Bob68,

    Do have any examples of the change to “born in the US? I don’ t recall noticing and such change

  18. T.F. B0W   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 4:32 PM

    In Elliot v. Cruz, the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled Cruz was a natural-born citizen. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed that ruling. The U.S. Supreme Court denied cert.

  19. Bob68   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 1:19 PM

    Hi thinkwell.

    Check this out from the World Book Encyclopedia, last copyright 1958:

    Quote:
    “Qualifications for the Presidency. The Constitution opens the opportunity for election to the presidency to all “natural-born citizens” of the United States, meaning citizens born in this Country. A person born of American parents in another Country, such as Canada or France, would not be eligible for election. The candidate must be at least 35 years old, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years.”

    Looks like this was written for Ted Cruz.

  20. thinkwell   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 11:49 AM

    Mr. Laity,

    In my last message I completely forgot to thank you for your efforts and personal sacrifice in defending our great Constitution. Please accept my apologies for that.

    As you well know, courts routinely error for all kinds of reasons. If you get a chance and the moment is right, please remind the judge that the Constitution was written in plain English to be understood by ordinary citizens. And more importantly, please ask the judge to explain the difference between a mere “born citizen” and a true natural born Citizen and respectfully ask him or her, “Do you assert that the founders were in the habit of inserting completely meaningless, superfluous words into key phrases of the Constitution)?” Clearly a natural born Citizen per plain common sense English is one born a citizen needing no law or statute to make it so (when one is born in-country to citizen parents, it is the only case where no other citizenship is possible).

  21. thinkwell   Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 11:36 AM

    Mr. Laity,

    All of the cases brought against Ted Cruz so far were either dismissed or, in a couple of cases, decided in his favor (there is a subtle difference, but I am sure you know more about that than I). None of these wrongly decided cases made it anywhere near the Supreme Court. None of these activist judges explained how if Ted Cruz had been born as he was in a foreign land to a foreign father, but just a mere few decades earlier (before the naturalization statutes were relaxed), he would not have been a citizen of the USA at all, let alone a natural born Citizen (i.e., he clearly is only a statutory born citizen at best).

    Those who supported Ted Cruz’s campaign must contend that being born anywhere in the world to just one American citizen parent is enough to make one a natural born Citizen and be eligible to become President. If these blind followers of Cruz were thinking clearly they would realize the horrible implications to our national sovereignty of such a belief.

    For example, imagine that a Chinese man naturalizes as a US citizen, then, without giving up his citizenship, returns to communist China where he starts a business selling his valuable US-citizen sperm to hundreds or thousands of communist Chinese women who wish to birth a natural born Citizen of the USA. These thousands of communist Chinese babies (who would be born overseas to just one US citizen parent) would be legally every bit as eligible to become president as native Canadian-born (and Cuban-American) Ted.

    How can anyone really believe that is what the founders had in mind? This is as bad as or worse than our perverted anchor-baby law. Obviously, their clear goal is to subvert the Constitution, destroy our sovereignty and turn us into just another globalist, elitist run state.

  22. Bob68   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 6:08 PM

    After Sheriff Arpaio and Mike Zullo’s last news conference in December, 2016 almost all of the Obama defenders have stopped saying Obama was, “born in Hawaii”, and changed to, “born in the U.S.A.”. This is in spite of the fact his claimed birth certificate, which they say is authentic, says he was born in Hawaii. Even the most ardent Obots are now admitting the BC posted as Obama’s legitimate one is a proven forgery, and their change of wording is an admission of that knowledge.

  23. Jeffrey Harrison   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 5:40 PM

    Kurt, perhaps it isn’t so much what Trump hasn’t done yet, but moreover what countless citizens who know Obama had been a fraud and have not taken action to support the effort.

    Many bitch and have done nothing. Perhaps for no united action we are reaping nothing.

    I for one couldn’t actually expect Trump to jump on the birther issue so close to taking office.
    In due time, I am hopeful that Trump will indeed take action, but first perhaps he needs to get
    some momentum and put things in line, before he pounces.

    If anyone who could pull it off, it will be Trump. In the mean time, we’ll all have our work cut out
    for us.

  24. Robert Laity   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 5:40 PM

    Sandy T, You may be interested to know that I am suing Rubio,Cruz and Jindal for attempting to usurp the Presidency of the U.S., along with the State of New York for allowing them to run on the ballot.

    My case comes up for Argument in May,2017. See: Robert C. Laity v. State of New York., Rafael “Ted” Cruz., Marco Rubio and Piyash “Bobby” Jindal, Docket # 524197, NY State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 3rd. Department.

  25. Robert Laity   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 5:30 PM

    Kurt, Trump simply said that “Obama was born in the U.S.” in order to assuage birther issue gainsayers.

    Mere birth alone, “in the U.S.” does NOT suffice however to be President. Obama remains ineligible to be President regardless of any statement that Trump made that Obama was born in the U.S.

    No one really KNOWS where the quisling Obama was born. His BC is a proven forgery. That fact alone constitutes the proof needed of Obama’s usurpation of the Presidency by FRAUD during time of war., a CAPITAL offense.

  26. Kurt   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 11:27 AM

    Didn’t Donald Trump turn his back on the birthers last September?

  27. SandyT   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 10:25 AM

    A natural born citizen is someone born on U.S. soil to a citizen father and a citizen mother, no more, no less. Obama’s father was not a citizen (ever) so even if Obama had been born in the White House, he is not now, nor ever was a “natural born citizen”. He was born a “citizen” because his mother was, but even his citizenship is in question because of his mother’s marrying an Indonesian citizen (her second husband) and him (Lolo Soetoro) adopting him so he could attend school in Indonesia. His mother sent him back to her parents in Hawaii but there has been no documentation released that showed that he applied to have his U.S. citizenship restored. Even if he had, it would be “naturalized” citizenship and he would still not be eligible as a natural born citizen for the presidency.
    The Republican Party is just as guilty of fraud when they allowed three ineligible candidates to run in the primary, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal. Cruz was born in Canada and only his mother was a citizen. Rubio and Jindal were both born in the U.S. but none of their respective parents were citizens at the time their sons were born. We MUST abide by the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution, no matter which political party they represent!

  28. Robert Laity   Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 6:07 AM

    Elmo, Obama may not be in the WH anymore but he is still guilty and must be penalized. The charges against him were filed early in 2008. Obama cannot escape culpability. ANY Statute of Limitations will not apply since charges against Obama were formally filed within said period.

    Philo, Letters to the President may be read by the Correspondence section but that doesn’t mean much when Trump is involved. I sent a copy of the letter to Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen. He will see that Mr. Trump actually reads it. The Court of Public Opinion will also bring this matter to a boil.

  29. Bob68   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 7:38 PM

    It would be very difficult for Jeff Sessions, after being in Congress the entire time Obama was usurping the presidency, to do anything now which would expose and have acted on the fact that Obama is an identity fraud, con-artist who faked being president with the help of Congress and the media. Both political parties refused to consider, and attempted to ignore the fact that massive evidence of Obama’s usurpation and identity fraud exist. Obama’s success in damaging America as much as possible was greatly helped by a Congress complicit in his usurpation by not demanding an investigation of, “Who is Barry Soetoro?”, before Obama was sworn in back in 2009. Now, after covering for his usurpation and refusing to do anything which could reveal the truth, like impeachment or a real investigation, the last thing Congress wants is the truth to be exposed at this point. Congress protected Obama, both parties, from the truth about his usurpation being revealed and acted on. They do this even now because giving America’s government and her military to the enemy is not a crime they want to be found complicit in. Barry being a fraud protected him, and made all attempts at exposing the truth futile. Very hard to see Sessions, or even Trump, doing anything now. Obama being allowed to usurp the presidency effectively blackmailed those complicit in the usurpation, both Congress and the media never want to be confronted with the truth about Barry……..those complicit protect Obama to protect themselves.

    This occurred the moment Obama was allowed to be sworn in back in 2009, with no objections from Congress….they sealed their fate at that moment. Obama used this to his advantage as he did whatever he wanted and dared Congress to impeach him………no matter how many times he ignored the Constitution. Congress put on a show for 8 years and did……..nothing. Obama being a fraud was a huge factor in both parties trying to defeat Trump. They knew Hillary would be “Obama 3” and the usurpation would just fade away over the years. With Trump, they cannot be completely certain………..

    A question now would be, “Is Obama ever going to return to the USA?”

  30. Jeffrey Harrison   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 6:50 PM

    A spark can ignite a massive forest fire. I commend Mr. Robert Laity for his effort. And I appreciate The Post and Email for posting Laity’s letter. Therefore, what is stopping us and
    others from supporting Laity’s stance?

    This evening I will send a letter by mail similar to Laity’s to President Trump.

    Here is Trump’s mailing address:

    Donald J. Trump, Sr.
    President of the United
    States of America
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
    Washington, D.C. 20500

    P.S. Just think what thousands of sparks could do!

  31. Philo Vance   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 5:30 PM

    Things to keep in mind.

    Letters to the President go first to the the office of Presidential Correspondence. There they are opened and read. The office is headed by Robert Porter. He was chief of staff for senator Hatch of Utah. Hatch wrote that Obama released is nirth certificate in 2008 and is a natural born citizen. Porter will decide if Trump sees the letter.

    In eight years Jeff Sessions never said Obama was ineligible.

    The current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is an Obama appointee.

  32. ELmo   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 5:00 PM

    Jonathan,
    These are great comments. Thanks for the links – My computer was hacked back in October and I lost all the links I had regarding eligibility. I have restored some of them but some that I was missing are contained in your comments (and some I didn’t have at all).

    Regarding Hannity and O’Reilly’s public responses: Hannity cancelled a show that was supposed to expose Arpaio/Zullo evidence against Obama and O’Reilly originally claimed he had “Seen” the Birth Certificate and it was legit (turned out that what he saw were the Newspaper annoucements of Obama’s birth – O’Reilly claims no one would fake a birth annoouncement because there would be know way of knowing that that baby would be elected President 47 years after the birth announcement was made – O’Reilly is a total Phony and Obama apologist who is only interested in furthering his own career by sucking up to POTUS so he can iterview POTUS on his show. Total Phony (IMHO).
    ELmo

  33. Philo Vance   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 4:14 PM

    Everyday President Trump gets thousands of letters at the White House. They are read by the correspondence department. Only a few make it to Trump himself.

    If Trump doesn’t redpond it is just as likely that he never saw it as he chose to ignore it.

  34. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 3:25 PM

    https://www.teaparty.org/obama-joined-tahiti-campaign-supporters-oprah-hanks-springsteen-partying-scheming-230411/

    http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/actors/tom-hanks-net-worth/

    http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/singer/bruce-springsteen-net-worth/

    http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/media-mogul/oprah-winfrey-net-worth/

    http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/20/news/obama-pension/

    We all expect the angry-jealous Theft Left to be FACT STABBERS, but what about the “good guys” and fellow “conservatives” and even die hard “Trump supporters” when forced in a public setting to explain the FACT that “Obama II” only offered a FORGED BIRTH CERTIFICATE to some 320,000,000 American citizens as proof of his Constitutional eligibility to be your Commander-in-Chief and, now, your tax-paid-for ex-president?

    What is Hannity’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    What is Tom Fitton/Judicial Watch’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    What is newly inducted Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2017/04/16/obama-eligibilityforgery-lawsuit-appeal-docketed-tenth-circuit-court-appeals/

    What is ‘No Spin” Bill O’Reilly’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    What is Rush Limbaugh’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    What is AG Jeff Sessions’s public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    What is Donald John Trump’s latest public response to “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2017/04/17/letter-trump-alleges-obamas-two-time-usurpation-presidency-meriting-investigation/

    WHAT IS YOUR PUBLIC RESPONSE TO “Obama’s FORGED birth certificate”?

    Here are the sterile, emotionless, fingertip accessible FACTS available from the comforts of your own home:

    FACT 1: 1789 http://constitutionus.com/

    FACT 2: 08-28-08 http://canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm

    FACT 3: http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/birther%20case%20list.pdf

    FACT 4: http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/officer-imprisoned-for-challenging-obama-tells-his-story/

    FACT 5: 4-27-11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM2GJn6hpJE

    FACT 6: http://www.wnd.com/2014/05/trump-obama-rejected-50-million-for-birth-records/

    FACT 7: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuhF-Ok3djI

    FACT 8: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-115

    You don’t even know the full identity of your own “candidate/president/ex-president Obama” do you?

    How could you, since that inalienable rightful presidential-ID-knowledge/intellectual property has been robbed from you every day since 08-28-08. http://www.carlgallups.com/zullo-affidavit.pdf

    Regardless of what the media says, what Hollywood says, what your uncle says, regardless that you want to believe that your government would never allow a known illegal usurper to be your president et al, WHAT DO YOU THINK NOW?

    12-7-41…………………………..9-11-01….08-28-08

    Are you a responsible American Citizen, or an apathetic U.S. Government subject?

    ANSWER:

    1. Your response to the following question:

    DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ALL 320,000,000 AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE AN INALIENABLE RIGHT-TO-KNOW, A PRACTICAL NEED-TO-KNOW, AND A PATRIOTIC DUTY-TO-KNOW THE FULL IDENTITY AND FULL LIFE HISTORY OF ANY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE AND ANY INCUMBENT PRESIDENT AND ANY LIVING EX-PRESIDENT AT ANY TIME?

    2. Your behavior after the following discovery is publically disclosed:

    Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., aka Barry Soetoro, is declared by the U.S. Department of Justice to be America’s first ineligible caliphate candidate, Muslim Brotherhood president and islamic insurgent ex-president based on his fraudulent issuance of a FORGED BIRTH CERTIFICATE and other disclosed fraudulent acts; further, all votes cast for Obama 2008 and 2012 are null and void and all his presidential actions 08-28-08- 1-20-17 are CONSTITUTIONALLY NULL AND VOID. God Save America.

    WHO CAN PROVE REALITY WRONG HEREIN; CAN YOU?

    JD Mooers, PE (MA, ME, NH, NY) Where public safety is of paramount importance, there is no accommodation for fraud from pollutics.

    Obama lovers: Can you now remodel your frames of mind from believing is seeing to seeing is believing?

  35. ELmo   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 12:28 PM

    Robert,
    Great letter -. I agree with Stephen Hiller – This is the only avenue left to seek Constitutional redress on this issue – As “Gary” pointed out in his comment to a previous article: SCOTUS and the U.S. Congress have already spoken on this issue by refusing to address it over an eight year+ period. If Trump and Sessions refuse to move, it’s a lost cause (made even more difficult by the fact that Obama is out of office and many will consider it a “moot point” at this juncture). In addition and more importantly, our inability to receive a fair hearing on this matter is of grave concern regarding the future of our Constitutional Republic.
    ELmo

  36. Stephen Hiller   Monday, April 17, 2017 at 10:18 AM

    Maybe … all we can do is hope. If President Trump doesn’t address this issue and give it 100% support, the establishment incumbents sure won’t do diddly about it; that’s already been proven.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.