WHY WON’T HE ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS REGARDING OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY IF HE IS A TRUE DEFENDER OF THE CONSTITUTION?
August 17, 2010
Dear Editor: The following letter has been sent to Glenn Beck, talk radio and Fox News television show host:
Thank you for the great work you are doing in educating the American people about all the lies and distortions we have been fed about our history. I was especially moved by your revelations concerning the vital role played by early black Americans in the founding of our nation.
I regret that I cannot attend the 8/28 gathering in Washington D.C. which you have organized because I have a longstanding commitment to attend a reunion on that date in your home area, near NAS Whidbey Island, WA, of the U.S. Navy squadron in which I served in Vietnam.
Despite your very vocal support of the U.S. Constitution, Glenn, I remain dismayed at your failure to address the issue of the ineligibility of Barack Obama to serve in the office of president. I believe this is the core issue at the root of many of our current problems which you have been exposing so thoroughly on your show.
Please have one of your staff read this message carefully. Please also read the attached affidavit which was filed this week by Dr. Orly Taitz in her appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Barnett et al v. Obama, seeking a resolution of the eligibility issue from the 2008 presidential election.
If you think this is not a worthy issue, please tell me why.
Are you aware that there is not one single piece of legally admissible evidence confirming Obama’s birth in Hawaii as he claims – not one document, not one person who witnessed the birth or had observed Obama as a newborn child in Honolulu, not one hospital claiming to have been the birthplace of the president of the United States?
Are you aware that there is no evidence that Obama actually attended Columbia University, as he claims; that no member of the Columbia graduating class to which he allegedly belongs remembers him as a classmate at Columbia University; and that all records, if any, relating to Obama’s attendance at Columbia University have been sealed?
Are you aware that the putative president of the United States is apparently using a fraudulent Social Security number, issued in the state of Connecticut at the time that Obama was a youth living in Hawaii, to a person, now deceased, who was born in 1890?
Are you aware that Obama likely never registered with Selective Service as required by law, and that in order to cover up this fact, Obama‘s representatives released a document purporting to be a copy of his Selective Service registration which is suspected of being a forgery?
Are you aware that there are several mysterious deaths which have been connected circumstantially to the 2008 presidential election, including the apparent assassination of a person who was reported to have been a key witness in an investigation into a criminal act of unauthorized access to the U.S. State Department passport files for Barack Obama?
Are you aware that, with the exception of the nomination certification sent to the State of Hawaii, the presidential candidate nomination certification letters sent to the other 49 states by the chairman of the Democratic National Committee omitted the language certifying that the candidate is qualified to serve in accordance with the requirements of the United States Constitution?
Are you aware that there are now three retired U.S. Army generals who have demanded Obama’s resignation over his lack of eligibility?
Are you aware that a decorated U.S. Army colonel is being court-martialed, abused, and physically threatened by senior Army personnel over his refusal to accept deployment orders until he can be assured that the presumed president of the United States is legitimately holding that office and possesses the actual legal authority to issue such orders?
Are you aware that a criminal complaint will be submitted this week to FBI Director Mueller demanding a full FBI investigation of Obama for 29 listed criminal acts, including Social Security fraud and usurpation of the office of president due to lack of constitutional eligibility?
Are you aware that despite numerous attempts across the country, no member of Congress will provide a substantive response to the requests for action by the millions of American citizens who are extremely concerned about the unresolved constitutional issues surrounding the 2008 presidential election and the many serious fraudulent acts which allowed it to happen?
Glenn, if you are aware of any of these disturbing facts, one would never know it from listening to your show. You go on, day after day, educating the American people about the dangers to our country of the policies being implemented by Obama and his progressive allies, yet the most urgent problem is not Obama’s policies. The most urgent problem is that Obama himself is a usurper in the White House, having been put there in violation of the very requirements of the Constitution that you claim to so admire. He does not belong there and everything he does is illegal. This is what you should be talking about.
I can offer you an example from my own personal experience of what happens when a constituent seeks a meaningful response from his or her congressman on the eligibility issue. Typically, they simply refuse to respond until they are cornered. When cornered, they insist that they believe there is no issue, or that there is nothing they can do, or they offer a nonsensical interpretation of the Constitutional eligibility requirements. The ultimate brush-off is a statement that this is a matter for the courts. Of course, the courts avoid the issue by insisting that American citizens do not have “standing” to demand verification of the constitutional eligibility of the president.
This is why America needs a person like you, who has gained the attention of a huge audience of Americans who are extremely concerned about the direction this country has taken since the 2008 election, to finally acknowledge the elephant in the room – the president’s refusal to respond to the question on the lips of millions of Americans: Who is Barack Obama and where is he from?
The message attached below was sent to Ms. Christy Guerin, District Director for Rep. Brian Bilbray (CA-50), after she stated in a message to me following my inquiry into Congressman Bilbray’s recent public statement that the Constitution does not require a president to have been born in the United States, that the process of naturalization transforms a foreign-born citizen into a “natural born Citizen” as the term is used in the U.S. Constitution.
This statement is not only bizarre; it is unfortunately a classic example of the kind of nonsense and obfuscation that has been coming from the mouths of people who represent us in Congress on the eligibility issue. They will say anything, no matter how ridiculous it is, to avoid addressing the reality that we apparently have an ineligible usurper, a fraud, a forger, and very possibly an illegal alien in the White House.
If this is not a threat to our national security, I don’t know what is. Why aren’t you talking about this? Have you been threatened? Is all your talk about “speaking out with boldness” just words? Are you for real, or are you just another hypocrite like all those congressmen, senators, and military officers who violate their oath of office to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic” every day that they do not speak out about the constitutional crisis precipitated by the 2008 election?
Where do you stand, Glenn Beck?
David F. LaRocque
CDR USNR (ret)
Email to Congressman Brian Bilbray’s staffer:
Thank you for responding to my message.
I believe that your statement that “the 14th amendment states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States”, which has been interpreted to mean that if two American citizens travel to another country and give birth to their child there and then come back, the child will be naturalized and is a natural born citizen at the point. They do not have to be born in the United States” is just plain wrong.
A naturalized citizen is not a “natural born citizen” as the term is used in the United States Constitution. When I was growing up, every school child knew that a person must be born in the United States to become president.
Attorney Mario Apuzzo has published extensive writings on the subject, confirming the above. (Attorney Apuzzo is an expert in constitutional law and counsel in Kerchner et al v. Obama, which is currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.)
These writings are in part based on new research confirming the important role played by Emmerich de Vattel’s well-known treatise titled “The Law of Nations, or Principles of the Laws of Nature Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns” in the deliberations which occurred during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
You may read my editorial on this subject here.
Frankly, I am shocked and dismayed to learn at this late date that Congressman Bilbray believes that the Constitution does not require a person to have been born in the United States to satisfy the Article II, Section 1 requirements to serve in the office of president. This is simply incomprehensible. If this were true, then what was the point of S. 511 from April 2008 in which a number of Democratic senators (including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton) attempted to resolve by Senate resolution the problem with Senator McCain’s eligibility arising out of his birth outside U.S. soil in Panama? These people are lawyers – surely they understand what the Constitution says on this subject.
Moreover, if Obama were, in fact, born in Hawaii as he claims, why has he spent several million dollars fighting every effort to simply confirm this fact? It does not make any sense, does it?
Unfortunately, Congressman Bilbray is exposing himself as seriously deficient in his understanding of the Constitution which he took an oath to “support and defend against…all enemies, foreign and domestic”, or he has an agenda which is in direct conflict with the U.S. Constitution. Neither of these possibilities is acceptable for a sitting member of Congress, in my opinion.
This issue is not a trivial matter. If Attorney Apuzzo’s conclusion is true that Barack Obama is probably an undocumented alien, then the American people have been victimized by the greatest hoax in the history of this nation. This is a national security concern of the very highest order.
There is no issue more important to the American people, and to the very survival of the American nation, than to resolve this matter promptly and expeditiously. Every public policy action implemented by this administration, every appointment made by Obama (including two of the most frightening Supreme Court appointments imaginable), every bill he signed, and every combat military operation carried out under his authority, is very likely illegal and unconstitutional.
Moreover, the highest levels of our government are now infested with Communists, Marxists, radical left-wing terrorists, and even some serious criminals. In reality, our government has been overthrown in a bloodless coup d’état.
The situation now existing in our country is one which I could not have imagined when I was on active duty as a naval officer many years ago. I thought that Congress and the courts would have prevented this from happening. Instead, they seem to have been complicit in enabling the very thing they are sworn to prevent.
I strongly urge you to read the information I have provided, and I hope that Congressman Bilbray would do the same. This issue is no longer a matter of private discussion. It is quickly becoming a matter of the most urgent national concern.
David F LaRocque