If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
NEWSCASTERS OR POMPOUS PURVERYORS?
by Neil Turner
(Feb. 23, 2011) — How can you two Pompous Purveyors of Parse call yourselves Newscasters or Investigative Reporters, when you can’t even read a cue card or a screen image that says:
CERTIFICATION (not CERTIFICATE) of LIVE BIRTH;
NATURAL BORN CITIZEN (not CITIZEN, or NATURALIZED CITIZEN, or BORN IN AMERICA)?
Here are a few of the more remarkable examples of your journalistic incompetence on your TV shows on Monday, Feb 14th (Bill O’Reilly), and Tuesday, Feb 15th (Anderson Cooper):
The Factor (Bill O’Reilly): “Here’s the deal. The issue doesn’t matter! Sane, clear thinking people understand that the President is not a Muslim. He wasn’t born in Indonesia, or whatever.”
(Juan Williams: Why all the State legislation to require eligibility be proven to be on the ballot?).
“Because they’re PINHEADS! It’s just a Grandstand play by people who are looking for attention.”
We The People: “Here’s the real deal, Mr. O.” The issue does matter to 180 million Americans who question his faith and his condition at birth. Sane, clear thinking people understand that:
1. If he is a Christian who converted from his documented muslim faith in his 20’s, there would be a fatwah on his ‘apostate’ head; a death sentence called for by all ‘good’ muslims worldwide. (the silence is deafening here).
2. If he is a Christian, not still a muslim, he wouldn’t be reciting the muslim prayer at sunset, or saying that he will stand with them (the muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction, or funding terrorist organizations like the Hamas ‘refugees’ from Palestine, or bowing down to muslim kings and potentates.
3. You don’t legitimize illegitimacy by:
a. simply showing a proven-to-be-forged CERTIFICATION of LIVE BIRTH (and calling it a CERTIFICATE);
b. interchanging the words ‘natural born’ with ‘naturalized’ or ‘native born’ or ‘citizen’ or ‘American’;
c. saying that the 14th Amendment defines (or even mentions) ‘natural born’. It doesn’t;
d. calling people ‘PINHEADS’, just because YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH! (thank you, Jack Nicholson);
AC360 (Anderson Cooper): “Under the 14th Amendment, and under U.S. laws, anyone born in the U.S., regardless of what their parents are, is a ‘natural born’ citizen.”
“You heard (MT State) Rep. Wagner allude to the 14th Amendment and the standard it set for who is considered a ‘Nationalized (sic) Born American Citizen’. Until recently, that wasn’t in question nor was the candidate’s (Obama’s) citizenship.”
We The People: As Ronald Reagan was oft heard to say: “Well, Anderson, there you go again.”
Here’s the real deal:
1. MT State Rep. Wagner did NOT allude to the 14th Amendment as the standard for who is considered … ‘eligible’. You did! And very poorly and inaccurately at that. The 14th Amendment does not mention ‘natural born’ nor does it alter Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution in any way. Tsk. Tsk.
2. Your showing of and claiming that the forged CERTIFICATION of LIVE BIRTH proves that Obama was born in Hawaii (a red herring issue in any case, since the nationality of Obama’s father at time of birth is the defining requirement for ‘natural born’ status here) can get you in real trouble for fraud – once the massive cover-up of the ‘unknown’ in the White House is blown. You should research some of this fraudulent ‘proof’ yourself before standing behind it. Your research staff should all be FIRED! (and considering The Donald’s recent speech at CPAC – check his comments at :30 – 60 seconds, he would be willing to do it for you).
3. You said: “Until recently, that wasn’t in question nor was the candidate’s (Obama’s) citizenship.”
Let me refer you to the recent Geico commercial: ‘What? Do you live under a rock?’ Over 20 lawsuits that the corrupt judiciary refused to hear because We The People, authors of our Constitution/Contract, don’t have STANDING? Over a dozen Citizens Grand Jury indictments served on over 500 elected officials across the country? A decorated military officer, LTC Lakin, being court-martialed and now being held as a political prisoner in Leavenworth just for DOING YOUR JOB for you: demanding that Mr. Obama prove that he can issue anything but unlawful orders!
And finally, you introduce your legal expert, Jeffrey Toobin, Esq., who has the chutzpah to tell us that:
“Barack Obama was born in HI, – in the United States. This is not up for debate.”
“The words (natural born citizen) have been interpreted many times by the Supreme Court, and what it means is ‘Born in the United States’.”
“What Vattel says is that (to be a natural born citizen) you were be born in the U.S. and your parents were born in the U.S.”
“The only problem with that (scenario) is that 6 other Presidents had parents who were not (both) born in the U.S., including Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson, so the idea that there is some new requirement that your parents have to be born in the U.S. is as ridiculous as all their other arguments.”
We The People: Wow! What a pack of obfuscations.
1. There is no legal proof that Obama was born in HI. And anyone with an Esquire after their name can tell you that, unless they got their degree at Columbia University along with the proven-to-have-never-been-in-attendance-there, Barack Obama. Actually, there should be no debate about the fact that he was definitely NOT born in HI. Just ask HI Governor Neil Abercrombie. He can’t find any proof either. (Here’s why!)
2. The words (natural born citizen) have been interpreted by SCOTUS, and they agree with Vattel, not that your parents have to be born in the U.S., but that they HAVE TO BE CITIZENS when (Obama) was born, not when they (Obama’s parents) were born. In fact, Obama has already admitted his ineligibility in a court ruling that was also filed and accepted as an amicus brief along with VA A/G Ken Cuccinelli’s successful lawsuit against Obamacare.
3. 6 other Presidents may have had parents who were not ‘born’ in the U.S., but they (the duly elected Presidents) certainly were born of parents who were U.S. citizens at the time of birth. Your ignorance of the facts is astounding, IMHO.
You ALL should be FIRED! Newscasters, Investigative Staff, Investigative Reporters, and Esquires INDEED!
O’Reilly thinks we who know the truth are “pinheads” – the argument ad hominem typical of vacuous morons trying to obfuscate their bias. O’Reilly KNOWS the truth and is intentionally lying. Here is a tip: shut him off; turn the channel; delete your Saudi-managed Fox News subscription.
As a journalist, O’Reilly defames Harvard in the same manner as Obama (Harvard grad) and GWB (also a Harvard grad). Makes you wonder what that Unitarian school teaches up there, doesn’t it?
Great work by Neil Turner except for his repetition of an old either/or fallacy when he says that Obama’s birthplace is just “a red herring issue in any case, since the nationality of Obama’s father at time of birth is the defining requirement for ‘natural born’ status here.” NO, NO, birthplace is NOT a red herring.
To the contrary, if Congress or a federal court investigates the facts and finds that Obama has no American birth certificate, GAME OVER. And you call an issue that powerful a red herring?
Legalistic fencing over the meaning of nbC would also become moot if the Kenyan birth cert obtained by Lucas Smith were found to be authentic: again, it would be GAME OVER. No amount of legal hair-splitting or Arizona-style wordsmithing could obfuscate a foreign birth. It would be definitive and definitely not a red herring.
If Obama is not even a plain citizen, he is obviously not a natural born citizen, so the birth cert issue most certainly is important. The birth certificate question is sufficient by itself to resolve the Obama eligibility issue, but not necessary to do so. The nbC question is likewise sufficient to settle the issue, but not necessary unless Obama has an American bc, which he doesn’t. There is more than one way to skin a cat.
Actually, there are numerous paths of investigation that would lead to resolving Obama’s fraud, including the birth certificate question, the definition of nbC, Obama’s fraudulent Social Security numbers, Obama’s passport record, Obama’s admission to Occidental College as a foreign student, and Obama’s non-attendance at Columbia University.
It is not necessary or wise to put only one egg (the definition of nbC) in our eligibility basket.
I agree. Stinking fish may have been the better term here, as in ‘something smells real fishy here’.
The rotten, fishy-smelling CERTIFICATION may just become the ‘straw that breaks this muslim camel-jockey’s back. And we’ll take whatever straw that is that leads to the restoration of our Constitution.
I believe there are a long list of actions for which Obama could be impeached.
This question occurred to me:
Does Obama’s ineligibility reduce the possibility that he would ever be impeached, no matter how deserving it is, or who controls Congress?
It seems to me that it would be difficult to go through an impeachment process without revealing Obama’s eligibility to everyone, and also more of his hidden past and sleazy friends and associates.
Because Congress is so intent on insuring Barry’s ineligibility is hidden to the best of their ability, would they also never impeach him for the same reason, hiding his ineligibility?
IMO impeachment is not necessary or likely. Under its lawful authority per the 20th Amendment, all Congress has to do is to find that Obama is unqualified for office per Article II. Since such a finding would also disqualify Biden, whose tenure depends entirely on Obama’s legitimacy, under Amendment 20 Congress could then name an acting president.
First a congressional committee or committees must fully and fairly investigate and hold public hearings, in the process of which Obama might well resign anyway to put Biden in office. Then Biden could appoint Billary VP before he himself resigned.
“Does Obama’s ineligibility reduce the possibility that he would ever be impeached?” Answer: It depends on the grounds of impeachment. To impeach because of “ineligibility” will not work – as Orly argues, such charges would admit a lawful claim to the office.
I believe he has a lawful hold on the office, because the Electoral College and the US Senate had the ultimate responsibility to determine eligibility — and found him eligible (res judicata).
Consequently, he must be impeached for other charges, such as fraud, mispersonation, treason, election fraud, and crimes against humanity (among others). The use of two fraudulent birth certificates alone is a crime of sufficient severity to warrant removal from office. The failure to register for the draft before his 26th birthday is also a crime sufficient to warrant his removal, particularly since the federal law in question prohibits a violator from ever holding a job within the federal government, and furthermore, denies a non-citizen any possible path to citizenship.
He should be impeached. He is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood working economic jihad against the United States. His deployment of civilian “troops” to Wisconsin is an act of war against one of the several states and is an act of treason. His direct funding of Hamas – a designated terrorist organization and a declared enemy of the United States (20.3 million in his first week in office) is treason. There are plenty of reasons to impeach.
BTW: People who know the COLBs are forged but continue to promote them as legitimate are, as a matter of federal law, co-conspirators of mispersonation (misprision), and could face up to 15 years in prison for doing so. Even if we don’t catch them during Obama’s one term, we will convict them later, even if we have to do it posthumously.
Skypilot believes Obama “has a lawful hold on the office” because Congress failed to vet him, but that failure does not nullify the MANDATE of Article II, which says the prez “shall be” nbC. If Obama is not nbC, he is only a president-elect, NOT president.
No congressional action or inaction can override the Constitution. As long as Article II stands, Barack Obama can never be president. It takes more than winning an election and being sworn in to be president: you MUST BE nbC.
Again, impeachment would most certainly disclose his ineligibility, and it is one more reason why the complicit 111th and 112th Congress-members will refuse to do it.
But then again, demanding impeachment may just be one more straw to pile on the muslim camel-jockey’s back.
10 million ‘straws’ of pro-active Americans is all we ask.
I bet you won’t see this on the evening news!?!?!?
The power of persuasion has failed. Time to employ the persuasion of power.
You are exactly correct RacerJim; time is NOW for a series of multi-million man marches on DC; either accomplished peacefully (by active participation of the people) “as an obvious first choice”, or lastly by Revolution? – Your decision to make folks!!!!!
The credibility of the media is at stake so they are hostile to anything that undermines their position. The same for the remnants of the 111th congress. There is one court that must intervene and it is going to take a multi-million man march on DC, shutting it down if need be, to force the constitution to be upheld. That is the only way to upend these traitors and they are banking on it not happening. We either put them in a corner or they put us in one. So far, we’ve been the sheep they like to shear.
You are exactly correct “A pen”; time is NOW for a series of multi-million man marches on DC; either accomplished peacefully (by active participation of the people) “as an obvious first choice”, or lastly by Revolution? – Your decision to make folks!!!!!
Worse than this, boys, is that HB2544 is now said to be “dead” per Rep. Judy Burges.
This whole game is a joke. I’ve pretty much lost faith in all of the representatives, in whatever state (most of which do not have a big enough rep-dem ratio) it may be. You’re telling me that we can’t get ONE SINGLE STATE to pass an eligibility bill so that, even if you don’t see Obama’s birth certificate, it gets appealed to the SCOTUS for final definition of NBC???
Unbelievable! I feel like my following of this issue is a complete waste of time. It is truly a dog and pony show, just constant BS. Anyone else feel that way?
It seems the republicans dont have the moxie to fully investigate this and demand answers. I trust NO ONE in the US Congress, NO ONE! Politiians have got us in the mess we are in and its getting worse. A Muslim, alien is preident of this country! I served 27 years in the armed forces for this??????
This is a very well organized and powerful piece of work in my opinion.
Great letter, But they won’t pay attention……………..
I saw that Anderson Cooper “spin” 360 episode as well. Just how stupid are these people on TV? To change anything about the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President must and only come from a Constitutional Amendment that directly and specifically addresses ARTICLE 2 SECTION 1 of the Constitution! No peripheral and incidental newly written amendment designed to address an entirely different legal civil matter can change the original intent of ARTICLE 2! Why doesn’t this Cooper idiot know this? Why is he on TV putting out misinformation?
Excellent letter. Regarding the US Supreme Court and their interpretation of the term “natural born citizen”, here are five cases in which they characterized a natural born citizen to be born in the country to citizen parents:
1814 – The Venus
1856 – Scott v. Sanford
1874 – Minor v. Happersett
1898 – Ark v. US
1939 – Perkins v. Elg
These cases either quoted Vattel or used his language.
There is also an 1824 case (McCreery v. Somerville) where the Supreme Court declared the US-born children of an alien father to be “native born citizens”.
To date, the Supreme Court has never characterized a natural born citizen to be anything less than someone born in the country to citizen parents.
Just last night the traitor O’Reilly made comment about how his staff is the best in the business! That is a “spin” to me because he and his staff seem to know nothing about the U.S. Constitution!
I don’t know about O’Reilly’s ratings, but I would surely think they have to be falling. I simply don’t understand news reporters/opinion purveyors on this issue.
I know I don’t watch him much anymore. He is an egotistical bore who likes to talk over his guests. I may disagree with his guests, but if they took the time to come on his show, I’d at least like to hear their point of view….but it’s impossible with O’Reilly. I try watching CNN for a change of pace, but I can only stomach that station for 15 min tops, then I just turn the TV off all together.
In fact, I’ve stopped watching Fox as a whole. I used to have them on from the time I got up until I went to bed, but their lineup is just plain boring now…..and they either lean way to the right or surprisingly in some cases, way to the left. There isn’t anything fair or balanced about Fox anymore.
And we just laugh when Bill says….’we’re looking out for you’, when he should be saying, ‘I could care less about you, I’m looking out of me’. LOL He’s a joke.
Thank you Sally Hill. We all should boycot FOX. Fox has never answered a sigle one of my may communications with them. They are off my viewing list, in fact, our tv now stays off almost all of the time unless we are watching a CD or ROKU.
Thank you, Mr. Turner,
More trouble. Arizona recently voted down a good eligibility proposal by refusing to vote it out of committee, with the help of, I am told, several republicans, including one who is a sponsor of the bill.
Senate bill 1308, an attempt by Arizona to define, “natural born citizen”, as someone who has just one parent who does not have dual citizenship. Sounds like an attempt to get Barry off the hook and clear the lying worthless media and Congress of their compliancy in the usurper being able to unconstitutionally occupy the office of president.
Way to go.
I wish I could write that well. All I can do is read and envy those that can put their thought on paper. I do agree with everything you said.
patriotactionnetwork artical shria finance watch has list of compliant banks
we also need to forward this letter to john king and chris matthews along with george stepanapolous at a b c good morning america or at least a copy of it. it would be great for all in the msm to read it and give it plenty of thought. i would hope that many of them can be charged with wire fraud.
Actually it did go to Chris ‘Tingle-Leg’ Matthews, along with some tongue-in-the-cheek kudos for his asking why Obama just doesn’t release the darn birth certificate last December.
It did also go to my ‘media’ list, but john king and george step-in-a-pile-of-it are not on that list. Maybe these ‘Article II Deniers’ talk to each other, and will share some of this get-the-facts-straight information with each other.
After all, they do consider themselves ‘investigative reporters’, don’t they?
Neil, Great job!!! If O’Reilly sees this which I doubt (he is like our politicians, staffed to filter, they will ditch it) and the letter I sent him… Unless he is as narcissitic as Obama he may feel a twinge of oops.