NEW DEVELOPMENT: CNN INTERVIEW REMOVED FROM YOUTUBE
by Sharon Rondeau
(Oct. 25, 2017) — In an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper on Tuesday following his announcement that he will retire in January 2019, Sen. Jeff Flake enumerated a number of his objections to the Trump presidency impacting his decision.
On Tuesday, The Post & Email linked to the YouTube video of Tapper’s “The Lead,” but as of press time on Wednesday, it has been removed.
One of the reasons Flake gave for his dissatisfaction with Trump was that Trump publicly questioned the constitutional eligibility of his predecessor, Barack Hussein Obama II, beginning in early 2011.
Since 2007, questions and inconsistencies arose about Obama’s birthplace and other life details and continued through his eight-year occupation of the White House.
Trump demanded that the White House release Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate to prove that he was born in the United States, as he claimed, and qualified for the presidency as a “natural born Citizen” as required by Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
Most Americans interpret the term of art to mean, at a minimum, “born in the United States.” In modern times, the citizenship of the parents has not generally been a discussion point, although no president, other than Chester A. Arthur, had a parent who was not a U.S. citizen when he was born.
Arthur is considered by many to be an ineligible usurper of the Oval Office given that evidence surfaced that his father remained a British citizen for a number of years after Chester was born.
Obama’s life narrative states that his father was a British citizen who obtained a visa to study at the University of Hawaii in 1959. Born in what later became the nation of Kenya, Barack Hussein Obama (Sr.) became a citizen of the new country upon its declaration of independence from Great Britain on December 8, 1963.
According to Kenya’s 2010 constitution, which Obama supported with U.S. taxpayer dollars, Obama is himself eligible for Kenyan citizenship as a result of having a parent who was a Kenyan citizen.
The referendum on the new constitution took place on Obama’s purported birthday of August 4.
Speaking of Trump, Flake told Tapper at 23:44 in the video, “I was troubled years ago by his birtherism,” invoking the term the media assigned to the “conspiracy theory” that Obama was not born in the U.S.
Both before and after Obama announced he would seek the presidency, various reports said that he was born in Kenya or Indonesia.
Neither Flake nor Tapper referred to the five-year investigation conducted by the Maricopa County, AZ Cold Case Posse authorized by then-Sheriff Joseph Arpaio which found the long-form birth certificate image, posted at whitehouse.gov on April 27, 2011, to be a “computer-generated forgery.”
The Post & Email recently attempted to contact Tapper about a misleading subcaption to his 2015 interview with Arpaio about the investigation but received no response. To the right of the video, it states, “Sheriff Joe Arpaio says that he still believes that President Obama was not born in the United States,” although Arpaio has always stressed, as he did in that interview, that the probe never focused on Obama’s birthplace and Arpaio has never said where he believes Obama was born.
The caption, however, is accurate, and states, “Joe Arpaio: Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent.”
In a December press conference, Arpaio stated that the evidence gathered during the investigation would be turned over to federal authorities and Congress. While it does not appear that a probe has been launched into the forgery of the birth certificate image and Obama’s Selective Service registration form, also found by the posse to be fraudulent, evidence of corruption within Obama’s State Department, FBI, and DOJ has been breaking daily over the last week regarding the sale of 20% of U.S. uranium to Russia between 2009 and 2010.
Breaking late on Tuesday was that the DNC and Hillary Clinton reportedly funded the discredited Trump “dossier” used to discredit Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign.
As The Post & Email has noted, it is Trump’s adversaries, particularly the political left, which now bring up the Obama “birther” issue, mainly by objecting to others having dared to question Obama’s birthplace despite the findings of fraud and forgery in his government-issued documents.
Former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin objected to Tapper’s statement on his Tuesday broadcast which attributed a remark to her which was contained in a tweet issued by her account but actually was made by a blogger. Whether or not that caused the removal of the broadcast is as yet unknown.
Robert Laity is, of course, free to believe whatever he desires, but there is no indication Obama’s birth certificate was forged. Arpaio has made various claims, but there is no indication that he will ever publicly release the findings from his purported experts.
On the other hand, every judge who has considered the issue has said that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. And Obama’s birth certificate has been entered into evidence in some courts without incident. And Hawaii has verified to two Secretaries of State the accuracy of the information on Obama’s birth certificate, and those secretaries accepted that verification.
Minor did state that those born in the United States to two citizen parents are natural-born citizens, which no one doubts. But the decision never limited the definition of natural-born citizens only to those born in the United States to two citizen parents are natural-born citizens, which is why the decision states, “For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.” This is the basic logical difference between necessary and sufficient conditions.
Soebarkah’s questionable birthplace not withstanding,
his forged personal credentials require prosecution !
Bow, Fact is the BC is a forgery. Nothing on that worthless scrap of paper can be relied upon. You claim that “every Judge…”
Then, Pray tell, how do you then reconcile your spurious statement with the decision made by the full U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v Happersett? The Nine Justices unanimously defined “Natural Born Citizen” as one born in the United States to Parents who are U.S. Citizens themselves”.
Mark, You prove my point. Unconstitutional people have attempted to and continue to attempt to flout the Constitution. Neither Arthur or Hughes were eligible.
Gary, I usually qualify that issue by using the term purported. Since Obama’s BC is forged nothing on it can be taken as gospel.
Isn’t “CNN INTERVIEW REMOVED FROM YOUTUBE” a misleading subline since the interview was posted on CNN’s site?
Videos get removed from youtube all the time for a variety of reasons, often for copyright violations. Did the original youtube contributor have CNN’s permission to post its content?
Youtube back up.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DrXJbHwnKys
Even worse than Chester Arthur’s ineligibility status, Obama’s father was not even an immigrant to this country. We are a nation of immigrants but Obama’s father was not one: https://www.scribd.com/doc/48856102/All-U-S-Presidents-Eligibility-Grandfather-Clause-Natural-Born-Citizen-Clause-or-Seated-by-Fraud ProtectOurLiberty.org
The CNN interview is still on CNN’s site.
http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/07/24/sheriff-joe-arpaio-trump-obama-birth-certificate-tapper-wolf.cnn
Yes, that was never in question and is linked to from the articles here. It contains a misleading sub-headline.
There are no “findings of fraud and forgery in his government-issued documents”; Arpaio claims such findings exist, but there is no indication that Arpaio will ever publicly release those findings.
Obama, Sr., is listed as Obama’s father on his birth certificate, and there is no credible evidence that Obama’s father is anyone other than Obama, Sr.
Robert Laity is free to believe whatever he desires, but every judge that has considered the matter has ruled that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship.
“Does anyone really believe that they would have allowed a Brittish [sic] Subject to be President?”
President Theodore Roosevelt in his book “Fear God and Take Your Own Part” acknowledged that President Arthur was a dual citizen of England and the US. In fact he wrote that should Arthur visit England he could have been impressed into British military service.
In the 1916 presidential election, Charles Evan Hughes was the Republican candidate for President even though it was well known that his father was not a US citizen at the time of Hughes’ birth.
Re: [ Breaking late on Tuesday was that the DNC and Hillary Clinton reportedly funded the discredited Trump “dossier” used to discredit Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign.]
One has to wonder if Bill & Hillary will remain under the bus, or come out swinging on Pres. Trump with a new fury ?
SPECIAL REPORT: BIRTHER BOMB SHELL – Hillary went after Obama in ’12 ‘Used’ Ally Trump
http://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2016/05/special-report-birther-bomb-shell.html?m=1
Absolutely correct, Gary! Until all of Obama’s records are unsealed, for whatever reason or by whatever means, no one will ever know for sure about his (entire) true birth narrative.
Hi Bob…fully agree. However the argument re: Obama, assumes that Barry’s father is who he says he is, which of course has NEVER been proven.
I am here to educate those Americans who wrongly conclude that if a person is born in the United States then he/she is a “Natural Born [U.S.] Citizen”. Mere birth in the United States is not sufficient to be President. A person’s parents must both be U.S. Citizens. I am on very solid legal ground on this. It’s an incontrovertible fact. Neither Chester Arthur or Barack Obama were ever the President. They may have been presumed to be but neither actually was. William Arthur did not naturalize as a U.S. Citizen until (14) years after Chester was born in Vermont.
Wm. was born in Dreen, Ireland and was an Irish citizen when Chester was born. In 1829 Coverture attained from the Husband to the wife and not from a wife to her Husband. The citizenship of the Father is the citizenship of the child. Both Arthur and Obama inherited British Subject hood from their respective Fathers. Everyone knows that only (53) years earlier the United States of America became a sovereign nation fully disconnected of all ties to Britain. Does anyone really believe that they would have allowed a Brittish Subject to be President? The British Nationality Act of 1948 made anyone born to a Brit in any of England’s past colonies or territories, a Brit him/herself. It specifically mentions Hawaii as one of those previously link to the Great Britain.
In arguendo, even if Obama were born in the US that does not help him. His Father was never an American citizen