AND WHERE ARE YOU NOW?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Feb. 24, 2019) — Directly after Democrats won the majority in the U.S. House of Representatives in November, then-minority leader and Speaker-“Designate” Nancy Pelosi began invoking the U.S. Constitution and her pledge that she would promote a vision of “E Pluribus Unum,” “checks and balances” and “accountability,” among other attributes, in the 116th Congress.
She praised America’s Founding Fathers for their “vision” and quest for “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Further, she maintained that “We as Democrats are here to strengthen the institution in which we serve and not to have it be a rubber-stamp for President Trump.”
She promised that the new House of Representatives would “open the Congress with a rule that will insist on openness and transparency…”
More recently, Pelosi again referred to the Constitution’s tripartite “system of checks and balances” in condemning President Trump’s February 15 declaration of a “national emergency” at the U.S.-Mexico border stemming from illegal crossings, human trafficking and drug smuggling.
Pelosi and her caucus, as well as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, have vehemently opposed the construction of a border wall, a key Trump campaign issue which Congress has declined to fund in the amount he believes is necessary to reduce crime.
Conversely, Pelosi insisted that there will be “no wall” at the border, although an appropriations agreement signed on February 14 contains $1.375 billion for “fencing in Texas.” Far short of the $5.7 billion Trump desired, as a result of the emergency declaration, he plans to use funds from the Treasury Department’s drug forfeiture operations and monies appropriated to the Department of Defense for the seizure of drugs and construction projects.
Following the declaration, Pelosi released a statement in which she said, in part:
The President’s unlawful declaration over a crisis that does not exist does great violence to our Constitution and makes America less safe, stealing from urgently needed defense funds for the security of our military and our nation. This is plainly a power grab by a disappointed President, who has gone outside the bounds of the law to try to get what he failed to achieve in the constitutional legislative process.
The President’s actions clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse, which our Founders enshrined in the Constitution. The Congress will defend our constitutional authorities in the Congress, in the Courts, and in the public, using every remedy available.
This issue transcends partisan politics and goes to the core of the Founders’ conception for America, which commands Congress to limit an overreaching executive. The President’s emergency declaration, if unchecked, would fundamentally alter the balance of powers, inconsistent with our Founders’ vision.
We call upon our Republican colleagues to join us to defend the Constitution. Just as both parties honored our oath to protect the American people by passing the conference committee bill, the Congress on a bipartisan basis must honor the Constitution by defending our system of checks and balances.
The Speaker’s recent invocations of the Constitution have been echoed by certain sycophants in the mainstream media.
On Friday, House Democrats prepared a resolution expected to be voted on Tuesday aimed at nullifying the emergency declaration. Forecasts are that the resolution will easily pass the House, and its origin in the 1976 National Emergencies Act mandates a vote in the Senate “within 18 days” of its receipt.
Trump has said he will veto the resolution if it is passed. On Sunday morning, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Maria Bartiromo of “Sunday Morning Futures” that following the expected veto, the resolution will be “deader than dead,” indicating that he believes the veto cannot be overcome by a constitutionally-mandated two-thirds majority of both chambers of Congress. Graham added that Congress had appropriated billions in 2013 for border security and he believes current Democrat opposition is politically-motivated.
Trump has termed the illegal border-crossings, drug smuggling and human trafficking at the international border with Mexico a “humanitarian crisis,” with which Pelosi agreed in 2014 upon a visit to Brownsville, TX to meet with Border Patrol agents.
This past Friday, Pelosi and Rep. Henry Cueller (D-TX) visited Laredo, TX “to celebrate our country’s origin, to celebrate our country’s diversity, those Founders said to us, E Pluribus Unum, from many one.” During her remarks, she declared there is “no emergency, but rather, “a mythology by the president.” She also referred to both George Washington and Martha Washington as “our founding mother.”
Pelosi reported that while in Laredo, she met with a number of Border Patrol officials who “told us what some of their needs were,” although she did not elaborate on what those “needs” might be. Members of the Border Patrol are restrained from making political statements but have affirmed Trump’s push for new barriers and repair of existing ones.
During her Laredo address, Pelosi made frequent references to the U.S. Constitution and specifically, to Article I, in which the Founders laid out requirements of members of both the U.S. House and Senate as well as the responsibilities of the Congress as a whole, which includes establishing immigration law.
In defense of her stance against building a wall and the newly-raised resolution against Trump’s national emergency declaration, Pelosi claimed on her Speaker’s website that Trump is “trying to usurp” one of Congress’s responsibilities:
This is about the oath we take to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, our Founders very wisely placed in the Constitution provision for the separation of powers. Co-equal branches of government, there to be, again, a check and balance on each other.
That Constitution begins with the beautiful preamble to the Constitution, and the very first words following the preamble are, ‘Article 1,’ the Legislative Branch. The first branch of government, the text of which spells out our responsibilities. The first of which, the power of the purse, which our President is trying to usurp, many other powers contained there. We are there to honor the Constitution and protect it but also to strengthen the institutions in which we serve. We in the Congress of the United States, hopefully the Congress in the executive branch.
In 2008, after Barack Hussein Obama secured the Democratic presidential nomination, then-DNC Dhairman Nancy Pelosi signed the nomination certificates distributed to all 50 states, along with Alice Travis Germond, then DNC Secretary. A number of researchers thereafter noted that a different form was sent to the state of Hawaii, whose state statute requires that presidential candidates must affirm they are “legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution” to run seek the office.
An additional Hawaii requirement is the inclusion of “A statement that the candidates are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national party, giving the time, place, and manner of the selection…”
Instead, in 2008 the Hawaii Democratic Party chose to substitute the required wording with the statement that Obama and Vice-Presidential candidate Joseph Biden were “legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”
The 2008 nominating documents Pelosi and Germond signed have since been removed from Scribd. It is The Post & Email’s understanding that all states except Hawaii do not require a statement from the national political parties that presidential and vice-presidential candidates must be constitutionally qualified.
Hawaii law additionally provides for a process by which a presidential candidate outside of the two-party system whose “eligibility” is challenged can respond.
An investigation conducted by this publication in 2010 revealed that the DNC removed “constitutional eligibility” wording from its presidential nomination forms in 2004 and 2008. In 2004, U.S. Senator John Kerry ran for president alongside vice-presidential nominee and U.S. Senator John Edwards.
In 2000, the Democratic Party of Hawaii had included the “legally qualified” wording with reference to the U.S. Constitution for Al Gore and Joseph Lieberman.
In January 2011, former Hawaii Board of Elections temporary employee Tim Adams signed an affidavit stating that among his colleagues and supervisors, it was common knowledge that Obama did not have a birth certificate on file with the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH). Despite mainstream reports to the contrary dating back to at least 2004, Obama has claimed a birth in Honolulu on August 4, 1961.
While UPI and Snopes.com originally reported that the Queen’s Medical Center was Obama’s place of birth, both outlets mysteriously changed their statement to say that Obama was born at the Kapiolani Medical Center for Women & Children.
A “short-form” birth certificate image posted on June 12, 2008 at Obama’s “FighttheSmears” campaign website and others was immediately deemed suspect and never confirmed by the HDOH as having been issued there.
Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president and commander-in-chief to be a “natural born Citizen.” While the Framers did not precisely define the term, four U.S. Supreme Court cases and remarks recorded in The Congressional Globe, the precursor to The Congressional Record, indicate that at least some congressmen understood the term to mean “born in the United States to parents who are U.S. citizens.”
On his 2008 website, Obama claimed eligibility for the presidency via the 14th Amendment and his alleged birthplace in Hawaii, which became a state in 1959. In 2007, however, he hinted that he has a personal “immigrant” history and last summer declared himself “from Kenya.” He also claimed to have been born a dual citizen of Kenya and the U.S., although at that time Kenyans were British citizens.
Even if awarded “birthright citizenship,” Obama’s claimed father was never a U.S. citizen, which some have identified as a disqualifier for the presidency. In 1964, his student visa was reportedly non-renewed as a result of his conduct while attending Harvard University.
Shortly before the 2008 election, former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said in Spanish that Obama is “an immigrant” to the United States. Regardless of the nuances of the term “natural born Citizen” in modern history, Americans generally understand that a person who comes to the country and goes through the naturalization process cannot serve as president.
Richardson was co-chair of the DNC in 2004.
Early in 2011, then-businessman and real-estate mogul Donald Trump raised the “eligibility” question in regard to Obama by demanding that the White House release his “long-form,” or more detailed, birth certificate. “There’s something on that birth certificate that he doesn’t like,” he told “The View” on March 23, 2011. Prior to that time, the mainstream media had squelched any discussion of the questions arising from the conflicting media reports and narratives, including their very own, as evidenced by a December 2007 statement made by MSNBC commentator Chris Matthews that Obama was “born in Indonesia.”
A 2004 AP report headlined with, “Kenyan-born Obama all Set for US Senate.” A 2006 The Honolulu Advertiser reported that Obama was born in Indonesia, after which author Will Hoover hastily changed it to say Obama was born in Hawaii as a result of intense media scrutiny.
In 2010, members of the Kenyan Parliament described Obama as having been physically born there, which followed a 2008 statement by the same body that Obama is “a son of this soil.” During the 2008 campaign, Michelle Obama termed Kenya her husband’s “home country” in a public address.
In an interview just after the November 4, 2008 election, Kenya’s ambassador to the U.S., Peter Ogego, said Obama’s birthplace in Kenya is “already well-known.” He later retracted the statement to say that his remarks related to Obama’s father.
Although excoriated by the media, Trump continued to demand that Obama release proof that he was born in the United States and presumably eligible to occupy the office he held, an office Trump considered pursuing himself in 2012.
On April 27, 2011, the White House released what it said was a PDF scan of a certified copy of Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health by Obama’s personal attorney, Perkins Coie’s Judith Corley. Within hours, the image was deemed a sloppy forgery by experts, which ultimately gave way to a 5+-year criminal investigation conducted under the authority of the Maricopa County (AZ) Sheriff’s Office, then led by Sheriff Joseph Arpaio.
During three different press conferences on March 1, 2012, July 17, 2012, and December 15, 2016, lead investigator Mike Zullo detailed his findings, beginning with “probable cause” to believe the long-form birth certificate image to be a forgery and concluding with the declaration that two forensics experts, working from two different disciplines on two different continents and without knowledge of the other, reached very similar conclusions.
The investigation also declared Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, whose accompanying documentation was produced in two different versions to FOIA requesters, to be fraudulent.
To this writer’s knowledge, Pelosi has never expressed concern about the possible usurpation of the Constitution’s Article II despite her recent public resolve to uphold Article I. Constitutionally, if all other vetting processes for federal elected office-holders fail, it is the duty of Congress, in its joint session following a presidential election, to file written objections to an individual’s qualifications if doubts exist.
In January 2009, when Congress held its joint session to count the electoral votes from the 2008 election, Pelosi was Speaker of the House. As then-Vice President Richard Cheney/Senate President announced the vote totals as reported by each state, at a point where he might have asked if there were any objections, Pelosi interrupted by standing and loudly clapping, followed by an overwhelming number of colleagues (begins at 33:30 in video.)
In dereliction of his constitutional duty, Cheney did not attempt to call for objections, as the National Archives documents is part of the procedure: “The President of the Senate then calls for objections to be made. If any objections are registered, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and Senate. The House and Senate would withdraw to their respective chambers to consider the merits of any objections according the procedure set out under 3 U.S.C. section 15.”
Pelosi believes that “the Constitution” renders her, as Speaker, “equal to Trump.”
In a radio interview last August, Zullo told “Freedom Friday” host Carl Gallups for the first time that two U.S. intelligence sources informed him that it is “an open secret” that Barack Hussein Obama was born outside the country and therefore understood not to meet the “natural born Citizen” requirement of Article II. “That’s coming from people that are in the know, that are in three-letter agencies,” Zullo said.
If Obama was ineligible to the presidency, he “usurped” the office.
In November, Zullo reported that “very, very high, high, high-level White House officials have had a cursory briefing of the information that we garnered about the certificate.”
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.