// ]]>
Breaking News: Obama releases long awaited birth certificate.
You have to give Donald Trump credit. He has accomplished what even the Clintons could not. Eligibility advocates have tried to get Barack Obama to release his birth certificate for three years. Donald Trump gets involved and finally, the long lost birth certificate comes out.
It is about time.
Democrats are hailing this as a huge defeat for the Republicans. It isn’t, but they are very good at messaging.
However, there is a very serious question to be asked. Since there are no bombshells here, except the possibility that Obama’s mother might have been a few days underage at the time of the conception, the question remains, why did Obama spend millions of dollars to keep this document secret?
Donald Trump, being the savvy guy that he is, is already moving to his next target. Obama’s college records. Obama has never released his college records, including those at Occidental College. Many believe Obama went to college there on a scholarship reserved for foreign students.
Obama should release his college records, as well as his attorney disciplinary records. Whether he will or not is anyone’s guess, though once Obama broke and released this document, he will have a much harder time not releasing other documents.
For the conservative movement, this is a two edged sword. Getting to see some of these documents is great. The question is what will it do to the Obama candidacy? Obama could be mortally wounded if some of the other records reveal embarrassing things, such as attending school on a scholarship reserved for foreign students. The Democrats may actually want this to happen. As gas prices rise and so does inflation, the chances of an Obama second term diminish. If something happened and the Democrats could replace Obama with someone else (Hillary Clinton?), that candidate could run against the Obama record as well as the Republicans, giving them a shot at keeping at least the White House in Democratic hands.
This story will have more twists and turns through the day and as it does, TPN will have updates for you.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rick Johnson on -
Father from Kenya = NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
CASE CLOSED
-
Permalink Reply by Kay Allen on -
Sorry -- 14th Amendment: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside" -- It's pretty clear. Says "all persons"
-
Permalink Reply by DocHollywoodMD on
-
The US Constitution: 14th Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution - Rights Guaranteed Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process and Equal Protection
AMENDMENT XIV of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
History and Ratification
The fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States was proposed to the legislatures of the several States by the Thirty-ninth Congress, on June 13, 1866. It was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State dated July 28, 1868 to have been ratified by the legislatures of 28 of the 37 States. The dates of ratification were:
Connecticut, June 25, 1866
New Hampshire, July 6, 1866
Tennessee, July 19, 1866
New Jersey, September 11, 1866 (subsequently the legislature rescinded its ratification, and on March 24, 1868, readopted its resolution of rescission over the Governor's veto, and on Nov. 12, 1980, expressed support for the amendment);
Oregon, September 19, 1866 (and rescinded its ratification on October 15, 1868)
Vermont, October 30, 1866
Ohio, January 4, 1867 (and rescinded its ratification on January 15, 1868)
New York, January 10, 1867
Kansas, January 11, 1867
Illinois, January 15, 1867
West Virginia, January 16, 1867
Michigan, January 16, 1867
Minnesota, January 16, 1867
Maine, January 19, 1867
Nevada, January 22, 1867
Indiana, January 23, 1867
Missouri, January 25, 1867
Rhode Island, February 7, 1867
Wisconsin, February 7, 1867
Pennsylvania, February 12, 1867
Massachusetts, March 20, 1867
Nebraska, June 15, 1867
Iowa, March 16, 1868
Arkansas, April 6, 1868
Florida, June 9, 1868
North Carolina, July 4, 1868 (after having rejected it on December 14, 1866)
Louisiana, July 9, 1868 (after having rejected it on February 6, 1867)
South Carolina, July 9, 1868 (after having rejected it on December 20, 1866)Ratification was completed on July 9, 1868.
The amendment was subsequently ratified by:
Alabama, July 13, 1868
Georgia, July 21, 1868 (after having rejected it on November 9, 1866)
Virginia, October 8, 1869 (after having rejected it on January 9, 1867)
Mississippi, January 17, 1870
Texas, February 18, 1870 (after having rejected it on October 27, 1866)
Delaware, February 12, 1901 (after having rejected it on February 8, 1867)
Maryland, April 4, 1959 (after having rejected it on March 23, 1867)
California, May 6, 1959
Kentucky, March 18, 1976 (after having rejected it on January 8, 1867)
-
Permalink Reply by Cristi Ritchey on
-
This is true of a "Native Born Citizen", but not a "Natural Born Citizen"
-
Permalink Reply by John Gaver on
-
It's not a good idea to cite the 14th Amendment, unless you have no other choice. That's because it has been the subject of several very controversial SCOTUS rulings - not the least of which was, Maxwell v. Dow 176 U.S. 581 (1900).
In Maxwell v. Dow, the SCOTUS ruling stated, "The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal Constitution against the powers of the Federal Government."
So according to that ruling, the effect in law of this section, is the exact opposite of what an otherwise educated reading of section 1 of this amendment would lead one to believe.
Of all of the amendments to the Constitution, the 14th has been by far, the most controversial and has been routinely interpreted by the court, in a way that is exactly the opposite of how most non-attorney citizens who voted for it, would have interpreted its meaning.
That said, we still have to wonder why B. Hussein Obama has spent more than $2 million, in his attempt to keep his birth certificate secret. There is still something sinister afoot here and regardless of my opinion of Trump, I must commend him for keeping up the pressure. Obama is spending tons of money, doing all the things that a guilty person would do and an innocent person would not. As we say here in Texas, if it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a pretty safe bet that it's a duck. You just don't spend millions of dollars to keep non-detrimental documents secret.
-
Permalink Reply by Ryan McKenzie on -
That and the fact that the 14th was never actually legally ratified.
-
Permalink Reply by Ryan McKenzie on
-
Speaking of reading, try checking what I wrote. I didn't say nobody had declared it ratified. I said it was not LEGALLY ratified. In other words it's ratification did not meet the amendment requirements of the Constitution. The ratification process for the 14th amendment, and several other amendments, was fraudulent.
The very idea that the central government can force states to ratify a document through duress is complete nonsense. Why have an amendment process at all if DC can put a gun to the heads of the states and force them to sign off on anything DC wants.
What would you say if tomorrow the government came out with an amendment to the Constitution that allowed the president to have a 25 year term and they told you that if you did not sign off on the law, they would declare martial law in your state and your representatives would be excluded from the national legislature. That's exactly what they did in the case of the 14th Amendment.
That's only the tip of the iceberg of reasons why the 14th amendment was never LEGALLY ratified.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Richard Harper on -
That has nothing to do with the term "natural born" as a requirement for President. Read my long posting from 15 to 20 minutes ago, plus my replies to others, like yourself, who have not studied hsitory enough to know who defined, and why the Founders used the term, "natural born"
-
Permalink Reply by Richard Harper on
-
We are talking about "natural born" as a qualification for President of the US in Article two, Section one of the Constitution, and the only place that term is used. It comes from, and is defined in, a book by Emmerich deVattel, "The Law of Nations", and was quoted and referenced by the Founders often. Do some research on the history of the Constituion. John Jay, first Supreme Court Chief Justice referred to the book in several of his opinions and if you read my entire posting of about an hour ago, there are many links to sites to explain it all to you and tell you how much the Founders referred to the book. They did not use terms loosely. Note specifically the note that John Jay sent to Washington during the Constitutional Convention when considering that point (the actual note is on the internet), saying he thought it unwise if "anyone other than a "natural born" citizen be commander in chief of the armies (i.e. President). Washington is known to have checked that book out of the library that afternoon. They did not want divided loyalties in the mind of a serving President (as you have seen so much from Obama). Precisely what they feared and did not want.
-
Permalink Reply by Eph 6:12 on
-
There are plenty of records that should be looked at: How was this man vetted?Obama's hidden public records:
1.. Dunham-Obama marriage license. Not released.
2.. Dunham-Soetoro marriage license. Not released.
3.. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama adoption records. Not released.
4.. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Besuki School application obtained.
5.. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Punahou School records. Not released.
6.. Selective Service Registration – a proven forgery released and a criminal act.
7.. Obama’s Occidental College records. Not released.
9.. Obama’s passport from Indonesia, he had to have one to attend school in Indonesia. Not released
10. Obama’s U.S. Passport, if one exists. Not released.
11. Obama entered Pakistan on what countries passport. Not released.
12. Obama’s Columbia University records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.
13. Obama’s Columbia University thesis. Not released.
14. Not one name of any student who knows Obama attendant Columbia released or known.
15. Obama’s Harvard Law School records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.
16. Obama’s Harvard Law Review articles, none released.
17. Obama’s Baptism certificate, if one exists ? None released.
18. Obama’s Illinois State Senate records. Not released.
19. Obama’s Illinois State Senate schedule. Not released (alleged to have been lost).
20. Obama’s Law practices client list and billing records. Not released.
21. Obama’s University of Chicago scholarly articles, none released or exist
22. The reason Obama lost his license to practice law in Illinois.
23. Explanation for his false Connecticut Social Security number
-
Permalink Reply by C & S Buss on
-
The list you provided is a very important reason we need to take back our country.
© 2012 Created by Judson Phillips.
