The left likes to call it the “birther” issue. The term birther is used as a derisive term by the left, much as truther is. Of course the difference is truthers beliefs are based on a paranoid ideology, where as the birther issue is based on facts.
I prefer to call it the eligibility issue, not the birther issue. Whether you agree or not, the people who are pushing the eligibility issue are on our side. It is certainly counter-productive to deride them like liberals do.
Recently a whole stream of Republicans have come out, at the prompting of the drive by media, to reassure us that Obama is a citizen and oh, yes, he is a Christian too.
Last Sunday, at the prodding of David Gregory on Meet the Press, or as Rush likes to call it, Meet the depressed, Boehner said, the State of Hawaii had said he was born there, that was good enough for him.
Karl Rove, not a friend of the Tea Party, pushed the RINO line that Obama is a citizen and Sarah Palin, at a meeting in Long Island, a few days ago, also denounced the eligibility issue. Palin ended her remarks on the subject by saying, “let’s stick with what really matters.”
This issue does matter.
There are three variations on the eligibility issue. Two are based on undisputed facts. The third is in dispute.
The most commonly reported of the eligibility challenges is the claim that Obama was actually born in Kenya, not Hawaii. I believe, based on the available evidence, that it is more likely than not, Obama was actually born in Hawaii. Obama has spent a lot of time and (other people’s) money, keeping his original birth certificate out of sight.
Jack Cashill is one of my favorite writers and he has a theory which I think makes sense, that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, but there is something else on his birth certificate that would destroy the myth of Barack Obama. (See his website, Cashill.com). In the law, there is a presumption that if a party has exclusive access to a piece of evidence and will not release it, the evidence must be adverse to their position.
The second eligibility issue is the claim that because Barack Obama’s father was a Kenyan, a British subject at the time of Obama’s birth, he is not a natural born citizen.
The third is the argument that because Barack Obama was adopted as a child by an Indonesian and moved to Indonesia, he is not an American citizen. Under the law at that time, if an American child was adopted by a citizen of another country and moved to that country, he lost his citizenship. He could regain his citizenship by applying at an American Embassy when he was 18, but would then be treated as a naturalized citizen and thus ineligible to be President.
What is stunning about all of this is the mainstream Republican reaction to the eligibility issues.
The RINOs turn their noses up at the people who want the answers, which, incidentally is 60% of Republican voters. They turn their noses up at the Tea Party movement. Yet, they do not take a moment to consider why this is important.
If Barack Obama is proved to be ineligible to be President, everything he has done is wiped out. Obamacare is gone. The START treaty is gone. The liberal lunatics Obama has appointed to the Federal Judiciary, including the two he has put on the Supreme Court are gone.
Much of the damage Obama has done to this country can be undone. Unfortunately, the Country Club Republicans remain clueless. In their minds, the Democrats are simply the lower class versions of themselves. They do not understand that if the party of treason has its way, America will be forever changed and ultimately destroyed.
The Courts have so far brushed aside all of the eligibility claims. None have been addressed on the merits under the claim that Americans lack standing to challenge the issue. Recently, the Supreme Court has given some indication it may consider one of the issues. We can only hope.
What are the chances of success? Who knows?
Why do football teams run the flea flicker play? It does not work all of the time, but when it does, the results are spectacular. Why should conservatives all hope this works out? Because this wipes out almost everything the Obama regime has done. We get a do over.
You would think, even the RINOs who want to denigrate the eligibility issue could figure this one out.
I agree in part with the author's dissection of Vatel's understanding of Natural born citizen. My point of divergence, is that our Constitution does not fall under the Law of Nations. Even though that tome had tremendous and undeniable influence on our founders, the meaning as understood by the founders at the Adoption of the Constitution is that a natural born citizen is born in the country to citizen parents. If the author would study the writings of the founders and the laws and court cases his conclusion would yield the fact that the conditions of the natural born citizen are born in the country to citizen parents.
None of this changes the outcome of his reasoning except in the case of McCain, who was born an American Citizen in a foreign country and as such is not a natural born citizen.
The naturalization act of 1790 enacted that a child born of American citizens beyond the sea was a natural born citizen. This demonstrates that before this law that child was not a natural born citizen. It also demonstrates that it takes two citizen parents to be a natural born citizen. The law dealt with naturalization, which was the purview of Congress, but tampered with the definition of natural born, which would have required an Amendment to change. One of the definitions of natural born is that it occurs naturally and through no legislation. The law was undone in 1795, which in any event would remove any possibility of altering the original intent.
One last point on Vatel. At that time in history, before women's equality, a woman's citizenship was that of her husband, making the point of two citizen parents redundant. Today it is recognized that a woman may have a different citizenship than her husband.
The meaning of natural born citizen is also clarified by Supreme Court precedent in Minor v. Happersett as a child born within the country to citizen parents.
I believe in 1924 the law that said the father's citizenship determines the child's citizenship was rescinded.
Janet I sought that 1924 law, and while I could not find the father-child citizenship issue, I found what I think is a synopsis of all the immigration laws. Very interesting reading, especially of the drive to limit immigration. Years ago in doing family tree research I was disappointed to learn that the 1890 census was destroyed by fire. That census was the most detailed ever conducted, and after reading the material I attach I can see why it might have been destroyed purposely.
Finally someone comes out and confronts Holder with a laundry list of the Attorney General's culpability with respect to Fast and Furious. Leahy provides cover and emphasizes Holder's point that it is all Bush's fault. Evidently Holder and Obama read from the same play book.
Holder embroiled in new corruption charges. The criminal enterprise know as Eric Holder strikes again.
WND has obtained several hundred pages of documents alleging that Holder and Lanny Breuer, the assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s criminal division, have intervened to block recommended federal prosecutions in an ongoing dispute involving the exclusive Yellowstone Club, a private golf and ski resort now owned by supermarket billionaire Ron Burkle and international bank Credit Suisse.
Allegedly, Holder and Breuer want to shield from federal criminal prosecution the bank, Credit Suisse Group AG, a client of the Washington-based law firm Covington & Burling, as well as key Democratic Party operatives suspected of playing a role in allegedly fraudulent mortgage financing and bank lending practices.
Before joining the Department of Justice in the Obama administration, Holder and Breuer were partners at Covington & Burling.
“I know how Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer operate,” Mike Flynn, legal counsel for Tim Blixseth, the founder of the Yellowstone Club, told WND.
Holder and Breuer are protecting Credit Suisse, he charged.
“In my 42 years of trying high profile cases, I have never seen such corruption,” Flynn said. “The American people need to know what is happening inside the Holder-controlled Justice Department. The fox is now truly guarding the hen house.”
Do the average Americans care? They seem to float along as if in an old wooden rowboat unless something exciting like "Dancing with the Stars" is on TV.
Will it take another horrible terrorist attack to awaken them?
I know you are very excited that Holder is being asked questions, Royce. I hope something good results.
Elizabeth, We have the local news media to thank for that! Most of my family members and friends think i'm nuts when i tell them what i read online about this obama administration! Thank God for the internet!!!
I heard the only reason Boehner is going along with Issa in charging Holder with contempt is because some of the GOP House members went to him and told him they'll vote him out as Speaker if he doesn't go along with the contempt charges.
Boehner is a wimp! He let the Democrats bamboozle him last summer with the debt ceiling and he was actually trying to craft a seque out of F&F for Holder. Some House Speaker, eh?
It's about time the others speak up and tell him to take some action against Holder! Whatever made them let such a wimp be Speaker? Or was it "his turn," just like the GOP picked McCain in 2008 and now Romney for 2012. Maybe they would have better luck if they just "pick straws" to choose candidates!
Shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing, Holder instructed FBI agents to recover from Terry Nichols any remainder of the explosives the Bureau had provided him and McVeigh. To the chagrin of Eric Holder, the explosives were later discovered by another agency, complete with the fingerprints of Nichols, McVeigh and 2 FBI agents. Holder had reportedly offered Nichols respite from the death penalty for his cooperation in recovering the explosives. Obviously the Deputy Attorney General considered covering up his criminal complicity in the bombing eminently worth sparing Nichols just punishment for the murders of 168 innocent Americans.
After getting away with complicity in the Oklahoma bombing, Holder considers anything else he has done a minor offense. So now he brazenly sues states for protecting their citizens from foreign invasion and voter fraud. Holder, we are saving a hot seat for you in Hell.
Holder cuts loose a F&F insider.
by Doug Book, staff writer
Just days ago, House Speaker John Boehner shocked the conservative world by at last granting his long awaited approval for next week’s contempt of congress vote against Attorney General Eric Holder. But it wasn’t the thought of doing what’s right for the family of Brian Terry, Jaime Zapata or others killed in the Regime’s Fast and Furious scheme that prompted the Speaker’s decision. After all, Mr. Boehner is hardly one to risk a loss of political advantage—or more importantly, anger the national media—just because a few hundred people have been killed by his Democrat friends.
No, the very cautious Congressman Boehner and other Republican leaders at last chose to take a stand because of reports that “…at least one and perhaps two sources within the Justice Department…have approached the Issa committee seeking whistle blower status.” (1)
For weeks it has been suggested that House and Senate committee’s investigating Eric Holder’s participation in Operation Fast and Furious were receiving vital information from a leak in the Department of Justice. For example, the wiretap applications produced by the House Judiciary Committee last week—documents which proved that Attorney General Holder and others at the Department had been lying to Congress in claiming no knowledge of ATF tactics in its scheme of smuggling guns to Mexico.
In a letter to Holder, Darrell Issa made it clear, “…the wiretap applications amply demonstrate the immense detail documenting gun walking tactics that should have prompted senior officials in the (DOJ) Criminal Division to shut down the program immediately.” Yet for the past year, Holder and his DOJ minions had maintained the Operation was not halted because the Department knew nothing of the ATF’s reckless and illegal tactics. That was a lie and thanks to the DOJ employee or employees now seeking whistle blower protection, Holder and his colleagues are STUCK with it. (2)
Yesterday, Congressman Issa wrote a second letter to Holder in response to a desire to meet expressed by the Deputy Attorney General, Holder’s second-in-command. Issa makes it clear he’ll stand for no further lies or delays by the DOJ. With the contempt vote already scheduled next week and the Speaker and other House leaders apparently on board, finally persuaded by the information provided by whistle blowers that they hold a winning hand, Issa is at last in position to dictate rather than cajole. “If the Department of Justice submits a serious proposal for how it intends to alter its refusal to produce critical documents subpoenaed by the Committee, I am ready and willing to meet and discuss your proposal.” (3)
But if the DOJ wishes to continue its game of delay and obfuscate, the contempt vote will take place. Republicans unwilling to take the Attorney General to task will have to defend their decision to constituents.
Eric Holder knows he is in a very tough spot. And it took the few remaining honest officials in the Justice Department to put him there. Of course, those very courageous individuals are also responsible for convincing the weak-kneed Speaker of the House to fulfill his obligations to the people of the United States. These DOJ employees may be among the very few heroes of Fast and Furious.