US Supreme Court to Conference on Obama's Presidential Eligibility

Stop it already.

Obama is our president, elected by the majority of Americans. I did not vote for him, however the election is over, he is MY president now, it is time for everyone of us to rally behind him, to support his administration to STOP these insane games aimed at disqualifying him from office.

The American people have spoken in overwhelming numbers.

The time to have done something regarding his eligibility and citizenship passed long before November. Can any of you imagine what would happen now if for some reason Obama is prevented from taking office?

Everyone say it with me...

I am an American, Barack Obama is my President, I will support him.

After 8 years of a Bush administration and all that resulted from that, the new President is going to need ALL of the support he can get. No one should envy him, look at what he is going to be walking into on day 1.

Best of luck President Obama.

reply to post by Walkswithfish


If I could give you more stars I would...

...AMEN AMEN AMEN!!!

reply to post by Walkswithfish


I understand your point, but I highly doubt you will convince everyone on this board to unquestioningly support the president whether it is now or 20 years from now. As I have pointed out before, this situation wasn't cooked up by a bunch of nuts on ATS. There are 17 lawsuits in 12 states. It is our right as citizens to want the questions in these lawsuits surrounding Obama answered once and for all.

If you read the posts in this thread and others, most of us just want it over and done with either way. From what I have seen, there is evidence that says he is a natural born citizen but there is also some evidence that says he isn't. It is up to the courts to decide (assuming they quit telling everyone that they don't have standing and just hear and decide on one of the many cases anyway) and neither side on ATS is going to definitively prove their side is right until the courts make an actual decision.

If he is indeed a natural born citizen and never lost citizenship, great I hope he does a great job. If he is not a natural born citizen or did lose that status, he is not qualified to be president. Despite Bush's apparent opinion on the matter, no one is above the law and no one is above the Constitution.

On a website who's motto is to deny ignorance, one can hardly expect everyone here to just sit back and say "Oh well, it doesn't matter. He was elected so who cares." Doing so is actually the complete opposite of denying ignorance. Questioning and seeking the complete truth is what most of us have been doing, and is what we should be doing. Whether it is in regards to his natural born status or his policies. I for one refuse to roll over and just accept anything as truth without having all the facts, regardless of what the topic is.

Originally posted by Walkswithfish
Stop it already.

Obama is our president, elected by the majority of Americans. I did not vote for him, however the election is over, he is MY president now, it is time for everyone of us to rally behind him, to support his administration to STOP these insane games aimed at disqualifying him from office.

The American people have spoken in overwhelming numbers.

The time to have done something regarding his eligibility and citizenship passed long before November. Can any of you imagine what would happen now if for some reason Obama is prevented from taking office?

Everyone say it with me...

I am an American, Barack Obama is my President, I will support him.

After 8 years of a Bush administration and all that resulted from that, the new President is going to need ALL of the support he can get. No one should envy him, look at what he is going to be walking into on day 1.

Best of luck President Obama.

thats the funniest thing i ever heard

I will never stop until he is seen for the lier he is, Dose our constitution mean so little to you? he has cheated the american people and most of you are just fine with it. Oh no big deal he seems like a good guy right? so who cares that he lied to us about this. www.youtube.com...://www.obamacrimes.com/ and who cares that he said this.------ "That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist--- www.msnbc.msn.com...
what about this!!!! “In a new afterword to his memoir, 1960s radical William Ayers describes himself as a “family friend” of President-elect Barack Obama..." AND “In the updated version of his 2001 book “Fugitive Days,” Ayers calls into question one of the more incendiary quotes attributed to him during the campaign: “I’m nowadays often quoted as saying, ‘I don’t regret setting bombs. I wish we’d set more bombs. I don’t think we did enough.’
this guy dosent think he has done enough!!! and he just happens to be family friend of obama.
and thats all tip of ice burg. SO NO UNTILL HE HAS ANSWERED ALL OF AMERICAS QUESTIONS I WILL NEVER SUPPORT HIM.

reply to post by Jenna


The problem is I have not seen compelling evidence, and because these issues seem to take on more urgency AFTER the election raises serious suspicion on the opposition party. Do you not believe that if there had been any substantial evidence to support these allegations the McCain campaign would have stopped at nothing to disqualify Obama BEFORE the election?

These are dangerous times for ALL Americans we do not need more divisive political agendas.

The election is over, the time is upon us, we must rally behind the new administration and hope that we as a nation and people can survive these desperate times.

God bless the United States of America!

reply to post by Walkswithfish


At least two of the cases were filed prior to the elections. I for one hadn't even heard about his natural born status being questioned until after the election was over with. So I don't think it's necessarily that there is an increase in urgency now, it is more that there is an increase in awareness. The evidence I have seen brought up in a few of these threads was enough to cast a shadow of doubt in my mind. Perhaps not enough to convince me that he definitely is not natural born, but enough of a doubt that I believe it needs to be settled in one of the many court cases regardless of the outcome. One way or the other, the complete truth needs to come out. Starting out his presidency with these doubts surrounding him is not my idea of a good way to start. It needs to be settled before he is sworn in.

And no I don't think McCain would have gone after Obama over this if only because his natural born status was also questioned. He may have seen it as being no better than when a kid gets in trouble and says "But my friend Billy did it too and he didn't get in trouble!" He didn't go after Obama over the Ayers connection or the Rev. Wright connection, why would he go after this? (Palin did try with the Ayers connection, but not McCain.)

We are living in dangerous times. But they have been dangerous for a long time now. I can't even watch the news or read a newspaper anymore without constantly being reminded how dangerous this world is. Obama being president is not going to change that. Our problems are not going to disappear the moment he is inaugurated.

Personally I don't think we question our government enough. Maybe things might be different than they are now if more people had questioned during Bush's administration instead of waiting until it was too late.

Why dooesn't someone go to the Hawaii registrars office and ask for a copy of his birth certificate?

Don't you have in the USA a right to see and or copy the certificates of births, deaths and marriages?

And the negro/african question can be easily answered by having a 47 year old black man from USA show his current birth certificate and then ask for a copy to be issued to him and see if there is any difference between the original saying negro and the re-issue saying African or whatever

[edit on 27/11/2008 by Wig]

reply to post by Wig


Birth certificates are not released to anyone except the person named in the birth certificates or someone who has authorization by the person named. So I can't go get a copy of Obama's no more than you could get a copy of mine.

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by Walkswithfish

 

this situation wasn't cooked up by a bunch of nuts on ATS. There are 17 lawsuits in 12 states.

Ever think those 17 lawsuits are orchestrated and were cooked up as part of an attempt to destablize his presidency just like the Arkansas project was cooked up to harass Clinton?

In short the same old some and dance from the hard right that somehow just somehow they lost because the candidate that beat them was crooked and so is an illigitimate president.

You will note that after $70 million spent the final special prosocuter stated in his final report that there was nothing to the whole Whitewater etc. claims... all they ever got on him was that he was playing around with Monica... and that should have never been part of the whole investigation in the first place.

And for your info Obama has released his birth certificate and the state of Hawaii confirmed it was real.

But of course you guys will never believe that.
To wig:

Why dooesn't someone go to the Hawaii registrars office and ask for a copy of his birth certificate?

They have. Go to factcheck.org and type in Obama birth certificate and read what they found.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by grover]

reply to post by grover


If the lawsuits weren't spread around the country and weren't by people that apparently don't have connections to each other I would say maybe you are right. But as far as I'm aware, those who filed the lawsuits are not all connected to each other. If you have proof otherwise I'm sure everyone would be more than willing to discuss it, I know I would. In it's own thread of course.

Edit: You edited while I was posting. Yes I've seen that article, and I've seen the factcheck page. But as has been pointed out repeatedly by numerous posters: factcheck is suspect and may not be telling the truth, Hawaii never explicitly stated "He was born here" though they have said they hold his BC (and what people seem to be forgetting is that you don't have to be born in Hawaii to register your birth there, your parent(s) just have to live there for a year prior to your birth and they can register it there regardless of where you actually were born), and his BC is not the only issue being raised in the lawsuits.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by Jenna]

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by Walkswithfish

 

At least two of the cases were filed prior to the elections.

And those in position to take actions on those cases did NOT.

Why?

Could it be because there is not enough evidence to actually make a case?

Take a good long look at what is going on here, who or what agendas are behind it... There is more to this than just suspicion.

Yes Obama should can and I believe will answer these allegations in a clear and convincing way... I have a hard time believing he would have fought as hard as he did to win the election if he knew this could bring him down.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by Walkswithfish]

what every one is forgeting is he has the right and power to show us his BC and anything eles we need to see to prove he is or is not a natural born, but he refuses to show us. THATS WHEN THE RED FLAG WENT UP FOR ME! and like i have posted before his COLB that he has on the internet is a forgery!! the fact that there is like 17 cases in 12 different states aginst him and that there has been no news coverage... that should anger every american. even if it was false and could be provin wrong why not cover the story why not explaine to EVERY AMERICAN WHY THERE IS SO MANY QUESTIONS THIS GUY HASN'T ANSWERED!!!! BE A MINDLESS SHEEP IF YOU WANT! I FightLies

reply to post by Walkswithfish


With Berg he was told he didn't have standing because he had not been harmed at the time. Apparently, no US citizen had standing prior to the election because they could prove harm according to the courts. Now that the election is over, they should be able to prove harm if the allegations against Obama are found to be true.

The courts didn't actually look at any of the evidence. They dismissed saying there was no standing without looking at any of it.

And I agree, he should put an end to all of it if the allegations are all false. But the only way to do that is to actually go through the discovery process in one of the many court cases. Stalling and paying thousands in lawyers fees is not the way to end it. It just makes him appear guilty to many even if he isn't.

Originally posted by Walkswithfish

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by Walkswithfish

 

At least two of the cases were filed prior to the elections.

And those in position to take actions on those cases did NOT.

Why?

Could it be because there is not enough evidence to actually make a case?

[edit on 27-11-2008 by Walkswithfish]

how can you say this when I know at least one is still running that was started before the election. could be more I am checking.
www.youtube.com...://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-main/31-new-video-posted-at-you-tube- details-the-issues-in-be
so maybe they just didnt go high enough yet????

reply to post by Jenna


It is possible that Obama has been advised to hold back all evidence until or if it makes it to court, when anything he presents to the public can be portrayed as a forgery etc.

So perhaps a legal court proceeding on this matter is the best way to put this to rest once and for all... However the doubts raised may have already done too much damage. It is too bad that so many fail to see what is actually going on here. Hopefully that will change before Obama officially takes office in January. In these times we need to be United, perhaps now more than ever before.

I do not want to even speculate on what could happen to this country if by some chance this drags on for a long time, or worse somehow Obama is disqualified.

reply to post by Walkswithfish


When these cases came before the court,no one had been elected yet.They were only running for the office,ergo no damage had been suffered as yet. The plaintiffs would now have standing in the court with damage claims.
In these type cases the defendant has the burden of proof.Should the SCOTUS see fit to allow redress in this case,it will undoubtly be very interesting indeed.

I agree with Jenna, no matter how much you like Obama (or any other candidate), no matter how many votes he/she had, if there is some illegality it should be addressed and dealt with.

As I've stated before, I think of myself as an Obama supporter, but the law is the law.

Now I've seen some people talk about "loss of citizenship". Well, US law has no restrictions on dual nationality:

U.S. nationals and citizens may possess dual or multiple nationality and owe allegiance to one or several foreign states. (source)

Furthermore:

Dual nationality can occur as the result of a variety of circumstances. The automatic acquisition or retention of a foreign nationality, acquired, for example, by birth in a foreign country or through an alien parent, does not affect U.S. citizenship. (source)

Obama's situation (since his father had UKC nationality).

Here are the reasons that could result in loss of citizenship:

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

1. obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);
   
2. taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);
   
3. entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);
   
4. accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);
   
5. formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);
   
6. formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);
   
7. conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA). (source)

As far as I know, but correct me if I'm wrong, Obama didn't do any of these things. Having lived in Indonesia or any other place, wouldn't make him lose his US citizenship.

Are you allowed to inspect the births register? OK not allowed to copy the certificates, but are you allowed to inspect the register? It's very strange that a country that purports to be the most free in the world would not allow the register of births deaths and marriages to be open to public inspection.

I also doubt that an 18 year old Kansas girl would have left her studies in Hawaii to go to Kenya on her own to give birth to her son. It doesn't make sense, she would have definately stayed in Hawaii for the birth.

Plus, as the constitution does not define "natural born citizen" and the senate and legal think tanks have all said that a child of an American citizen born outside the USA would qualify to be a "natural born citizen" I really don't see what all the fuss is about.

As far as I am concerned "natural born citizen" is a citizen who by the nature of the circumstances of their birth is automatically granted that citizenship. i.e. the child of an American citizen born outside the USA is always automatically granted US citizenship.

The only interesting thing about all of this is the allegation of fraudulent birth certificates. On that point I say, if I was Obama, knowing I was not born in USA, that I was born in Kenya, I would rely on the fact that my mother was a USA citizen. rather than start to create and release fraudulent documents. Especially as John McCain was in the same predicament.

[edit on 27/11/2008 by Wig]

reply to post by Walkswithfish


I agree. He may have been told, or decided on his own since he was a lawyer before he became a senator, to refrain from saying anything more to the press about the situation to keep from muddying the waters. And I agree that going through the court proceedings is the best way for him to put this to rest one way or the other.

reply to post by danx


The only issue I'm aware of that has been raised regarding him losing citizenship would have been while attending school in Indonesia. His school records from there that have been released show his citizenship as being Indonesian and there has been speculation that at the time you had to be an Indonesian citizen to attend school there. So the line of thinking is that his US citizenship had to be renounced, or was terminated due to his attendance at that school.

There has also been information posted in a thread around here somewhere about him using an Indonesian or Kenyan passport to enter a country that Americans were not permitted to enter. I'll have to see if I can track down that particular post since I can't remember exactly what was said or which thread it was in. Unless someone else knows and can post it.

reply to post by Wig


The only thing that can be inspected regarding births by someone who is not named on the birth certificate, given authorization by the person named, the legal guardian of the person named, or the parents is the announcement in the newspaper. Birth certificates are confidential due to the risk for identity theft. Nothing suspect there.

We can speculate all we like about why she would have gone to Kenya, but that doesn't make anyone's speculations true. Maybe she had already moved there. Maybe she went to visit her husbands family and couldn't get on a plane back to the US before going into labor. Maybe she never went to Kenya till after giving birth. We don't know. That's part of the point of the lawsuits.

There not being a definition of "natural born citizen" in the Constitution is part of the problem. It could have meant, to the writers of the Constitution, only someone born in the US, only someone born to parents who were both US citizens, only someone born to at least one parent who was a US citizen, or only someone born on US soil no matter if it was in the US, on a military base, or in an embassy. We don't know what they meant for it to be.

There is also the potential that if he is not in fact a natural born citizen, maybe he didn't even know. Maybe he grew up thinking he was and is just now being confronted with the possibility that he isn't. He may not have knowingly tried to deceive anyone. Again, that is only a possibility if he is not a natural born citizen.

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by danx

 

The only issue I'm aware of that has been raised regarding him losing citizenship would have been while attending school in Indonesia. His school records from there that have been released show his citizenship as being Indonesian and there has been speculation that at the time you had to be an Indonesian citizen to attend school there. So the line of thinking is that his US citizenship had to be renounced, or was terminated due to his attendance at that school.

Not necessarily.

While it's not a stretch to think that, if his stepfather adopted him, it would have made Obama, an Indonesian citizen, and since Indonesia didn't allow dual citizenship, Obama could only be an Indonesian citizen. This is all true, in the eyes of Indonesian law. From a US law standpoint, however, this is not.

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481) states that:

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality-

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

Obama was not 18+ years when he lived in Indonesia, or when his stepfather allegedly adopted him. Therefor, he did not lose his US citizenship from a US law standpoint.

The argument that Obama stopped being a US citizen because of Indonesian law, is invalid, and I find it rather surprising, especially coming from conservatives, who usually don't care about other countries' laws.





[edit on 27-11-2008 by danx]