[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

These Are 2025's 'Most Livable' Cities Nicotine and Fish Genocide Summer Camp, And Other Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix This Can Create Endless Green Energy WITHOUT Electricity Geoengineering: Who’s Behind It and How We Stop It Pam Bondi Ordered Prosecution of Dr. Kirk Moore After Refusing to Dismiss Case California woman bombarded with Amazon packages for over a year CVS ordered to pay $949 MILLION in Medicaid fraud case. Starmer has signed up to the UNs agreement to raise taxes in the UK Magic mushrooms may hold the secret to longevity: Psilocybin extends lifespan by 57% in groundbreaking study Cops favorite AI tool automatically deletes evidence of when AI was used Leftist Anti ICE Extremist OPENS FIRE On Cops, $50,000 REWARD For Shooter With great power comes no accountability. Auto loan debt hits $1.63T. 20% of buyers now pay $1,000+ monthly. Texas delinquency hits 7.92%. Quotable Quotes from the Chosenites Tokara Islands NOW crashing into the Ocean ! Mysterious Swarm continues with OVER 1700 Quakes ! Why Austria Is Suddenly Declaring War on Immigration Rep. Greene Wants To Remove $500 Million in Military Aid for Nuclear-Armed Israel From NDAA Netanyahu Lays Groundwork for Additional Strikes on Iran: 'We Didn't Deal With The Enriched Uranium' Sweden Cracks Down On OnlyFans - Will U.S. Follow Suit? Joe Rogan CALLS OUT Israel's Media CONTROL Communist Billionaire Accused Of Funding Anti-ICE Riots Mysteriously Vanishes 6 Factors That Describe China's Current State Trump Thteatens to Bomb Moscow and Beijing Little Bitty Vertiv Drops After Amazon Unveils In-House Liquid Cooling System, Marking Pivot To Liquid 17 Out-Of-Place Artifacts That Suggest High-Tech Civilizations Existed Thousands (Or Millions) Of Years Ago Hamas Still Killing IDF Soldiers After 642 Days Copper underpins every part of the economy. If you want to destroy the U.S. economy this is how you would do it. Egyptian Pres. Gamal Abdel Nassers Chilling Decades-Old Prediction About Israel-Palstine Conflict.

Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Alan Keyes Files Lawsuit in Obama Birth-gate Case
Source: obamawaffles.typepad.com
URL Source: http://obamawaffles.typepad.com/oba ... -in-obama-birth-gate-case.html
Published: Nov 14, 2008
Author: obamawaffles
Post Date: 2008-11-14 20:27:13 by randge
Keywords: Keyes, Obama, Birth certificate
Views: 7373
Comments: 120

November 14, 2008 Allen Keyes Files Lawsuit in Obama Birth-gate Case You gotta love this . . . while Michelle Obama is dreaming of new patterns for the White House china collection and Barack Obama is busy redesigning the presidential seal, Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes—who is black and therefore cannot be dismissed as having a racist agenda—petitioned the Superior Court of California yesterday to require proof of Obama's birth certificate.

In his petition, Dr. Keyes points out that someone wanting to get a California drivers license must provide more proof of citizenship than Sen. Barack Obama has provided in his bid to be the next U.S. President:

Heretofore, only a signed statement from the candidate attesting to his or her meeting those qualifications was requested and received by SOS [Secretary of State], with no verification demanded. This practice represents a much lower standard than that demanded of one when requesting a California driver’s license.

Why should this matter? Keyes explains:

62. Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, states, in pertinent part, as follows:

"No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;"

63. Senator Barack H. Obama is a candidate for the Office of the President of the United States. However, to assume such office, Senator Obama must meet the qualifications specified for the Office of the President of the United States, which includes that he must be a "natural born" citizen. Senator Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a "natural born" citizen.

70. Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void, Petitioners, as well as other Americans, will suffer irreparable harm in that an usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.

For a PDF download of Dr. Keyes eye-opening and well-written petition, click here.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 72.

#21. To: randge (#0)

63. Senator Barack H. Obama is a candidate for the Office of the President of the United States. However, to assume such office, Senator Obama must meet the qualifications specified for the Office of the President of the United States, which includes that he must be a "natural born" citizen. Senator Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a "natural born" citizen.

Obama has evidently satisfied all requirements to be on the ballot in California. Keyes cites no state law to which the California secretary of state has failed compliance. While Keyes asserts that, "[i]it was incumbent on the candidates to present the necessary documentation confirming his citizenship," it is entirely up to each state to establish laws and regulations establishing what the state officials may accept as adequate evidence of citizenship. The court is unlikely to require, based on the law, that the secretary do more than the law requires.

In any case, if he desired or was required to supply acceptable proof, a COLB from Hawaii with a raised seal and signature would suffice. Proof that he was born in Hawaii after it was a state satisfies every requirement for natural born status. The COLB would be an official state record and must be accepted in the other 49 states pursuant to the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution.

70. Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void, Petitioners, as well as other Americans, will suffer irreparable harm in that an usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.

Contrary to this claim, all of the treaties, laws, and executive orders signed by someone later shown to be ineligible for the office would remain valid.

Once inaugurated, he could not be removed from office by any means other than impeachment.

Andy Martin filed a Petition in the Hawaii Supreme Court which was denied on October 22, 2008.

The Hawaii Supreme Court found that pursuant to state law they would not require any personal documentation about Obama to be released.

Martin has another action started and has posted

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Obama court hearing to focus on actions of Hawai'i officials, need for disclosure

Obama author Andy Martin heads for historic court hearing in Honolulu. Martin will arrive in Honolulu Friday evening to prepare for a historic court hearing in the Circuit Court Tuesday, November 18th at 10:30 A.M. "Some people want to run up the white flag and kiss Obama's fanny," Martin says. "In the words of John Paul Jones, 'I've just begin to fight.' Unless and until Obama releases records about his past—his birth certificate, college files and similar information—he lacks legitimacy. I do not think any American owes loyalty to Obama's radical socialist revolution, which is bent on destroying our way of life. Why will Barack Obama not release his original, typewritten 1961 birth certificate?"

There would seem to be no legal reason to justify ordering the state of Hawaii to produce anything other than a COLB such as that shown by Obama. About the only challenge might be that the state did not really issue it.

There is no legal requirement that an individual produce the original of a state record. The original document is the property of the state and is exempt from the best evidence rule. A certified copy of the record, or of an entry within the record, meets federal approval.

From the Federal Rules of Evidence

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm#Rule902

Rule 902. Self-authentication

Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to the following:

(1) Domestic public documents under seal. A document bearing a seal purporting to be that of the United States, or of any State, district, Commonwealth, territory, or insular possession thereof, or the Panama Canal Zone, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or of a political subdivision, department, officer, or agency thereof, and a signature purporting to be an attestation or execution.

(2) Domestic public documents not under seal. A document purporting to bear the signature in the official capacity of an officer or employee of any entity included in paragraph (1) hereof, having no seal, if a public officer having a seal and having official duties in the district or political subdivision of the officer or employee certifies under seal that the signer has the official capacity and that the signature is genuine.

(3) Foreign public documents. A document purporting to be executed or attested in an official capacity by a person authorized by the laws of a foreign country to make the execution or attestation, and accompanied by a final certification as to the genuineness of the signature and official position (A) of the executing or attesting person, or (B) of any foreign official whose certificate of genuineness of signature and official position relates to the execution or attestation or is in a chain of certificates of genuineness of signature and official position relating to the execution or attestation. A final certification may be made by a secretary of an embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States, or a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States. If reasonable opportunity has been given to all parties to investigate the authenticity and accuracy of official documents, the court may, for good cause shown, order that they be treated as presumptively authentic without final certification or permit them to be evidenced by an attested summary with or without final certification.

(4) Certified copies of public records. A copy of an official record or report or entry therein, or of a document authorized by law to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed in a public office, including data compilations in any form, certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification, by certificate complying with paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this rule or complying with any Act of Congress or rule prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority.

[...]

The is from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule44.htm

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 44. Proving an Official Record

(a) Means of Proving.

(1) Domestic Record.

Each of the following evidences an official record — or an entry in it — that is otherwise admissible and is kept within the United States, any state, district, or commonwealth, or any territory subject to the administrative or judicial jurisdiction of the United States:

(A) an official publication of the record; or

(B) a copy attested by the officer with legal custody of the record — or by the officer's deputy — and accompanied by a certificate that the officer has custody. The certificate must be made under seal:

(i) by a judge of a court of record in the district or political subdivision where the record is kept; or

(ii) by any public officer with a seal of office and with official duties in the district or political subdivision where the record is kept.

The procedure set up to make challenges is as a political matter in the Federal legislature when the electoral college ballots are opened and counted.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/provisions.html#law

UNITED STATES CODE

The following provisions of law governing Presidential Elections are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended):

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Chapter 1. Presidential Elections and Vacancies

[...]

Counting electoral votes in congress

§ 15. Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o'clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.

nolu_chan  posted on  2008-11-14   21:47:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Obama has evidently satisfied all requirements to be on the ballot in California.

Oh really. Show me where he proved he was a citizen. I understand your sympathy for Obama not being born here yourself. But the constitution requires our president to be a natural born citizen. If Obama has a birth certificate he could very easily clear this up. My bet is that he is not natural born or at the least became a citizen of Indonesia. The upon turning 18 years of age he could have reclaimed his citizenship but he neglected to do that.

I also think you voted for Obama. Come on admit it.

Old Friend  posted on  2008-11-14   21:50:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Oh really. Show me where he proved he was a citizen. I understand your sympathy for Obama not being born here yourself. But the constitution requires our president to be a natural born citizen. If Obama has a birth certificate he could very easily clear this up. My bet is that he is not natural born or at the least became a citizen of Indonesia. The upon turning 18 years of age he could have reclaimed his citizenship but he neglected to do that.

I also think you voted for Obama. Come on admit it.

I think you completely missed the point of the post. All these law suits will come to naught and it is the wrong way to handle it. What it takes is someone from the House and a Senator from the same state to contest the Electoral College vote. It is the only Constitutional way.

farmfriend  posted on  2008-11-14   22:34:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

All these law suits will come to naught and it is the wrong way to handle it. What it takes is someone from the House and a Senator from the same state to contest the Electoral College vote. It is the only Constitutional way.

Bullshit. "we the people" have standing per constitution. We shouldn't have to wait around for someone from house or senate to make a fuss. Show me in the constitution where it says that is the remedy. SOMEONE NOT BORN HERE IS NOT ELIGIBLE PERIOD. If he was born here then that is fine he can be president and I wish him well.

Old Friend  posted on  2008-11-14   22:42:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Bullshit. "we the people" have standing per constitution.

Among other things, standing has to do with the plaintiff's ability to show his particularized interest in the outcome of the litigation, as distinct from a large group of others similarly situated.

forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=1045201

Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (D.N.H. 2008)

[excerpt]

III. Analysis

As previously mentioned, the defendants argue that Hollander lacks standing to maintain this lawsuit. “Article III of the Constitution limits the ‘judicial power’ of the United States to the resolution of ‘cases' and ‘controversies'.... As an incident to the elaboration of this bedrock requirement, [the Supreme] Court has always required that a litigant have ‘standing’ to challenge the action sought to be adjudicated in the lawsuit.” Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of Church & State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471, 102 S.Ct. 752, 70 L.Ed.2d 700 (1982). So-called “Article III standing” has three requirements: (1) the plaintiff has suffered “an injury in fact,” (2) that injury bears a causal connection to the defendant's challenged conduct, and (3) a favorable judicial decision will likely provide the plaintiff with redress from that injury. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992). The party bringing the claim-Hollander here-bears the burden to show his or her standing to bring it. Elk Grove Unified Sch. Dist. v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1, 12, 124 S.Ct. 2301, 159 L.Ed.2d 98 (2004).

Based on these principles, the Supreme Court has “consistently held that a plaintiff raising only a generally available grievance about government-claiming only harm to his and every citizen's interest in proper application of the Constitution and laws, and seeking relief that no more directly and tangibly benefits him than it does the public at large-does not state an Article III case or controversy.” Lujan, 504 U.S. at 573-74, 112 S.Ct. 2130. These holdings include Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208, 94 S.Ct. 2925, 41 L.Ed.2d 706 (1974), where the Court ruled that a group of citizens lacked standing to litigate the eligibility, under the Incompatibility Clause,FN5 of members of Congress to serve simultaneously in the military reserves.

nolu_chan  posted on  2008-11-15   20:51:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

the Supreme Court has “consistently held that a plaintiff raising only a generally available grievance about government-claiming only harm to his and every citizen's interest in proper application of the Constitution and laws, and seeking relief that no more directly and tangibly benefits him than it does the public at large-does not state an Article III case or controversy.”

So, the court opines that if one individual is screwed royally he has standing to sue, but when the entire country gets screwed no one has standing ???

Nonsense ! The opinion reeks.

Of course I don't think the Constitution has anything to do with it !

noone222  posted on  2008-11-15   21:03:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I have to agree..

When the simple wording of the Constitution, the highest law in the land, which applies to all of us and is our birthright, doesn't give us "standing" then something is wrong.

Jhoffa_  posted on  2008-11-15   21:15:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#74. To: All (#72)

PS: I guess a better way to put it is:

Which of us ISN'T harmed when the Constitution is subverted?

It's our highest law.. It governs all of us, from the poorest among us to the one guy we give the power to destroy the earth.

Which American doesn't have an equal stake in this?

Jhoffa_  posted on  2008-11-15 21:28:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

When the simple wording of the Constitution, the highest law in the land, which applies to all of us and is our birthright, doesn't give us "standing" then something is wrong.

Recent opinions such as Kelo or those cited relating to road blocks or check points radically violate the spirit of the CONstitutional intent. When the courts tell us that the reason we as individuals haven't been violated (or in the Berg vs. Obama matter that we lack standing) is because we're all being violated equally ... fuck the courts and their twisted logic.

www.apfn.org/apfn/drivers-license-scam.htm

This gentleman was one of the appellate lawyers for Timothy McVeigh. The ruling he received on appeal from the "federal" court caused him to reflect upon the whole notion of CONstitutional applications, ultimately causing him to reject his bar card and practice.

His determinations ring true with me and my own studies, even though at some point in time I don't think laws will mean anything to a system rotted to the core.

noone222  posted on  2008-11-16 03:13:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]