by Brandon Walker, Mad World
For five years we have been arguing over the legitimacy of this presidency. People have dug up records, proven he used a false social security number, and we have the debate of where he was born. Forget about the birther argument, it doesn’t matter where he was born, we have no legitimate president in the United States.
Now don’t get me wrong, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz have done a good job uncovering a lot of documentation to say this man called Barack Hussein Obama was not born in the United States. I have a great deal of respect for them and the investigation team that have taken this to court over and over and may actually get it heard before the Supreme Court. I don’t have a lot of respect for the very first birther, Hilary Clinton, but how soon the Liberal Left will forget that she was the one that brought it up in the first place due to his statements of being the first Kenyan born Senator. I’ve even seen several of their movies on Western Center for Journalism and WND.
Do you think Cubans are fighting for healthcare or freedom from Communism?
I’m saying it doesn’t matter. That is not what we should concentrate on if you want to prove this man can not be President of the United States.
The entire thing that makes the case for whether he is an Usurper to the US Constitution and not the legitimate President of the US, or if he is eligible to be the leader of the Executive branch all hinges on one thing: his natural born citizenship.
You see, I don’t question his claim to US citizenship. For him to claim being a citizen he only had to have one parent that was a United States Citizen. Yes, I’ll be the first to come out and say it. Barack Hussein Obama, or even if he used his alias of Barry Soetoro, could claim US Citizenship. His mother Ann Dunham was an American Citizen. Therefore it doesn’t matter if he was born here in the United States in Hawaii as he says, or if he was born in Kenya like the birthers say. Either way he would be an American Citizen by birth, but not a Natural Born Citizen as required by the Constitution.
Now in order to be president of the United States, you have to be a Natural Born Citizen. There is a difference between a US Citizen and a Natural Born Citizen. That is where the problem lies, and it has nothing to do if Obama was born here in Hawaii or Kenya or as some have proposed Seattle, Washington.
Now the reasons the birthers are so frantic is because Title 8 Section 1401 of the United States Code attempts to abridge this by saying it means someone that is a United States Citizen at birth. What they don’t understand is that the United States Code can not change the Constitution without an amendment. Therefore it doesn’t matter that they recently tried to pull a fast one, if it hasn’t been judicially challenged and is in direct conflict of the Constitution; that means this law is considered unlawful, unconstitutional, and can not be used as a legal definition, nor is enforceable. The courts have already ruled on what is a Natural Born Citizen, and that ruling can not be changed without a constitutional amendment approved by 75% of Congress and the States. That’s right. I’ll say it again. The Constitution and the Supreme Court have already defined Natural Born Citizen and that can not be changed without changing the Constitution.
You see, the Constitution uses the word citizen several times. It is found in Article 1 Section 2, Article 1 Section 3, Article 1 Section 8, and in the 14th Amendment. The argument of “Aha, see he is eligible” comes crashing down around Article 2 Section 1.
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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. ~US Constitution
It goes a step further to define what is a Natural Born Citizen by using the definition in the Law of Nations, and that is where the trouble comes in for our current Usurper.
§ 212. Citizens and natives~The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. ~US Legal Dictionary
If we take a close look at the long form birth certificate provided by Whitehouse.gov (pictured on the right), you will find one strange thing that is the “smoking gun” that all these lawyers, law enforcement, experts, and legal gurus have been searching for, and I always wondered why they didn’t realize it instead of trying to prove this is a fake. Barack Hussein Obama Sr. never was a US Citizen. Even if you want to go the birther route, BHO’s father never was a US Citizen. Neither was his adopted father. He was not born to two parents that were both US Citizens.
Now if you are thinking that surely this would have more legal definition then that, turns out there is. There are a total of four US Supreme Court cases that define what it means in the US Constitution to be a Natural Born Citizen.
- The Venus-12 US 253 (1814) – the natives or indigenous are those born of the country who’s parents are citizens.
- Shanks v. Dupont (1830) – for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country.(which kinda adds a twist saying that if he practiced his father’s nationality, which he did, he would be a British subject. Has he ever revoked his British citizenship?)
- Minor v. Hppersett ( 1875) – children born (in this case a woman) where both parents are citizens are natural born citizens of the United States.
- US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) – children born to parents who are both US Citizens are in turn defined as natural born citizens.
There has not been any other Supreme Court case to try to define Natural Born Citizen. There hasn’t had to be. The Supreme court made a decision on it four times, and all four times it agreed with the US Constitution. In order to be a Natural Born Citizen, you had to have two parents that were also citizens of the United States. For the lawmakers to say that the definition by the Constitution is too vague so they need to make a law usurping the Constitution is illegal. Its an unlawful order. You can not change the Constitution without amending it through the ratification process.
Unfortunately for Barack Obama, that also means that he is a usurper. He can not hold the title for president, nor was he eligible for the office according to the US Supreme Court and the US Constitution. This is even further compounded when you have to stop and wonder if he ever revoked his Indonesian or British Citizenship, which would make him a foreign national that usurped the Presidency. By arresting him as a usurper, unlike impeachment, it makes all executive orders he made null and void. It also makes all laws he signed during the time in which he said he was President null and void. All treaties signed, same thing.
There is also bad news for any member of congress, like Nancy Pelosi, who vetted the usurper as president. That makes them guilty of conspiring to usurp the government. Yes, that means they would be wanted under suspect of TREASON.
What I want to know is where the ACLU and ACLJ are on this? Where are the lawyers fighting this instead of the birth certificate? Why do we keep beating a loosing battle when the answer has been in front of us the whole time? Why don’t we put together a class action suit about this? This is also something that both Republicans and Democrats, Birthers and Liberals, can get behind as long as they still believe in the US Constitution. Has anyone wondered why, other then his total disregard for law, he wants people to think the Constitution is flawed?
Now, I have seen poster after poster of calling the Sgt. of Arms in the Senate at (202) 224-2341 . Truth is that the Sergeant of Arms is only responsible for Congress and can not arrest the president unless the House voted to impeach. He can however arrest the people that illegally vetted a usurper, and as it turn out, many of them, like Dianne Feinstein, and Nancy Pelosi, are still there. We can always call him and say we want them arrested for possible treason. If he will do it or not, I don’t know, but it would keep him busy and is his job.
As for the Usurper, well there is plenty that people can do that does not result in bloodshed or violence. I’ll have more on that later. Meanwhile, spread the word. It’s not every day we find out that everyone was right but just not looking in the right place. We the People have a phone and a pen as well to get the message out. We also have the internet. Let us know what you think about all this in the comments below.