57 thoughts on “Eligibility Update: HI AG Response to Questions; “Birther” Infomercial Airs; Kerchner v. Obama Letter to Judge”

  1. More bull$$it rhetoric and spin from you…I think I’ll take my chances with Kerchner and Apuzzo over your nonsense….you don’t know much about the Constitution because you keep trying to tell people that you don’t have to be “natural born” in order to be POTUS and further more you don’t know the meaning of “natural born”…study the case law and read what the founders intended once the grandfather clause was up….OBOTS still on the Kool-aid are the only ones who accept the FRAUD as POTUS….with every passing day there are fewer and fewer of you who accept him as POTUS…look at the decline of his poll #’s…I have many friends who are now leaving the DemoCRAP party because of his LIES and refusal to show his pertinent documents….I still say Chavez is your man!!!
    ____________________________________________________________________
    I hope you will take your chances with Apuzzo and Kerchner. Their case has no chance if winning. I have seen his evidence and it has throughly been debunked by real lawyers, not DWI lawyers pretending to know about Constitutional law. I never said that you don’t have to be natural born to be President. I said that the Constitution does not state what the definition of natural born is. The Supreme Court in the Wong Kim Ark case stated in the majority opinion that citizenship in this country comes from English Common law, not De Vattel. All of Apuzzo’s so called arugments were used over 100 years ago by George Collins, and he was the losing lawyer in the Wong Kim case. Your problem for whatever case you possibly may cite that may agrue Vattel there are more cases that say English Common law is where our citizenship laws come from. And De Vattel in his so called law of nations never stated that 2 parents needed to be citizens. He actually stated that the father, or one needed to be a citizen. So when Apuzzo fails, and he will, then we will see where the movement goes next.

  2. Black Lion says:
    October 3, 2009 at 10:47 pm

    Jacqlyn Smith says:
    October 3, 2009 at 6:48 pm

    ********************************************************************

    BL…if you had an inkling of an idea about the Constitution you would know that it doesn’t state per say in the Constitution that you must be born to 2 US citizens…..however….it does say you must be a “natural born” citizen…..this interpretation of the Constitution comes from various court cases and the Law of Nations by Vattel…however you already know all this as do all of us here yet you continue to ask for the proof in the Constitution!

    Your rhetoric is more proof than we all need that you are not a TRUE AMERICAN and that you believe the FRAUD in our White House is ABOVE THE LAW….wake up OBOT or move to another country that has a different type of government that isn’t of the people, by the people and for the people….sounds like Chavez is your man!!!!
    ____________________________________________________________________
    I know about the Constitution, and I know that it does not even reference De Vattel. The Supreme Court has already stated in numerous cases that English Common Law was the basis of our Constitution. So continue with your De Vattel fantasy and we will see how far that gets with the SCOTUS.

    De Vattel never states that a natural born citizen had to have 2 citizen parents. Actual translations indicate that he may have meant that only the father need to be a citizen. Meaning you only needed one parent to be a US citizen, which the President has. Either way the English Common law states that you only need to be born in a country to be a natural born citizen. Since the Constitution only defines 2 types of citizens, naturalized and the ones born on the soil of a country.

    So I am not a true American. I guess I will have to change my Birth Certificate which shows that I was born in the United States. Seriously a true American believes in the law. Even when they don’t agree with the results. Most True Americans has accepted that Barack Obama in the 44th President of the United States.

    *******************************************************************

    More bull$$it rhetoric and spin from you…I think I’ll take my chances with Kerchner and Apuzzo over your nonsense….you don’t know much about the Constitution because you keep trying to tell people that you don’t have to be “natural born” in order to be POTUS and further more you don’t know the meaning of “natural born”…study the case law and read what the founders intended once the grandfather clause was up….OBOTS still on the Kool-aid are the only ones who accept the FRAUD as POTUS….with every passing day there are fewer and fewer of you who accept him as POTUS…look at the decline of his poll #’s…I have many friends who are now leaving the DemoCRAP party because of his LIES and refusal to show his pertinent documents….I still say Chavez is your man!!!

  3. Jacqlyn Smith says:
    October 3, 2009 at 6:48 pm

    ********************************************************************

    BL…if you had an inkling of an idea about the Constitution you would know that it doesn’t state per say in the Constitution that you must be born to 2 US citizens…..however….it does say you must be a “natural born” citizen…..this interpretation of the Constitution comes from various court cases and the Law of Nations by Vattel…however you already know all this as do all of us here yet you continue to ask for the proof in the Constitution!

    Your rhetoric is more proof than we all need that you are not a TRUE AMERICAN and that you believe the FRAUD in our White House is ABOVE THE LAW….wake up OBOT or move to another country that has a different type of government that isn’t of the people, by the people and for the people….sounds like Chavez is your man!!!!
    ____________________________________________________________________
    I know about the Constitution, and I know that it does not even reference De Vattel. The Supreme Court has already stated in numerous cases that English Common Law was the basis of our Constitution. So continue with your De Vattel fantasy and we will see how far that gets with the SCOTUS.

    De Vattel never states that a natural born citizen had to have 2 citizen parents. Actual translations indicate that he may have meant that only the father need to be a citizen. Meaning you only needed one parent to be a US citizen, which the President has. Either way the English Common law states that you only need to be born in a country to be a natural born citizen. Since the Constitution only defines 2 types of citizens, naturalized and the ones born on the soil of a country.

    So I am not a true American. I guess I will have to change my Birth Certificate which shows that I was born in the United States. Seriously a true American believes in the law. Even when they don’t agree with the results. Most True Americans has accepted that Barack Obama in the 44th President of the United States.

  4. Black Lion says:
    October 3, 2009 at 5:48 pm

    Melvin E. Holliday says:
    October 3, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    I continue to be amazed at the arguments for and against the subject of constitutionality to hold office of President by Barrack Obama. Not even considering the facts that both his parents were not American citizens which should automatically disqualify him. The failure to produce one legal document of proof is not only amazing but dumbfounding. The reluctance of Obama to bring this situation to a close is mystifying. Were I accused of a crime and I had proof that I was not guilty I would most certainly produce the evidence. There are simple elements here that keep getting hashed over and over for no apparent reason. I won’t be happy until the outcome has been proven one way or another. Obama must realize this so with every passing day he continues to make himself look more and more guilty. He either has an ultimate plan of making everyone involved look bad or he is as guilty as sin and ….we the people will prevail.
    ____________________________________________________________________
    If you could just point out to us where in the Constitution that it states that both of your parents need to be US citizens for a person to be eligible to be President then your statement would make sense. OK, if not the Constitution then a law? Please enlighten us. What is mystifying is how you just make up requirements that are not in the Constitution. And by the way his mother was an American citizen.

    If I was accused of a crime then I agree with you, I would supply evidence of my innocence. However the President is not being charged with a crime and the Constitution has a remedy if you want to charge the President with something, that is Congress. Either way if I recall if you are accusing some of something you should have some evidence. So far there has been no legitimate evidence submitted. And by the way he has released the suffcient evidence to prove where he was born. If you choose not to believe it, then that is up to you and the less than 1% that actually believe that. The bottom line is that he was born in HI and is eligible to be President.

    ********************************************************************

    BL…if you had an inkling of an idea about the Constitution you would know that it doesn’t state per say in the Constitution that you must be born to 2 US citizens…..however….it does say you must be a “natural born” citizen…..this interpretation of the Constitution comes from various court cases and the Law of Nations by Vattel…however you already know all this as do all of us here yet you continue to ask for the proof in the Constitution!

    Your rhetoric is more proof than we all need that you are not a TRUE AMERICAN and that you believe the FRAUD in our White House is ABOVE THE LAW….wake up OBOT or move to another country that has a different type of government that isn’t of the people, by the people and for the people….sounds like Chavez is your man!!!!

  5. Melvin E. Holliday says:
    October 3, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    I continue to be amazed at the arguments for and against the subject of constitutionality to hold office of President by Barrack Obama. Not even considering the facts that both his parents were not American citizens which should automatically disqualify him. The failure to produce one legal document of proof is not only amazing but dumbfounding. The reluctance of Obama to bring this situation to a close is mystifying. Were I accused of a crime and I had proof that I was not guilty I would most certainly produce the evidence. There are simple elements here that keep getting hashed over and over for no apparent reason. I won’t be happy until the outcome has been proven one way or another. Obama must realize this so with every passing day he continues to make himself look more and more guilty. He either has an ultimate plan of making everyone involved look bad or he is as guilty as sin and ….we the people will prevail.
    ____________________________________________________________________
    If you could just point out to us where in the Constitution that it states that both of your parents need to be US citizens for a person to be eligible to be President then your statement would make sense. OK, if not the Constitution then a law? Please enlighten us. What is mystifying is how you just make up requirements that are not in the Constitution. And by the way his mother was an American citizen.

    If I was accused of a crime then I agree with you, I would supply evidence of my innocence. However the President is not being charged with a crime and the Constitution has a remedy if you want to charge the President with something, that is Congress. Either way if I recall if you are accusing some of something you should have some evidence. So far there has been no legitimate evidence submitted. And by the way he has released the suffcient evidence to prove where he was born. If you choose not to believe it, then that is up to you and the less than 1% that actually believe that. The bottom line is that he was born in HI and is eligible to be President.

  6. I continue to be amazed at the arguments for and against the subject of constitutionality to hold office of President by Barrack Obama. Not even considering the facts that both his parents were not American citizens which should automatically disqualify him. The failure to produce one legal document of proof is not only amazing but dumbfounding. The reluctance of Obama to bring this situation to a close is mystifying. Were I accused of a crime and I had proof that I was not guilty I would most certainly produce the evidence. There are simple elements here that keep getting hashed over and over for no apparent reason. I won’t be happy until the outcome has been proven one way or another. Obama must realize this so with every passing day he continues to make himself look more and more guilty. He either has an ultimate plan of making everyone involved look bad or he is as guilty as sin and ….we the people will prevail.

Comments are closed.