Welcome! Jesus Christ is my LORD and Savior! Romans 10:9-10,13; John 3:16

[For EU visitors, I do not personally use cookies, but Google or any clickable link (if you choose to click on it) might. This is in compliance with mandatory EU notification]

I am a Natural Born United States Citizen with NO allegiance or citizenship to any nation but my own, and will use this site as a hobby place of sorts to present my own political and religious viewpoints, as a genuine Constitutional Conservative and a genuine Christian Conservative.

Thank you for coming.
In the Year of our LORD Jesus Christ
-- As of January 20, 2017
A Sigh Of Relief With The Inauguration Of Donald John Trump as President of the United States of America, And Hope For A Prosperous Future For All United States Citizens (we who are a nation called "the melting pot of the world"). We shall be great and exceptionally great again.

It is likely that the entries to this blog will be less frequent than in years past. I do intend to keep this blog active, and to offer insightful information and/or opinion (and sometimes humor and/or entertainment on occasion) when I do post.

Peace and Liberty. Semper Fidelis.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Orly Taitz, still standing. New Lawsuits v. Obama by 2012 contenders needed.

John Jay, in a letter to George Washington on July 25, 1787,

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."

It is important that whoever is President be publicly vetted beyond all reasonable doubt. It is part of our Constitutional Checks and Balances, as suggested by the First US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay.   If a naturalized citizen swears off all allegiances to all other loyalties and nations, then he / she becomes someone who can pass a natural citizenship to their child.  They do NOT pass a dual citizenship, but a sole United States Citizenship.  Therefore, a Natural Born Citizen has only one allegiance, and only one nationality at birth...else, why make a naturalized citizen take the oath, swear off all other allegiances, if a natural born can have multi-nationalities and multi-national conflicting allegiances?  It is idiocy to suggest such can exist because it is a non sequitor...a logic that does not follow.  No, if a naturalized citizen can have children born to him on US Soil, and pass on a natural born citizenship...the child must have sole allegiance and sole citizenship to be a NATURAL born citizen of the United States. 

But there are those who resort to Common law and the 14th Amendment, require others to produce documentation, boast of theirs, but REFUSE to have their alleged documents or their own identity vetted in a US Court of Law?  Why?  Unless there is something rotten and fraudulent about them. 

Why is it that the LAWYERS @ Perkins Coie or the Chief White House Counsel Robert Bauer never released the alleged Barack Hussein Obama II Long Form Birth Certificate in its hard copy form to the Press (et al.) themselves, and instead it was released through unnamed and unknown sources from within the White House via the Press Secretary?

They must KNOW beforehand that it is a fraudulent document, and that an electronic release is nothing more than a Public Relations gimmick...hence, any conduct outside the Court to this effect, must be to them, therefore, "fair game"?  

I would even go so far as to speculate that this fact alone, that none of Obama's lawyers dare enter his electronic forgery into the Court record on their own, suggests to us that Perkins Coie and Robert Bauer are allegedly duplicitous in felony fraud upon the American People in not presenting themselves as officers of the Court with the alleged documentation, vetting its authenticity at the risk of losing their law licenses in so doing.

Nor especially have we seen the US Attorney in rebuttal to Orly Taitz ever submit the alleged Barrack Hussein Obama II Long Form Certification of Live Birth (LF-COLB) into ANY Court Record as a legal document to refute even the allegations of actionable claims and/or standing.  Even the US Attorney refuses to submit the blatant Obama LF-COLB forgery into the Court Records.  That speaks VOLUMES of its very appearance of Fraud, and felony conspiracy and collusion on the part of the US Attorney in behalf of Barack Hussein Obama II. 

Under US Law, and a decision made by the US Supreme Court in 2001, 533 US 53 @ 54,62; the US Attorney in defending Obama's having standing to be US President is obligated when challenged to produce Obama's LF-COLB into the Court Record, or it can legally be subpoenaed by the Plaintiff.

As I understand it, Barack Obama was served 4 Times with subpoenas, two granting standing:
1) prior to his election on November 04, 2008,
2) after his election and prior to usurping the office.
The two later servings of subpoenas after his swearing-in would ergo have chain of standing and representation predicated on the prior two, before he took office and are duplicative, carrying over a good faith effort to enforce what the Court by dereliction previously failed to enforce, and by illegal actions Obama's lawyers failed to abide by under current US Supreme Court decisions that were Law at the time of enforcement.

What does a Judge say to a lawyer ignorant on the Law? 
Ignorance of the Law is no excuse.  This is especially so for those who are BAR certified.

This would especially be true for those who are supposed to be the top attorneys in the nation, especially if they are over-paid attorneys working for one of the nation's top Law Firms...would it not?   So what is Robert Bauer's or Barack Obama's or the current US Attorney's excuse for a claim to be legally ignorant of 533 US 53 (2001) @ 54, 62?   I submit that unlike the lay person, THEY have no excuse.  Or perhaps, no legal claim to the ignorance of it, especially when specializing in the knowledge and field of being required to know. 

Therefore, I submit the premise that by Barack Obama and his lawyers' dereliction to yield to the subpoenas emanating from Court via Orly Taitz and her clients, this gives Orly Taitz (representing Dr. Alan Keyes et al.) legal standing to challenge Obama by failing to comply with the subpoena prior to usurping the Office,  and the onus of the dereliction lies upon both the Court and upon Barack Hussein Obama II for failure to comply in November-December 2008 and in January 2009 up to the moment prior to Obama's swearing in. 

I respectfully submit that Orly Taitz should also pursue that line of attack, or that she pose such questions to the Judges to solicit a response, and go from there.  

Orly Taitz, a Naturalized United States Citizen thoroughly familiar with the effects and signs of political Marxist-Leninist Communism and indoctrination ploys from first-hand citizenship experience abroad, has kept her arguments against Obama on points of facts regarding Barack Obama's Social Security Number Identity Fraud, his LF-COLB.

Since 2008, she has become as a champion fighting taking her issues of contention head on, and enduring as the last one truly standing against the Goliath of political and media corruption in the United States, which as grown into such a behemoth, that the only ones seeming to report that Harry Reid's and Nancy Pelosi's 111th Congress was the most corrupt, evil, and treasury robbing Congress in the history of the United States is small independent media and internet bloggers.


Orly Taitz, despite whatever flaws you may or may not attribute to her (English not being her native-born language) has taken on the issue and person of Barack Hussein Obama II, who is flagrantly guilty of identity and Social Security Number Fraud by using a stolen Social Security Number that was issued to a Connecticut citizen of the United States and born in 1890, used for Barack's entire adult life. 

  As the Law Enforcement quip once went, "Be stupid if you must, just don't be felony stupid".  (Or words to this effect.)

The same can be said of Barack Hussein Obama...the man is not only criminal, his three decades use of a stolen Social Security Number up to and including the time he entered and served as a United States Senator was and is the "proof" of that editorializing of the characterization of the actions of the man. 

Point of Fact:  The US Attorney (now representing the Usurper Obama) refuses to introduce Barack Hussein Obama II's Social Security Number into the Court Record because it is a stolen Connecticut Social Security Number, and proof that he has committed many felonies in its use.

Point of Fact:  The US Attorney (now representing the Usurper Obama) refuses to introduce an alternate Social security number, especially one with an Hawaii State prefix, because Obama is on record for 3 decades as using a Connecticut prefix, dating to his Selective Service filing in 1980, and almost certainly to his 1979 Occidental College records.

So let me ask this:  Why would Obama feel the need to seal his Occidental records?  I believe that the answer that Obama's records at Occidental are still sealed most likely will be because of dismal grades and a Fulbright Foreign Undergraduate Student scholarship he received using either his then still active Indonesian passport and citizenship OR his then still active Kenyan Citizenship.  Most likely the former, with a letter of introduction from his step-father Lolo Soetoro to the Financial Aid office at Occidental.  This coupled with the fact that he had extremely close ties with three Pakistanis at Oxy. 

Those Pakistanis who still join him annually for Ramadan dinners at the White House are:

* Imad Hussain: Freshman @ Occidental College room-mate with Obama.

* Mohammed Hasan Chandoo: wealthy Pakistani Sophmore year rom-mate with Obama @ Occidental College, and host to Obama's visit to Pakistan in January 1981.

* Wahid Hamid: another wealthy Pakistani who accompanied Obama and Chandoo to Pakistan. This was Obama's second Muslim handler.

Question:   Where did Al Qaeda find its deepest home and where was Osama Bin Laden killed?
Answer:   In PAKISTAN.


See also another curious insight by Pam Geller of AtlasShrugs to Obama's probable later than Occidental Saudi financial connection  @

Alex Jones Interviews Jerome Corsi about Obama

Moving on to the recent release of the Jerome Corsi expose' on Obama, on May 20, 2011, Dr. Corsi was interviewed by phone on Prison Planet with Alex Jones.  Say what you will about Alex, it is far better to be informed and spend some time to research for yourself and either vet or debunk him on this or that issue, than to NOT listen and dismiss him. 

A January 11, 2009 "flash-back" video interview with Alan Keyes  
which could be labeled,
"The Constitution, Common Sense, and why won't Obama just simply show a physical copy of his vault Long Form Birth Certificate?"

Where to go from Here:
    It seems to me that while Orly valiantly carries on, a whole new group of Lawsuits challenging Obama can be issued by any Democrat challenger running for President in the Primary.

   In fact, every Republican Candidate should be asked the question of whether or not they are willing to spike Obama's entire Presidency in a Court of Law AS SOON AS they receive the Republican Nomination, while even the Convention is on-going, and have Obama thrown off the ballot on legal technicality that he cannot prove he is a US Natural born Citizen.


Leaving aside the Paternal Power and Common Law argument over Natural Born Citizen under US Law, Obama does not even rise to the Wong Kim Ark level of US Citizenship:

Obama supporters dance between Obama being a Natural Born Citizen by the 14th Amendment and the application of British Common Law as if British Common Law were US Law.  The primary case they point to is the US v. Wong Kim Ark from 1898.

Specifics of Wong Kim Ark refute / disqualify Obama:

1)     @ 169 US 652, Wong Kim Ark (WKA) was born and reared in one permanent residence in California “and never lost nor changed  that residence."               
2)       @ 169 US 653 – 654   neither he nor his parents acting for him ever renounced his allegiance to the United States, or did or committed any act or thing to exclude him
Page 169 U. S. 653  therefrom.”

3)      @ 169 US 654, we are told that he temporarily left the United States at age 17 to visit China, and returned in the same calendar year.  WKA was admitted in by Customs as a native-born citizen of the United States.

4)      @ 169 US 654, although both parents were resident aliens in the United States, they kept and maintained a permanent residence and domicile for WKA to be born in and spend his first 21 years of life in, until he became of age at 21.
5)      @169 US 654, the resident alien parents were employed, “and there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China…”    

6)      @ 169 US 654, it was immediately recognized that WKA appeared to have immediately qualified as a US Citizen under the 14th Amendment Section 1’s “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."     

7)      @ 169 US 705, the conclusion was: “ The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties were to present for determination the single question stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicil and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.”

Conclusion drawn from WKA:   
The Court concluded by majority that WKA was a citizen of the United States under the criteria of the 14th Amendment because –
1)      Wong Kim Ark was born in the United States.
    Wong Kim Ark never renounced US Allegiance, nor did his parents do so for him. 
2)      Wong Kim Ark was maintained in a permanent US State domicile every year of his life as his primary residence from birth to age 21.
3)      Neither of his parents were employed in either a diplomatic or in ANY OFFICIAL capacity at the time of WKA’s birth. 

Barack fails the WKA test: 

By comparison, Barack Obama has never proved he was USA born.  He refuses to submit a hard copy into Court record under penalty of perjury, etc.

By comparison, Barack Obama had his allegiance renounced by swearing fealty to the Indonesian flag daily in Menteng - 1 in Jakarta Indonesia, being an adopted Indonesian Citizen where the step-father took him to the renunciation of all other allegiances, including the United States, to the consent of the mother.

By comparison, Barack as Barry Soetoro (Soebarkah) -- his adopted and legal name in Indonesia -- had 4 years residence in Indonesia, and would visit Hawaii and stay temporarily for up to 3 weeks at a time, and attend Elementary School as a visitor pending his removal and return after his mother finished vacationing in Hawaii with her parents.   The primary residence of the mother was with her husband in Indonesia, and the primary residence of the child was with his mother.  Hence, there was no permanence of a US Domicile at any time for Barry Soetoro / Barack Obama until he was about age 10 or 11 and moved in with his grandparents at that time.

Obama's Mother declares Obama Jr. lost his US Citizenship as of August 13, 1968

Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro-Passport Application File-Strunk v Dept of State-FOIA Release-FINAL-7-29-10
The above passport file information on Barack Hussein Obama II's mother reveals that  
Barack Hussein Obama II 
has NO 14th Amendment US Citizenship,
and de facto, 
was sworn under signed oath by his Mom
to no longer be a Citizen of the United States
as of August 13, 1968!!!

The immediate form following the opening letter has the mother sign under oath on the back page of  Form FS-299 of 7-64.

Following the instructions:
"I have not (and no other person included or to be included in the passport or documentation has), since acquiring United States citizenship, been naturalized as a citizen of a foreign state, taken an oath or made an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state; entered or served in the armed forces of a foreign state, accepted or performed the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or political subdivisions thereof; voted in a political election in a foreign state or participated in an election or plebiscite to determine the sovereignty over foreign territory, made a formal renunciation of nationality either in the United States or before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state; ever sought or claimed the benefits of the nationality of any foreign state; or been convicted by a court or court martial of competent jurisdiction of committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, or conspiring to overthrow, put down or to destroy by force , the Government of the United States.

{If any of the above-mentioned acts or conditions have been performed by or apply to the applicant, or to any other person included in the passport or documentation, the portion of which applies should be struck out , and a supplementary explanatory statement  under oath (or affirmation) by the person to whom the portion is applicable should be attached and made a part of this application.}

Ann Dunham wrote Barack Hussein Obama (Soebarkah) and struck his name out to indicate that he was legally to no longer be a United States Citizen, and the document stood to apply all relevant passages that could apply to a 7 year old who lost US Citizenship by naturalization to Indonesia with a renunciation of his allegiance and renunciation of his citizenship by both he and his mother and his step-father for him. 

Thus, it can legally be argued before the Court that Barack Hussein Obama II may very possibly, even probably have never been a US Citizen beyond the age of 7, even by Wong Kim Ark Standards as the Court laid out @ 169 US 652-654,705; and that the Court needs to have him prove otherwise per 333 US 640 (1948) @ 653 -- 

"The burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States, or the prohibition of power to the states, is upon those making the claim"  
                   {i.e., Obama has the burden to prove legitimacy}

-- and that his putative Presidency is of  NO Constitutional legal effect, with exigency the US Supreme Court needing to have his putative term in office (and all laws and regulations and policies thereto) be declared NULL and voided out.  

[This post has been edited by the blog's author and modified to correct prior factual error, and add new material on this same date of May 23, 2011.  I apologize for any previous wrong presumption now since corrected and excised from presentation.  Thanks. -- Brianroy]

No comments:

Post a Comment