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
2017
-- 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.


Peace and Liberty. Semper Fidelis.









Saturday, December 6, 2014

Arpaio and Klayman File Suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Over Obama's Illegal Amnesty / With Added Extras by Brianroy


 
FREEDOM WATCH PRESS RELEASE:
Arpaio and Klayman Were First to File Suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
(Washington, D.C., December 4, 2014) Today, in response to President Obama's announcement of November 20, 2014, that he on his own authority will grant legal status in the United States to approximately 4.7 million illegal aliens, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona and his crime-fighting attorney Larry Klayman, have filed a complaint and preliminary injunction motion with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking to enjoin or stop this illegal action by President Obama. (See www.freedomwatchusa.org.)

Sheriff Arpaio's attorney, Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, and former federal prosecutor, is quite familiar with preliminary injunctions as he recently succeeded in enjoining the National Security Agency from illegally spying on American citizens who have no ties to terrorists or terrorism. (Klayman v. Obama (13-cv-00851)).

Upon filing this preliminary injunction, styled Arpaio v. Obama (14-cv-1966) filed on November 20, 2014, Klayman issued this statement:

"Obama's form of amnesty violates the U.S. Constitution, plain and simple. The President does not have the authority to rewrite immigration laws as legislation and national policy are enacted by Congress, not by the President. The President's executive responsibilities are to execute – that is implement – the laws enacted by Congress. As Sheriff Arpaio's attorney and friend, I salute him for being the first to boldly challenge President Obama's unconstitutional executive order effectively granting amnesty to illegal aliens, some of whom are hardened criminals. As he stated under oath in his Declaration, Sheriff Joe Arpaio attests that he 'found out that over 4,000 illegal aliens were in our jails over the last 8 months . . . [and] one third of the 4,000 illegal aliens arrested in Maricopa County had already been arrested previously for having committed different crimes earlier within Maricopa County under Arizona Law.' This must not be tolerated and must be stopped."




https://www.scribd.com/doc/249339818/Preliminary-Injuction-filed-By-Attorney-Larry-Klayman-on-Behalf-of-Sheriff-Joe-Arapaio-of-Maricopa-County-Arizona-Over-Obama-s-Illegal-Amnesty-New-l




See also    http://www.brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2014/11/on-november-21-2014-obama-issued-2.html



When Orly Taitz went before Judge Malihi in Georgia in January 2012-- before knowing that Judge Malihi had spoken with Valerie Jarrett in Farsi and by more than just mere appearance thereof, allegedly threw the case for Obama -- I had acted as an intermediary between Attorneys Orly Taitz of California and Leo Donofrio in New Jersey, to convey an invitation by Orly for Leo to please be invited to give an Amicus Brief in this case. Leo took the offer, and composed this brief over the course of about 3 days. Unknown to us, Judge Malihi was spoken to by Jarrett, Obama's closest Adviser in the Oval Office, and threw the case aside what Judge Malihi effectually described was to the effect of having it based on "feelings" rather than the evidence or the Law. Repercussions for taking a stand to try and cite the proper legal considerations to help the Court in what we at first thought would be a fair and impartial one, seem to have had such negative blow-back that even the appearance of such a blow-back directly related to submitting this Amicus seems to be the root-cause to have sent Mr. Donofrio into a forced voluntary retirement, as it were.   Prior to voting for the Affordable Healthcare Act, and then as a lone vote of it for a tax, Supreme Court Justice Roberts is alleged to have -- with great mental and emotional breaking point duress -- underwent what was alleged to be a home invasion where he and his family were allegedly present, and either the alleged gun to the family's heads intimidation or an alleged kidnapping and release, which was starting to be reported in the Media at the time and then so very quickly suppressed and then media blacked out. Because it is a Law Enforcement and a National Security Issue, details would have to be forth coming by a publicized Congressional Investigation delving into the subject as to how his vote was coerced, but was really a 1 against 8 votes (2 of whom, Kagan and Sotomayor are illegally placed and should have been recused anyway, especially Kagan for prosecutorial bias  having rendered impassioned advocacy for that same thing beforehand).     In light of the recent IRS over-reach and intimidation of Conservatives Scandals going back to at least 2010, and other scandals, we can only surmise what hidden pressures were brought to bear down on a decent guy just trying to do the right thing for the Constitution and ALL of us in the United States of America.   I reintroduce the pdf, to remind others that we have need to decide on the issue of Impeaching and VOIDING OUT Obama's entire illegally ensconced time in the Presidency of the United States, being a foreign usurper. 





See also:  
 http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2014/08/a-response-to-allen-wests-lame-six-only.html
http://www.brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/01/januray-26-2012-obama-lawyers-stipulate.html



Then we have Sheriff Arpaio's own Mike Zullo, a Cold Case Posse Maricopa County Arizona Investigator who  lists over 200 points as to why he believes Obama's Birth Document is an Identity Fraud. Submitted as Amicus Curiae in Alabama in 2013.







Natural Born Citizen (NBC), 3 Little Words, And More Specific and Distinct From "Native Born Citizen" because it demands natural voting rights present by the Father at birth.



A US "Native born" in the legal rulings to 1934 was sometimes contradictory or vague in its definition or intent. Generally, the child appeared only to have needed only to be born on US Soil to be called "native", regardless of the parentage or citizen status...but it was not necessarily synonymous with "natural born".  That distinction is often lost upon those who are either unknowing in the subject or is intentional skewed by provocateurs attempting to deflect Obama's illegality by sowing intentional legal misinformation.  

A "natural born" was born by natural citizens -- the father at least having voting rights.  Barack Obama Sr. had NO Voting Rights in the United States at any time in his life, and was never a United States Citizen at any time in his life, and this failure EXCLUDES Barack Hussein Obama II from ever having ANY legal claim on the Presidency of the United States.  FACT!!!

At such a time that the parents had attained or thereafter maintained natural status to be its nations citizens owing it sole legience, their child who is natural born on the soil of their natural nation's lands (or territories) is declared upon birth and registry as "natural born citizens".

If the mother owes legience to one nation, and the father owes foreign legience of any kind, the birth is unnatural in the legal sense after 05/25/1934 to well after any relevant period regarding the birth of Barack Obama II.


Until the Act of May 25, 1934, the plain sense meaning of a US NBC was chiefly dependent on the citizenship of the Father, or the presumption thereof (in the case of birth illegitimacy); in order that his "seed" be legally recognized as born jus soli and jus sanguinis. Obama Sr.'s seed was a Kenyan national's.

Whereas before May 25, 1934 backwards to even in the days of Vattel, a Barack Obama II birth would naturally be ruled as Kenyan regardless where in the world he was born (because "natural born" follows the seed from which the child grew, not the flesh it was plowed into and grown from / the mother).



In the case of Kenya, those lands which Barack would owe natural born status to from Vattel's time to 1961, would by Nature (paternal family) be those tribal lands that border southeastern Lake Victoria (if applied currently to Vattel's time and laws of nations), and Obama's nationality would then merely be a tribal location in the Safari lands of Eastern continental Africa. That would be his nationality in the times of Vattel. No real difference or change geographically. 












 




If this is what the Eastern Standard meant in June 2004's headlines of Senator Barack being "Kenyan born", following their laws, Vattel, and the citizen lineage of his father...then Obama is still legally disqualified according to the nation of Kenya, who have no Treaty with the US to relinquish NBC status, nor do they recognize dual citizenship with the US. The Act of May 25, 1934 adds the subsequent requirement of a US Citizen mother to make the child "US natural born", but if you take away the father, under the original as well as active intent of the Amended Constitution of the United States as it stands now, you would clearly misconstrue what the law clearly says if you make anyone with a foreign citizen father at the time of the child's birth into a U.S. Natural Born Citizen", even were he or she born on U.S. soil at the time.  This U.S. Constitutional Legal Fact thus excludes even those Republicans such as Cruz, Rubio, Jindal, and others born of foreign citizen fathers from having any legal right to run for the Presidency of the United States.

For the first 21 years of his life, (even Factcheck.org now admitted that for the first 23 years of his life) Barack Obama held Kenyan citizenship in the legal eyes of the nation of Kenya...and that alone, legally disqualifies Barack from attaining the Presidency of the United States legally, no matter where he resided in those first 21 or 23 years of his life. By having kept a Kenyan citizenship past the age of 21 in the United States, which Kenya demands is that of a BIRTH Citizenship of both jus sanguinis and jus soli (by blood and by being born there);  this under the Untied States Constitution  forever disqualifies Barack Hussein Obama II from being labeled anything other than KENYAN Natural Born Citizen through his father.   And remember that this same Barack Hussein Obama II is under foreign influence by holding ANY foreign citizenship.  He fails the John Jay test:


 


 



 Our first chief Justice of The United States Supreme Court gave legal counsel to George Washington that a United States Natural Born Citizen does NOT obtain, hold nor retain foreign citizenships like Obama II, who anybody who defends that arch-felon claims that he "just happens" to have held such foreign citizenships, even acquired by birth to Kenya and the United Kingdom (as a colonial subject) through his father.  

Currently, Obama holds two foreign citizenships while illegally occupying the Presidency of the United States:  an Indonesian citizenship, and a re-established Kenyan citizenship (now that putative Vice-President Joe Biden helped Kenya to amend its last Constitution to grant Obama back his Kenyan Citizenship status via his father Barack Hussein Obama I).






No comments:

Post a Comment