WND | Empowered Patriots

Has Obama’s Kenya Birth Certificate Been Found?

WASHINGTON – California attorney Orly Taitz, who has filed a number of lawsuits demanding proof of Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president, has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication.

The document lists Obama’s parents as Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Obama, formerly Stanley Ann Dunham, the birth date as Aug. 4, 1961, and the hospital of birth as Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

No doctor is listed. But the alleged certificate bears the signature of the deputy registrar of Coast Province, Joshua Simon Oduya. It was allegedly issued as a certified copy of the original in February 1964.

WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.

Last week, a counterfeit document purporting to be Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate made the rounds of the Internet, but was quickly determined to be fraudulent. The new document released by Taitz bears none of the obvious traits of a hoax.

One of the issues Taitz must deal with will be the authentication of the document. Critics immediately jumped on the Feb. 17, 1964, date for the document, explaining that the "republic" of Kenya wasn’t assembled until in December of that year.

Media Matters wrote, "Sorry, WorldNetDaily: Kenya wasn’t a republic until Dec. 1964."

But Kenya’s official independence was in 1963, and any number of labels could have been applied to government documents during that time period.

At Ameriborn Constitution News, the researcher noted that the independence process for the nation actually started taking as early as 1957, when there were the first direct elections for Africans to the Legislative Council.

"Kenya became an Independent Republic, December 12, 1963, which gives more [credibility] that this is a true document," the website stated.

The 1963 independence is corroborated by several other information sources, including the online African History.

Even the People Daily news agency cited, on Dec. 12, 2005, the "42nd independence anniversary" in Nairobi. "The country gained independence from Britain on Dec. 12, 1963," the report said.

An online copy of the Kenya Constitution, "adopted in 1963, amended in 1999," states: "CHAPTER I - THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA, Article 1, Kenya is a sovereign Republic. Article 1A, The Republic of Kenya shall be a multiparty democratic state…"

It was in November 1964 when the region voluntarily became a one-party state, according to an online source.

The region including Mombasa originally was dealt with as a separate independence movement, but it almost immediately became part of Kenya when the sultan of Zanzibar ceded the "coastal strip" to Kenya, according to sources.

Taitz told WND that the document came from an anonymous source who doesn’t want his name known because "he’s afraid for his life."

Taitz’s motion, filed yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, requests the purported evidence of Obama’s birth – both the alleged birth certificate and foreign records not yet obtained – be preserved from destruction, asks for permission to legally request documents from Kenya and seeks a subpoena for deposition from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

"I filed the motion with the court asking for expedited discovery, which would allow me to start subpoenas and depositions even before Obama and the government responds," Taitz told WND. "I am asking the judge to give me the power to subpoena the documents from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate [the birth certificate].

"I’m forcing the issue, where Obama will have to respond," she said.

"Before, they said, ‘You don’t have anything backing your claims,’" Taitz explained. "Now I have something. In fact, I have posted on the Internet more than Obama has. My birth certificate actually has signatures."

Join the petition campaign to demand President Obama resolve the question by revealing his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

Taitz’s most celebrated case involved a military officer, Maj. Stefan Cook, whose order to deploy to Afghanistan was revoked when he challenged Obama’s eligibility to hold office. That case has now been refiled in federal court in Florida, raising the specter of a class-action claim among members of the military that their orders aren’t valid because of questions surrounding Obama’s constitutional eligibility.

Taitz told WND she plans to file additional paperwork with the Florida court tomorrow, adding the alleged Kenyan birth certificate to Maj. Cook’s case.

The suit seeks damages and a declaratory judgment. Named as defendants are Simtech, Cook’s former civilian employer, and several officials, including Col. Louis B. Wingate and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

WND previously reported a judge in Georgia dismissed Cook’s case when the government suddenly revoked his orders to report to Fort Benning for deployment to Afghanistan.

WND reported when the case originally was filed that Cook’s concern was that without proof that there is a legitimate commander in chief, the entire U.S. Army becomes "merely a corps of chattel slaves under the illegitimate control of a private citizen."

Cook told WND: "As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my] duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a ‘natural-born citizen,’ he is not eligible to be commander in chief."

The new complaint says it seeks Cook’s reinstatement with his civilian employer, Simtech Inc., as well as protection from the Department of Defense and president "from further retaliation for plaintiff’s challenge to the president’s constitutional authority."

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery!

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama’s decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Developing …

August 03, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

$10K bounty for any witness to Obama birth

WASHINGTON – WND Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah is offering a $10,000 reward to anyone who can prove he or she was present at the birth of Barack Obama – and he’s asking Americans to donate to the cause in hopes of raising the bounty to an irresistible amount.

"Barack Obama claims to have been born in Honolulu Aug. 4, 1961," explains Farah. "His entire constitutional claim to the presidency rests on this premise. Yet, he refuses to release a copy of his long-form birth certificate – the only document that could possibly corroborate his claim. Therefore, in the interest of truth, justice and the Constitution, I am making the extraordinary offer to entice someone to come forward with the facts of his birth – whether it took place in Hawaii or elsewhere."

Obama has steadfastly refused to release evidence of that Hawaiian birth – a valid, long-form birth certificate that would show details of the birth, such as the hospital and the attending physician. Because the short-form "certification of live birth" he released to select news organization was at least sometimes issued for foreign births on the basis of an affidavit by one parent, it proves nothing as far as constitutional eligibility – and, in fact, raises suspicions about a foreign birth.

To date, no hospital in Hawaii has come forward to claim this historic birth.

No doctor or nurse has come forward to say they were present for that historic birth.

No witness of any kind has come forward to say they have first-hand knowledge or involvement in that historic birth – at least in Hawaii.

Obama’s paternal grandmother, Sarah Obama, claims to have been present for the birth in Mombassa, Kenya.

"It is clear now that Obama will never willingly release his birth certificate," said Farah. "It’s time for Americans who still value the Constitution to step up and force the issue. It’s time for us to learn the truth of where Obama was born. We may find he was born in Hawaii. We may find he was born elsewhere. I have no pre-conceived ideas. But this issue has haunted the American people long enough. It’s time for some truth and transparency."

To collect the reward, the subject must:

1. Agree to an interview with WND journalists;

2. Provide persuasive evidence, such as pictures, documents or verifiable details;

3. Agree to a polygraph test.

"I think it’s disgraceful that Americans should be forced to go to such lengths by the intransigence of public officials toward accountability," said Farah. "But that is what it has come to in 2009 with our current president. He prefers to dodge and weave, while his apologists in government and media viciously attack citizens for attempting to see that the Constitution is observed."

Farah launched a petition drive earlier this year that has accumulated nearly 400,000 signatures demanding that all controlling legal authorities pursue proof of Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen." That petition campaign is still on-going.

More recently, he launched a billboard campaign raising the simple question, "Where’s the birth certificate?" That campaign has raised $85,000 so far. Farah says there are plenty of billboards available, despite a ban on the campaign by several major outdoor advertising companies. But donations have dried up because of an apparent misperception among readers that billboards are not available due to the bans imposed by a few companies.

In addition, Farah points out those interested in backing his latest campaign can also raise visibility for the issue by purchasing magnetic bumper stickers, tea party rally signs and yard signs that raise the same simple question, "Where’s the birth certificate?"

All funds not used specifically for a reward will go toward the purchase of more billboard space.

If you would like to raise the reward, WND is accepting contributions in any amount. Donations can be made online, by phone and credit card or checks can be mailed to:

WND
PO Box 1627
Medford, Or 97501

Checks should be clearly marked as to purpose.

If you would like to arrange a credit card contribution by phone, call 1.800.4WND.COM

Here is an actual Hawaiian birth certificate from 1963 (the same era as Obama’s birth), which while redacted includes detailed information documenting a birth, including the name of the birth hospital and the attending physician.

Long-form birth certificate from state of Hawaii (Image courtesy Philip Berg)

Here is the "Certification of Live Birth" presented by Obama:

Short-form "Certification of Live Birth"

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.

June 23, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Why Obama wants to hide birth certificate

Since I began my quixotic campaign to uncover Barack Obama’s birth certificate, many have asked me about the president’s possible motives for hiding it with such tenacity and diligence.

I think there are many plausible motives:

* Perhaps something in that birth certificate, if it indeed exists, would contradict assertions Obama has made about his life’s story. These might even involve his true parental heritage. Without a real birth certificate, no one really knows who his parents
were. So it is ridiculous even to speculate about whether citizenship could be conferred upon him by his mother, when we don’t know for sure who his mother is.

* Perhaps it reveals a foreign birth, as Hawaii allowed for in 1961 while still issuing the "certification of live birth" we have seen posted on his website.

* Or perhaps it will show just what Obama has claimed all along – a birth in Hawaii to two officially non-citizen parents, for the purpose of establishing "natural born citizenship" under the Constitution.

What do I mean by that last possibility?

Well, as you know, in 2008, the Senate of the United States held hearings to determine if one of the presidential candidates fulfilled the requirement of being a "natural born citizen." It wasn’t Barack Obama. It was John McCain, who was born on a U.S. military base overseas to two U.S. citizens.

Start your own elibibility billboard campaign in your neighborhood with WND’s new yard signs, asking: "Where’s the Birth Certificate?"

On April 10 of last year, two senators, both Democrats, Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Claire McCaskill of Missouri, introduced a resolution into upper house expressing a sense of the Senate that McCain was indeed a "natural born citizen."

It’s interesting what Leahy had to say on the subject: "Because he was born to American citizens (emphasis added), there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen. I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the U.S. Senate."

And, indeed it was. It was also, interestingly, the only such hearing held by the Congress on the subject of "natural born citizenship" and its application to the 2008 presidential race. Why was that interesting? Because everyone involved in this process knew – or should have known – that the life story told by Barack Obama would raise far more doubts about his eligibility than McCain’s.

Notice Leahy did not say one parent citizen would qualify a child for "natural born citizenship." He indicted it would take two to tango.

He did so again at a Judiciary Committee hearing April 3, when he asked then-Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, a former federal judge, if he had any doubts about McCain’s eligibility to serve as president.

"My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen," Chertoff responded – again underlining the fact that both parents would need to be citizens.

And what did Leahy say to that? "That is mine, too."

By the way, Obama voted for this resolution, so he obviously agrees with the definition of what constitutes a "natural born citizen" – the offspring of two U.S. citizens.

Now, I don’t know who Barack Obama’s parents are, because I have never seen his birth certificate. All I’ve seen is a facsimile of a "certification of live birth" on the Internet. That document, even if genuine, proves nothing about Obama’s birth in Hawaii or who his parents were. Hawaii had a very slipshod practice in 1961 of issuing these documents to babies born outside the country and listing parents who may not have been the parents at all.

But I do know who Barack Obama claims his parents were. According to him, neither one of them was an American citizen able to confer natural born citizenship on a child. One, Barack Obama Sr., was a foreign national from Kenya, and the other, Stanley Ann Dunham, was too young to have qualified under the law for bestowing that privilege on her son, even if the father had been a citizen and even in the unlikely event Obama was actually born in Hawaii!

So, if we are to take Obama at his word, he is not a natural born citizen and not eligible to serve as president.

If he is to be judged by the same standard as his opponent in the race, there is no way he qualifies. That’s what Leahy said. That’s what Chertoff said. That’s what the law says.

A logical question naturally follows: Why didn’t the Congress of the United States hold hearings on Obama’s eligibility when they did so on McCain’s eligibility?

I’m still trying to figure that one out. Maybe the answer is this simple: Because there’s no way Obama would have qualified.

Another logical question follows: Why is this man still serving in the White House and turning the country upside down when he is not even constitutionally eligible?

That’s the heart and soul of the campaign I’ve been running.

By the way, further establishing that it was impossible for Obama to have been a "natural born citizen" are some astonishing words found on his own campaign website. They indicate that Obama was "at birth" a citizen of Kenya and a subject of Great Britain. Why did the founders insist upon a "natural born citizen" clause in the Constitution? To avoid questions of divided loyalties. (Just scroll down the webpage and read the FactCheck.org excerpt to see this amazing admission for yourself.)

So, again, I ask: Why doesn’t Obama want to reveal his real birth certificate? Because he wants this discussion of eligibility to go away – once and for all. It is a vulnerability he cannot explain away. So he would rather not discuss it at all.

But let me remind you all, in case you hadn’t considered this: Obama plans to run for re-election in 2012. And that’s why we can never, ever let this matter rest.

June 16, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Obama fires watchdog who barked at his crony

Former Inspector General Gerald Walpin filed two reports exposing gross misappropriation of federal AmeriCorps funds by a prominent Barack Obama supporter and was shortly thereafter fired by the White House, circumstances he told WND are likely linked and others have called an outright illegal action by the administration.

"I think you have to look at the facts and the circumstances and reach your conclusions," Walpin said in a WND interview. "I will tell you that [my firing] came only after we had issued those two reports to Congress, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence."

Further, Walpin said, "I am convinced that I and my office are not guilty of any impropriety. In essence, I was fired for doing my job."

Independent, federal inspectors general are supposed to be granted special protection from political interference – thanks in part to a law co-sponsored by the then-Senator Barack Obama – to ensure that they are free to investigate waste and fraud uninfluenced by political cronyism.

But after Walpin dared to push for action against the St. HOPE Academy program – run by Obama supporter and former NBA star Kevin Johnson – which had misappropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal AmeriCorps funds, he nonetheless found himself fired by the White House under circumstances that have led some to wonder if Obama has violated his own co-sponsored law in retaliation.

"There are two big questions about the president’s actions," writes Byron York, chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner. "One, why did he decide to fire Walpin? And two, did he abide by the law that he himself co-sponsored?"

Discover how government is grinding away Americans’ individual liberties in "Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws."

Radio talk host Rush Limbaugh fired off an answer to York’s questions on his program yesterday:

"Firing an inspector general is a big deal. If you’ll remember, Alberto Gonzales as attorney general fired a couple of U.S. attorneys. He took hell for it. This is bigger. Inspectors general are supposed to be completely above politics," Limbaugh commented. "This is big. This is political cronyism, power and so forth. … I’m telling you, firing an I.G., because they’re not political, it is a much bigger deal than replacing United States attorneys."

Furthermore, Limbaugh stated, the unusual circumstances surrounding the night before Walpin’s dismissal constitutes a clear violation of the very law Obama helped to pass as a senator.

"The Obama administration did it overnight," Limbaugh stated. "[It] broke the law firing the AmeriCorps I.G."

According to the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, co-sponsored by Obama, inspectors general do not serve at the president’s pleasure and therefore cannot be fired without 30 days notice and written cause for the decision sent to Congress.

The firing of Walpin, however, took on a very different form.

Walpin confirmed to WND that on Wednesday evening earlier this week, he received a sudden and unexpected ultimatum from White House counsel Norman L. Eisen: Resign with the hour or suffer being fired.

Walpin refused to resign, replying in an email, "It would do a disservice to the independent scheme that Congress has mandated – and could potentially raise questions about my own integrity – if I were to render what would seem to many a very hasty response to your request."

The next day the administration nonetheless fired Walpin and sent a letter to Congress citing as its only reason for the dismissal, "It is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as inspectors general. That is no longer the case with regard to this inspector general."

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who also co-sponsored the Inspector General Reform Act, immediately protested the White House’s action.

"I was troubled to learn that last night your staff reportedly issued an ultimatum to the AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin that he had one hour to resign or be terminated," Grassley stated in a letter to the president. "Inspectors General were designed to have a dual role reporting to both the President and Congress so that they would be free from undue political pressure. This independence is the hallmark of all inspectors general and is essential so they may operate independently, without political pressure or interference from agencies attempting to keep their failings from public scrutiny."

Grassley’s letter reminded Obama of the statute requiring the president to submit 30-days notice to Congress of an inspector general’s dismissal and stated, "No such notice was provided to Congress in this instance."

"We cannot afford to have inspector general independence threatened," Grassley concluded. "In light of the massive increases in federal spending of late, it is more critical than ever that we have an inspector general community that is vigorous, independent and active in rooting out waste, fraud and abuse. I urge you to review the Inspector General Reform Act you co-sponsored and to follow the letter of the law should you have cause to remove any inspector general."

The White House then clarified two issues, explaining that Walpin was not immediately fired, but suspended for 30 days of paid leave as a countdown to his official release, and that his dismissal, indeed, was related to the Johnson investigation.

In a written response to Sen. Grassley, White House counsel Gregory Craig cited an ethics complaint filed against Walpin by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento, Lawrence Brown.

Brown had had declined to file criminal charges against Johnson, who was elected in November as mayor of Sacramento, or the St. HOPE Academy, but did reach a settlement requiring the organization to pay back over $400,000 of $850,000 in grants it was given through the AmeriCorps program.

Both Grassley’s letter and Walpin, however, pointed out that the inspector general has not been found guilty of any misconduct, and the charges are disputed.

"I have been performing – and my office has been performing – its work with the highest integrity, in the spirit of an independent office, calling the shots as it sees them," Walpin told WND. "The integrity committee will decide the merits of the complaint, but what troubles me is that the White House is apparently relying on the complaint. At this point, it is before an adjudicatory body, and if the White House felt it couldn’t wait for that decision, it should have at least waited for me to come in and provide my factual response, so it could consider it. It did not."

And while Walpin has been guarded in responses to the media, refraining from commenting on his future plans or even accusing the president of firing him for political reasons, he did share with WND that he believes Obama has compromised the independent integrity of the office of inspector general.

"I am sorry for what I believe to be clear interference with the institution of the inspector general," Walpin said. "And I am sorry for the people in my office, who I respect. I took the position because I believed when the president called upon me, it was a great opportunity to give something back to this country. I have done what I believe is right, and I will go on."

June 14, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Obama: Where have all his records gone?

While nearly 400,000 concerned citizens demand President Obama present his elusive "long-form" birth certificate, more than a dozen other documents remain unreleased or otherwise blocked from the public eye.

Numerous documents which have yet to be surrendered include the following.

Obama kindergarten records

The Maui News reported that Obama attended kindergarten at Noelani Elementary School on Oahu during the school year 1966-67. It released a photo of two teachers, Katherine Nakamoto and Aimee Yatsushiro, with five students. The teachers claim one of the children is Barack Obama.

According to the Hawaii Department of Education, students must submit a birth certificate to register. Parents may bring a passport or student visa if the child is from a foreign country.

So far, no records have been released by the school. Noelani Elementary School officials have not responded to WND’s request for comment.

Punahou School records

Punahou’s alleged 1979 yearbook photo of Obama playing basketball

Though from a modest background, Obama began attending the prestigious Punahou School in Honolulu, one of Hawaii’s top private institutions. He reportedly received a scholarship and attended the school from the fifth grade until he finished high school, though no financial records have been released.

The Boston Globe reported, "In 1979, the year Obama graduated, tuition for high school students at Punahou was $1,990, a sizable expense compared with Hawaii’s median family income of $22,750 that year.

Obama, reportedly a "B" student, studied among the island’s richest and most accomplished students. According to the school’s website, he also played forward on Punahou’s 1979 state championship basketball team.

Occidental College records

Obama arrived at Occidental College, a small liberal arts school in Los Angeles, Calif., in the fall of 1979. He only briefly mentions the school in his 1995 memoir, "Dreams from My Father."

Obama attended the school on a scholarship. Some question whether the financial aid he received was reserved for foreign students. Financial records have not been released.

In a legal action, handled largely by Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation, officials at Occidental College were served with a demand to produce records concerning Barack Obama’s attendance there during the 1980s because they could document whether he was attending as a foreign national.

Kreep petitioned the college with a demand for its records concerning Obama.

Occidental College library

"The gravamen of the petition is the question as to whether United States Senator Barack Hussein Obama, of Illinois, is eligible to serve as president of the United States pursuant to the requirements for that office in the United States Constitution," he wrote. "The records sought may provide documentary evidence, and/or admissions by said defendant, as to said eligibility or lack thereof."

College officials then contacted Obama’s lawyers, who argued to the court that the election was over and that future concerns should be addressed to Congress.

The motion stated that the records, which could reveal on what name Obama attended classes at Occidental and whether he attended on scholarship money intended for foreign students, "are of no relevance to this moot litigation."

The motion also claimed the petitioners failed to serve the subpoena properly.

"The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place," the firm working on Obama’s behalf stated.

"The central issue in this lawsuit … is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from Democratic Party’s nominee," the motion said. "None of the documents sought by petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question."

A judge granted a motion to quash the subpoena.

"Obama’s attorneys bent over backward to block us," Kreep told WND. "Obama doesn’t want anyone to see those records. He’s trying to hide them."

His efforts resulted in a threat from Obama’s attorneys to seek financial sanctions against the plaintiff’s lawyers.

Kreep said a notice of appeal will be filed next week.

A notice posted on the Occidental College website states, "Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) regulations protect the privacy of student education records. We, therefore, cannot disclose students’ classes, grade point averages, majors or other such information."

Columbia University records

Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University in 1981, at the age of 20.

According to the New York Times, Obama "suggests in his book that his years in New York were a pivotal period: He ran three miles a day, buckled down to work and ’stopped getting high,’ which he says he had started doing in high school. Yet he declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."

Campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt told the newspaper in October 2007, "He doesn’t remember the names of a lot of people in his life."

In a 2005 profile in a Columbia alumni magazine, Obama called his time at the school "an intense period of study."

"I spent a lot of time in the library. I didn’t socialize that much. I was like a monk," he said.

Obama claimed to be a part of the Black Student Organization and anti-apartheid activities. But according to the New York Times, several well-known student leaders did not recall his involvement.

Fox News made contact with 400 of Obama’s classmates. No one remembered him.

The Columbia University chapter in Obama’s life remains blank, according to the New York Sun.

"The Obama campaign has refused to release his college transcript, despite an academic career that led him to Harvard Law School and, later, to a lecturing position at the University of Chicago," the Sun reported in September 2008. "The shroud surrounding his experience at Columbia contrasts with that of other major party nominees since 2000, all whom have eventually released information about their college performance or seen it leaked to the public."

When the newspaper inquired, the Obama campaign did not offer an explanation for why the transcript had not been released.

According to the New York Sun, a program from Columbia’s 1983 commencement ceremony lists Obama as a graduate. University spokesman Brian Connolly confirmed that Obama graduated with a major in political science but without honors. Nonetheless, he was later admitted to Harvard Law School.

Columbia thesis "Soviet Nuclear Disarmament"

Before applying to Harvard, Obama is said to have written a major thesis in his senior year. It has not been released.

An Oct 30, 2007, a New York Times article stated, "[Obama] barely mentions Columbia, training ground for the elite, where he transferred in his junior year, majoring in political science and international relations and writing his thesis on Soviet nuclear disarmament."

Former Columbia professor, Michael Baron, told NBC News Obama excelled in his year-long honors seminar called American Foreign Policy.

He also said Obama spent a whole year writing a "thesis" or "senior thesis" on the topic of nuclear negotiations with the former Soviet Union.

"My recollection is that the paper was an analysis of the evolution of the arms reduction negotiations between the Soviet Union and the United States," Baron told reporters in an e-mail. "At that time, a hot topic in foreign policy circles was finding a way in which each country could safely reduce the large arsenal of nuclear weapons pointed at the other … For U.S. policy makers in both political parties, the aim was not disarmament, but achieving deep reductions in the Soviet nuclear arsenal and keeping a substantial and permanent American advantage. As I remember it, the paper was about those negotiations, their tactics and chances for success. Barack got an A."

Baron said he saved Obama’s paper and recently searched through boxes hoping to find it, but he told reporters he may have thrown it away during a move several years ago.

Baron wrote a letter of recommendation when Obama applied to Harvard Law School. According to Federal Election Commission records, he also donated at least $1,250 to Obama’s presidential campaign.

On July 24, 2008, the Obama administration told NBC News Obama was unable to release copies of his thesis paper.

"We do not have a copy of the course paper you requested and neither does Columbia University," Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said.

According to MSNBC, Columbia University officials claim they do not have a copy available in the college’s archives.

Harvard Law School records

With less than steller marks upon his graduation from Columbia, Obama was accepted into Harvard Law School.

WND columnist Jack Cashill wrote, "If Obama’s LSAT scores merited admission (to Harvard), we would know about them. We don’t. The Obama camp guards those scores, like his SAT scores, more tightly that Iran does its nuclear secrets."

He continued, "We know enough about Obama’s Columbia grades to know how far they fall below the Harvard norm, likely even below the affirmative action-adjusted black norm at Harvard."

Cashill wrote, Khalid al-Mansour, principle adviser to Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, lobbied friends like Manhattan Borough President Percy Sutton to intervene at Harvard on Obama’s behalf. Al-Mansour reportedly mentored founders of the Black Panther party in the early 1960s.

Cashill suggests Obama’s "shyness" about his Harvard experience may stem from his reluctance to broadcast his connections.

According to Politico, Obama’s name does not appear on any legal scholarships during his time at Harvard. His campaign reportedly said his Harvard education was a product of hard work and student loans. Obama graduated magna cum laude in 1991.

Harvard Law Review articles

In 1990, Obama beat out 18 other contenders to become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, where he spent at least 50 hours a week editing submissions from judges, scholars and authors.

According to Politico, there were "eight dense volumes produced during his time in charge there – 2,083 pages in all."

Campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt told Politico Obama didn’t write any articles for the Review, but he did leave behind numerous case analyses and unsigned "notes" from Harvard students.

As Matthew Franck noted in National Review Online, "A search of the HeinOnline database of law journals turns up exactly nothing credited to Obama in any law review anywhere at any time."

Susan Estrich, the first female president of the Review who served 14 years earlier, said Obama must have had something published that year, even if his campaign denied it.

"They probably don’t want [to] have you [reporters] going back" to examine the Review, she said.

However, Politico later reported it had unearthed a 1990 article that "offers a glimpse at Obama’s views on abortion policy and the law during his student days."

His six-page summary answers a legal question about whether fetuses should be allowed to file lawsuits against their mothers.

"Obama’s answer, like most courts’: No," Politico reported. "He wrote approvingly of an Illinois Supreme Court ruling that the unborn cannot sue their mothers for negligence, and he suggested that allowing fetuses to sue would violate the mother’s rights and could, perversely, cause her to take more risks with her pregnancy."

The report continued, "His article acknowledged a public interest in the health of the fetus, but also seemed to demonstrate his continuing commitment to abortion rights, and suggested that the government may have more important concerns than ‘ensuring that any particular fetus is born.’"

Despite its earlier statement, the Obama campaign later confirmed Obama’s authorship of the article and claimed it was the only piece he had written for the Review.

University of Chicago scholarly articles

Obama lectured at the University of Chicago Law School, a top school where the faculty is known for voluminous scholarly publishing, from 1992 until 2004.

The university offered Obama a full-time tenure-track position, an honor typically reserved for published instructors. However, reporters have been unable to find scholarly articles authored by him. The university reports that Obama declined the tenure offer.

Sarah Galer, news editor at the Law School and Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, told WND, "President Obama wrote ‘Dreams from My Father’ while at the law school but did not produce any scholarly articles as far as I know."

Passport

According to March 2008 reports, State Department employees conducted an unauthorized search of Obama’s passport files during the recent presidential campaign. CNN reported that three different contract workers accessed his information on separate occasions – Jan. 9, Feb. 21 and March 14 – without authorization. Two workers were fired and another faced discipline.

Obama’s files reportedly contained copies of passport applications, birth date, basic biographical information, records of passport renewal and possibly citizenship information.

The Obama campaign demanded a thorough investigation to determine which employees looked at the file and why.

"This is an outrageous breach of security and privacy, even from an administration that has shown little regard for either over the last eight years," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton told CNN in a statement. "Our government’s duty is to protect the private information of the American people, not use it for political purposes."

Meanwhile, a key witness who had been cooperating with federal investigators was later found fatally shot in front of a Washington, D.C., church. A police officer found the body of Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, slumped dead inside his car.

At the time, investigators said they didn’t have any information connecting the murder to the passport case. After one year of investigation of the homicide, there have been no arrests.

The passport has not been released.

Medical records

During his first presidential campaign in 1999, Sen. John McCain released 1,500 pages of medical and psychiatric records collected by the Navy. In 2008, McCain allowed reporters to spend three hours sifting through 1,200 pages of health records.

In 1999, former Vice President Al Gore released medical records revealing "mildly elevated" cholesterol levels and removal of a common form of skin cancer from his forehead in 1997. The documents disclosed his weight, resting heart rate, resting blood pressure, cardiovascular fitness and a variety of other health details. Gore’s records were compiled after a complete physical examination by several military physicians.

Likewise, President George W. Bush allowed the media to view about 400 pages of personal medical information in 2000 and 2004.

After initial reluctance, Sen. John Kerry allowed the Navy to release his full medical records in 2004.

While not all have done so, it has been common practice for presidential candidates to release medical records.

However, Barack Obama, a relatively young candidate who was said to have been in "excellent health," refused to release medical records. Instead, he simply provided a six-paragraph note from his physician briefly summarizing 21 years of doctor visits and health information.

The letter contained no supporting documentation.

Campus evangelists clash with police

Dispute over signs, 1st Amendment rights prompts 4 arrests, including felony charge

A campus evangelism group is stunned today, as a ministry event at a community college in
Ohio resulted in four members being arrested, one on a felony assault charge that the ministry’s leader claims is fabricated.

"I’ve done ministries like this at more than 200 universities," said Jason Storms, director of Faithful Soldier School of Evangelism, a ministry of Mercy Seat Christian Church in Milwaukee, Wis. "We train people to do evangelism, and I have never seen an incident like this."

Storms and a team of students earlier this week traveled to Sinclair Community College in Dayton, Ohio, with signs, literature and a message of faith.

When they arrived, however, a student complaint led campus police to confront the evangelism team and demand that their signs and literature be put away in accordance with college policy. When two of the evangelists refused the order, however, insisting their materials were protected by the freedom of speech guaranteed in the First Amendment, the officers arrested them on charges of disorderly conduct.

Remind the world who’s really in charge with the "Worship GOD, not GOV" magnetic bumper sticker from WND.

"There are many times when police hassle us and intimidate or bully us on campus, and usually we stand them down and are successful in defending our rights to freedom of speech," Storms told WND. "I can count on one hand the number of times we’ve had an arrest situation."

Later in the afternoon, however, two more arrests followed, one on a now-disputed felony charge of striking a police officer.

Storms himself was detained by police, when after speaking freely with students on campus for a couple of hours, he approached Officer Michael Beane to inquire about the charges filed against the other two evangelists. Storms and Beane then got into an argument, resulting in the officer claiming he was being harassed and Storms being detained in a holding cell.

The situation escalated, however, when Officer Beane demanded that a member of the evangelism team surrender a cell phone that had been taping the incident.

Faithful Soldier student Katie Carroll refused to give up her phone and hid behind fellow evangelist team member Daniel Pollion. What happened next is highly disputed. Natasha Baker, director of public relations for the campus police force, told WND Pollion struck Beane in the face.

"We have witness testimonies, students who did see the officer being punched by one of the demonstrators and at that point [Pollion] was arrested," Baker said. "We have not had anyone file a police report stating otherwise."

The members of Faithful Soldier, however, tell a different story.

Pollion, who was released from jail today upon posting $2,000 bond, told the Dayton Daily News, "It can’t be construed as assault or even attempted assault. They were on the offensive, not us."

Storms told WND his organization has witnesses of their own that say Pollion merely asked the officer to "chill out" when he was placed in a headlock and wrestled to the ground. Storms said Beane radioed in a phantom "fight" and phony charge that he had been assaulted.

"Three of our people were standing there watching the entire thing as well as Sinclair College students," Storms said. "We have numerous direct, eyewitness testimonies. There was no punch, no assault, nothing like that. It was just a crazy cowboy officer acting belligerently and making his third arrest of the day of a group of Christians peacefully trying to witness."

Baker told the Daily News, "It is a very serious matter and we don’t have things like this happen often and it deserves our attention."

She also explained to WND that evangelists from Faithful Soldier had been on campus last year and were told then that while they have the freedom to talk to students, campus policy requires pre-approval of organizations bringing signs or literature.

"Because we do have the campus access policy and they did understand what that policy was before they came on campus," Baker said, "the officers had asked them to please remove their signs and stop handing out literature unless asked for by students."

Storms told WND the policy is unconstitutional and the evangelists were right to resist demands to put their tracts and signs away. He also believes that the enforcement of First Amendment issues is driven by an anti-Christian atmosphere on college campuses.

"When we first got out there, a young man complained and told us it was not right that we were out there," Storms said. "There are war protests that take place here where they scream about the war. There was an Obama rally here not too long ago. There are gay pride rallies that take place on this campus. Nobody gets offended by those things. The issue is not with our method; the issue is with our message."

Storms continued, "I would like to see the campus’ freedom of speech policies changed, because it obviously has policies that aren’t constitutional. I think they need to invest in a little more training for their officers in how to deal with First Amendment situations."

According to a statement from the college, external investigators will review the incident and report to school’s president.

All four arrested evangelists, including Katie Carroll – who was arrested for obstruction for refusing to surrender the video – have been released on bond.

May 24, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Eligibility attorney asks Supremes to cooperate with FBI

A lawyer investigating the eligibility of Barack Obama to be president under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the office be occupied only by a "natural born" citizen is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to cooperate with an FBI investigation into alleged cyber crimes connected to her work.

In a letter addressed yesterday to Chief Justice John Roberts, the associate justices, the Secret Service and others, California lawyer Orly Taitz, who is working on a number of eligibility cases through the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, wrote, "I hope that the Supreme Court will show proper cooperation in investigation of such crimes by the FBI and other agencies and I request a letter of cooperation to that extent."

Taitz is just one of many attorneys across the country whose clients are raising questions about Obama’s eligibility.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 345,000 others and sign up now!

Taitz is one of several lawyers who have brought emergency motions to the U.S. Supreme Court over the cases, only to have them dropped without a hearing.

While her effort was pending at the court, its references suddenly were scrubbed from the public website just two days before a conference among justices on the case was to be heard.

She filed a complaint with the FBI, which promised a review, but the investigative agency noted that in that situation, technically the Supreme Court was the "victim" of having its website hacked, and officials there would need to cooperate for the effort to move forward.

That circumstance generated Taitz’ letter requesting cooperation.

"This is particularly important in light of the fact that there is a common denominator in a number of cyber crimes committed," Taitz wrote. She cited a hacking into her PayPal account where donations to her foundation allegedly could have been diverted, sabotage on her website and the creation of an "imposter site" for one of the plaintiffs in one of her cases.

"All of these cyber crimes, together with all the other crimes that are handled separately, have one common denominator – a concerted effort to put Obama in the White House and keep him there by virtue of fraud and concealment of all of his records," she wrote.

The president also has been named in an indictment turned in by a peoples’ grand jury in Georgia, and one other man has sought a criminal complaint against the president.

Taitz also told WND she has forwarded to U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor in Washington, D.C., a request for the U.S. to relate Quo Warranto "on Barack Hussein Obama, II to test his title to president."

Named as plaintiffs in the action are nine military or legislative leaders, including Allen C. James, currently on active duty in the U.S. Army in Iraq. Others include several retired military leaders as well as elected state representatives.

"Relators request that as U.S. Attorney, you institute a Quo Warranto proceeding against Obama under DC Code § 16-3502, and demand that Obama show clear title, proving, with clear and convincing evidence, that he had qualified as president elect," Taitz told Taylor.

"By each relator’s constitutional oath of office, and interest above other citizens and taxpayers, relators submit that they have standing," Taitz wrote.

"In arguendo of Respondent Obama’s burden of proof, motions are submitted requesting mandamus on Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle for evidence, and on Sec. State Hillary Rodham Clinton for evidence and to request evidence from Britain and the Republics of Kenya, Indonesia and Pakistan," Taitz said.

"Quo Warranto" essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, said the demand is a legitimate course of action.

"She basically is asking, ‘By what authority’ is Obama president," he told WND. "In other words, ‘I want you to tell me by what authority. I don’t really think you should hold the office.’

Eidsmoe said it’s clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents, "he does not want the public to know."

What else could be the reason for his hiring law firms across the nation to fight any request for information as basic as his Occidental College records from the early 1980s, he asked.

As Jerome Corsi, WND senior staff writer, explained, "The main reason doubts persist regarding Obama’s birth certificate is this question: If an original Hawaii-doctor-generated and Hawaii-hospital-released Obama birth certificate exists, why wouldn’t the senator and his campaign simply order the document released and end the controversy?

"That Obama has not ordered Hawaii officials to release the document," Corsi writes, "leaves doubts as to whether an authentic Hawaii birth certificate exists for Obama."

Obama officials repeatedly have declined comment, relenting only one time to call such allegations "garbage."

WND reported earlier on a proposal by U.S. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., and the criticism he’s taking for suggesting that the issue be avoided in the future by having presidential candidates supply their birth certificate.

Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama’s eligibility:

* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn’t properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut’s secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state’s 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public’s support.

* Chicago lawyer Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama’s vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama’s eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama’s citizenship. His case was denied.

* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

* Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.

* In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama’s citizenship. The case was denied.

* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama’s birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia’s secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama’s eligibility include:

* In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

* In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

* In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

* In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.

* In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

April 04, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Historic Issue: YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE?

WorldNet Daily Whistleblower Single Issue - April 2009 – YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE? Why dozens of lawsuits and millions of Americans want Barack Obama to prove he’s constitutionally qualified to be president . With Barack Obama in the White House, millions of Americans are watching the news night after night in sheer shock, wondering out loud what the next unprecedented expansion of government power will be. Nationalizing entire industries with gigantic taxpayer bailouts; forcing taxpayers to fund abortion; releasing Gitmo prisoners onto U.S. streets; rapidly converting free-market, capitalist America into a government-run socialist state – every day seems to bring a new unconstitutional power-grab, critics say.

But arguably Obama’s most egregious, unconstitutional “power-grab” as president may have been his very first – being elected to the highest office in the land while steadfastly refusing to offer proof he is a “natural born citizen,” as required of all presidents by the U.S. Constitution.

That explosive story is the focus of the April 2009 edition of WND’s acclaimed Whistleblower magazine. It’s called “YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE? Why dozens of lawsuits and millions of Americans want Barack Obama to prove he’s constitutionally qualified to be president.”

This issue of Whistleblower “is not only the most complete and thorough exposé of the eligibility questions surrounding Barack Obama’s presidency,” says WND founder and CEO Joseph Farah, “it is an indictment of the process that put him in the White House Jan. 20 of this year.”

Although Article II section 1 of the Constitution clearly requires that all presidents be “natural born citizens,” the 2008 election proved, Farah points out, “that no controlling legal authority bothered to establish” that Obama was qualified for the Oval Office. “Everybody dropped the ball,” said Farah.

The biggest reason interest in the Obama eligibility issue continues to mount, with ever more legal actions being filed and more Americans demanding answers, says WND Managing Editor David Kupelian, is simple: “Barack Obama is hiding something. About that statement, there is no dispute. Despite dozens of lawsuits, with plaintiffs including a former presidential candidate, a former deputy attorney general, many legislators, active-duty U.S. military and other serious people, Obama simply refuses to release his original, long-form birth certificate. That’s the one that could actually prove he was born in Hawaii. What is posted on Obama’s ‘Stop the Smears’ website as well as the FactCheck.org website is the abbreviated short-form ‘certification of live birth’ that could have been issued for a child born overseas, and thus does not prove he was born in Hawaii. What is so difficult about this to understand?”

And while some of the many lawsuits challenging Obama on this issue have reached the eyes of U.S. Supreme Court justices, at least one former state Supreme Court chief justice – Alabama’s Roy Moore – now says the Obama eligibility issue should be adjudicated: “Why doesn’t the president have to show that he’s a natural born citizen? … We’ve had all kinds of suits filed, and the press doesn’t mention them and the courts continually reject them. … It’s troubling to me because we’ll suffer the consequences if we ignore our Constitution."

Highlights of “YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE?” include:

"The question of eligibility" by Joseph Farah
"Why I care about the Obama eligibility issue" by David Kupelian
"Why questions persist regarding Obama’s qualifications" by Bob Unruh, on why the president’s defenders never actually address the merits of eligibility challenges
"The 20th Amendment: What if the president-elect fails to qualify?"
"U.S. military officers demanding eligibility proof" by Bob Unruh, regarding which one plaintiff said, "In the worst case … it’s going to be revolution in the streets"
"What is ‘quo warranto’"
"Scalia: You need 4 votes for Obama eligibility case"
"Ex-chief justice: ‘If he’s not a natural born citizen, he’s not qualified’" in which former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore weighs in on the issue
"Was Obama born in Hawaii – or Kenya?" by Jerome R. Corsi, who interviews the private detective who investigated Honolulu hospitals claimed as Obama birthplace; also a report on eyewitnesses to Obama’s grandmother saying she witnessed his birth in Mombasa, Kenya
"Kenyan ambassador: ‘I don’t know’ if Obama was born in U.S." by Chelsea Schilling – a revealing follow-up to the on-air "gaffe" by African official about president’s birth
"What congressmen say about Obama’s eligibility," an extensive sampling of what lawmakers are telling constituents about where the president was born
"Eligibility bill hits Congress" by Drew Zahn, detailing U.S. Rep. Bill Posey’s proposed law requiring candidates to show birth certificate – which would apply to Obama’s re-election
"Congressman scorned for suggesting eligibility proof," documenting media reaction to Rep. Bill Posey’s eligibility bill, including MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann who advises the congressman to "take the Reynolds Wrap off your head"
"States reviewing ‘eligibility’ challenges," detailing how Montana has tabled its plan while Oklahoma’s gets committee approval
"California used to check presidential candidates’ qualifications"
"Wikipedia scrubs Obama eligibility" by Aaron Klein, who documents how the very mention of citizenship issues is deleted in minutes and "offending" users banned
"Judge ripped for using blog hearsay" by Bob Unruh, on the eligibility case lawyer who says he’s entitled to see Obama’s birth certificate during "discovery" process
"Resolving Obama birth issue ‘once and for all’" by Leo C. Donofrio, in which the attorney proposes a solution to what he calls the "bottomless pit of pending litigation"
"Does dual citizenship disqualify a candidate from being president?"
"Chief justice accepts lawsuit docs, WND petition" by Drew Zahn, in which John Roberts agrees to read Obama filings and consider WorldNetDaily’s 330,000 online petition signers
"Obama team threatens plaintiffs" by Alan Keyes, the former Reagan diplomat and presidential candidate who rallies all involved in the eligibility battle to stand firm

“To me, this is a historic issue of Whistleblower magazine,” says Farah. “I do not pretend to know where the information you are about to read will lead. But I do know that it is explosive, profoundly important and represents much more than the future of the Barack Obama administration. No less than our Constitution – the foundation of our national liberties and the rule of law in America – is at stake.”

April 03, 2009 | Patriot | Comments 0

Citizen grand jury indicts Obama

President Obama has been named in dozens of civil lawsuits alleging he is not eligible to be president, with one man even filing a criminal complaint alleging the commander-in-chief is a fraud, and now a citizen grand jury in Georgia has indicted the sitting president.

The indictment delivered to state and federal prosecutors yesterday is one of the developments in the dispute over Obama’s eligibility to be president under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that presidents be "natural born" citizens.

Orly Taitz , a California attorney working on several of the civil actions, also announced she has filed another Quo Warranto case in the District of Columbia, where, she told WND, the statutes acknowledge that procedure.

The Quo Warranto claim essentially calls on Obama to explain by what authority he has assumed the power of the presidency.

Georgia resident Carl Swensson, whose work is detailed on his Rise up for America website, told WND he got tired of the issues over Obama’s eligibility, as well as his performance in office.

"I took it upon myself to find as many patriots as I could across the state, for the purpose of seating 25 for a grand jury," he said.

Over the weekend the jurors took sworn testimony from several sources, including Taitz, and then generated an indictment that later was forwarded to the U.S. attorney, the state attorney general and others in law enforcement across the state.

Swensson cites on his website as authority for the grand jury the Magna Carta, the bill of rights that formed the foundation of British common law on which U.S. law is based.

He said the members were chosen, sworn in and observed all of the rules of procedure. Swensson declined to elaborate on the specific allegations about Obama, telling WND that remains confidential at this point because of the possibility of a prosecution.

However, the website explanation of the procedure includes some intimidating language.

"If the government does not amend the error within 40 days after being shown the error, then the four members shall refer the matter to the remainder of the grand jury," it says. "The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions, and any way else they can until amends shall have been made according to the sole judgment of the grand jury."

Swensson said the indictments were delivered to the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, state officials and leaders of the Georgia Senate and House.

He told WND that since the action in Georgia, he’s been contacted by groups in at least 20 other states who want to pursue a similar action.

Meanwhile, Taitz told WND she has forwarded to U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor in Washington, D.C., a request for the U.S. to relate Quo Warranto "on Barack Hussein Obama, II to test his title to president."

Named as plaintiffs in the action are nine military or legislative leaders, including Allen C. James, currently on active duty in the U.S. Army in Iraq. Others include several retired military leaders as well as elected state representatives.

"Relators request that as U.S. Attorney, you institute a Quo Warranto proceeding against Obama under DC Code § 16-3502, and demand that Obama show clear title, proving, with clear and convincing evidence, that he had qualified as president elect," Taitz told Taylor.

"By each relator’s constitutional oath of office, and interest above other citizens and taxpayers, relators submit that they have standing," Taitz wrote.

"In arguendo of Respondent Obama’s burden of proof, motions are submitted requesting mandamus on Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle for evidence, and on Sec. State Hillary Rodham Clinton for evidence and to request evidence from Britain and the Republics of Kenya, Indonesia and Pakistan," Taitz said.

Where’s the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 345,000 others and sign up now!

She told WND the case was filed in the District of Columbia because the district recognizes the procedure. Taitz, who is working on her cases through the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation , cites a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Obama’s eligibility to be president.

She previously submitted a similar case to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

The legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, said the demand is a legitimate course of action.

"She basically is asking, ‘By what authority’ is Obama president," he told WND. "In other words, ‘I want you to tell me by what authority. I don’t really think you should hold the office.’

"She probably has some very good arguments to make," Eidsmoe said.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "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."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several of the civil cases already have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined even to hear arguments.

Eidsmoe said it’s clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records and other documents, "he does not want the public to know."

What else could be the reason for his hiring law firms across the nation to fight any request for information as basic as his Occidental College
records from the early 1980s, he asked.

According to the online Constitution.org resource: "The common law writ of quo warranto has been suppressed at the federal level in the United States, and deprecated at the state level, but remains a right under the Ninth Amendment which was understood and presumed by the Founders, and which affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

According to author Chester Antieau in his "The Practice of Extraordinary Remedies," Quo Warranto is one of the oldest rights in common law.

"The earliest case on record appears in the 9th year of Richard I, 1198," he wrote. "The statute of 9 Anne c. 20 in 1710 authorized a proper officer of a court, with leave of the court, to exhibit an information in the nature of quo warranto, at the ‘relation’ of any person desiring to prosecute the same – to be called the relator. Early American statutes were modeled after the Statute of Anne and, indeed, the statute has often been ruled to be part of the common law we inherited from England."

Antieau noted the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled, "Quo warranto is addressed to preventing a continued exercise of authority unlawfully asserted, rather than to correct what has already been done. …"

Its first recognized purpose, he said, is "to determine the title of persons claiming possession of public offices and to oust them if they are found to be usurpers."

Among those who are subject to its demands, under court precedent, are chief executives in other U.S. governmental positions, including governors and sheriffs.

As WND has reported on several occasions, none of the so-called "evidence" of Obama’s constitutional eligibility produced thus far is beyond reasonable doubt nor as iron-clad as simply producing an authentic birth certificate, something Americans are required to do regularly but the president still refuses to do.

Adding fuel to the fire is Obama’s persistent refusal to release documents that could provide answers. While his supporters cite an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii, critics point out such documents actually were issued for children not born in the state.

As Jerome Corsi, WND senior staff writer, explained, "The main reason doubts persist regarding Obama’s birth certificate is this question: If an original Hawaii-doctor-generated and Hawaii-hospital-released Obama birth certificate exists, why wouldn’t the senator and his campaign simply order the document released and end the controversy?

"That Obama has not ordered Hawaii officials to release the document," Corsi writes, "leaves doubts as to whether an authentic Hawaii birth certificate exists for Obama."

Obama officials repeatedly have declined comment, relenting only one time to call such allegations "garbage."

WND also has reported that Taitz’ appeals have been submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Justice Department, where officials confirmed they received the paperwork.

WND reported earlier on a proposal by U.S. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., and the criticism he’s taking for suggesting that the issue be avoided in the future by having presidential candidates supply their birth certificate.

Other members of Congress have been reading from what appears to be a prepared script in response to queries about Obama’s eligibility:

Among the statements from members of Congress:

* Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.: "Thank you for your recent e-mail. Senator Obama meets the constitutional requirements for presidential office. Rumors pertaining to his citizenship status have been circulating on the Internet, and this information has been debunked by Snopes.com, which investigates the truth behind Internet rumors."

* Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla.: "Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States. Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr. Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of president."

* Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: "President Obama has provided several news organizations with a copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department recently issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate."

* U.S. Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J.: "The claim that President Obama was born outside of the United States, thus rendering him ineligible for the presidency, is part of a larger number of pernicious and factually baseless claims that were circulated about then-Senator Obama during his presidential campaign. President Obama was born in Hawaii." The response provided no documentation.