Update: 26 April 2012 0501z. Eric sent me this link to one of the lawyers that tried the case for the Birther side:
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 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; neither shall any person be eligible to that office, who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”
New Jersey state statutes (N.J.S.A. 19:23-7 and N.J.S.A. 19:23-15) state that a person must be eligible to run for the office he or she seeks. They make no exception for someone running for the Office of President. N.J.S.A. 19:25-3 provides that a presidential candidate does not have to file his or her consent to be nominated for that office. But the statute does not say that such candidate does not have to show under the previous cited statutes that he or she is eligible for the office sought.
Additionally, the New Jersey Secretary of State instructions on her web site to presidential candidates running in the New Jersey primary tell them they must be “natural born Citizens.”
New Jersey statute N.J.S.A. 19:29-1(b) provides that voters can contest the New Jersey election of any candidate who is not eligible for the office he or she seeks.
Upon my request that she so stipulate, Obama’s lawyer agreed during the trial that there was absoulutely no evidence before the court as to who Obama is or where he was born, including excluding from evidence the internet image of Obama’s alleged Certificate of Live Birth he released on April 27, 2011. The ALJ [Administrative Law Judge – ed.] confirmed that to be the case.
Yet, in his decision, the ALJ said that because he does not have to consent to his nomination it did not matter who Obama is or where he may be born because he has no legal obligation to show that he is constitutionally eligible to run in the New Jersey primary for the Office of President.
Not only did he say that Obama has no legal duty to provide the State of New Jersey with any evidence that he is constitutionally eligible to be placed on the New Jersey primary ballot for election to the Office of President, the ALJ also said: “Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.” Initial Decision, p. 7. Dr. Conspiracy, in light of the fact that there was absolutely no evidence before the ALJ as to where Obama was born, must be so embarrassed by the finding of the court that at his blog he tries to tell us that it is not true that the ALJ found Obama to be born in Hawaii. But on the contrary, from the quoted language, we can conclude that the ALJ found that Obama was born in Hawaii and therefore based on that fact alone and with no reference to the citizenship of his parents, found that he is a “natural born Citizen.” But he made the finding that he was born in Hawaii without providing any explanation as to what evidence he relied upon to make such a finding. His Initial Decision is silent as to what evidence he relied upon to find that Obama was born in Hawaii.
Interesting.
Update: 26 April 2012 0317z.
Blogmaster Eric tells in the comments that he managed to find the videos here. They are there. The original link I posted at the beginning of the story was dead for a while. It is now live again. Eric is of the opinion that the story has no merit. What do I think? Interesting.
=====
There is a case in New Jersey dealing with Obama’s birth certificate. I have been following this case in the background for about a week or so. There are YouTubes up showing the court in action and the arguments that were presented. Funny enough a YouTube search does not show up the videos. Despite the fact that I downloaded them a few days ago. Interesting. Well we have this report.
A crushing situation is emerging for, not only Barack Obama, but also for the American people as a landmark statement has been made by the Obama administration that is going to turn the entire 2012 Presidential race and potentially much more on its head.
Lawyers representing the current sitting President of the United States of America have been forced, under penalty of perjury, to admit that the long-form birth certificate presented by the White House in April of 2011 is a total forgery.
In a NJ ballot access eligibility case spawned by Tea Party activists, attorneys representing Obama had to admit the document presented to the American people by Obama himself is actually knowingly faked and was used to fool the American public into believing a complete fabrication.
What could be the most shocking aspect of the situation, however, may be the fact that Obama and his attorneys have crafted an argument that truly boggles the mind.
In a direct assault on everything the citizens of the USA take for granted, in layman’s terms, his attorneys literally made the argument during a hearing on April 10th that because the document was so obviously faked and could not possibly be considered proof of citizenship, the document itself should not be allowed as evidence in the case.
Obama is now basically asserting that only a legitimate document should be allowed as evidence in this case and therefore this one should be thrown out due to the fact that it’s not real. The Judge agreed.
Go to the link for more links.
Let me add that the Judge declared the document irrelevant because New Jersey law does not require proof of citizenship.
Interesting. (a word I have been using with increasing frequency)
Comments
17 responses to “Citizenship In New Jersey”
So who or what is going to enforce the penalty against Obama? If John Boehner had a video of BO creating the fake image with Photoshop, along with a narration of the forgery attempt in BO’s own voice, John Boehner might call it “shocking” or “disturbing”, but he and the RINO Establishment won’t impeach BO. Heck, even with the above scenario I doubt you could get a majority of GOP weenies to vote a resolution of censure.
We fail to realize that we have moved beyond the time when the normal rules and procedures are an obstacle to The Left. What have Boehner and McConnell done about the illegal “recess” appointments? When you have limp weenies in opposition to an anti-Constitutional bulldozer you have no real opposition. The TV Watchers depend on what the mainstream press decide to tell them. The TV Watchers, at best, may hear SOME say BO is an illegal POTUS and they will hear the 24/7 dismissal of that charge by the TV press. BO and the press merely have to make up some statement such as ” this is all settled by the Heffernen decision” and the TV Watchers aren’t going to know there is no “Heffernen decision”. The people are too lazy and content-free to govern themselves. This is why they resort to social skills to make political and technical decisions.
WTF?
I’ve seen Obama do everything he could possibly do to avoid producing the document. Then I’ve seen him release a scan of the document, and not caring whether the PDF metadata of the scan makes it look more valid or less valid.
I’ve seen the many arguments about the birth announcement in the newspaper.
If the document released is a fake, but the birth still happened as announced in the newspaper, what data on the original is Obama hiding?
If the document released is not a fake, why are DOJ lawyers arguing that it is fake?
Looks like they got it wrong:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/ineligible.asp
(I went to Youtube and searched “birth certificate fake” and got lots of hits.)
.
My god you are fucking stupid.
You know that examiner link (now) goes nowhere…
TMI,
Uh. Yes. Lots of links. Now find the link to the hearings.
Snopes is not really a trusted source on politically hot issues:
http://www.examiner.com/article/snopes-com-plays-semantics-with-examiner-obama-eligibility-article
I’m still looking for a link to the original.
I have notified the Examiner that the link is bad.
From the above link I posted in the comments:
Instead of simply making the statement that a birth certificate is not necessary to show for ballot access and leaving it at that, the attorney made no sense while making the mistake of using the example that, “even if petitioners HAD an authentic copy, it still wouldn’t be necessary to show for NJ ballot access,” openly alluding to the fact that there is no authentic certificate.
More:
Additionally, the attorney twisted reality in this one statement alone because it is the petitioners themselves that are arguing there is no authentic birth certificate to show in the first place. Not to mention, this is a fact that no one in the hearing, including Obama’s attorney disagreed with, not even the judge.
Not only was this embarrassing and twisted “Freudian-slip” one of many mistakes that got her immediately removed after the hearing as Obama’s representing attorney for the 2012 election, mistakes such as admitting in the hearing that Obama’s father was not a US citizen or even born in the USA, ultimately forced the Obama administration to feel compelled to order the public video of the hearing be completely removed from the internet entirely.
Confirming my point that the videos have been scrubbed.
AK April 25th, 2012 (#):
My god you are fucking stupid.
An honor not afforded to many in my circumstances. Thank you.
Most (All? I shoulda done a page save) of the original article can be found here:
http://www.alipac.us/content/obama-officially-ineligible-403/
No links though.
Videos are here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRcQcgiVf9I
And here’s the whole thing (very long):
http://theintelhub.com/2012/04/20/obamas-lawyers-move-to-censor-videos-of-new-jersey-ballot-challenge-hearing-rewrite-history/
I got tired of watching them. At no point does the lawyer “admit that the long-form birth certificate presented by the White House in April of 2011 is a total forgery.”
The videos at: http://theintelhub.com/2012/04/20/obamas-lawyers-move-to-censor-videos-of-new-jersey-ballot-challenge-hearing-rewrite-history/
Are the ones I was looking for. A YouTube search did not turn them up.
“there was absoulutely no evidence before the court as to who Obama is or where he was born, including excluding from evidence the internet image of Obama’s alleged Certificate of Live Birth he released on April 27, 2011. The ALJ confirmed that to be the case.”
Since it was excluded from evidence the forgery aspect was not adjudicated.
The whole birther thing is asinine. A desperate attempt to do circuitously what they failed to do at the polls. What would I say to them? Win the damn elections, people! Win the arguments! Don’t whine about having failed in one particular election like some the-South-will-rise-again loser type casting about himself for some reason why two and two don’t have to equal four.