(WND) Hawaii guv can't find Obama birth certificate

[TNforPaul45]

Gov. Abercrombie cannot find Obama's long form birth certificate, after vowing by his blood to end this "false controversy." Well I wonder why. . .

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=252833



Suggesting he was still intent on producing more birth records on Obama from the Hawaii Department of Health vital records vault, Abercrombie told the newspaper there was a recording of the Obama birth in the state archives that he wants to make public.

Abercrombie did not report to the newspaper that he or the Hawaii Department of Health had found Obama's long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate. The governor only suggested his investigations to date had found an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives.

"It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down," Abercrombie said. . .

It's there, there's a notation about it, someone wrote a note, in pencil, about his birth, I think it's on a cocktail napkin. His was such a radiant birth that there are hundreds of cocktail napkins int he state archives, in the "obama" file. What, these have "Happy New Year 2000" on them? NO NO that's ok, ignore that!

They cannot even produce the "unspecified, written notation," just saying that "he was told about it." Such incredible BS.



WND previously reported (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105817) the Hawaii Department of Health has refused to authenticate the COLB posted on the Internet by Snopes.com and FactCheck.org.

WND has reported (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=121136) that in 1961, Obama's grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, could have made an in-person report of a Hawaii birth even if the infant Barack Obama Jr. had been foreign-born.

Similarly, the newspaper announcements of Obama's birth do not prove he was born in Hawaii, since they could have been triggered by the grandparents registering the birth as Hawaiian, even if the baby was born elsewhere.

See the link for more.

[Bruno]

So far the "investigation" has shown that someone says it is actually written down somewhere. Wow, how convincing!

[Anti Federalist]

I haven't been beating this particular drum, but it sure is starting to look like there's some smoke here.

[oyarde]

I haven't been beating this particular drum, but it sure is starting to look like there's some smoke here.

Does now , when you get a Gov. stumblin' & bumblin ' .

[Brett85]

How convenient.

[TNforPaul45]

I haven't been beating this particular drum, but it sure is starting to look like there's some smoke here.

I'm in the same boat as you AF. I've been watching it from afar, not agreeing with either side who are hasty for a decision one way or the other. But if you look at the whole picture of Obama, there is something, wrong, down at the core of this story, maybe something no one has guessed yet.

- His grandmother said he was born in Kenya
- He changed his name to Barack Hussein Obama (or his parents changed it for him)
- His Columbia school records, even papers he wrote, grades, everything, are sealed up tight. The faculty up there are protecting him from something, big time.
- No one can produce a long form birth certificate (though this in itself is not a clincher, I checked at my house last month, and I couldn't find mine, just a Cert. of Live Birth from TN)
- They came here, he was supposedly "born" here, then he was hauled off two weeks later back to Indonesia or wherever and spent a decade there. Doesn't sound right.
- The newspaper announcement was supposedly made by his Grandparents in Hawaii. I wonder if a phone call was placed while he was born abroad saying "put that in the paper so that we can say he was an American born baby." If I was his parents, I would do it too. The "stupid americans" as they probably thought, wouldn't know the difference. And with a COLB, they could say he was a Natural Born and guarantee him citizenship privileges later in life. The thought of him being Pres. probably didn't even enter their minds, they were just looking out for their baby. If you were a foreign parent in the 50's/60's, having your baby be an American was the holy grail of opportunity for it.

[jmdrake]

- No one can produce a long form birth certificate (though this in itself is not a clincher, I checked at my house last month, and I couldn't find mine, just a Cert. of Live Birth from TN)


Just to be clear, you haven't checked with the state to see if they could find it either right? They should have a copy on file. If someone Obama's age was unable to locate a long form BC anywhere then I'd be somewhat willing to give him a pass on that.

Anyhow, I wish this would just get settled one way or another. Oh yeah and "In before someone calls everyone raising questions racist conspiracy nuts".

[Bruno]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?274083-CNN-Hawaii-Gov.-tries-to-end-birther-debate-once-and-for-all&highlight=hawaii+governor

[purplechoe]

yeah, it's pretty funny in retrospect...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScQ9E_dZyQU

[jmdrake]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?274083-CNN-Hawaii-Gov.-tries-to-end-birther-debate-once-and-for-all&highlight=hawaii+governor

Are you cooking this up for the naysayers?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQvIap3EF3mDuv5uW6qgacEnW1gX31dc 3Hpl3K_yogLMQM1RouFZw

[TNforPaul45]

Just to be clear, you haven't checked with the state to see if they could find it either right? They should have a copy on file. If someone Obama's age was unable to locate a long form BC anywhere then I'd be somewhat willing to give him a pass on that.

Anyhow, I wish this would just get settled one way or another. Oh yeah and "In before someone calls everyone raising questions racist conspiracy nuts".

Hey JM, no I've not done that yet. Out of curiosity, I just got my birth certificates out and saw that they were Live Birth documents. Though the ones i have I requested from the state two years ago and they sent them to me, but no, I've not specifically asked for my long forms yet. I remember, way back in the cobwebs of my mind, seeing one for me when I was little though, do not know where its at.

[HealthWyze]

You would have thought that he wouldn't have said anything about 'ending the controversy' until he had actually found something to show people.

[2young2vote]

I can go and get a birth certificate real quickly. Why can't the governor do the same for Obama? Maybe they had bad recording practices during the time that he was born. Wouldn't surprise me because it is the government after all.

[oyarde]

You would have thought that he wouldn't have said anything about 'ending the controversy' until he had actually found something to show people.

Yeah , wth ?

[Anti Federalist]

I'm in the same boat as you AF. I've been watching it from afar, not agreeing with either side who are hasty for a decision one way or the other. But if you look at the whole picture of Obama, there is something, wrong, down at the core of this story, maybe something no one has guessed yet.

- His grandmother said he was born in Kenya
- He changed his name to Barack Hussein Obama (or his parents changed it for him)
- His Columbia school records, even papers he wrote, grades, everything, are sealed up tight. The faculty up there are protecting him from something, big time.
- No one can produce a long form birth certificate (though this in itself is not a clincher, I checked at my house last month, and I couldn't find mine, just a Cert. of Live Birth from TN)
- They came here, he was supposedly "born" here, then he was hauled off two weeks later back to Indonesia or wherever and spent a decade there. Doesn't sound right.
- The newspaper announcement was supposedly made by his Grandparents in Hawaii. I wonder if a phone call was placed while he was born abroad saying "put that in the paper so that we can say he was an American born baby." If I was his parents, I would do it too. The "stupid americans" as they probably thought, wouldn't know the difference. And with a COLB, they could say he was a Natural Born and guarantee him citizenship privileges later in life. The thought of him being Pres. probably didn't even enter their minds, they were just looking out for their baby. If you were a foreign parent in the 50's/60's, having your baby be an American was the holy grail of opportunity for it.

That ^^^^ exactly

Something is starting to stink here.

[Bruno]

I can go and get a birth certificate real quickly. Why can't the governor do the same for Obama? Maybe they had bad recording practices during the time that he was born. Wouldn't surprise me because it is the government after all.

That would be one argument unless it wasn't already purported that someone has already seen it.

http://www.kitv.com/r/17860890/detail.html

HONOLULU -- The state's Department of Health director on Friday released a statement verifying the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama birth certificate.

The state has received multiple requests for a copy of Obama's birth certificate. State law does not allow officials to release the birth certificate of a person to someone outside of the family.

There were rumors that Obama was born in Kenya, where his father is from. The Constitution requires that the president be a natural born citizen of the U.S.

While many sites and news organizations have released copies provided by the Obama campaign, the rumors have persisted.

"There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record," DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said.

Fukino said she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

Fukino said that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently from any other.

Some Obama critics claim he was not born in the United States.

Multiple lawsuits were filed to try and force Obama to provide proof of citizenship. Earlier Friday, a southwest Ohio magistrate rejected a challenge to Obama's U.S. citizenship. Judges in Seattle and Philadelphia recently dismissed similar suits.

[TNforPaul45]

That ^^^^ exactly

Something is starting to stink here.

Add to the fact both his Chicago Politics involvement AND all these supposed connections and frequent visits to a Gay Bath House in Chicago, and Obama is getting good at covering stuff up.

[jmdrake]

You would have thought that he wouldn't have said anything about 'ending the controversy' until he had actually found something to show people.

LOLZ! Yeah. The corollary to not asking questions you don't already have the answer to is to not make public proclamations that you can't actually back up. That said, I'm still not ruling out the possibility that this is a honeypot. Get the right all riled up over the BC issue and then pull the rug out right at the critical moment. Obama is trailing Mitt Romney* by 5 points and "Presto/change-o"...out pops the long form BC.

*The reason I say Mitt Romney is because if the GOP was smart enough to back Ron Paul he'd be 15 points ahead and not cheap "October surprise" would be able to rescue Obama's failed campaign.

[TNforPaul45]

That would be one argument unless it wasn't already purported that someone has already seen it.

http://www.kitv.com/r/17860890/detail.html

HONOLULU -- The state's Department of Health director on Friday released a statement verifying the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama birth certificate.

The state has received multiple requests for a copy of Obama's birth certificate. State law does not allow officials to release the birth certificate of a person to someone outside of the family.

There were rumors that Obama was born in Kenya, where his father is from. The Constitution requires that the president be a natural born citizen of the U.S.

While many sites and news organizations have released copies provided by the Obama campaign, the rumors have persisted.

"There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record," DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said.

Fukino said she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

Fukino said that no state official, including Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama's certificate be handled differently from any other.

Some Obama critics claim he was not born in the United States.

Multiple lawsuits were filed to try and force Obama to provide proof of citizenship. Earlier Friday, a southwest Ohio magistrate rejected a challenge to Obama's U.S. citizenship. Judges in Seattle and Philadelphia recently dismissed similar suits.

The State could come out and officially verify, with stamps and seals and parades, that the Sky is Polka Dotted Purple too, but that doesn't make it so.

[Bruno]

The State could come out and officially verify, with stamps and seals and parades, that the Sky is Polka Dotted Purple too, but that doesn't make it so.

I couldn't agree more.

[HealthWyze]

The State could come out and officially verify, with stamps and seals and parades, that the Sky is Polka Dotted Purple too, but that doesn't make it so.

Absolutely. That's what makes this situation so troubling. There is really no way for us to check to see if he was born here, and know without a doubt that he was.

[tangent4ronpaul]

That it can't be found now is quite interesting considering that the guy that runs the vita records dept claimed to have personally seen it and vouched that it did exist.

uh hu...

-t

[Bruno]

That it can't be found now is quite interesting considering that the guy that runs the vita records dept claimed to have personally seen it and vouched that it did exist.

uh hu...

-t

Indeed. The governor could simply call him and say, "show me where you found it."

[qh4dotcom]

That it can't be found now is quite interesting considering that the guy that runs the vita records dept claimed to have personally seen it and vouched that it did exist.

uh hu...

-t

Something smells fishy here

[vita3]

I met Phil Berg & was not impressed. Seemed like a con-man.

[erowe1]

Until someone produces proof of Obama's being born outside the country, the birthers have nothing. The burden of proof is on them, not Obama. The lack of a birth certificate is nothing but the lack of a birth certificate. It isn't in itself positive evidence of anything.

[Bruno]

Until someone produces proof of Obama's being born outside the country, the birthers have nothing. The burden of proof is on them, not Obama. The lack of a birth certificate is nothing but the lack of a birth certificate. It isn't in itself positive evidence of anything.

Tell that to the Governor of Hawaii and Chris Matthews. They both believe he should show it. He has not provided anything that shows definitively he was born here, and has spent over a million dollars to stay out of court so he won't have to.

People aren't concerned about the legal burdon of proof. If I apply for a job and represent that I graduated from Yale with a 4.0, the burdon of proof is on me. I can't simply tell my employer I lost all proof of it, and they should then have to prove that I never attended.

I really don't care where the courts, the law, or anyone else believes the burdon of proof is. I believe it is on him. So that argument has no weight at all with me.

See, I'm looking at it from an exact opposite view. I am waiting to be convinced that he was born here on Aug. 4th. That hasn't been proven to me yet. Everyone wants me and others to prove he wasn't born here. That's like asking me to prove Santa Claus doesn't exist after being shown an "offical document" that he does. I want to have definitively proven to me that he does exist, before I am to believe it.

Who would verify it? I'm sure the free market could come up with a cross-section of impartial professionals we would all be comfortable with.

President Obama, prove to me and the world that you were born in this country. Release your long form birth certificate.

More of my position on that arugment in the original thread. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?274083-CNN-Hawaii-Gov.-tries-to-end-birther-debate-once-and-for-all/page24&highlight=hawaii+governor

[tangent4ronpaul]

Tell that to the Governor of Hawaii and Chris Matthews. They both believe he should show it. He has not provided anything that shows definitively he was born here, and has spent over a million dollars to stay out of court so he won't have to.

It's not just his birth certificate. He spent tons of money making sure articles he wrote, his dissertation, school records, etc. would not be released.

Also, his OB should still be alive. Anyone find it odd that this person hasn't come forward?

-t

[erowe1]

Tell that to the Governor of Hawaii and Chris Matthews. They both believe he should show it. He has not provided anything that shows definitively he was born here, and has spent over a million dollars to stay out of court so he won't have to.

Even in court he wouldn't have to provide any such thing. Nor does it have to be the case that any such thing even exists at all. Having a birth certificate of any kind is not a prerequisite for being POTUS.

[Bruno]

Even in court he wouldn't have to provide any such thing. Nor does it have to be the case that any such thing even exists at all. Having a birth certificate of any kind is not a prerequisite for being POTUS.

I don't care about that. I already said that.

I really don't care where the courts, the law, or anyone else believes the burdon of proof is. I believe it is on him. So that argument has no weight at all with me.

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite. That has not been definitively proven, imo.

[jmdrake]

Even in court he wouldn't have to provide any such thing. Nor does it have to be the case that any such thing even exists at all. Having a birth certificate of any kind is not a prerequisite for being POTUS.

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite to being POTUS just like being over a certain age is a prerequisite. Let's say if there was some legitimate doubt as to whether Obama was old enough to be president. It would not be unreasonable for a court to demand proof of age. Same thing here. There is a disputable question of fact that could allow a court to require a B.C. where in other cases it would not. While some birthers do push the limits of sanity the "Under no circumstances could Obama be forced to show proof of where he was born" crowd pushes the limit as well.

[dannno]

Maybe they had bad recording practices during the time that he was born. Wouldn't surprise me because it is the government after all.

So then can you explain the motivation for that Health Minister or whoever a year or two ago came out and said that they personally viewed the long-form birth certificate and everything was in order? Were they lying, or did they lose it since then? Those are the only two options I can think of, and both of those options look really bad.

[erowe1]

I don't care about that. I already said that.

I really don't care where the courts, the law, or anyone else believes the burdon of proof is. I believe it is on him. So that argument has no weight at all with me.

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite. That has not been definitively proven, imo.

But he has not obligation to prove it to you or anyone else. So it doesn't matter if you're not satisfied. No matter what he did, even if he did produce a long form birth certificate with a doctor's signature, some people would still claim that he hasn't proven to their satisfaction that he was born here, which would be too bad for them, since proving to their satisfaction that he was born here is not his responsibility.

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite for being POTUS. Proving that he is to your satisfaction or anyone else's is not. No president ever had to prove such a thing to everyone's satisfaction, nor does the Constitution require it, nor would it be possible to do if it were required.

[jmdrake]

So then can you explain the motivation for that Health Minister or whoever a year or two ago came out and said that they personally viewed the long-form birth certificate and everything was in order? Were they lying, or did they lose it since then? Those are the only two options I can think of, and both of those options look really bad.

Hmmmmm...that raises another possibility of prosecuting the Health Minister for obstruction of justice. Sometimes you can't punish the crime but you can punish the cover up.

[dannno]

I met Phil Berg & was not impressed. Seemed like a con-man.

Ok, and Orly Tate is an idiot.. maybe these were essentially actors provided by the elite to represent the birther movement?

[erowe1]

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite to being POTUS just like being over a certain age is a prerequisite. Let's say if there was some legitimate doubt as to whether Obama was old enough to be president. It would not be unreasonable for a court to demand proof of age. Same thing here. There is a disputable question of fact that could allow a court to require a B.C. where in other cases it would not. While some birthers do push the limits of sanity the "Under no circumstances could Obama be forced to show proof of where he was born" crowd pushes the limit as well.

Do you think that if a natural born citizen who ran for president didn't have a birth certificate, all that person's opponents should have to do to prevent him from running would be to claim that they doubt he was born here, and then he'd be out of luck because he lacked a birth certificate?

[2young2vote]

So lets say he loses his second term and is no longer president. If, five or ten or even fifteen years later, it is proven that he was not born in the USA then what kind of punishment could he legally receive, what should he receive, and what will he receive? That is what is interesting to me. Because if he wasn't born in the USA then was he ever even technically/legally president? Could we have been a president-less country for the time that he was acting as president?

[Bruno]

But he has not obligation to prove it to you or anyone else. So it doesn't matter if you're not satisfied. No matter what he did, even if he did produce a long form birth certificate with a doctor's signature, some people would still claim that he hasn't proven to their satisfaction that he was born here, which would be too bad for them, since proving to their satisfaction that he was born here is not his responsibility.

Being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite for being POTUS. Proving that he is to your satisfaction or anyone else's is not. No president ever had to prove such a thing to everyone's satisfaction, nor does the Constitution require it, nor would it be possible to do if it were required.

Well, it matters to me if I'm not satisfied. And it matters to tens of millions of Americans, too.

Of course some will doubt it if he showed the long form (which supposedly exists, has been seen by one person, and yet he refuses to release it). Show it. Have it independently verified. And 90% of all the "birthers" will be convinced.

[torchbearer]

Do you think that if a natural born citizen who ran for president didn't have a birth certificate, all that person's opponents should have to do to prevent him from running would be to claim that they doubt he was born here, and then he'd be out of luck because he lacked a birth certificate?

the birth certificate is an affidavit of your birth, with doctor as a witness.
if you don't have one, you could still get your birth doctor to testify under oath/affidavit, or any attending physicians/nurses present at your birth could testify under oath to witnessing your birth.

[erowe1]

the birth certificate is an affidavit of your birth, with doctor as a witness.
if you don't have one, you could still get your birth doctor to testify under oath/affidavit, or any attending physicians/nurses present at your birth could testify under oath to witnessing your birth.

What if you couldn't do that? Would you be out of luck? I wonder how many of our 44 presidents could have found people who were present at their birth had that been demanded from them.

[tangent4ronpaul]

So lets say he loses his second term and is no longer president. If, five or ten or even fifteen years later, it is proven that he was not born in the USA then what kind of punishment could he legally receive, what should he receive, and what will he receive? That is what is interesting to me. Because if he wasn't born in the USA then was he ever even technically/legally president? Could we have been a president-less country for the time that he was acting as president?

More interesting would be the nullification of everything he signed into law.

-t

[torchbearer]

What if you couldn't do that? Would you be out of luck? I wonder how many of our 44 presidents could have found people who were present at their birth had that been demanded from them.

yes, you'd be out of luck.
same goes for all public offices that require qualifications.
in louisiana, to run for a state office, you have to reside in that voting district for a year prior to the election date. if you can't prove that, you can't get on the ballot.
if this time around, every state demanded that the presidential candidate prove they qualify for the ballot. obama won't be on any of them.

[Bruno]

What if you couldn't do that? Would you be out of luck? I wonder how many of our 44 presidents could have found people who were present at their birth had that been demanded from them.

That's a ridiculous argument. He can do that, because the birth certificate supposedly exists (unless it doesn't, and it has then all been a lie). THIS president is having his birthplace questioned (as was McCain's eligibility as well). If someone runs against Obama and there is doubt where he was born, I'd like proof of natural born citizenship for that candidate, as well.

[erowe1]

yes, you'd be out of luck.
same goes for all public offices that require qualifications.
in louisiana, to run for a state office, you have to reside in that voting district for a year prior to the election date. if you can't prove that, you can't get on the ballot.
if this time around, every state demanded that the presidential candidate prove they qualify for the ballot. obama won't be on any of them.

Lousiana has its own constitution, so a law requiring those candidates to prove their residency might be constitutional. And certainly no federal law should be able to prevent Louisiana from doing that. But for a presidential election it would be unconstitutional for states to add that additional qualification to run for president. If Obama is qualified to be president (and the lack of any proof that he's a natural born citizen doesn't disqualify him), then those states can't prevent their electors from voting for Obama in the electoral college.

[erowe1]

That's a ridiculous argument. He can do that, because the birth certificate supposedly exists (unless it doesn't, and it has then all been a lie). THIS president is having his birthplace questioned (as was McCain's eligibility as well). If someone runs against Obama and there is doubt where he was born, I'd like proof of natural born citizenship for that candidate, as well.

Exactly. It supposedly exists, unless it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then so what?

Simply having his birthplace questioned by someone is irrelevant. If you can prove he wasn't born here, then prove it. Otherwise, he doesn't owe anyone any proof, whether it matters to them or not.

[dannno]

What if you couldn't do that? Would you be out of luck?

You wouldn't even be able to play little league baseball..

[erowe1]

You wouldn't even be able to play little league baseball..

1) Yes you would.
2) Even if you wouldn't, that has nothing to do with being POTUS.

[torchbearer]

Lousiana has its own constitution, so a law requiring those candidates to prove their residency might be constitutional. And certainly no federal law should be able to prevent Louisiana from doing that. But for a presidential election it would be unconstitutional for states to add that additional qualification to run for president. If Obama is qualified to be president (and the lack of any proof that he's a natural born citizen doesn't disqualify him), then those states can't prevent their electors from voting for Obama in the electoral college.

the state can't add qualifications, but it can enforce the ones in the constitution.

[erowe1]

the state can't add qualifications, but it can enforce the ones in the constitution.

I'm not so sure that the state can do that. But supposing it can, being able to produce proof of the circumstances of one's birth, whether that be with a birth certificate or affidavit or anything else, is not in the Constitution. I have no idea which of our 44 presidents did or did not have such things. But the ones who didn't have them weren't disqualified from being POTUS on account of that.

[torchbearer]

I'm not so sure that the state can do that. But supposing it can, being able to produce proof of the circumstances of one's birth, whether that be with a birth certificate or affidavit or anything else, is not in the Constitution. I have no idea which of our 44 presidents did or did not have such things. But the ones who didn't have them weren't disqualified from being POTUS on account of that.

you have to prove your age, you'll need a birth cert for that. that cert will also provide the location of birth.
both qualification come from the same document.

[Noob]

Strunk v Paterson (Obama): Judge has opined on what Natural Born citizen is; Concludes Obama is not a NBC.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/01/strunk-v-paterson-obama-first-time-in.html


The Court asked if Plaintiff is seeking to obtain a copy of Barack Hussein Obama Jr.’s (BHO Jr.) Certified Birth record herein; to wit Plaintiff responded "NO". Plaintiff seeks a decision by the Court as to whether or not the Candidate(s) are eligible for Office of President of the United States (POTUS) as required with the United States Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 as required as a regulation by the New York State Board of Elections including inter alias based upon the Certificate of Live Birth published August 21, 2008 by Annenberg Political Fact Check at FactCheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html (see Exhibit A); and that as a prima facie matter Plaintiff seeks a Court decision herein as to whether or not Obama in fact has Dual Allegiance, is not a Natural Born Citizen per se but merely a Native-Born citizen if that; because BHO Jr.’s father, BHO Sr., is a British subject with a student visa at that time, and is shown to be the purported father of BHO Jr. by both the newspaper announcement and the COLB shown by Fact Check.org; and therefore, at best BHO Jr. is only a "Native" born citizen, if that, with only one U.S. Citizen parent mother as a minor at his birth, and that without two U.S. Citizen parents - BHO Jr. is NOT a "Natural" born citizen at best is “Native” born.

[Bruno]

Exactly. It supposedly exists, unless it doesn't. And if it doesn't, then so what?

Simply having his birthplace questioned by someone is irrelevant. If you can prove he wasn't born here, then prove it. Otherwise, he doesn't owe anyone any proof, whether it matters to them or not.

If it doesn't exist, then we have a problem, don't we? Because the whole argument has been that it does exist, and he just "shouldn't have to show it."

I posted this previously:

Obama: "I am Santa Claus."

Me: "Prove it."

Obama: "I give presents to people. Reindeer follow me. Trust me."

Me: "Um, I'm still not convinced you are Santa Claus."

Obama: "Then I'll spend millions to avoid proving to you that I am."

Me: "Well, in that case, I'm unlikely to become more convinced then that you are Santa."

AxisMundi: "Prove there's no Santa Claus, I bet ya can't!"

Mainstream media: "Obama says he is Santa Claus. Stop it, kooky racists, it's good enough for us. Now look at the shiny trinkets he brought!"

Crazyfacedjenkins: "It really doesn't matter if he really is Santa Claus or not, because Santa lives in all of our hearts..."

Hawaii Governor: "I knew Obama when he was just a little elf. I'm going to do my best to end this Santa debate once and for all."

Hawaii Governor: (Update): "Shit. I can't find it. Someone said there was a sticky note that says someone knows someone who says they heard some someone else they had once seen it somewhere. That's all I got. You crazy birthers might be right!"

[erowe1]

you have to prove your age
Not to be POTUS you don't.

[erowe1]

If it doesn't exist, then we have a problem, don't we? Because the whole argument has been that it does exist, and he just "shouldn't have to show it."

I posted this previously:

Obama: "I am Santa Claus."

Me: "Prove it."

Obama: "I give presents to people. Reindeer follow me. Trust me."

Me: "Um, I'm still not convinced you are Santa Claus."

Obama: "Then I'll spend millions to avoid proving to you that I am."

Me: "Well, in that case, I'm unlikely to become more convinced then that you are Santa."

AxisMundi: "Prove there's no Santa Claus, I bet ya can't!"

Mainstream media: "Obama says he is Santa Claus. Stop it, kooky racists, it's good enough for us. Now look at the shiny trinkets he brought!"

Crazyfacedjenkins: "It really doesn't matter if he really is Santa Claus or not, because Santa lives in all of our hearts..."

Hawaii Governor: "I knew Obama when he was just a little elf. I'm going to do my best to end this Santa debate once and for all."

Hawaii Governor: (Update): "Shit. I can't find it. Someone said there was a sticky note that says someone knows someone who says they heard some someone else they had once seen it somewhere. That's all I got. You crazy birthers might be right!"

Right. But all that has to do with whether or not you are personally satisfied. It has nothing to do with whether or not Obama can be POTUS.

[devil21]

Im looking more psychic by the day:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?220537-Obama-s-Presidential-family-tree&p=2428053&viewfull=1#post2428053


11-16-2009
One suspicion I've had is that Obama's "timeline" is completely fabricated. The entire thing. Seems no one can get a straight answer on where he's from, what religion he is, who his ancestors are (they keep dying quietly). That's not to say that the alternative of another Bush or Clinton of known lineage is more appealing, just that it's possible that Obama's backstory is entirely fabricated. I mean, just the relation to Cheney itself raises a lot of eyebrows. What are the odds it's just some random twist? He came out of practically nowhere to elevate to President from relative obscurity. Makes me wonder if he hasn't been groomed for this for a lot longer than most think.

[jmdrake]

Do you think that if a natural born citizen who ran for president didn't have a birth certificate, all that person's opponents should have to do to prevent him from running would be to claim that they doubt he was born here, and then he'd be out of luck because he lacked a birth certificate?

Ok. I see you didn't at all understand what I was saying. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I will try again. Some issues can be mooted. Again consider the age question. If someone questioned Joe Biden's eligibility based on age that would be silly. He's been in public life more than 36 years. On the other hand let's say some young looking candidate that nobody knew ran for president. Should he have to show a drivers license at least to show his age? It's not just a question of whether or not there is a birth certificate. It's also a question of what other alternatives exist to prove eligibility. If both Obama's parents had been American the whole issue would have been moot. The birth certificate wouldn't matter because even if Obama was born outside the country he would still be a natural born citizen. Again here's the pertinent regulation.

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock:

A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.

So your example of any natural born citizen really doesn't cover what we are talking about. This is the specific case of a citizen where there is a legitimate question of whether he is a natural born citizen or not. Do you understand now?

[oyarde]

If it doesn't exist, then we have a problem, don't we? Because the whole argument has been that it does exist, and he just "shouldn't have to show it."

I posted this previously:

Obama: "I am Santa Claus."

Me: "Prove it."

Obama: "I give presents to people. Reindeer follow me. Trust me."

Me: "Um, I'm still not convinced you are Santa Claus."

Obama: "Then I'll spend millions to avoid proving to you that I am."

Me: "Well, in that case, I'm unlikely to become more convinced then that you are Santa."

AxisMundi: "Prove there's no Santa Claus, I bet ya can't!"

Mainstream media: "Obama says he is Santa Claus. Stop it, kooky racists, it's good enough for us. Now look at the shiny trinkets he brought!"

Crazyfacedjenkins: "It really doesn't matter if he really is Santa Claus or not, because Santa lives in all of our hearts..."

Hawaii Governor: "I knew Obama when he was just a little elf. I'm going to do my best to end this Santa debate once and for all."

Hawaii Governor: (Update): "Shit. I can't find it. Someone said there was a sticky note that says someone knows someone who says they heard some someone else they had once seen it somewhere. That's all I got. You crazy birthers might be right!"

Your killing me man !

[Bruno]

Right. But all that has to do with whether or not you are personally satisfied. It has nothing to do with whether or not Obama can be POTUS.

Right. That's why I have said repeatedly that I am not convinced and that I don't care what some court has or has not decided. I have little faith in our judicial system, the vetting process (which didn't happen), or the electoral college.

[erowe1]

Ok. I see you didn't at all understand what I was saying. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I will try again. Some issues can be mooted. Again consider the age question. If someone questioned Joe Biden's eligibility based on age that would be silly. He's been in public life more than 36 years. On the other hand let's say some young looking candidate that nobody knew ran for president. Should he have to show a drivers license at least to show his age? It's not just a question of whether or not there is a birth certificate. It's also a question of what other alternatives exist to prove eligibility. If both Obama's parents had been American the whole issue would have been moot. The birth certificate wouldn't matter because even if Obama was born outside the country he would still be a natural born citizen. Again here's the pertinent regulation.

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock:

A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.

So your example of any natural born citizen really doesn't cover what we are talking about. This is the specific case of a citizen where there is a legitimate question of whether he is a natural born citizen or not. Do you understand now?

Yes. I understand now, as I did earlier.

For this "legitimate question of whether he is a natural born citizen or not" does there have to be some evidence of his not being a natural born citizen?

If there does, then we're back to my point that the burden is on his detractors to produce that evidence (and his failure to produce a birth certificate when asked does not count). If there does not need to be evidence, and there merely needs to be some person somewhere claiming that there's a legitimate question, then we're back to my question of whether a person who lacks proof of the circumstances in which he was born should be disqualified simply because his opponents claim they have legitimate questions about the circumstances of his birth.

[jmdrake]

Yes. I understand now, as I did earlier.

For this "legitimate question of whether he is a natural born citizen or not" does there have to be some evidence of his not being a natural born citizen?

If there does, then we're back to my point that the burden is on his detractors to produce that evidence (and his failure to produce a birth certificate when asked does not count). If there does not need to be evidence, and there merely needs to be some person somewhere claiming that there's a legitimate question, then we're back to my question of whether a person who lacks proof of the circumstances in which he was born should be disqualified simply because his opponents claim they have legitimate questions about the circumstances of his birth.

Except there is evidence that he's not a natural born citizen. Maybe there's not enough evidence to "prove" it to you, but there is enough evidence for a reasonable judge to allow a lawsuit to go forward. You may not understand how the burden of proof works in these situations. Many people mistakenly think that all questions of law require a "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof. That is not true. In civil cases the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence. And sometimes the burden of proof shifts to the defendant.

For example, lets say if someone filed a civil lawsuit asking for a declaratory judgment that Obama is not a natural born citizen and hence not eligible to be president. The first thing that would happen is Obama's lawyers would file a motion to dismiss. Motions to dismiss are only supposed to be granted if there is no disputed fact or law that could possibly lead to the other side winning. The burden of proof is on the side making the motion (the defense side). If both sides agreed Obama's parents were Americans then the motion to dismiss would have to be granted because it wouldn't matter if he was born in Kenya or Hawaii. But since both of his parents weren't American, and due to the unique circumstances surrounding his birth (I posted that earlier), it's not a slam dunk case that he is America. Plus there are the statements by his grandmother that he was born in Kenya along with various newspaper accounts that he was born in Kenya to consider. During the motion to dismiss phase all evidence is looked at in the light most favorable to the non moving party. In other words any judge adjudicating this who actually followed the law would have to assume that grandma Obama wasn't lying or crazy and the newspaper reports were not made up. So it's very unlikely that such a case would be thrown out on motion to dismiss if not for the highly politically charged nature of the lawsuit. (Sometimes judges ignore the law for the sake of political expediency).

If a motion to dismiss fails then you go into something called "discovery". In other words each side gets to demand that the other side turn over everything and the other side must turn over everything unless it has a REALLY good reason not to do so. Simply saying "well other people don't have to turn over their birth certificates" is NOT a really good reason. Other people are not embroiled in a similar lawsuit under similar circumstances. Ask yourself this question. Why did Bill Clinton have to testify about whether or not he had sex with Monica Lewinski? People generally don't have to talk about their private sexual lives. The reason Clinton did was because that was material to the sexual harassment lawsuit. The same is true here. People generally don't have to turn over their birth certificates. But only if it is material to the lawsuit.

If Obama can prove that he's a natural born citizen without turning over his birth certificate than he shouldn't have to. But under the circumstances it doesn't appear to me that he can. There is a report that Obama's half sister, who was born in Indonesia, has a Hawaiian certificate of live birth just like Obama. If that's true and/or if it's generally true that you can get a certificate of live birth without being a natural born citizen then Obama has not proven himself to be one. So yes, under these circumstances Obama could, and possibly should have to turn over his birth certificate. That doesn't mean that every president has to turn over his birth certificate any more than every president should have to say whether or not they had sex with Monica Lewinski or anybody else. And it's not a race thing. (I know you haven't said that, but others have). If Jesse Jackson had been elected president this wouldn't have been an issue because both of his parents were citizens and his mom was not out of the country near the time of his birth.

One other thing to consider on burden of proof. Say if the person CHALLENGING Obama's birth is the defendant? That already happened with a U.S. soldier challenging his deployment to Afghanistan based on the assumption that Obama is not eligible to be president. What happened in that case? The soldiers order were changed mooting the case.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=104009

But people could file all sorts of lawsuits challenging all sorts of presidential orders base on the belief that Obama is not eligible to be president. If that happened at some point Obama would have to prove he legitimacy or risk becoming even less effective than he already is.

I hope this helps.

[TNforPaul45]

Thr constitutional requirements are only as good as the government agencies that will uphold them. Unfortunatley, the state has been using the technique of nullification since the civil war for all sorts of constitutional provisions.

Also if people choose to lie up and down the government chain about obama natural birth, what could we really do? They are calling peoples bluff, pushing unconstitutional vagrancies a little farther. If the local hospital lies, the state agencies of hawaii lie, and the president lies about his birth status, then what can we really do? Sue? Ha, the courts will find in his favor.

I posit that any one of the foreign born dictators could sail over and just become president and the american people would do nothing.

I mean what can you do? They are just laughing at us. And we deserve it. Every bit.

[Bruno]

You're killing me man Smalls!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aPJYrFLStg

[Danke]

But people could file all sorts of lawsuits challenging all sorts of presidential orders base on the belief that Obama is not eligible to be president.

You mean Executive Orders?

[jmdrake]

You mean Executive Orders?

I mean any order coming from the president. Yes that covers executive orders, but it also covers deployment orders. Or what about treaties Obama has negotiated? Are they really binding if he isn't really qualified to be president? It doesn't matter if he didn't sign a law, because bills can become law without the president's signature. But anything that requires official action by the president can be challenged. And if someone gets in legal trouble for not following some presidential directive of any sort, the validity of that order must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That means that the burden is then on Obama to prove his legitimacy beyond a reasonable doubt instead of the other way around. Obama can avoid the problem by always refusing to prosecute, but that would become impractical after awhile.

[Krugerrand]

I mean any order coming from the president. Yes that covers executive orders, but it also covers deployment orders. Or what about treaties Obama has negotiated? Are they really binding if he isn't really qualified to be president? It doesn't matter if he didn't sign a law, because bills can become law without the president's signature. But anything that requires official action by the president can be challenged. And if someone gets in legal trouble for not following some presidential directive of any sort, the validity of that order must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That means that the burden is then on Obama to prove his legitimacy beyond a reasonable doubt instead of the other way around. Obama can avoid the problem by always refusing to prosecute, but that would become impractical after awhile.

Or he could deem said person a terrorist and have them executed.

[idirtify]

Except there is evidence that he's not a natural born citizen. Maybe there's not enough evidence to "prove" it to you, but there is enough evidence for a reasonable judge to allow a lawsuit to go forward. You may not understand how the burden of proof works in these situations. Many people mistakenly think that all questions of law require a "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof. That is not true. In civil cases the burden of proof is preponderance of the evidence. And sometimes the burden of proof shifts to the defendant.

For example, lets say if someone filed a civil lawsuit asking for a declaratory judgment that Obama is not a natural born citizen and hence not eligible to be president. The first thing that would happen is Obama's lawyers would file a motion to dismiss. Motions to dismiss are only supposed to be granted if there is no disputed fact or law that could possibly lead to the other side winning. The burden of proof is on the side making the motion (the defense side). If both sides agreed Obama's parents were Americans then the motion to dismiss would have to be granted because it wouldn't matter if he was born in Kenya or Hawaii. But since both of his parents weren't American, and due to the unique circumstances surrounding his birth (I posted that earlier), it's not a slam dunk case that he is America. Plus there are the statements by his grandmother that he was born in Kenya along with various newspaper accounts that he was born in Kenya to consider. During the motion to dismiss phase all evidence is looked at in the light most favorable to the non moving party. In other words any judge adjudicating this who actually followed the law would have to assume that grandma Obama wasn't lying or crazy and the newspaper reports were not made up. So it's very unlikely that such a case would be thrown out on motion to dismiss if not for the highly politically charged nature of the lawsuit. (Sometimes judges ignore the law for the sake of political expediency).

If a motion to dismiss fails then you go into something called "discovery". In other words each side gets to demand that the other side turn over everything and the other side must turn over everything unless it has a REALLY good reason not to do so. Simply saying "well other people don't have to turn over their birth certificates" is NOT a really good reason. Other people are not embroiled in a similar lawsuit under similar circumstances. Ask yourself this question. Why did Bill Clinton have to testify about whether or not he had sex with Monica Lewinski? People generally don't have to talk about their private sexual lives. The reason Clinton did was because that was material to the sexual harassment lawsuit. The same is true here. People generally don't have to turn over their birth certificates. But only if it is material to the lawsuit.

If Obama can prove that he's a natural born citizen without turning over his birth certificate than he shouldn't have to. But under the circumstances it doesn't appear to me that he can. There is a report that Obama's half sister, who was born in Indonesia, has a Hawaiian certificate of live birth just like Obama. If that's true and/or if it's generally true that you can get a certificate of live birth without being a natural born citizen then Obama has not proven himself to be one. So yes, under these circumstances Obama could, and possibly should have to turn over his birth certificate. That doesn't mean that every president has to turn over his birth certificate any more than every president should have to say whether or not they had sex with Monica Lewinski or anybody else. And it's not a race thing. (I know you haven't said that, but others have). If Jesse Jackson had been elected president this wouldn't have been an issue because both of his parents were citizens and his mom was not out of the country near the time of his birth.

One other thing to consider on burden of proof. Say if the person CHALLENGING Obama's birth is the defendant? That already happened with a U.S. soldier challenging his deployment to Afghanistan based on the assumption that Obama is not eligible to be president. What happened in that case? The soldiers order were changed mooting the case.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=104009

But people could file all sorts of lawsuits challenging all sorts of presidential orders base on the belief that Obama is not eligible to be president. If that happened at some point Obama would have to prove he legitimacy or risk becoming even less effective than he already is.

I hope this helps.

Great points. Even though erowe’s comments (which admits that being a natural born citizen is a prerequisite for being POTUS yet claims that Obama doesn’t have to prove that he qualifies) already seemed to be legally/constitutionally unsound, your points about the different burdens in civil lawsuits appears to refute them completely.

[Kludge]

" Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie will end his quest to prove President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii because it's against state law to release private documents, his office said Friday.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor he can't disclose an individual's birth documentation without a person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_BIRTH_CERTIFICATE?SITE=ALANN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[TNforPaul45]

" Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie will end his quest to prove President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii because it's against state law to release private documents, his office said Friday.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor he can't disclose an individual's birth documentation without a person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_BIRTH_CERTIFICATE?SITE=ALANN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.umbc.edu/blogs/changingaging/church_lady.jpg
How Convenient!!!!!!

So....There is a birth certificate, but the govenor's office cannot find it, but the records office says there is a "notation" about it (probably written on a cocktail napkin), but according to state laws, the cocktail napkin cannot be disclosed without Obama's consent, which he will not give because the certificate really doesn't exist. Oh and the icing on the cake is that the new Gov. didn't know the state laws well enough before he started his "Non-Partisan Campaign to Save the Name of the Glorious Obama who is being Bullied."

Oh me.

[Noob]

Government files motion to dismiss in lawsuit that alleges healthcare bill is unconstitutional on 15 separate counts including Obama's ineligibility.



Government files their motion to dismiss in Purpura et al. v. Sebelius et al.. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey by Nicholas Purpura and Donald Laster of the Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots and the New Jersey Tea Party Coalition. Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the Colts Neck Tea Party, Jersey Shore Tea Party Patriots, Jackson Tea Party Patriots, Bayshore Tea Party Group and Ocean County Citizens for Freedom. The lawsuit alleges the healthcare bill is unconstitutional on 15 separate counts including Obama's ineligibility.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/01/government-files-motion-to-dismiss-in.html

[devil21]

At this point Obama should just authorize the release of the info and be done with it. The more that comes out casting doubt on the "official story" (once again), the worse it looks.

[Golding]

" Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie will end his quest to prove President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii because it's against state law to release private documents, his office said Friday.

State Attorney General David Louie told the governor he can't disclose an individual's birth documentation without a person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_BIRTH_CERTIFICATE?SITE=ALANN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULTAbsolutely hilarious when I read about it this morning. He went from a hardline "I will put an end to this once and for all" to the typical "I've seen something written about it and that's good enough for me, so it should be good enough for you too."

Even as someone who doesn't really identify as a so-called "birther" (whatever that's supposed to entail), it's exceedingly obvious that they're trying very hard to hide something.

[Stary Hickory]

Yeah this is turning into a real circus. WTF about a year ago they were saying its there....I've seen it. Now the Govenor can't find it.....really.....how many freaking lies do we have to be told here?

Something is up, the idiot Governor probably did more harm by even trying this stunt.

[erowe1]

Something is up, the idiot Governor probably did more harm by even trying this stunt.

Unless it's a rope-a-dope.

If the governor's being entirely honest, he can't honestly think he's helping his cause, which is to help Obama. Therefore, he's probably not being entirely honest.

[ItsTime]

Yeah this is turning into a real circus. WTF about a year ago they were saying its there....I've seen it. Now the Govenor can't find it.....really.....how many freaking lies do we have to be told here?

Something is up, the idiot Governor probably did more harm by even trying this stunt.

that is strange! this whole deal is getting laughable. Im no birther but this raises some flags lol.

[Bruno]

He can just ask the Director of Health Services, who swears he saw it and examined it.

The Gov. knew this from the beginning. He just didn't like what he found out. I would also be interested in whether he has had any contact from the White House.

[Noob]

more news


Lawyers for the Hollister v Soetoro (Obama) case say Supremes broke rule by failing to respond to the recusal motion for Kagan and Sotomayor.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/01/lawyers-for-colonel-hollister-v-soetoro.html


Evidence of a cover-up that DOS illegally destroyed Obama’s Mother’s passport application(s)

Here is the appeal to DOS for Obama’s mother’s passport and consular records. Many hours of research of Department of State and National Archive policies, procedures and history strongly suggests that the federal government agency illegally and intentionally destroyed Obama’s mothers 1965 passport application and possible prior applications in an attempt to cover up Obama’s birth story and whether he is a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution.

http://unlawfulpresident.com/?p=262

http://www.scribd.com/doc/47559872/CPT-Pamela-Barnett-Appeal-to-DOS-Evidence-of-State-Department-Cover-Up-of-Obama-s-Birth-Story-1-19-11

[moostraks]

Local radio this am host claims that states making laws that demand the candidates comply with eligibility requirements would deprive us of an Obama second term. If a candidate is a citizen and properly documented then it shouldn't be a problem. If questions indicate a non-citizen status and candidate refuses to comply or can't comply then said candidate is out of luck, find a different career.

If I don't have documentation for a drivers license I am ineligible to drive. If I lack documentation to prove residency for a library card I am ineligible for services at the library. You cannot even play little league without proper documentation. No one will give us little people a pass on these issues just because we or our families need or want to reap the benefits without complying with the requirements.

Why should the person running for President be given a pass because a cabal of elitests have made a choice for their greater good and (s)he doesn't meet the eligibility requirements? Oh yeah, because they want us to believe we would be depriving the country of the great leader...:rolleyes: