"Congress sued to remove prez from white house"

ORLY?
You can find it here. I know that haters just want to make shit up, but his borth certificate has been public for a very long time now.

bobirthcertificate.jpg
You haven't been paying attention have you?

That is NOT a birth certificate. That is a certificate of live birth. That doesn't state the hospital, doctors name that delivered baby Obama, or anything other then a live child was born. That document can easily be achieved even if I were born in VA. My mother or father fly to Hawaii and state I was born at home. Boom my live birth certificate for hawaii.

 
Yeah, that's what I understand the claim to be. But from the statute that I cited I don't see how there was an event whereby he would have lost his citizenship. Unless I am just missing it, I see nothing that allegedly occurred that falls under any of the enumerated ways for a dperivation of U.S. citizenship.



You are going to have be more specific. I have no idea what parts you are talking about.

The thing is, there is a specific procedure, mandated by law, for checking ID's on alcohol purchases. Did Obama fail to abide by a specific law that states candidates must provide birth certificates and that such birth certificates must be provided in a certain manner?

I am pretty confident that this country would be in deep poo if Obama was removed from office under these allegations.
To go where he went as a child to be allowed to Indonesia HIS PARENTS singed off his US CITIZENSHIP, they CHANGED HIS NAME. For him to come back "legally" he would have had to of have reinstated his rights with Immigrations. There is no record of him doing so. Nothing to stop him from doing so but he never did, and then in 1981 apparently he used his "Indonesian name" and citizenship to go back over. Which under law at that time he couldn't do legally. Be it what these lawyers are accusing him of now or be it he was in Pakistan and Indonesia illegally under their or at least one of those countries laws. Again you can say it is here-say but it is here-say as well for Obama too because for some reason he doesn't want to disprove anything. All I am saying is he ran on the promise of being transparent and out of any president I ever recall he is the least transparent with his past. He destroyed all of his State Senate records from 96-2002, his college records are sealed and his medical is too except for his almighty doctors note:laugh: IIRC also he turned in the least ammount of tax info between he, Clinton and McCain and all you ever heard the media whine about is the other two's tax records LOL

 
Because legally, you do not have the standing to challenge it. I am not sure how or why it works this way, but people/citizens do not have the "standing" to legally challenge it. Perhaps someone with more legal expertise can explain this.
It is not that I don't have the legal standing. It is just not inferred by the government. It wasn't a provision added to the constitution as this situation was never foreseen. The problem with this however is if I, Democratic lawyers, and others have no place to challenge this then who does? Who is allowed to uphold the constitutions amendments? The people who are already breaking those laws?

 
It is not that I don't have the legal standing. It is just not inferred by the government. It wasn't a provision added to the constitution as this situation was never foreseen. The problem with this however is if I, Democratic lawyers, and others have no place to challenge this then who does? Who is allowed to uphold the constitutions amendments? The people who are already breaking those laws?
That is a good point. I don't know too much about the legal aspects of who can or cannot...and more importantly, why the cannot. I don't have the time to research it neither.

 
For the record I am not saying he is guilty, just seems pretty strange that ANYOTHER person running or to have ran for president would GLADLY prove this situation. They have in the past so why not now? Is this part of the Patriot Act in reverse?

 
Because legally, you do not have the standing to challenge it. I am not sure how or why it works this way, but people/citizens do not have the "standing" to legally challenge it. Perhaps someone with more legal expertise can explain this.
I can tell you probably understand as much as can really be uderstood, that standing is a requirement that the plaintiff have a sufficient connection to to the matter to bring the case. If I am scammed, you have no reason or right to9 bring the suit.

IMO, the courts in this case are making a determination based on practicality. We don't want the courts flooded with cases filled with every hair brained idea that someone can come up with every time there is an election.

You can see it here in this thread. Although there is no legal mechanism for a child to lose his citizenship in the manner people claim Obama did in Indonesia, they just wont let it go due to their own biases. We simply don't have the resources to go through thousands of cases brought by voters based on any and all shit they can dream up. The show must go on.

 
If his parents renounced his citizenship he has to apply to get it back..plain and very simple. If it is so hair brained then explain to me why congress forced McCain to prove what they already knew? You can't do it and all you do is run arround in circles. It would not be a "big waste of time" either because it can be proven in a very little time if his papers are in order. Only way it would be drawn out is if he can not prove he is a citizen of the United States....

Were they trying to disprove McCain from being a citizen? His father was stationed in Panama at a military base. His mother was also at the military base, he was born at the military base...so why did he have to prove it? In hopes to find he was born in a Panama back alley? LOL

 
i say just give him a chance. im not saying he will be a good or bad president, but it would be bad if he turned out to be a good president and gets impeached by people that just dont like him or democrats. his birth cirtificate etc. does not mean that he will not do well as a president. i know it states such in the constitution but this should of been decided before he was capable of even running for the position. shouldnt be able wait a year+ and after his swearing in to say wait a minuite, lets look into his birth records etc.

 
Why would it be any different for him vs anyone else that leaves the country for a few years? Visa's passports and citizenship do not apply to minors? Anyhow why would have congress demanded what they did of McCain and not Obama? You have 0 case of that reguardless. An American Military base in another country is 100% US soil and he provided records saying as such....why isn't Obama held to the same standards as EVERYONE else who ran?It is pretty simple McCain did his in less than an afternoon. Obama refuses to be held to that standard or what? So now he is better than everyone? Is he a King? LOL I dunno but considering he is and was backed and came from a corupt political system I do not think the standards are any higher or lower for him than anyone else.

 
i say just give him a chance. im not saying he will be a good or bad president, but it would be bad if he turned out to be a good president and gets impeached by people that just dont like him or democrats. his birth cirtificate etc. does not mean that he will not do well as a president. i know it states such in the constitution but this should of been decided before he was capable of even running for the position. shouldnt be able wait a year+ and after his swearing in to say wait a minuite, lets look into his birth records etc.
Never underestimate the tenacity of a racist

 
Why would it be any different for him vs anyone else that leaves the country for a few years? Visa's passports and citizenship do not apply to minors?

No authority, huh?

Loosing your citizenship requires a voluntary act and it certainly appears to me, from the statute that I cited, that a child does not have the capacity for such a voluvtary act.

It's similar to the policy behind statutory ****, which is based on the idea that a child does not have the capacity to consent to ***.

So yes, we treat children and adults differently.

 
No authority, huh?
Loosing your citizenship requires a voluntary act and it certainly appears to me, from the statute that I cited, that a child does not have the capacity for such a voluvtary act.

It's similar to the policy behind statutory ****, which is based on the idea that a child does not have the capacity to consent to ***.

So yes, we treat children and adults differently.
For all we know he is Barry Soetoro in Indonesia and Barack Obama in the US:laugh: He still would have to come back and change that through immigration......there is no records that anyone can find....If so any kid under the age of 18 in the United States cant be an iilegal then too right? Because they wouldn't have to provide any records:laugh: Why shouldn't he have to show? Better yet why won't he? It is not any huge leagal case if his papers are legit...and for some odd reason some think he has old medical records in Kenya that are sealed as well...

 
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...

About this thread

evildave101

10+ year member
Senior VIP Member
Thread starter
evildave101
Joined
Location
arizona
Start date
Participants
Who Replied
Replies
215
Views
4,450
Last reply date
Last reply from
audiolife
IMG_20260516_193114554_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0
IMG_20260516_192955471_HDR.jpg

sherbanater

    May 16, 2026
  • 0
  • 0

New threads

Top