The controversy over President Barack Obama continues with an interesting twist: Maj. Gen. Carroll Dean Childers (ret.) and active U.S. Air Force reservist Lt. Col. David Earl Graeff are supporting the litigation. On July 8th, Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook filed the suit July 8th in federal court demanding conscientious objector status and a preliminary injunction based upon his claim that President Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States. He argued that, since Obama cannot serve as president of the United States, he cannot order him to deploy as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.
What is curious is the decision by the military to suddenly revoke the deployment orders of Cook. That served to fuel the growing movement spreading this rumor. The government is now claiming that the lawsuit is “moot” since Cook doesn’t have to go to Afghanistan. Cook in turn has added a claim to this lawsuit that he was retaliated against for his lawsuit after he was terminated at Simtech Inc., a Department of Defense contractor.
The addition of a retired major general and active colonel will have more of a promotional and legal benefit for these litigants. It was an unfortunate decision to revoke these orders. The Administration should have fought the lawsuit on the merits rather than try to moot the matter. The optics are perfect for those alleging a grand conspiracy to conceal Obama’s birth certificate (which has been viewed as third parties) and hide his alleged foreign born status.
For the full story, click here.
It doesn’t take an Einstein to see Obama is a fraud.
Jim Byrne, it does not matter how frequently a publication is cited. It’s a question of what it’s cited to support. Your methodology is equivalent to asking everyone in the room to raise their hands if they’ve heard of Vattel, and then guaging his authority by the response. Have you actually waded through volumes 5 through 9 of the Cranch law reports and read the cases in which Vattel has been cited? I confess that I have not, but it should be remembered that Vattel’s main interest was in formulating from natural law principles rules for the conduct of nations in the pursuit of war, peace and international trade relations. Thus he was frequently cited in commercial disputes. I suspect that the cases you reference deal primarily with commerce and maritime issues. If I’m wrong, slap me down.
To me, it’s an uncomplicated English common law analysis. The Founders were not concerned with one’s parentage. That’s why naturalized citizenship was fine for congressional candidates. But they wanted to make certain that future presidents had roots in American soil, meaning that they were born here. That Vattel is literally the only scholarly authority for the birthers’ position is reason enough to suspect the agenda.
Yes, the NCDMV is good. They are trained well to reject ‘no value’ documents.
BVM, gee, I guess Obama’s lucky that he doesn’t have to get a North Carolina driver’s license. And I guess all of us are lucky that the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles doesn’t determine presidential qualifications under the Constitution.
North Carolina will not accept Obama’s COLB for a drivers license. They require a Certified or original birth certificate. Will your state?
BVM,
To the best of my knowledge (I haven’t done any research), I don’t think being a felon would prevent someone from being elected POTUS. It would be a good reason to remove one from office, if the felony occured while in office, but I don’t think a prior felony would present a bar from holding the Office of President.
Vince may be able to provide better information on that subject.
Theh BC is trivial considering that Obama has been a War Criminal / mass murderer for years. Can a mass murderer get a drivers licence in HI?
You have been beating this dead horse for ages, bvm. The COLB is by definition a birth certificate that lists both parents, and Obama’s COLB says on the bottom that it is a certificate and lists his parents.
The website nowhere says “No COLBs.” Those are your words. You don’t live in Hawaii, anyway.
And you used to claim that Home Lands would not accept a COLB. Well, they do now, despite an obsolete web site. You have yet to acknowledge that particular fact.
And the State Department will accept a COLB issued by Hawaii, since that is all Hawaii now issues, and a lot of Hawaiian like to travel.
So get over it.
BVM,
A valid COLB is accepted when applying for a driver’s license.
Call the State Dept. and verify it.
http://www.honolulu.gov/csd/vehicle/dlrequirements.htm
Hawaii only accepts a “State Certified Birth Certificate with both parents listed or State Certified Birth ID Card.”
NO COLB !
The COLB is a fool’s document! Fool’s ID! 🙂 This country is full of fools! Obama knows his constituents.
BVM, the World Nut Daily is wrong.
The COLB is the ONLY birth certificate that Hawaii now issues, and is good for everything, including Hawaiian Home Lands, drivers license, and passports. Hawaii no longer issues certificates of live birth or long-form certificates, so how can they be required? The COLB states on its face that it is prima facie evidence of birth.
Find someone who received anything other than a COLB lately. Find someone who could not get a passport with it.
“The certification of live birth, which, as WND reported recently, is not even considered by the U.S. State Department to be a document with which you can obtain a passport, let alone establish a constitutional standard of “natural born citizenship” and qualify to serve in the White House.”
You can’t even get a drivers license in Hawaii with it.
http://www.wnd.com
Jim B,
I wont be doing my own search and I take you and Vince at your word – that’s not my kind of research. I just don’t see why you’re putting such faith in one non-canonical source on such a significant issue when, at the bare minimum, a majority of the people who’s opinions matter disagree (or the SCOTUS would have heard one of the cases that were considered by the justices). To me, you are just lending credence to Mike S’s arguments and you haven’t yet put a dent in the edifice that Vince has built.
Professor JT:
Would the COLB stand as proof in your court?
Can you answer without losing your MSNBC gigs?
What do you think of the case on its merits?
Hear ye, hear ye. What say you JT?
BVM writes: I thought Jon Stewart had more investigative ability. He is certainly shallow on the birth certificate issue.
Jon Stewart is a comedian, not a journalist. you should catch him live someday. he’s hilarious.
“I think that “The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” is a great book but what relevance does that have? I’m sure that the founding fathers looked at all of the books on national law they could get their hands on – why should we enshrine one of them as definitional to the constitution?”
Previously I posted a link to the U.S. Supreme Court Records. That document covers 5 thru 9 Cranch (our early Court cases). A word search of that document reveals that Vattel is identified 30 times; Montiesquieu twice, and Blackstone only 7 times.
When looking at the law, I find it reasonable to look at who those interpreting the law looked at.
Feel free to perform your own search. Make sure you count the occurences…not just the pages.
Vince Treacy and Jon Stewart are my heroes!
Jim B,
I think that “The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” is a great book but what relevance does that have? I’m sure that the founding fathers looked at all of the books on national law they could get their hands on – why should we enshrine one of them as definitional to the constitution?
Thanks for the link, Vince. So, what did Judge Robertson really think?
“Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume: 3 January 1, 1776 – May 15, 1776”
Benjamin Franklin to James Bowdoin
“My dear Friend, Philada. Mar. 24. 1776 Inclos’d is an Answer to the Request from the Inhabitants of Dartmouth. I have comply’d with it upon your Recommendation, and ordered a Post accordingly.
I have put into Mr Adam’s Hands directed for you, the new Edition of Vattel When you have perus’d it, please to place it in your College Library.
I am just setting out for Canada, and have only time to add my best Wishes of Health & Happiness to you & all yours. Permit me to say my Love to Mrs Bowdoin, & believe me ever, with sincere & great Esteem, Yours most affectionately B Franklin”
“Letters of Delegates to Congress: Volume 22 November 1, 1784 – November 6, 1785”
Elbridge Gerry to Timothy Pickering
“I am in Want of the following Books from Messr Jackson & Dunn, & wish to know whether I must send the others to Phila., or deliver them to any Friend of those Gentlemen here. The Books wanted are Vattel’s Law of Nations. Burlamaqui’s principles of natural & political Law 8 vo. Burlamaqui’s Law of Nations if the Reputation of it, is equal to his other works. “
The 1760 English translation of the “Law of Nations” uses the virtually the same Vattel definition as has been previously posted. –The one that requires a natural born citizen to be the offspring of citizen(s). (I say virtually, because the letter “s” is represented by “f”.)
Some good history on the definition of “natural born citizen” can be found here.
http://www.greschak.com/essays/natborn/