Just when he probably thought that it could not get much worse than losing to the Packers in a home game, Rahm Emanuel has lost his fight to get on the ballot. The court just ruled that he is ineligible.
He had won below and the Illinois Appellate Court ruled 2-1 to overturn a Chicago Board of Elections decision. In questioning, the judges had expressed skepticism. Justice Thomas Hoffman asked “Can a person dwell conceptually, or do they have to have a place to put their body Can you have a permanent place of abode where there is no dwelling?”
Apparently not according to the majority. You can expect a rapid appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court.
The Court reached the decision despite the following factual findings:
At all relevant times, including the time he was in
Washington, D.C., the candidate continued to pay property taxes for
the Hermitage house, continued to hold an Illinois driver’s license
listing the Hermitage house as his address, continued to list the
Hermitage house address on his personal checks, and continued to
vote with the Hermitage house as his registered voting address. He
did, however, pay income tax in 2009 and 2010 to both Washington,
D.C., and Illinois.
The dissenting judge however add a few facts to support the view of residency:
The candidate initially rented an apartment in Washington,
D.C., but later rented a home when his family joined him during the
summer of 2009. The lease terms of both his Chicago residence and
the Washington, D.C., home coincided with the school year of the
candidate’s children in order to provide the least disruption
possible to their education. Prior to the family’s move to
Washington, D.C., the candidate’s wife and her friends filled 100
boxes with belongings that were then left in a locked storage area
in the basement of the Chicago home. The candidate described the
stored items as the family’s most valuable possessions, including
his wife’s wedding gown, heirloom china, family photograph albums,
an heirloom coat brought by the candidate’s grandfather when he
immigrated to the United States, the clothes and birth outfits of
the candidate’s children, and their school projects and report
cards.
The majority found that candidates were given an added criteria to satisfy on residency:
We base this conclusion largely on the plain language of the
Election Code. That plain language limits the reach of the
“business of the United States” exception to “elector[s]” or their
spouses; it makes no mention of “candidates.” Further, as we have
noted, we must interpret statutes “as a whole, with each provision
construed in connection with every other section.” Cinkus, 228
Ill. 2d at 216-17. Section 3-2’s “business of the United States”
exception is housed not only in the Election Code, but in a portion
of the Election Code dealing exclusively with voter qualification,
in fact in an Article titled “Qualification of Voters.” See 10
ILCS 5/3-1 through 3-5 (West 2008). As explained above, the
Municipal Code sets forth two qualifications for candidates: they
must meet the Election Code’s standards for a “qualified voter,”
and they must have “resided in” the municipality for one year
preceding the election. The location of section 3-2’s “business of
the United States” exception–in the Election Code, and in an
article of the Election Code dedicated exclusively to voter
qualification–supports the conclusion that the exception applies
only to the Election Code’s “qualified voter” standard, and not to
any supplemental candidate qualifications located outside the
Election Code.
Here is the opinion: Emanuel decision
On Dec. 23, 2010, the Chicago Board of Elections voted 3-0 to uphold the decision of Joseph Morris, a local Chicago attorney and elections official. Usually a lower court’s factual findings are given great deference but this was a mixed question of law and fact — if not a pure question of law. The court simply disagreed on what is required to establish residency.
A poll this week showed Emanuel way out in front. The problem is the early voting starts in a week and the clerk is going ahead without Emanuel’s name.
So it is my personal opinion that the evidence of Obama’s birth in Hawaii is overwhelming, and that the evidence of birth elsewhere is either non-existent, not credible, or falsified.
Now, it would be nice to have the paper record from 1961 that was sent by the hospital to the health department and entered into its records, and then was the source of the information sent to the two newspapers for the printed announcements. It may in fact be released someday.
Perhaps the Hawaii Attorney General will relent in his opinion, on the basis of some expression of consent. But that will make no difference at all to the birthers. If they have doubted the official COLB despite all the assurances of state officials that Obama was born in Hawaii, then they will be compelled to doubt the 1961 paper form.
They will call it a forgery. If they no not believe that the COLB is valid despite the statements of the state officials, why would they believe the assurances of those selfsame officials that the paper certificate is valid?
They will demand more documents. They will argue dual citizenship and require two citizen parents. No amount of proof will ever satisfy them.
That is the reason that the issue will never go away for the birther fringe.
In the meantime, the only officials with jurisdiction under the Constitution to resolve the issue are the Members of the House of Representatives, which has the sole power of impeachment. But even the Republican Members, like Cantor, Issa and Boehner, are running away from the issue.
I cannot read their minds, but I suspect that they know to a moral certainty that Obama was born in Hawaii and is in fact a natural born citizen. This, in my opinion, is the reason they will not raise the issue.
So perhaps the anonymous birther posters could redirect their efforts to their elected representatives and convince them with some probative evidence to open an investigation.
Perhaps they could post their letters here so that we could evaluate their arguments.
Good to see you, Vince.
I was wondering if the Klingon had got ya!
Vince said:
“So, everyone out there, you have a choice between a certified public document that is valid under the laws of the State of Hawaii, and under the laws and Constitution of the United States, or the unsupported opinions of anonymous posters.”
You forgot a couple ambulance-chasing lawyers and a delusional Moldavian dentist…
By the way – good for Leo! I wish him luck at the tables…
Hey Vince, it’s good to hear from you! It’s too bad you were unable to reach convicted felon Lakin when it could have done him some good – everyone with any experience in military law seemed to be saying the same thing and it played out exactly as they (and you) predicted. CF Lakin should sue Jensen for malpractice – what kind of lawyer tells a Medal of Honor winner that ‘you had your chance’ (I believe Jensen actually told this to Lakin’s commanding officer’s aid, not the commanding officer himself, but it still seems stupid to me). It sickens me to see how the birthers treat CF Lakin as a hero – especially after the testimony of the doctor that had to deploy in his place that he was no properly prepared to deal with a multi-causualty attack that happened days after he arrived.
“Seems a legitimate question, why doesn’t he have a copy of his own birth certificate especially if he is running for public office which requires verification of citizenship. The document released by HI is not enough.”
Obama does have a copy of his birth certificate and has produced it.
The statement that ” The document released by HI is not enough” is just an opinion.
The law, however, says otherwise.
In fact, the COLB meets the binding federal legal definition of birth certificate. The federal legal definition of “birth certificate,” is set forth in Title V of the United States Code, section 301 (5 U.S.C. 301 nt.):
http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title5/5usc301.html
The definition reads:
“(3) Birth certificate. – As used in this subsection, the term `birth certificate’ means a certificate of birth–
“(A) of–
“(i) an individual born in the United States; or
“(ii) an individual born abroad–
“(I) who is a citizen or national of the United States at birth; and
“(II) whose birth is registered in the United States; and
“(B) that–
“(i) is a copy, issued by a State or local authorized custodian of record, of an original certificate of birth issued by such custodian of record; or
“(ii) was issued by a State or local authorized custodian of record and was produced from birth records maintained by such custodian of record.
Under this definition (which was first posted here at the Turley site), the COLB is a “birth certificate.” It is a “certificate of birth” issued to “an individual born in the United States” who is a “citizen or national of the United States at birth” and whose “birth is registered in the United States,” and that certificate “was issued by a State or local authorized custodian of record and was produced from birth records maintained by such custodian of record.”
It is a public document of the State of Hawaii, and as such is binding on all states under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution.
So Obama did produce his official legal birth certificate when he was running for public office. McCain NEVER made his birth certificate public.
But nothing will ever stop the birthers from asking “Where’s the birth certificate?”
The answer is that he has produced the birth certificate already, it was posted on the web, and it was submitted to independent press sites like factcheck and politifact for verification.
So, everyone out there, you have a choice between a certified public document that is valid under the laws of the State of Hawaii, and under the laws and Constitution of the United States, or the unsupported opinions of anonymous posters.
Take a pick.
I wasn’t the first to mention birthers – look at the very first comment in the thread.
My bad I guess I was just attracted to yours;)
I don’t know who Lame Cherry is and have not been to Dr. Kates site in over six months. I thought the issue was resolved but apparently not.
By the way Fukino has left her post at the DOH. Rumor has it she’s in the witness protection program 🙂
Kerchner, who was the plaintiff in Mario Apuzzo’s frivolous lawsuit that was thrown out repeatedly and recently denied cert by the Supreme Court, seems very confused about JT and said some very nasty things:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/12/28/cdr-charles-kerchner-speaks-out-about-the-court-martial-of-lt-col-terry-lakin/
[quote] DR KERCHNER: No, we’re not a fringe. And who were the original birthers? Jonathan Turley and the Democratic Party? Were they a fringe when they put up the constitutional questions about John McCain? They’re hypocrites. They will use the Constitution to go after whomever they want to go after, and whether it’s false or true, they will point to the Constitution. But if we point to the Constitution, then we are “nutcase, boneheaded constitutionalists…birthers, crazy, fringe.” Well, Jonathan Turley, that’s you, then; you’re a “boneheaded constitutionalist nutcase birther fringe” yourself, then. He’s the guy who was put up by the Democratic machine to go after McCain, and The New York Times piled on with it. Do you remember all that?
MRS. RONDEAU: Yes, I do.
CDR KERCHNER: So what’s so different about them and us? Except they consider us the enemy. That bonehead constitutionalist birther Jonathan Turley wrote all these articles in his blog which were parroted in The New York Times, and there were a couple of lawsuits filed against McCain, and they had a congressional inquiry in the Judiciary Committee in the Senate as a result of a few thousand people asking questions. Hundreds of thousands, even millions of people, were asking questions about Obama, and did they have a congressional inquiry? No. They just called us names and the mainstream media piled it on deeper. [unquote].
This is a very intemperate, uncivil and uninformed statement. The Professor originally raised the question whether McCain had an “Alexander Hamilton” problem because he was born outside the 50 United States. A lot of us chimed in on the debate. I do not recall that Turley himself ever took a final position (he may have), but we eventually ended the discussion after we posted the Tribe-Olson memo concluding that McCain was in fact natural born, and the Senate non-binding resolution to the same effect.
On Obama, Turley raised the same kind of questions, and gave a very fair summary of Leo Donofrio’s theory that dual citizenship disqualified him. After JT amended his post to clarify the Donofrio theory, he received effusive thanks from Leo. We all got into the debate. Again, I recall that JT opined that the courts would be very unlikely to get to the merits of this, but he never actually came out with an opinion. He has posted a lot of threads on the birthers, but none in the last year, reporting on some of the cases. Again, he seems to have steered clear of the merits.
So why is Kerchner so angry and abusive?
The idea that Turley was “put up by the Democratic machine to go after McCain” is laughable. Turley has never jumped to the signal of any machine. He has been an equal opportunity critical of nearly everyone in the political arena, and he has posted hundreds of articles critical of the Obama administration since it was inaugurated.
Jim Byrne used to post here. He recently tried to authenticate the Kenyan birth certificate put up by Lucas Smith. It proved to be a phony.
[quote] A contribution by Jim Byrne, describes how he sent an email to the doctor whose name appeared on the ‘Kenya Birth Certificate’ obtained by Lucas Smith:
I need to know three things:
1. Were you the Chief Administrator (or acting Chief Administrator) of CPGH on Feb. 19th 2009?
2. Do the stamp and signature that appear in the attached document appear to be your stamp and signature?
3. Is the attached CPGH birth certificate representative of what a birth certificate issued by CPGH in 1961 would look like?
The good doctor did not immediately respond but eventually, a short email was received
However, much to my surprise and delight, Dr. Heltan Maganga responded to my email on July 29. His response was not what many of us would have wanted it to be, nor what I suspected it would be.
The following is the message received from Dr. Heltan Maganga’s email address:
From: Heltan Maganga
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 4:53 PM
To: Jim Byrne
Subject: Re: Lt. Col. Lakin
The answers to all your questions is a resounding NO.
There you have it, folks! While we may still question whether or not the document in the possession of Lucas Smith really did come from Coast Province General Hospital, we can be reasonably sure that the signature on that document IS NOT that of Dr. Maganga.
Some background: I am a court-accepted expert in the field of computer forensics. I examined the header information for Dr. Maganga’s email response. It was indeed sent from Kenya. It appears that he used a dial-up service out of Nairobi. (Until very recently, high-speed access was limited to expensive satellite connections in much of Kenya, including Mombasa.) Nothing contained in the header was indicative of the email coming from anywhere other than the account I had for Dr. Maganga.) [unquote]
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/post-and-email-kenya-birth-certificate-a-forgery/
The bottom line is that the Kenyan birth certificate of Lucas Smith is phony. It is a crude forgery, disowned by the person who supposedly “signed” it.
Despite it all, Byrne is still a birther.
“But it became apparent that what had been discovered was an unspecified listing or notation of Obama’s birth that someone had made in the state archives and not a birth certificate.”
That is not what the article said.
[quote] Hawaii’s health director said in 2008 and 2009 that she had seen and verified Obama’s original vital records, and birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers were published within days of Obama’s birth at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu.
Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo again confirmed Friday that Obama’s name is found in its alphabetical list of names of people born in Hawaii, maintained in bound copies available for public view.
That information, called index data, shows a listing for “Obama II, Barack Hussein, Male,” according to the department’s website.
“The index is just to say who has their records within the department. That’s an indication,” Okubo said. “I can’t talk about anyone’s records.” [end quote].
This listing was not just “discovered.” The index listing has been a public document available for viewing all along. Okuba has stated that she viewed the underlying documents, but that she cannot talk about them, because of state laws.
The Governor did not say the underlying records do not exist. Instead, he was told by the Attorney General that he cannot release them.
Those index records have been public documents ever since 1961. The information in them was forwarded by the health department to two separate newspapers and printed back in 1961. They are proof that Barack Obama II, a black male, was born in Hawaii in 1961. They have been there all along.
Read all about it at the official site: http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
There have been a lot of other developments. The nonpartisan, objective Congressional Research Service law division has weighed in on the natural born citizen issue and rejected the theories that Obama is not natural born because of the citizenship of his father.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/11/05/congressional-research-service-report-on-obamas-eligibility/
The theory that a natural born citizen must have two American citizen parents, or that she may be disqualified by “dual citizenship” even if born in the United States, subject to its jurisdiction, has failed to attract any support from any court or any law professor in any accredited law school. The cases brought by attorneys Taitz, Apuzzo, and Hemenway have all been taken to the U.S. Supreme Court, but review has been denied in every single case.
Lakin is now residing in the stockade at Leavenworth. I tried to reach him and warn him against his course of action by posting a long response to an article he had posted at the American Thinker, but the site refused to post my comment and banned me from the site.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/from-vince-treacy-lakin/
Lakin eventually fired the birthers and the lawyer, Paul Rolf Jensen, who had no military justice experience, and hired a real military lawyer, who managed to keep the length of penalty down.
Leo Donofrio, to his credit, advised military personnel against any disobedience. After a long string of legal failures, Leo seems to have dropped out of the fray completely. He has stripped most of his postings from his site.
Tootie,
If the president had been born outside the country, it gets a little dicey, but I believe that since his mother was not legally married (Obama Sr. was a bigamist), she was qualified to transmit citizenship to him at birth (there is some debate as to whether or not this would be ‘natural born’ citizenship). Fortunately, we know he was born in Hawai’i so there is no problem.
On the issue of the Governor of Hawaii, I thought the State Attorney General explained that no one can get an old paper birth certificate anymore because of the state laws, so that is why the Governor had to end his efforts. The state law does not allow release, in the opinion of the Attorney General. There was a radio discussion of this. A guest from Fogbow, an anti-birther site, named Foggy, asked why no one else has come up with one of the old forms since the state went to computer generated forms:
[QUOTE] Foggy: I just posted a link in the chat room.
(http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl)
And if you go to that link, the Hawaii government state website says you can’t get a long form birth certificate any more … even if … and that’s a link to a program they do for Native Hawaiians, y’know, ethnic Hawaiians, that if you’re more than 50% ethnic Hawaiian, they try to help you with all kinds of programs, it’s called the Hawaiian Homelands Program.
And they say they prefer the long form birth certificate if you have one, but they explain on the website that they don’t give them out any more, and that if you don’t have your long form birth certificate right now, if you apply for a birth certificate, you’re gonna get a COLB, a Certification of Live Birth, just like the one that Obama published …
… and that’s why I was wondering, the state of Hawaii … that even for people they’re trying to help because they’re ethnic Hawaiian, if they can’t get a long form birth certificate, and if Terry couldn’t get a long form birth certificate for his own daughter, then how is President Obama supposed to get a long form birth certificate for himself?
Greg: Right.
ASK: Well, that’s a good question. Yeah.
Greg: Well, I think that’s something that’s fairly recent within the last few years, because it’s always been … before … y’know I understand we’ve all gone to electronic records now, but …
Foggy: Right. In the state of Washington, the only birth certificate that you get is a little card that fits in your wallet.
Greg: Um hm.
Foggy: And I live in North Carolina, and in North Carolina all you can get is a short form birth certificate too. So I just don’t understand how President Obama could get … unless they put him above the law that says that you can’t get a long form birth certificate any more. I don’t see how he could possibly get a long form birth certificate. [end quote]
All of this discussion was edited out by the site for the radio show where the discussion took place. They did not want you to hear it.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/edited-versus-unedited-what-happened/
“The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth.”
So a person born in Hawaii can no longer get the old paper form, because “the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth,” and must settle for the new computer form, even if the old form might help support a claim under the home lands act by a native Hawaiian. Supposedly the old records are available with the consent of the person who was born in Hawaii, but it appears that only the COLB is issued. Obama gave his consent in 2007 when the campaign requested his birth certificate (subsequently released in 2008), but all he received was the COLB.
The birthers keep asking for the impossible. Obama asked for the birth certificate and got the COLB. Another request today will just result in another COLB. If a native Hawaiian makes a request today, she will get only the COLB.
I have been away from the birther issue here because the Professor has had no new postings in over a year, and I am really reluctant because of all the personal attacks, so I am going to stick to fact and law. I am happy to answer any questions, but I will not make any attacks and will ignore all of them.
Yet thread seems to have been hijacked, for example: “Remember this was the lady who said it was Dr. West who delivered Obama but was forced to retract her claim because West retired in 1956 five years before Obama was born.”
This has been dealt with before. Rodney West did not retire until 1977. It is not certain, but it seems reasonable to conclude that Dr. West was the doctor who delivered Obama, based on the available information. It is totally irrelevant to the issue of natural born citizenship, however, since that qualification only requires birth in the United States, not a doctor-delivered birth. The identity of the delivering doctor is not relevant to natural born status.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/more-testimony-obama-was-born-in-k/
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2010/04/25/educating-the-confused-rodney-t-west-stanley-had-a-baby/
I’m just asking questions.. =D
Do you think that it is okay to lie if it will help get the darkie out of the White House?
Is it okay to forge documents and conduct fake forensic analysis as long as it forwards the coup many birthers wish to see against President Obama?
Is making up lies about someone’s dead mother an acceptable tactic to you guys as long as it’s your side using it?
Bdaman,
I wasn’t the first to mention birthers – look at the very first comment in the thread.
Regarding Chris Matthews, you quote a rhetorical question that he asked his guests to provoke discussion as if it were an endorsement of birthers, yet you yourself wont answer whether or not you support the seditious racists that you are in the company of.
Dr. Fukino’s statements can be found here:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/07/spinning-dr-fukino/
Until you produce evidence of perjury, I’ll consider her statements to be correct…
Do you agree with the racist bile that Lame Cherry spews or the lies and sedition that passes for a discussion at Dr. Kate’s? How do you treat people who make up lies about your mother in order to smear you?
Birther et Birther,
Why are you standing with racists and liars? It seems like a legitimate question to me. Do you denounce the hateful lies that have been spewed in the service of sedition by the birther movement? If so, then why are you championing their cause?
Not that I like Green Bay fan
SB Not that I’m like a Green Bay Fan
You go Henman I’m goin with the pack too. Not that I like Green Bay fan, I just have that pack mentality dog.
Tootie-
I agree with Tootie!! Hooray! Hooray! Oh Happy Day!
Oh, and to stay on topic, Emanuel is a reptile and therefore not qualified to run for office.