I noticed an interesting story on Facebook relating that the U.S. Supreme Court will review a case today (2/19/2013) pertaining to Obama’s legitimacy as President. The article said that the court will review a brief submitted by Orly Taitz, who has made several attempts to get this issue before a court without much luck. I found a post, which I assume is the brief, on Taitz’s website, titled: Supplemental Brief for the Supreme Court of the United States (you have to scroll down to see it).
Having read the document, I am left shaking my head. Not because some of the questions it raises, but in its mere presentation. Replete with errors, the reader is left with the notion that the writer did not care enough about the subject to present a well-crafted brief. I would think that such an important issue and having so many names attached to it, someone would proofread it before it was published on the website. More importantly, before it is filed with the highest court in the U.S. If not a hoax then what a missed opportunity to get to the bottom of an issue that has dogged Obama since hitting the national spotlight.
Before I get into any discussion about the allegations made in the brief, I would like to set a few things straight. The Politically-Correct crowd has deemed it taboo to even ask some of these questions. Politicians, the media, and Hollywood paint people as crazy or racist if they broach this topic. Wanting answers to serious questions does not qualify you for being crazy. Nor does a desire to see adherence to the Constitution make you a racist.
A person who would ignore such allegations is ignorant or feeble minded. Further, if someone refuses to look into these allegations because of Obama’s skin color, which is in fact making a decision based on race, doesn’t that make them the racist? Ask yourself, if McCain had won and all these issues surrounded him (some of which do), wouldn’t someone call me a racist if I refused to look into the issue? You cannot condemn one and not the other. And let me be clear, if it was McCain or any other person (regardless of color), I would be just as fervent about getting the matter resolved! We either choose to obey laws, or start down a path that I fear has no good ending.
Whatever your beliefs about Obama’s eligibility for President, we should agree that anyone who believes they have evidence proving otherwise has the right to be heard in court. Four years into this issue, no one has been given that day in court, making the judicial system complicit if the allegations are true.
After all, that isn’t that, in part, what we expect from our judicial system? Don’t we desire an avenue providing a civil manner by which matters may be resolved? Having a court decide on the evidence provided would silence skeptics if it is found to have no merit. However, if the evidence were found to be credible, we must deal with Pandora’s Box.
The brief covers four major themes; Obama’s eligibility for President, an argument for the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction, allegations of treason, and recusal of Supreme Court Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. The plaintiffs of the case are suing the State of California for a stay of certification for votes. Put simply, if he is not eligible for the office of President, the Electoral votes from California do not go to Obama. The plaintiffs hope that if successful, all other states must follow suit.
Eligibility: Essentially the brief contends that Obama’s candidacy was secured through fraudulent means. Citing a list of forged documents, the brief claims that Obama is not a natural-born United Stated citizen, thereby making him ineligible for the office of President. The brief discusses his passports, birth certificates, Selective Service Certificate, and Social Security Number.
Some of the facts of Obama’s life are pretty well known and undisputed. His father was Kenyan and his mother American. Early in his life, Obama’s mother took him to live in Indonesia. The brief asserts that it was during this time he became an Indonesian citizen, which was never revoked. However, as a child Obama had little control over the actions of his mother, let alone matters such of nationality and citizenship. I have no love for Obama, but I think this issue is a toss up if true. Obama could easily argue that he did not make the decision, thus he never relinquished citizenship. However, this is where Obama’s passport records come into play.
It has been alleged that Obama attended Occidental College as a foreign student. During the same time, Obama traveled to around the world, including Pakistan. There are questions about the timing of this visit and whether Pakistan was allowing Americans visas. The allegations have often been that Obama would have needed to use another passport to gain entry, most likely from Indonesia where he has lived before. I don’t hold out much hope that the Indonesian government will provide, or even has, accurate records to satisfy this part of the claim. However, Occidental College is well within our jurisdiction and an official investigation would answer at least part this question once and for all.
There has been much debate over Obama’s birth certificate. After much debate and public demand, two documents were released through the White House. Numerous people have come out claiming these documents were forgeries. Arguably, those images (altered or not) are just images on the screen and who knows if any laws were broken if images were altered. Of course altering the original documents would be a different story. Presenting an altered document as proof of citizenship definitely is illegal. Regardless, it does raise the question of why would someone altered such a document. An examination of the original documents would put the matter to rest. The FBI’s Questioned Documents Unit could easily determine if the original documents are authentic.
There has also been a question about Obama’s Selective Service registration. The brief alleges that Obama’s Selective Service Certificate is a forgery. Again, an FBI investigation would provide a definitive answer.
The Social Security Number is a bit more problematic for Obama. According to the brief, investigations into Obama’s SSN have revealed that this number belongs to Harrison J. Bounel, a Russian immigrant born in 1890. Further, the investigation found records indicating Michelle Obama as a close relative and that she altered some of the information in the record. At the very least, further investigation of IRS and SSA records is needed to reveal the truth.
Jurisdiction and Treason: The brief contends that if Obama is ineligible for the office of President, his appointment violates the Constitution. The brief argues that numerous people from the Democratic Party and Government are committing treason by furthering what they believe is Obama’s illegal occupation of the office of President. Additionally, there is a claim that the Supreme Court clerks illegally tampered with the case selection process to bury and/or deny previously filed briefs. At the very least, further investigation is warranted if only to maintain the Supreme Court above reproach.
Recusal of Justices: This is the weakest part of the brief. The brief claims that Obama’s Presidency being illegitimate, his appointment of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan were invalid. Now, I am no fan of either judge and believe them to be activists whose decisions will plague our nation for a very long time. However, regardless of how they were nominated, it was through the process of Congress that both were confirmed and put them on the bench.
Investigation: The brief asks for the Supreme Court to appoint a Special Prosecutor to investigate the allegations of fraud and forgery. Special Prosecutors have been used in Watergate, the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and the outing of Valerie Plame as a member of the CIA. If Obama is indeed ineligible for the office of President, the implications far exceed all three of those scandals combined.
My years of experience in law enforcement leave me believing there is merit to having an investigation. Quite frankly, this issue should never have reached the steps of the Supreme Court. Congress should have investigated and issue long ago. Not only to satisfactorily put these issues to rest, but to maintain the public’s confidence in Government. Whether by Special Prosecutor or the FBI under bipartisan review, an investigation is a prudent measure.
I don’t believe the public has the need, or the right, to peer into the private lives of our citizens without cause. But when someone is asking to become the most powerful person in United States, we do have a right to know who that person is and whether they qualify for the job.
The Constitution put in place a minimum requirement for the office of President. Whether from lack of foresight or a trust in the honor of fellow mankind, the Framers did not institute a manner by which we check a person to ensure their qualifications. Not only should we investigate these allegations, but any future person seeking the office. So for those who think my suggested investigation is grounded in anti-Obama sentiment, you are wrong. If we had the resources, I would require vetting for all politicians! It doesn’t take much digging to find that our Government has far too many criminals, frauds, and liars. Many of the atrocities they get away with once in office would land you or I in jail.
A lot of the evidence presented by Taitz has been gathered by private civilians who haven’t the resources or authority to dig into certain aspects of this matter. An official investigation, aided by the power search warrants, an official investigation could quickly obtain all the information needed to determine if the allegations are true or false. No blocking of subpoenas or FOIA requests, a search warrant ends the discussion. That is if they can find the documents and not, as Taitz alleges, that a cover-up has led to the destruction of Government records. In which case, an entirely different investigation is required.
In closing, there are some unanswered questions deserving of answers from Barack “Most Transparent” Obama. Perhaps it will turn out to be much ado about nothing. But, what if it is true? Can we afford to ignore it? Sadly, based on the document I read at Taitz’s website, it will likely fall far short of accomplishing that goal. Its tone and errors will likely see it die a death of a thousand cuts. It is a shame that the vehicle that brought this issue to the Supreme Court may turn out to be a broken down Pinto.