TRANSPARENCY:
Barack Obama’s Best-Kept Secret

Part 8

To: America
From: Robert Quinn
Date: March 3, 2014
Re: Barack Obama’s Ineligibility and Fitness for High Office

Our legal system criminally protects Obama’s ineligibility

Vetting: to examine or scrutinize, as an expert.

Federal judge James Robertson (US District Court-Wash.D.C.) threw out a lawsuit challenging Obama’s “Presidential eligibility” by saying Obama’s citizenship was “thoroughly vetted and massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during his two year presidential campaign.”

This statement was completely false, whether made deliberately or out of ignorance. Obama (then Senator) had his attorneys block the release of any document which, if valid, should have been able to confirm his eligibility. Presidential “vetting” is not exercised by America’s vigilant citizenry”, but by elected representatives who are charged with obeying the Constitution. Our courts have been criminally negligent. Obama was never “vetted”.

The birth certificate which he cited on the Daily Kos website as proof of his eligibility was a fraudulent “Certification of Live Birth” (COLB) which, even had it been legitimate,was an ineligible document for anyone (white, black or whatever color) seeking the Presidency… and Obama, a former Constitutional teacher, was well aware of that fact.  He knew that only a valid “Certificate of Live Birth” was acceptable for Presidential aspirants; yet, for two years he continued to deliberately deceive America with his fraudulent copy of a fabricated “Certification of Live Birth”.

Judge Robertson never saw a valid eligibility document since neither he nor any other American were given access to one.  Blogging and texting do not bestow legitimacy upon Presidential aspirants.  They only allow passing on of messages from one to another.  The Judge, and every party specifically mentioned in my letters, received copies of every letter; therefore, ignorance on this issue cannot be used as an excuse for their conduct.

The judge never retracted his words or his dismissal of the case before him. Did he owe me a reply?  No… he owed and still owes America an apology for mocking and silencing truth in his courtroom on that day.

Georgia’s Deputy Chief, Michael Maliki, subpoened Obama to appear in court with proof of his eligibility if he wished to appear on the 2012 Georgia ballot.  Obama simply ignored the subpoena and his attorney brazenly notified the judge, in writing, that neither Obama nor his counsel would appear in Court to answer.  Defenders of our Constitution?

The judge warned that he would take evidence solely from the plaintiff, but, in a rapid reversal, dismissed the plaintiff’s testimony and closed the case.  Of particular interest, he took no action against Obama for ignoring the subpoena.  Obama’s attorneys nationwide have never produced a valid birth certificate in any courtroom.  What a disgrace!  A simple order to the Hawaiian Health Department to send a Certificate of Live Birth to Washington for verification by experts could have resolved this issue five years ago.

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announces Tuesday, July 17, 2012, in Phoenix that President Obama’s birth certificate, as presented by the White House in April 2011, is a forgery based on an investigation by the Sheriff’s office. (AP Photo/Matt York)

Instead, Obama’s refusal to provide such proof has resulted in our Country now being run by a foreign usurper.  John Jay warned George Washington of the possible consequences of having other than a natural-born president leading our nation. Washington and the framers of the Constitution agreed and the “natural-born” status became part of Article II of the Constitution. Today, thanks to Obama’s lying, deception and refusal to produce any valid birth certificate, John Jay’s warning has become reality and Article II has become essentially null and void.

In another disgraceful courtroom dismissal, Circuit Judge Kevin Carroll (Leon County, Florida) dismissed a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility with pathetic twists of reasoning, saying “The Court notes that President Obama lives in The White House, flies on Air Force One, appears before Congress, delivers State of the Union addresses and meets with Congressional leaders on a regular basis and appoints ambassadors, etc.”

Does the judge really believe that simply living in The White House and enjoying the “perks” was a confirmation of Obama’s eligibility?  Those actions simply provided false respectability for his deception.  Most people committing fraudulent impersonations don’t hide themselves — they hide (or falsify) anything which might expose their duplicity, as Obama has done for more than four years. That’s why we have had over 100 lawsuits seeking the truth and Obama hiding it.

If Judge Carroll looked back in history to the Revolutionary War he would have read how General Benedict Arnold, after lawfully taking command of West Point, accepted the privileges and honored the obligations accorded because of a previously determined military eligibility. Simply living on the premises did not confirm his eligibility. Arnold’s treason immediately voided all of his rights and privileges, including living on the premises.

Obama’s treason, however, began before the 2008 election with his fraudulent birth certificate, making him immediately ineligible to even seek the Office of President, much less to reside in the White House or enjoy any other privileges reserved for eligible recipients.

Our courts no longer interpret the law, they now re-write or ignore it altogether.  Even the Supreme Court, which could have easily resolved this issue by insisting that Obama produce a valid birth certificate for scrutiny by experts to verify its authenticity, has remained silent though Justice Roberts, elsewhere, did not hesitate to suggest how “Obamacare” could “skirt” our Constitution, which, in my mind, made him part of Obama’s defense team.

Any U.S. President who attains high office through law-breaking will become a lawless president.

A SAD REFLECTION

Irony of ironies … our present-day courts have dismissed most cases challenging Obama’s presidential eligibility as having “no standing”; yet, those same courts ignored facts and truth, and made arbitrary determinations, some of which I made reference to above. Their legal reasoning did not have a leg to stand on, so, in truth, they were the ones who truly lacked “standing”, in every way.