Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Birth Cert. Activist Leo Donofrio To Sue Chrysler, Seek Birth Certificate

I just received this press release that appeared on Devvy.com from Jim Crum and Bob Robbins.

>(Dec. 7, 2009) — The Post & Email can confirm this afternoon, that Attorneys Leo Donofrio and Steven Pidgeon are representing a group of Chrysler Automotive dealers in seeking legal redress to their loss of their franchises following the direct and unconstitutional involvement of Barack Hussein Obama in the Chrysler reorganization.

It is speculated that the action will involve a writ of quo warranto, where by Obama will be legally forced to prove that he legitimately holds office as President of the United States in accord with the requirements of Article II, section 1, paragraph 5 of the United States Constitution.

That paragraph reads,

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The Supreme Court of the United States has on several occasions confirmed that the phrase “natural born citizen” indicates a U.S. citizen, who was born in the U.S.A. of two U.S. citizen parents. Obama, on account of having a father who was a British subject at the time of his own birth, was not, is not, and can never be a natural born citizen. He is thus unqualified to hold the office of president.

Regarding the pending action in the courts of the District of Columbia, Donofrio says that the goal of Steve Pidgeon and himself is to see the owners of the dealerships, whom they represent, “reinstated to their businesses.”

The District of Columbia is unique in the nation, for having a section of its legal code devoted to the writ of quo warranto, when employed against federal office-holders who exercise their office within the District.

Attorney Donofrio is famous for his advocacy of the use of the quo warranto provisions of the D.C. Code and holds that the D.C. courts are the only proper venue for such actions against federal officers.

For more information about the issues raised in this report, click on the tags at the bottom of this article.

2 comments:

smrstrauss said...

Re: "The Supreme Court of the United States has on several occasions confirmed that the phrase “natural born citizen” indicates a U.S. citizen, who was born in the U.S.A. of two U.S. citizen parents."

No it hasn't. The Supreme Court has never ruled on what a Natural Born Citizen is. It has, however, repeatedly used Natural Born to mean "born in the USA."

For example, it said in the Wong Kim Ark case:

" It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.

III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established. "

Note that it says EVERY child, even the children of aliens, was a natural born subject. Notice that it says the same rules applied in the colonies, early states, and continue to apply under the Constitution.

Natural Born in this context means "born in the country." This the original meaning of the term, which was used in the USA at the time of the writing of the Constitution.

Natural Born was used as we use Native Born today. Native Born was very rarely used. Natural Born was used all the time, and it was never used by a US writer to indicate anything other than "born in the country."

We get the word Naturalize from Natural Born, meaning to make someone who is not a citizen like someone who was born in the country (not like someone who was born in the country to two US parents).

And that is why such prominent conservative Senators who are also lawyers as Orren Hatch and Lindsay Graham say that a Natural Born Citizen is simply one who was born in the USA:

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:

“Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)

Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:

“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)

Deltronic said...

Whether Obama is a "natural born citizen" required for presidency by the U.S. Constitution, the "Supreme Law of the Land," is irrelevant because Obama is not even an American citizen!

He admits this at his web site, “Fight the Smears,” where a much controverted copy of his birth certificate is posted to supposedly prove "[He] was born in the State of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America." (See: http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html?source=SEM-RR-google-content-birth&gclid=CKXWmLuEkJ0CFR9N5QodVjHR7w )

The "smoking gun" is the quote from Fact Check "to clarify Obama's birth," found below the birth certificate:

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children."

How did this act "governed the status of Obama's Sr.'s children"? Part II, Section 5.—(1) of the British Nationality Act of 1948 states: "Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth." (See http://www.uniset.ca/naty/BNA1948.htm)

Clearly, this act conferred British citizenship on Obama (Jr.) "at the time of [his] birth.” But he lost it and became an Indonesian citizen when his Indonesian stepfather adopted him in 1967. Indonesia did not recognize a dual citizenship then. Despite these facts, some claim that Obama is still an American citizen by virtue of his Hawaiian birth. If so, Obama had to regain his American citizenship, however tenuous it was, by age 18 after he returned to the U.S. in 1972. He could have easily done this by going before a magistrate or an INS official, provide proof of citizenship, take an oath of allegiance and sign a declaration. THERE IS NO TRACE OF THIS DECLARATION! (Is he an illegal alien?)

So, smrstrauss, can you tell us how a person who is not even an American citizen be POTUS?