Sheriff Joe Sends Detectives to Honolulu

I really wish they wouldn't vote. Makes our nation look like a bunch of "Tards",(GLP definition). The lobotomy sounds promising though. Hey Birthertards, after Obama wins re-election. Will you be down for a lobotomy?

sheriff joe goes to fuuckushima to verify meltdowns personally......well how does it sound???

NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE

Dont take me out of context. Educated, well informed, people of reasonably dissenting opinions are what James Madison envisioned for this Republic. Not mindless, racist, drones who hate their president because he is of a different color. Apparently, I need remind you. Regardless of personal opinion, the man holds the Office of the Presidency of the United States. Not only is he head of government, but also head of state. Constantly disrespecting him in a forum were there are foreign visitors and posters. Is an act that is very disrespectful of the office, not just the man. Keep that in mind on your racist witch-hunt.

So I'm an idiot? Your post is a bit hard to determine what your point is; Are you confused or trying to confuse (others)?

You may want to check your reading comprehension skills and re-read my posts, as I clearly defined the difference between a 'Natural Born' citizen' and a 'Citizen' and clearly explained WHY it was important to the Founders that the criteria for President was higher than other positions.

There is definitely a difference, and NO they are NOT interchangeable!


The term Natural Born citizen (NBC) was not defined (in the Constitution) because the term 'natural' was generally understood (via Natural Law) at the time the Constitution was being written.

To give you an analogy you might understand; if I were to say I downloaded something to my iPad, most everyone of this generation would know what I was referring to. But in 100-200 years, the device will most likely be lost to antiquity. The Founding Fathers didn't think they had to define the term NBC because it was understood by all at the time. Read a few books from the era and or other historical documents of the period and perhaps you'll understand.


Aside from specific residency restrictions and age, the office of President (and VP candidate) is the ONLY position that requires a 'Natural Born' citizen.

Conversely, a Senator (for example), can be just a 'Citizen'.

Basically, a citizen can be someone who was born in the USA who did not have two citizen parents, or a person who has been Naturalized (i.e. a foreign born person who moves here and attains citizenship).

However, a 'Natural Born' citizen REQUIRES that not only were they citizens at birth, but also their parents were citizens at the time of their birth.

Marco Rubio (and probably Mitt Romney) are great examples of this rule. Although Marco was born on US soil, his parents did not become US Citizens until after his birth. So, unless we change the Constitution; Marco Rubio is not eligible to become President or Vice President.

Likewise, President Obama's father was never a US citizen, therefore President Obama was NEVER eligible as per Article II. (Technically and legally, we should not call even him President).

So contrary to what you think, your statement "The term Natural Born Citizen refers to anyone born in the US" is grossly inaccurate.

And your statement "...the wording insinuates that one must have two parents of US descent to hold the office" is abhorrently misunderstood. It doesn't require two descendants of the US, it requires two Citizens.

Had Marco Rubio's parents become Naturalized Citizens (even one day before he were born), he would indeed be eligible.


To question my 'depth' is laughable. Your misreading of legal proceedings and misinterpretations of the Constitution suggests that you yourself are the amateur.


By the way, I'm normally not so critical on accidental spelling errors or punctuation mistakes, but since you were so disparagingly called me an 'idiot' I thought I'd mention that: It's 'there' are other requirements, not 'their'


I await your reply.

Last Edited by First Professor on 05/28/2012 01:19 AM

I am bumping this thread for two reasons. One to remind you and your other cohorts that you have a challenge before you (i.e. I have presented factual proof to support my position that Barack Obama is ineligible, facts that you have yet to refute) and two to once again dispel the idiotic accusation that this is even remotely an issue of 'race' or 'hate'.

So, For you and the others that claimed that you'd respond and counter my points: I'm still waiting.

-

Your assertion that our objective or motivation to question President Obama's eligibility is based on race is (like all of your other assumptions) not only unfounded, it's getting old.

As many have pointed out; Barack Obama won the 2008 election, which proves he was elected by the majority of Americans. Whites make up about 65% of the total population, while Blacks and Hispanics account for about 13% each. For Obama to have won the election, a large percentage of Whites would have had to vote for him (which they did). Also, as you fail to acknowledge, Barack Obama's mother was white, therefore he was half-white. He was also (according to various biographies) raised by his white grandparents.

The term 'racist' is so over-used and abused, few if anyone still accept the term as legitimate. It's like a hypochondriac telling his doctor he is sick; at some point the doctor will refuse to accept their word because they know their claim is no longer genuine or honest.

If you truly understood what the term means, you'd know it doesn't even apply here. It's just a word that the Left has been told they can use to put their opponent on the defense.

My issue with Obama lies solely with his Constitutionality and to further prove that it's not about him or 'race', it also lies with most Government officials (especially Congress, the Supreme Court), other judicial and legal representatives, the Media and anyone else who is either hiding the truth or willing to circumvent the Constitution.

An overwhelming majority of blacks dislike President Bush. Is that not racists? Or is it okay if it comes from Democrats?

There are so many unanswered questions about President Obama that have not been answered. The failure by the aforementioned list of people, not to investigate borders on criminal.

I respect the office of President, but the Constitution which many of us (including President Obama) swore to uphold and protect states that we are entitled to free speech. Absolutely nothing we've said about President Obama has been dis-proven, because due to a corrupt government, few if any of the challenges have seen their day in court.

Many of us who question Obama have great respect for other great black leaders like Allen West and Herman Cain. We've supported them, voted for them and contributed to their campaigns. If we were 'racists', would we support them?

As for 'hate', we don't hate anyone. We may disagree with a person's politics and ideologies, but accusing us of hate is a serious indictment. One which is not only baseless but if used recklessly, will result in diminishing it's meaning as you have done with the word 'racist'.

I actually find your 'hate' accusation amusing, because our comments or positions do not normally convey any hateful or derogatory language. However (not surprisingly), most left-wing Obama supporters cannot reply to a thread without using foul language or disparaging remarks.

Case in point, in this thread we've been called 'Birthers', 'Birthertards', you've accused us of being racists, haters, mindless, drones (accusations that you cannot substantiate). You suggest that we are uneducated and need lobotomies.

Based on what? Your opinion?

Studies show that those with a very low IQ revert to such methods when they cannot defend their position. Prove me wrong, prove my points wrong and do so without using a left-wing blogs or left-wing media (non-Soros funded sites) as your proof. Use historical documents.

nice

Join Mark as he interviews Mike Zullo the lead commander of Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Cold Case Posse as he shares the latest regarding the posse's investigation into President Barack Obama's eligibility to be president.



Subscribe to this YouTube channel for the latest news regarding this investigation. Send us tips at [email protected].

Visit Mark's radio website at [link to www.teapartypowerhour.com]

Sheriff Arpaio and his cold case posse are awesome.

Thanks for getting us up to date!

Still waiting for a reply from the Obama defenders.

Those who threatened or promised to answer my questions... I'm waiting!



This will not go away, the truth will come out and your ignorance will be exposed.

County refuses funds for Sheriff Joe's Obama probe


Arpaio's posse wants to reimburse taxpayers for Hawaii trip



Joe Arpaio as political payback, the Maricopa County, Ariz., Board of Supervisors today rejected a $5,000 reimbursement from the sheriff’s volunteer Cold Case Posse for expenses incurred on a trip to Hawaii to investigate Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility.

“It’s sad that they use these politics to reject money,” Arpaio told WND. “I made the promise when I launched the investigation to do everything I can to not use taxpayer money.”

He confirmed his Cold Case Posse team would not be deterred by any disagreement over a donation, however.

“If they want to know what’s going on, there’s a press conference in three or four weeks,” he said.

“This is a criminal investigation,” Arpaio asserted. “You cannot have the board of supervisors interfere with the elected sheriff’s duties and responsibilities that he gets from the Constitution.”

The expenses incurred by the county were for a deputy who accompanied Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo for security purposes.

The reimbursement was rejected on a 2-2 vote, with the absence of Supervisor Fulton Brock.

The supervisors who voted to reject the funds were Mary Rose Wilcox and Don Stapley, who both were subjects of sheriff’s investigations in the past and filed claims alleging wrongful prosecution, explained Arpaio spokeswoman Lisa Allen.

She said Wilcox and Stapley are hurting taxpayers and obstructing the sheriff’s efforts to keep his promise to taxpayers that funding for the Obama investigation be kept to a minimum. The supervisors who voted to accept the funds were Andy Kunasek and Max Wilson.

Join with Sheriff Arpaio is his work to uncover the truth by donating to the Cold Case Posse expenses, or contribute to a fund that supports investigations by both WND and the sheriff.

The posse announced in March it found probable cause that the image released in 2011 by the White House as birth documentation for Obama is a forgery.

Another news conference is scheduled in a few weeks, and the sheriff says there will be major additional revelations.

Arpaio’s investigation was launched at the request of constituents who feared that placement of Obama’s name on the state’s 2012 would constitute fraud if Obama were found to be ineligible.

Allen told WND that the supervisors who rejected the funds appeared to be following the lead of Randy Parraz, an anti-Arpaio activist who has lobbied the supervisors to oppose the sheriff.

About 30 members of Parraz’s group, Citizens for a Better Arizona, attended the meeting today to protest. The Arizona Republic newspaper reported the group asked the board not to accept private donations to “back fill” the sheriff’s use of public funds.

The protesters contended the investigation was “well outside the jurisdiction of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and the duties and responsibilities of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.

At the board meeting, Kunasek argued the supervisors and sheriff are elected separately, and supervisors should not determine which criminal investigations the sheriff pursues. Parraz responded at that point and yelled at Kunasek, accusing him of wasting taxpayer money.

Posse lead investigator Zullo told WND the Hawaii trip was all business.

“From my [motel] balcony I had a view of an alley, a check cashing place and a liquor store,” he said, noting the room cost only $129 per night, a low rate for most locations in Hawaii.

He said the investigation is important because it focuses a document that appears to be fraudulent, and people are wrongly injecting politics. He has told his team that it doesn’t matter whose name is on the document.

“We are trying to conduct an investigation with zero cost to the taxpayers,” he said. “They refused to take the money. We don’t understand how that helps the taxpayers.”

Zullo said the deputy was needed on the Hawaii trip because as a sworn officer, he was allowed to be armed, while investigators from the Cold Case Posse, as volunteers, were not.

After the investigative trip to Hawaii, WND reported an intelligence source who warned early last year that a forged Obama birth record would be released now says a forged “original” birth certificate intended to pass forensic inspection by using 1961 materials is being prepared and could be released as an “October surprise.”

The source, who has contact with Hawaii government officials, was questioned by Zullo, who said regardless of whether the Hawaii source’s information pans out, he wants to see the original microfilm record of Obama’s birth.

“If they decide to try to produce a document, we’re going to be skeptical,” he said. “We’ve been calling for the microfilm from the beginning.”

Arpaio has said he wants to see the entire roll of microfilm that contains Obama’s birth record and submit it to court-certified forensic examiners to determine its authenticity.

The Hawaii source said ink and paper from 1961 have been secured to create an “original” document that would correspond with the digital copy posted on the White House website.

As WND reported one year ago, radical supporters of Obama openly have admitted their role in the forging of a Kenyan Obama birth certificate.

The White House released a purported copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate shortly after the Drudge Report prominently leaked details of WND Book’s then-upcoming expose “Where’s the Birth Certificate.”


Story courtesy: [link to www.wnd.com]

Still waiting for the Obama shills to dispute the data that has been presented here.

They promised to reply and dispel the information, but perhaps their version of a 'promise' is similar to the Obama administration; i.e. - They lie!

Last Edited by First Professor on 07/04/2012 12:36 AM

This^^^^Not all of them, but certainly MOST ALL of them (all three branches). 50 years ago, most of them would have been put under the jail for treason. Hell, even the mention of anything related to communism would've translated into immediate removal. Now, you're not a practicing politician unless you legislate "social justice."

We're f*cked until we remove them all and start over.

They're incapable of intelligent debate, which is what makes them so predictable. In that light, I'm confident that another amusing counter-post will be forthcoming very soon (void of any refuting fact of course, because they have none)...

Explain the birth announcement in two Honolulu newspapers in early August, 1961 that a male baby named Obama (his parents' names listed) was born on August 4th 1961 in a Honolulu hospital. The HOSPITAL submits the birth announcements about once a week of all the babies born during the past week in that hospital. Did somebody travel through time to August,1961 to alter that announcement? If you believe in time travel, it might be possible. Natural born citizen means that you were born in this country. Parents don't matter. The constitution would specify if it also applied to your parents. The people here are making things too complicated!

:karmascafe:

I will answer the above question below, however wanted to first make a comment.

I haven't been watching this thread for few weeks because I didn't think any Obama supporter was capable of disputing the data that I had posted (which they've still yet to do ).

The Obama shills promised to reply and dispel each point I made, which I submitted MONTHS AGO, but I'M still waiting!!!

Fact is - THEY CAN"T!

Come on OBAMABOTS - I am re-charged and ready for you

-

Now to answer the above question about the birth announcements in the Hawaiian paper.


First: Not ONE (zero, nada, zip) actual hard-copies of that 'newspaper' announcement has been revealed to be in existence. The only record of this information is on microfilm, which I will cover below. Please let me see / examine an actual hard-copy paper version of that newspaper that someone saved from that date. And yes, many people do still have the clipping and/or page from when they were born (from Obama's time period and much earlier). I still have my page - even though it's decades old, yellow and faded.


Second: We've learned that there have been MANY discrepancies with the Hawaiian department of Health, such that MANY people have now come forward stating that they too have Hawaiian birth certificates, but were born outside of the USA (check Obama's sister Maya Kassandra Soetoro for example - she was born in Indonesia but has Hawaii COLB like her brother). In other words, a Hawaiian birth Certificate from that period is VERY questionable!


Third: Guess what? ... I have members of my family who are MICROFILM / MICRO FICHE EXPERTS who have been working with the technology for decades! They still have and use the equipment on a regular basis!

Although I have zero proof of this (but neither do you to dispel my claim), I can tell you with authority and certainty that microfiche can be easily manipulated (portions of film - easily re-created and re-inserted in the libraries).

Again, let me examine the film! I can perform tests that will verify the age and integrity of the data.

My family members have stated that 'with the right equipment' one could (very) easily recreate the microfilm (fiche) that you are referring to to say anything you want.

Knowing the reach, connections & power that this President (or a future president) has, this would be very-very easy.

So, if this is your only proof, I suggest that you keep trying.


Tell me how many people remember him from college? What were his grades - why hasn't he released them? What about the dozen other records he's sealed? What is he hiding?

Why are similar (microfiche) documents missing from official records from the week that many believe his mother was traveling?


The PDF birth certificate has been proven to be a fraud, I too am somewhat of an expert in that field and would be willing to testify that the document he presented was fraudulent.

What else do you have?


And finally, your comment about what a 'Natural Born Citizen' is just shows your ignorance of history, the Constitution and our Founding Fathers.

If there is/was a difference for this provision, please explain why the Constitution omits the 'Natural-born' clause for 'Senators'? (i.e. only a 'Citizen' is required - not a 'Natural-born-Citizen'


Next, read up on (Emeric) de Vattel, Jefferson and Ben Franklin and get back to me.


Again, still waiting for credible answers to my previous posts.

I'll make a deal with you.

You tell/prove to us where the good sheriff is wrong and maybe we'll pay attention to you.

Fact is, you can't!

Typical Libtard, all criticism - no substance.