What kind of BS is this? Obama's attorneys argue that Obama's eligibily can't be questioned because he's not the parties nominee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Attorneys arguing on
behalf of Barack Obama’s re-election plans today urged a Florida judge to
decide that Obama is not yet the Democratic nominee for president and ignore
evidence challenging his eligibility.
The arguments were raised by attorney Mark
Herron on behalf of Obama in a hearing before Judge Terry Lewis in Florida, who
is best known for presiding over the 2000 Bush v. Gore election dispute.
Lewis is credited with making crucial rulings
in the contested 2000 presidential election when ultimately a Florida recount
was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court, and George W. Bush was declared the
Attorney Larry Klayman filed the challenge to
Obama’s eligibility for the ballot on behalf of Michael Voeltz, who identifies
himself in the complaint as “a registered member of the Democratic Party,
voter, and taxpayer in Broward County.”
Attorneys representing Obama at the hearing,
which was livestreamed by WND, argued that the Florida presidential preference
primary, which listed Obama as the only Democrat nominee, didn’t make him the
party’s nominee for president.
Herron argued the Florida process affirms only
that Obama is the choice in the state’s presidential preference primary but is
not necessarily the party’s nominee for president.
“This language clearly indicates the winner of
the president preference primary, not the nominee of the party,” he said.
But the judge noted that the party wrote to
Florida’s secretary of state a letter indicating Obama’s name was the only one
submitted, and he thought the state’s electors were bound to vote for him.
“Wasn’t there a letter [that said] this is the
only candidate whose name will appear?” Lewis asked.
Obama’s attorneys said such a decision “has
not been triggered yet.”
Klayman argued that according to state law,
when only one name is submitted, that person automatically becomes the nominee,
even if the national Democratic Party nominating convention has not been held.
No decision was announced immediately. The
judge said he would review the law, but he had pointed questions for both
When Klayman noted the Founding Fathers
established the natural-born citizen requirement because they wanted to avoid
foreign influence on a president from a non-citizen parent, Lewis countered by
posing a hypothetical situation in which a candidate’s two U.S.-citizen parents
later emigrate to Israel.
Klayman said the Founding Fathers’ attempt to
avoid a conflict of interest in the Oval Office did not include every possible
The judge asked whether the Democratic Party,
as a private group, had a right to choose a nominee, even if that person was
Lewis questioned a citation by Obama’s
attorneys of a Florida law that suggests when only one person is on the ballot,
that person becomes the nominee. He told the attorneys he would review the
details of the law.
The arguments by Obama’s attorneys reflected
their request that the judge simply dismiss the case because they claim a
sitting president chosen by his party at multiple levels is not yet officially
Klayman accused the Obama attorneys of playing
a “shell game” and trying to put off the issue, as numerous courts did in 2008
until the election was over and Obama was inaugurated.
The judge could remove Obama’s name from the
November ballot in Florida, a crucial swing state, should he determine that the
Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen” can be
applied at the primary level.
Klayman told WND that during a hearing last
month on discovery issues in the case, Lewis noted that the plaintiff’s brief
cited U.S. Supreme Court case Minor v. Happersett from 1875 defining “natural
born citizen” as the offspring of two citizens of the nation, while the Obama
campaign’s arguments provided no citations.
Defining the term is critical. Such a step has
not been reached in any of the more than 100 legal cases that have been brought
over Obama’s eligibility.
The U.S. Constitution’s “natural born citizen”
requirement is not imposed on other federal officials. The writings of the
Founders indicate the requirement was meant to ensure that no person who had
divided loyalties would serve as commander in chief.
Klayman has argued that since Obama, by his
own admission, was not born to two citizen parents, he is not a “natural born
citizen” and, therefore, is ineligible to be a candidate on the state’s
Florida’s election statutes provide broad
protections for voters to ensure that the integrity of the election system is
beyond reproach. One of the laws allows voters to challenge the nomination of a
candidate who is not eligible for the office he is seeking.
WND earlier reported on the case, which raises some of the
same issues that have been raised in other state ballot challenges.
Specifically it alleges:
On or about April 2011, only after years into
his presidency, and under media and political pressure, Barack Hussein Obama
published on the Internet an electronic version of a purported birth
certificate alleging his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961, to
American citizen mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, and Kenyan British subject father,
Barack Obama Senior.
There is credible evidence indicating that
this electronically produced birth certificate is entirely fraudulent or
otherwise altered. No physical, paper copy of the actual long form birth
certificate has been produced in order to definitively establish Barack Hussein
Obama’s birth within the United States.
The action follows by weeks the release of
Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s investigation into Obama’s eligibility. The investigation
by professional law enforcement officers working on a volunteer basis for
Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse found probable cause that Obama’s birth certificate
was forged and fraudulently presented as a genuine document.
The plaintiff has submitted affidavits from
Arpaio and others to support the claim.
The complaint explains that even if Obama was
born within the United States, he is still not a “natural-born citizen” as
required by the U.S. Constitution. That’s because his father was born in the
British Colony of Kenya on June 18, 1936, making him a British subject,
according to the British Nationality Act of 1948.
A case filing explains: “No physical, paper
copy of defendant Obama’s birth certificate has been presented to establish his
eligibility. … Defendant Obama has electronically produced a copy of what he
purports to be his ‘birth certificate.’ Nevertheless, there is evidence to
suggest that the electronically produced birth certificate is entirely
fraudulent or otherwise altered.”
When asked by Judge Lewis, Klayman confirmed
he could add to the complaint details of the evidence Obama was not born in the
Obama’s attorneys told the judge that other
courts have decided that courts should not make such decisions and the process
is better handled by Congress. They said state courts especially are not suited
to making a decision on the eligibility of Obama.
“They are precluded from judging the
qualifications of candidates for president of the United States,” the Obama
But Klayman pleaded with the judge to decide
the issue, because a determination made after the election could negate
“Florida has a special duty not just on behalf
of the citizens of Florida but on behalf of the United States,” he said.
Klayman referred to a recent Obama order to
underscore the significance of the Founders’ desire that the president not have
divided loyalties or “not even a hint of foreign influence.”
“Just a few days ago, he issued an executive
order … which in effect allows illegal alien students who came into this
country … to remain in this country. … The president’s own father was in fact
here on a student visa and ultimately was deported because that visa expired.”
Klayman reiterated the Supreme Court’s Minor
v. Happersett definition of “natural born citizen” as a person born in the
country of two citizen parents.
“The point is this, your honor,” said Klayman.
“The president is not like everybody else. If that was the case the framers
would have said ‘citizens’ [can be president.]”
He accused Obama’s attorneys of trying to
“push the issue down the road” until the legal process would fail due to lack
“It’s a shell game,” Klayman said. ” … Neither
the Florida Constitution nor the federal Constitution … would ever sanction
what they are saying.
See Votes by State
News & Politics