Obama is not a proud American

The president usurper, the fraud and foreigner, is certainly proud but not a proper "proud American" or he wouldn't have sat and received indoctrination in racist Jeremiah Wright's haven of hatred against the United States and people of white color (the white race) and he wouldn't hesitate to prove he is a natural born citizen instead of feeding expensive lawyers hush money to keep his revealing documents in the dark! 

Emperor Obama would be proud to help accomplish Israel's destruction, looking the other way as Iran prepares to ignite the world, even as he is working hard to destroy the United States in every way possible. 

Justice demands Obama/Soetoro/Obama has got to go if our Constitution and Republic are to remain, so help us God.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (4 votes)

Dear Concerned Friend,

Barack Obama is sweating it out after his Department of Justice ("DOJ") attorneys walked into court expecting United States Federal District Court Judge David Carter to dismiss the birth certificate case. Why you ask? Simply because they "think" Obama is President. Their arguments were hollow and unconvincing. and after hearing hours of argument, the Judge Carter "took the matter under submission." He has still not issued a ruling, 10 days later!

Is The President Above The Law and the Courts?

DOJ attorneys tried to explain to the Judge that no Court in the United States had the jurisdiction to rule on whether Barack Hussein Obama was eligible to serve as President of the United States? In their view he could only be impeached and/or disqualified from the Office of President under the 25th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

NOT TRUE! USJF pointed out to the Court that both the impeachment statutes, and the 25th Amendment required a sitting President, but if Mr. Obama is not eligible to serve as President, he could not be, and never was, a sitting President, so those options for removal could not apply. Therefore the courts would have jurisdiction.

Monday, October 5, 2009, , at 8:30 a.m., in California, was a critical milestone for our entire legal and public relations effort to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate and to prove whether he is eligible to serve as President of the United States. And with your support USJF was able to be there to argue the case.

The case has an excellent chance to survive the Department of Justice ("DOJ") motion to dismiss what has proven to be the best chance for America to have a hearing on the merits of this critical Constitutional issue.

What happened that day in Court? It's very simple—the DOJ attorneys brought up every argument that they could to try to persuade the Court to dismiss this case

USJF provided sound legal arguments against the DOJ legal theories; otherwise the whole case could have been over right then and there! The USJF oral arguments will be the difference between this case surviving or being dismissed.

The Judge raised issues critical to our case:

1. Did Senators question the eligibility of Mr. Obama? (Only Senators Coburn and Shelby and a number of House members.)

2. Were objections made by Members of Congress when the vote of the Electoral College was certified? (NO, then Vice-President Cheney had not performed his required duty of asking for objections, so there could have been none raised.)

DOJ attorneys argued that only Congress, and/or the Electoral College, could decide on the eligibility of Mr. Obama. Fortunately, the USJF legal team filed pleadings pointing out that the DOJ legal arguments in this regard WERE WRONG! And, I was there to argue against those claims.

People at the hearing and those who have found out what happened there since have been contacting USJF, thanking us for standing up for the truth!

But the fight is not over yet! We expect a ruling from the Court any day now. If we defeat the dismissal motion, then we're immediately filing pleadings ("discovery") seeking Mr. Obama's birth certificate, his college records, and so much more. AND, we'll be seeking to depose Mr. Obama ASAP!

And if the Court grants the motion to dismiss, we'll be immediately filing an appeal of the decision!

But we can only do this if we have your financial support!

Judge Carter has set a trial date of January 26, 2010 in this case. To keep that date, we need to defeat the DOJ dismissal motion, and then, IMMEDIATELY, move right into the discovery phase discussed above. BUT THAT WILL BE VERY EXPENSIVE AND WE WILL NEED TO:

  • Retain attorneys in Washington, D. C., to take the Obama deposition.
  • Retain attorneys in Hawaii to take the deposition of those in control of the Obama birth records and school records.
  • Take the deposition of Occidental, College officials to obtain Obama school records
  • We will have to retain attorneys in Massachusetts to take the deposition of Harvard. Law School officials to obtain Obama school records.
  • Pay the cost of the court reporters for all of these depositions. Plus,
  • Pay the cost of serving the subpoenas on the various witnesses.

    We expect the DOJ, as well as Mr. Obama's private attorneys, to fight us every step of the way! Obama attorneys will file motions to block the depositions in each and every state, and the District of Columbia by the Obama defense team!


  • Question the issue of the passport files of Mr. Obama! We're going to be going after the records of how he traveled abroad without a United States Passport in the 1980's, as he admits doing.
  • Question the issue of his alleged adoption by his step-father in Indonesia! We'll be seeking records about that also!
  • Resolve questions about his Selective Service files! We'll be seeking records concerning that also! But, first, we have to get past the DOJ dismissal motion!

    The DOJ's motion to dismiss also claims that our clients have no "standing," that the Federal Court does not have "jurisdiction" to hear this case, and that the matter is "political."

    But, if we as citizens of the United States have no "standing" to verify the citizenship of the man occupying the White House, who does? If our Federal Courts have no jurisdiction to hear this case, who does? It's not a "political" question, it's a CONSTITUTIONAL question!

    Last November, people said we were crazy to pursue this issue. Now, we've been shown to be right in our pursuit of the truth. It's not just the original birth certificate that they're refusing to release. Barack Obama's legal team has spent, according to published reports, over $1.4 million dollars so far to STOP anyone from seeing ANY of his actual identification documents, and many other documents.

    WHAT is Barack Obama trying to hide? WHAT is he afraid of? WHY doesn't he just release these documents to prove he is a natural-born citizen and therefore qualified to be president -- especially his actual birth certificate?

    When Barack Obama officially entered the office of President, he became, in essence, a "pretender to the throne." According to the Constitution, only a "natural born citizen" can occupy the presidency.

    Even though he was sworn in on January 20, 2009, Barack Obama is NOT legally the President of the United States, unless he can prove that he is a "natural born citizen."

    What's more, every action taken by him while he occupies the White House may be invalid. If he cannot legally be President, every law passed by Congress will be null and void because the Constitution clearly requires that all laws be signed by the President... and, without a legally elected and sworn in President in office, that becomes an impossibility.

    This crisis must be ended! And it must be ended NOW!

    And that's just what we're fighting to do. The United States Justice Foundation is spearheading a campaign to protect the United States Constitution... and your liberty.

    We have to press our case to stop Barack Obama from, apparently, illegally holding the Presidency, despite the ongoing threats against us. We are speaking of filing additional lawsuits and administrative actions, over and above the dozens already filed, if you will help us today.

    Are you willing to see the Constitution shredded by the Left? Will you sit back and do nothing while a foreign-born person may be illegally occupying the White House as President of the United States?

    Our country is on the fast track to disaster... but you can help us keep the situation from getting worse. I pray that I'll hear from you today.


    Gary Kreep, Executive Director
    United States Justice Foundation

    P.S. This is the biggest political cover-up in American history! It would be so simple to release the documents to PROVE Obama is a natural-born citizen… IF THEY HAD THE DOCUMENTS!

    America has never before faced such a threat. Everything we hold dear is at risk with Barack Obama sitting as President without him releasing his actual birth certificate, plus the dozens of other documents that he refuses to produce.

    Please remember that we are fighting in the California Appellate Court system.

    Barack Hussein Obama thinks he can get away with DUPING the American people and DESTROYING the U.S. Constitution. DON'T LET HIM DO IT!

The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a non-profit organization, whose tax-exempt status under IRS section 501(c)(3) has been recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. Your contributions are tax deductible. Corporate contributions may be accepted.

you have got to get out more often


Then you can clearly see what a fraud and foreigner he has proven himself to be. If you still don't know the big difference between a Certification of Live Birth and a long form birth certificate, go educate yourself!

A briefing schedule has been announced by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a case alleging Congress failed in its constitutional duties by refusing to investigate the eligibility of Barack Obama to be president, according to an attorney handling the challenge.
Find out the latest right now at WND.com.

Even the most brain dead Obamatons should wonder what the fraud and foreigner is hiding.

Report: Congressman challenges Obama eligibility

Even if the putative president ignores the challenge, he cannot hide from it, because by doing so he admits his guilt through silence. The question has to be asked near and far, why would a president who has promised greater transparency than any previous administration pay upwards of $2,000,000 of taxpayer money to hide documents that could resolve the matter once and for all time for the cost of $20.00. He has publicly admitted on more than one occasion that his father was NOT an American citizen. This alone disqualifies him from eligibility based on Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution, and consequently makes him a usurper,” the site said.


Four Supreme Court Cases Define "Natural Born Citizen"
The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a "natural born citizen" is.  Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to understand what this term means.

Let’s cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the "he says," "she says," fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.

First, let me note that there are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of "natural born citizenship":

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages.  The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.   Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

"The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country.  Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina.  There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782.  Whether she was of age during this time does not appear.  If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina.  If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country.  Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her?  Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

I'd like to add to these, Perkins v. Elg, the importance of which is that it actually gives examples of what a "natural born citizen" of the U.S. is; what a "citizen" of the U.S. is; and what a "native born citizen" of the U. S. is.

In this case, the U. S. Supreme Court found that a "natural born citizen" is a person who is born of two U.S. citizen parents AND born in the mainland of U.S.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.