Tuesday, September 01, 2009

FactCheck Had It Wrong: Obama May Still Be A Dual Citizen

It is my humble opinion that the U.S. Constitution does not permit a person with dual citizenship to serve as President of the United States. Our founding fathers specifically limited eligibility to persons who are "natural born citizens", those born of American citizen parents on American soil, for that very reason. These are persons who have sole allegiance and undivided loyalty to the United States of America. Fellow blogger and New Jersey attorney Leo Donofrio has done a great service to those Americans who still believe in their Constitution at his Natural Born Citizen blog teaching us about the presidential eligibility requirement some elitists in the legal community simply want to read right out of the Constitution just like they've been trying for decades to do with our Second Amendment right to bear arms. Donofrio's latest research uncovers the fact that Barack Hussein Obama may still be a dual citizen, a status he did not lose when he reached the age of 21 as FactCheck.org falsely claimed during last year's presidential campaign after the Rocky Mountain News reported that Obama held dual citizenship with his father's native country, Kenya. Donofrio explains what his legal research uncovered:

In a now famous report, Factcheck.org, in response to a story originally published in The Rocky Mountain News, attempted to lay rest to allegations that Obama was currently a Kenyan citizen. In that report, Factcheck.org. stated that Obama had been a Kenyan citizen up until August 4, 1982 when they allege Obama’s Kenyan citizenship expired.

Obama republished – at his web official site, Fightthesmears.com – only that part of the Factcheck.org analysis which stated that the President was a British citizen at birth. Obama republished this word for word thereby admitting the truth of the following assertion:

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…

The question arises as to why Obama didn’t republish the full article by Factcheck.org concerning his various foreign citizenship issues. Perhaps by placing a link on his page – just above the quote above – back to Factcheck.org, Obama intended to endorse all of the conclusions made by Factcheck.org in the report. But since the report has now been established to contain false and misleading data, I do not believe it’s fair to assume Obama endorsed that false data since he did not republish it . . .

Factcheck.org was absolutely wrong when they reported Obama’s Kenyan citizenship expired on August 4, 1982.

This is not just an issue of numerical semantics. Whether Obama was a Kenyan citizen on January 1, 1983 has important relevance to Obama’s status in the United Kingdom and to Commonwealth Citizenship in the Commonwealth of Nations (formerly known as the British Commonwealth).

On January 1, 1983, the British Nationality Act of 1981 went into effect. Section 37 of the BNA 1981 makes all citizens of commonwealth nations, who had been British Subjects before commencement of the BNA 1981, to thereafter “have the status of a Commonwealth Citizen“.

Section 50 of the BNA 1981 also states that Commonwealth Citizens are not aliens of the United Kingdom.

So, since Obama was a citizen of Kenya on January 1, 1983, he was also a Commonwealth Citizen and he was not an alien in the United Kingdom from that date. Had Obama’s citizenship expired on August 4, 1982 - as was incorrectly stated by Factcheck.org – then the British Nationality Act of 1981 (which didn’t go into effect until January 1, 1983) would not have governed Obama’s status.

The irony is that Factcheck.org was allegedly correcting The Rocky Mountain News story which stated that Obama was currently a dual citizen of Kenya. Suffice it to say, I am not impressed with Factcheck’s fact checking abilities. We shall see if they have the humility to correct their mistake.

Because of various statutory exceptions regarding the declarations mentioned in Section 97 of the Kenyan Constitution, the original report by the Rocky Mountain News – stating that Obama was a dual citizen of Kenya and the US – might have been accurate. Information not currently in the public domain is necessary to answer this question as well as the question of whether Obama is currently a British citizen . . .

It has now been conclusively established that President Obama could not have lost his Kenyan Citizenship on August 4, 1982. This means his foreign nationality issues were not only governed by the Kenyan Constitution, but – as of January 1, 1983 – he was also governed by the British Nationality Act of 1981.

My research has discovered multiple legal mechanisms which have the potential to establish that President Obama is now a full citizen of Kenya as well as the United Kingdom, the European Union, the Commonwealth of Nations and the Republic of Indonesia. Unfortunately, information available in the public domain cannot answer these questions.

The American people, despite what they have been told by factions such as the unreliable Factcheck.org, continue to remain in the dark as to whether their President holds any foreign citizenships or nationalities at this time.
Yes, Barack Hussein Obama is probably holding the highest office in the land in violation of the Constitution because people who think they know what is best for us refused to conduct proper due diligence in vetting this man we still know so little about. Because our federal courts systematically denied the people of this country the right to be heard on this issue, this important constitutional issue did not get resolved, and Chief Justice John Roberts swore into the office of the presidency someone who probably should have been denied access to the presidential ballot as other similarly-situated third party candidates have been dealt by state election authorities on numerous occasions in past elections.

This is potentially a much worse constitutional crisis than the country faced during the height of Watergate with former President Richard Nixon. At least Nixon legitimately held the office, even as he trounced on the Constitution he took an oath to uphold. Impeachment is never going to happen, but there is a little something Obama could do to help put the American people at ease. "It’s time for the nation to call on the President to officially and legally renounce all foreign allegiance," Donofrio writes. "And it’s time for the President to respond." Good luck with that request, Leo.

The reaction from the Left and the mainstream media will be predictable. They'll tell you the dual citizenship claim is simply made up nonsense by the wacko birthers, or that it just doesn't matter because Obama was born in Hawaii and he can hold citizenship to as many countries as his heart desires and it won't change the very broad definition they accord to what constitutes a natural born citizen. They'll tell you the founders were all slave-owning racists who wouldn't have let blacks or women be president so what they have to say is of no consequence to us today. I ask them to explain why our own State Department says this about dual citizenship:
“The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance. However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.“ (Emphasis added.)

The U.S. State Department discourages dual citizenship, but it's okay for our president to be one? I'll let Secretary of State Hillary Clinton take a shot at explaining that one.


POPA said...

I won't go so far as to say this is wacko birther nonsense. I'll just leave it at the most colossal waste of time ON nonsense since a large number of Americans became fixated on "Brangelina."

I've esteemed AI as reasonably sharp, though we frequently disagree. But every word you put down on this subject makes me think I'm erring grossly.

We have a Constitutional crisis greater than Watergate because Barack Obama might have dual citizenship with our closest American ally??! Do you completely miss the ABSOLUTE IRONY that, according to you, A FOREIGN LAW that apparently varies from year to year gets to decide whether a natural born American citizen (as you concede Obama was born in Hawaii) can serve as our President?

As if that wasn't bad enough, you get downright silly in citing the State Department. If Obama ever had dual citizenship, he got it through no affirmative act of his, and when he became president, he swore an oath to us. Do you REALLY think President Obama's allegiance was not unequivocally stated when he took that oath?

You wrote, "The State Department says dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country."

Well, when I was growing up in the Catholic Church, I was told I owed allegiance to the Pope, but he never got it. Saying somebody "owes allegiance" doesn't mean a damn thing.

But wait...the State Department continues, "They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there.“ (Emphasis added.)

I see. So you believe...what? That Obama will be arrested in another country? Good luck pulling that off, Great Britain!

When President Obama swore the oath of the Presidency, he made pretty clear where his allegiances are. Only people like you have doubt.

At the end of the day, this is just a tired ruse used to sully the President, who you can't stand.
And every time you post something on this, I'll ask the exact same question, which you NEVER answer:

"Tell me what you are afraid of?"

What country do you believe Obama will put above America? To what end? I don't care if you have ANY evidence of it at all. Speculate as wildly as you possibly can. I want to hear this. Has he done it yet? If not, what the heck is he waiting for? Is it only in his second term that he'll start subjugating America to the Queen again?

I'm making popcorn while I await your reply. This is going to be awesome!

Zappatista said...

While I understand your interpretation of the constitution, and your right to that, I will take up issue with another governance of our nation (with which I disagree, but live with). The popular vote/electoral college. You wrote that he is governing, "because people who think they know what is best for us". He did win the popular vote and electoral vote, no? So, more people thought that he was qualified to lead our country than didn't……

Gary R. Welsh said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gary R. Welsh said...

Do you honestly believe, Zappatista, that Obama's popularity would have survived had the courts allowed this issue to be fully litigated and the media had spent a fraction of the time on it that they spent on chasing rumors about Palin and her family?

And Chris, you know damn good and well if John McCain had won the presidency instead of Obama that the Democrats would have rushed to the courthouse and taken to the streets to proclaim him an illegitimate president because he was born in Panama and not on American soil. As to Obama's dual citizenship, what should we fear? That's pretty easy: blackmail. There is reason to believe that Obama possessed a foreign passport which the Queen and Prime Minister Brown know all about. Would Barry perhaps turn a blind eye to a move by the British government to trade the Lockerbie terrorist bomber for an oil deal with Libya to keep certain information secret? I don't know and neither do you. Indonesian government leaders know whether Obama was and is a citizen of their country. Do the American people? Could it make a difference? Could that information be used to blackmail him? It's not really something I'm willing to take to chance, and maybe you view such matters as trivial, but I don't.

artfuggins said...

Actually the Dems in congress affirmed that McCain was a natural born citizen and it was not a campaign issue which is more than can be said for the birthers who seem to incapable of reading, comprehending or believing anything that is presented to show that are dead wrong.

Anonymous said...

There's a bigger issue that trancends Obama: National elections are controlled by the few conglomerates who manipulate and control over 90% of our media.

I can promise you that 95% of the people who voted for Obama couldn't name one piece of legislation that he supported in the Senate. They also couldn't tell you where he went to school, how long he's been in office, what he did prior to entering politics, or any other single relevant detail about Obama as an individual with a track record that can be understood and supported.

At least 95% of the people who voted for Obama voted for a media creation. They voted for a PR image that was portrayed identically by all major networks which are all owned by the same few organizations. Obama was not elected for his track record or on his personal merit. He was elected by the media (big business) who worked with Obama and the teleprompters to paint the impression of salvation in the midst of failing hope.

What we're finding is that the hope is turning into an even bigger nightmare as more troops are being deployed overseas, we're now entering Pakistan on the ground in Obama's bid to face off with Russia, big business is now being merged with government (assuring that our tax dollars go straight to corporate coffers), and our economy is being decimated by criminal regulatory practices that are being propped up by Trillions of Obama dollars that are virtually disappearing into private banks. All with no oversight.

Obama is no different than Bush or Clinton. He's a usurper who then appoints his corporate sponsors to every significant position in Washington. Through media control and manipulation, the corporations have taken over our foreign policy, our domestic policy, and our treasury. They are handing trillions of dollars to the treasury, they're un-educating our kids with failed schools and mindless media programming and sending them across the globe to dominate foreign economies, they're working overtime to harmonize our domestic policies with Canada, Mexico, the EU, and other nations on everything from security to science to education and to accounting.

In short, the American people are being robbed and decimated as the corporations who control our government make the final push to go global. We are being abandoned by a government that has usurped control over our nation. The last official act of any government is to rob the people and we are experiencing that today. The foundation has been laid over the last 40 years by successive Administrations and Obama is putting all of the final pieces into play.

Like Bush, Obama is a lie. His ultimate success would be the Balkanization of the US in order to eliminate our Constitution and divide our capacity to unify against the global corporate objective of a single economic system under their control. Watch the media and see how they are facilitating this - propagandists like Glen Beck are stirring up righteous anger against the government without explaining that Obama is a corporate fraud, or that he has already deployed at least 20,000 actiuve duty federal troops throughout the US and is prepared to strike at any uprisings that Beck manages to instigate.

Obama may be inelligible for the Presidency, but he was never a true candidate in the first place. He's been a media promoted fraud from the beginning. A corporate plant. A lie. And he's more dangerous to the demographic that voted him into office than anyone who has preceded him.