A crushing situation is emerging for, not only Barack Obama, but also for the American people as a landmark statement has been made by the Obama administration that is going to turn the entire 2012 Presidential race and potentially much more on its head.
Lawyers representing the current sitting President of the United States of America have been forced, under penalty of perjury, to admit that the long-form birth certificate presented by the White House in April of 2011 is a total forgery.
In a NJ ballot access eligibility case spawned by Tea Party activists, attorneys representing Obama had to admit the document presented to the American people by Obama himself is actually knowingly faked and was used to fool the American public into believing a complete fabrication.
What could be the most shocking aspect of the situation, however, may be the fact that Obama and his attorneys have crafted an argument that truly boggles the mind.
In a direct assault on everything the citizens of the USA take for granted, in laymanâ€™s terms, his attorneys literally made the argument during a hearing on April 10th that because the document was so obviously faked and could not possibly be considered proof of citizenship, the document itself should not be allowed as evidence in the case.
Obama is now basically asserting that only a legitimate document should be allowed as evidence in this case and therefore this one should be thrown out due to the fact that itâ€™s not real. The Judge agreed.
In what may turn out to be one of the biggest scandals in the history of the United States, the Obama administration itself has now virtually admitted to High Crimes and Misdemeanors and to deceiving the public into believing a lie that was ironically intended to distract awareness from the actual issue that truly determines his eligibility, or lack thereof.
Even though now it has become evident that Obama cannot prove he was born in the Unites States after all, even before that admission in court, it was already known that he was not actually eligible to become either Vice President or President, due to the fact that Obama is not a â€œNatural Bornâ€ Citizen.
Although presenting the fake birth certificate to the American people was an attempt to falsely prove his automatic eligibility, even prior to the â€˜Presidentâ€™sâ€™ issuance of the fabricated document to the public last spring, attorneys arguing against his eligibility since 2007 proved that Obama was simply ineligible due to the fact that only one of his parents was a US citizen.
Ironically, arguments have been made against this age-old constitutional mandate with regard to Obamaâ€™s eligibility by using John McCainâ€™s â€™08 eligibility situation as an example, while missing the fact that even McCainâ€™s parents were both born in the USA and therefore was ultimately allowed to run for office, even though he was born on a US military base in Panama.
This simply isnâ€™t the case for Obama, aside from the fact that his administration has now admitted to open criminal activity and blatant ineligibility on multiple fronts.
Daily Pen Editor, Pen Johannson released a story Monday in a devastating editorial explaining the circumstances as one that is sure to set off a firestorm of controversy and could end up creating a gigantic constitutional and legislative nightmare of epic proportions in the weeks and months to come.
Brace yourself folks, itâ€™s bound to get a little bumpy.
Obama eligibility: media pressure: Lawyers for the Obama campaign demanded that videos of a New Jersey administrative-law trial come down
American Thinker: The Sea Change: Obama’s Confirmed Forgeries Are Not Going Away
Conservative News and Views: Obama eligibility: NJ ALJ ducks issues
Pen Johannson, The Daily Pen: ELIGIBILITY AND JUSTICE ARE BLIND REGARDING OBAMAâ€¦AND RUBIO
The Right Perspective: Obama Lawyer Admits Birth Certificate Is A Forgery
HillBuzz: Bill Clinton Knew Obama Was Ineligible
Bill Oâ€™Reilly Lies Again to His Viewers about Obamaâ€™s Felony Identity Document Fraud
Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards â€œimageâ€ as Indication of Obamaâ€™s Ineligibility Damage Control
A recent ballot challenge hearing in New Jersey exposes a desperate strategy by Obama to distance himself from his forged certificate and induce the contrived value of his transient political popularity as the only â€œlegitimate qualificationâ€ needed to hold the office of the presidency.
By Dan Crosby of THE DAILY PEN
Editor: Penbrook Johannson
Thursday, April 12, 2012
NEW YORK, NY â€“ After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obamaâ€™s alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obamaâ€™s ineligibility in a court of law.
Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obamaâ€™s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obamaâ€™s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is â€œirrelevant to his placement on the ballotâ€.
At the hearing, attorney for the plaintiffs, Mario Apuzzo, correctly argued that Obama, under the Constitution, has to be a â€œnatural born Citizenâ€ and that he has not met his burden of showing that he is eligible to be on the New Jersey primary ballot by showing that he is indeed a â€œnatural born Citizen.â€ He argued that Obama has shown no authenticate evidence to the New Jersey Secretary of State demonstrating who he is and that he was born in the United States. Apuzzo also argued that as a matter of law, Obama is not a â€œnatural born Citizenâ€ because he was born to a father who was not a U.S. citizen.
As Obamaâ€™s legal argument becomes more contorted, he is being forced to avoid an ever shrinking legal space, and an increasing weight, of his failure to meet constitutional eligibility requirements.Â
Hill, of Genova, Burn & Giantomasi Attorneys in Newark, made a desperate motion to dismiss the ballot objection arguing that Obamaâ€™s lack of natural-born citizenship status was not relevant to being placed on the New Jersey presidential ballot because no law exists in New Jersey which says that a candidateâ€™s appearance on the ballot must be supported by evidence of natural born citizenship status. Only the U.S. constitution restricts eligibility to hold the office of president to natural born citizens.
Judge Masin denied the motion to dismiss and the case proceeded to trial.
â€œSadly, regardless of her moral deficiency, Hill is legally justified,â€ says TDP Editor, Penbrook Johannson, â€œObamaâ€™s eligibility is a separate matter than the charges of forgery and fraud. Of course, we have evidence that he is not eligible. But, evidence of forgery by as yet unidentified counterfeiters working on behalf of Obama is not what legally excludes Obama from appearing on a ballot, by itself, until some authority is willing to consider this as evidence of forgery on its merit as an indication of actual ineligibility in a court of legal authority. Until some court of competent jurisdiction is willing to hear evidence of forgery and fraud, you canâ€™t legally punish a political candidate for that crime which has not been proven that they committed. However, since Obama is not eligible because of a lack of authenticated evidence to the contrary, he could be held off the ballot for that reason.â€
According to Johannson, there is an overwhelming level of moral certainty that Obama is a usurper, but until a court with jurisdiction considers this case, Obamaâ€™s status as a legitimate president is in limbo.
â€œHe does not exist as a president except in the imagination of those who blindly support him. Whereas he is politically desired by a transient consensus, his legality is unresolved until a responsible court makes a determination. This is the essence of our crisis. Our nation exists in a state of non-authorized identity. Obama is just some guy calling himself a president and living in the White House without the confirmative authority to do so.â€
Obamaâ€™s document forgery and fraudulent presidency have now forced him to flee to a â€œstrange twilight zoneâ€ between political popularity and legal legitimacy where poorly counterfeited records are apparently allowed to be published by Obama using government media resources for political purposes, yet those same records are held by the courts as irrelevant for determining Obamaâ€™s legal eligibility status because they are, according to judges, â€œso poorly forgedâ€ they are obviously meant to be satirical and not to be taken seriously as evidence.
Shockingly, parting from widespread public ignorance, Hill actually acknowledged two of the three necessary components of determining natural born citizenship as being place of birth and citizenship status of both parents. However, she argued that, â€œNo law in New Jersey obligated him (Obama) to produce any such evidence in order to get on the primary ballot.â€
The third component of natural born eligibility is maintenance of natural born citizenship status from birth to election without interruption, involuntarily or voluntarily, due to expatriation, extradition, renouncement or foreign adoption.
â€œObama is mocking our constitution,â€ says Johannson, â€œHis position is that he never claimed the image was an indication of his natural born status, just that it was information about his birth. Whether it is forged or authentic is irrelevant to Obama because plausible deniability affords him the security in knowing that no legal authority is willing to hang him with it.â€
Of course, Johannson adds that it makes Obama look like a willing accomplice and a liar, but, he says, â€œâ€¦show me a politician who cares about being seen as a liar by the public. If people who support him want to vote for a person like that, it reveals more about the reprobate character of Obama supporters than competency of any legal determination about his lack of constitutional eligibility. Degenerates will vote for a degenerate while patriots will exhaust all civil means to remove himâ€¦until those civil means are exhausted. Then things get ugly for government.â€
â€œHowever, Hill is also essentially admitting that Obama is not a legitimate president and that Obama believes that his illegitimacy does not matter to his legal ability to hold the office. Obama holds to a political tenet, not a legal one with respect to his views on his eligibility. Thatâ€™s what corrupt, criminal politicians do. When the law convicts them, they run to public favorability for shelter with the hope that their supporters will apply pressure to disregard law in their case.â€
Obama is now arguing that because he is politically popular, as he points to as being indicated by his so-called â€˜electionâ€™, despite accusations of eligibility fraud and election fraud, the constitutional eligibility mandate is not relevant, in his view. Until a courageous authority is willing to disagree and hold Obama to an equally weighted legal standard, civil remedies for the Obama problem are limited.
Johannson adds that Obama is making the same argument on behalf of Obamacare.
â€œIf he had the gall to actually tell the Supreme Court that they have no authority to determine the unconstitutionality of his illegitimate policies, what makes anyone think he believes they have the authority to disqualify him due to his lack of constitutional eligibility? Obama believes he holds preeminent power over all branches of government because of his delusions of political grandeur.â€
He correctly points to a lifetime pattern of behavior and testimony by Obama which indicates a complete lack of regard for the U.S. Constitution when it restricts Obamaâ€™s political agenda and lust for power.
â€œThis is a guy who illegally defaced public property when he scribed his aspirations to be â€˜kingâ€™ in a concrete sidewalk at the age of ten, for Godâ€™s sake. Now, his â€˜majestyâ€™ wants to put his illegal â€˜graffitiâ€™ into American law books. However, his problem is that he has to face the fact that he is an abject failure in his capacity to meet any standard required by the 250-year-old U.S. Constitution, in everything he tries to do. The Constitution owns him and he canâ€™t stand it. He hates it. Therefore, instead of admitting his lack of constitutionality, he simply breaks the rules and proceeds to illegally scribe his fake authority on everything until someone is willing to physically stop him. Obama is not just an illegitimate politician, he is a rogue outlaw without regard for the divine providence of American law.â€
Apuzzo submitted that New Jersey law requires Obama to show evidence that he is qualified for the office he wishes to occupy and that includes showing that he is a â€œnatural born Citizen,â€ which includes presenting evidence of who he is, where he was born, and that he was born to two U.S. citizen parents. Apuzzo added that the Secretary of State has a constitutional obligation not to place any ineligible candidates on the election ballot.
The account of the trial can be read at: