Even though WorldNetDaily’s Lord Monckton wants Canadian-born Ted Cruz to be the next president, he still believes that President Obama is ineligible because he was secretly born outside of the US. The irony seems to be lost on Monckton.
In his latest column, Monckton demands that Obama be both impeached and put in jail for the supposed birther scandal:
I call Hawaiigate the central ground of impeachment for two reasons. First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama’s advisers, once they realized the “birth certificate” was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the “president” has no clothes.
Secondly, not one of the numerous agencies of state, as well as federal government, whose duty was and is to investigate the Mickey-Mouse “birth certificate” has bothered even to respond to the thousands of requests for investigation put forward by U.S. citizens.
In Hawaii last year, I watched as a senior former state senator called the police and, when they came, handed over to them compelling evidence that the “birth certificate” had been forged. The police, correctly, passed the file to the state’s attorney general, a “Democrat,” who did nothing about it.
In Washington, D.C., I watched as a concerned citizen from Texas telephoned the FBI and reported the “birth certificate” as being a forgery. They said they would send two agents to see him within the hour. No one came.
In every instance, the “president” and his fawning courtiers have gone well beyond the level of habitual mendacity that is characteristic of the lesser sort of politician. It is no longer possible for anyone to believe a word they say.
Contrast this shoddy, lying administration with that of the first man to grace the office that Mr. Obama now occupies. George Washington “could not tell a lie.” Barry Soetero, or whatever his real name is, cannot tell the truth. That observation is a measure of how far America under the “Democrats” has fallen from the high ideals and the noble example of the founding president of the United States.
On any objective test, Mr. Obama should not merely be impeached: he should be imprisoned. But no one will do anything to bring him to book. Corruption by inaction is the most corrosive corruption of all.
Fox News regular Erik Rush is a champion of birtherism when it comes to President Obama, but that hasn’t stopped him from declaring that Canadian-born Ted Cruz eligible to be president. In fact, Rush hails Cruz as “a triple threat because he is conservative, Republican and an ethnic minority.”
How does Rush explain why he believes that Cruz – who was born in Canada to an American mother — can be president but that Obama — whom birthers like Rush falsely insist was born in Kenya to an American mother — isn’t? Well, he doesn’t: “There are also questions with regard to Cruz’s eligibility for the office (having been born in Canada), but given the history of this issue on the same subject with regard to President Obama, I won’t even go there.”
“Ted Cruz looks like a white guy, but he’s not – which is a non-issue to people who judge character over color,” Rush writes. “After all, our president looks like a black guy, but he’s not, and few of us make any bones about that.”
Rush classes up the column by calling Hillary Clinton “Miss Piggy” while lamenting that Cruz has been depicted as a “fringe, tinfoil hat-wearing fop.”
Don’t think for a moment that the ire, derision and ridicule of establishment Republicans and the liberal press that Ted Cruz now enjoys are merely a result of that speech. Considering the dire straits America is now negotiating (of which many of her proverbial passengers remain completely oblivious) and the designs of progressives in both parties, Cruz – who pledged to donate his salary to charity during any federal government shutdown – is a triple threat because he is conservative, Republican and an ethnic minority.
At a time when the GOP base was looking for a potential 2016 presidential nominee with testicular fortitude and without the historical political baggage, along came Ted Cruz – so it’s no wonder his name is already being floated for president amongst conservatives.
Ted Cruz looks like a white guy, but he’s not – which is a non-issue to people who judge character over color. After all, our president looks like a black guy, but he’s not, and few of us make any bones about that. There are also questions with regard to Cruz’s eligibility for the office (having been born in Canada), but given the history of this issue on the same subject with regard to President Obama, I won’t even go there.
It’s pretty apparent to anyone paying attention that unless Barack Obama declares himself emperor prior to 2016, Hillary Clinton (whom I affectionately call “Miss Piggy” due to resemblance rather than personal habits) is more or less a lock for the Democratic nomination. There have until recently been few prospects for the GOP, and it is highly probable that establishment Republicans and the Republican National Committee will do their best to ram another moderate or counterfeit conservative down our throats once again – perhaps Jeb Bush.
In this climate, someone like Ted Cruz, who has ingratiated himself to Americans in a big way simply by telling the truth, will remain a potential hazard to the establishment through 2016, unless he can be effectively neutralized. As we observed, GOP leaders united with the liberal press and politicians to thwart Cruz’s efforts to defund Obamacare, as well as conspiring to make him appear a fringe, tinfoil hat-wearing fop.
Never missing an opportunity to stoke anti-Obama conspiracy theories, American Family Association radio host Sandy Rios yesterday used the massacre at a mall in Nairobi, Kenya, to suggest that President Obama was born in the country and is related to a leading Kenyan political figure:
The implications of this are pretty frightening and of course it’s interesting that this is the country from which our President hails. This is his lineage. We know his cousin Raila Odinga is a Muslim communist. It’s just amazing. I think he’s the Prime Minister right now.
The AFA commentator’s claim that Obama “hails” from Kenya is not the first time she promoted birtherism, and her suggestion that Obama is related to the “Muslim communist” Raila Odinga most likely comes from discredited chain emails. Odinga is Kenya’s former prime minister and is neither a Muslim (he’s an evangelical Christian) nor a communist.
The right-wing rumor mill has claimed that Obama donated to Odinga’s presidential campaign (false), endorsed Odinga’s candidacy (false) and campaigned for him (false). While Odinga has claimed to be Obama’s cousin, they are not biologically related and it is likely that Odinga was simply trying to garner publicity for his campaign.
The myth-busting website Snopes.com found that “no evidence has been offered to document that claim,” noting that Odinga was not the only candidate for president to claim to be Obama’s cousin and that Obama’s uncle denies that they are blood relatives. PolitiFact adds:
"It's stretched to the point of ridiculousness," said Joel D. Barkan, political science professor emeritus at the University of Iowa and senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. "To my knowledge, they are not first cousins in the normal sense. To my knowledge, there's absolutely no relationship at all."
Alex Awiti, a Kenyan postdoctoral fellow at Columbia University, says you have to consider the context of when Odinga was speaking, in the middle of a political crisis.
"Raila Odinga was groping all over the place, trying to find some political legitimacy to get on a high pedestal to claim leadership and using Obama was basically going to add some political points," said Awiti, who lived in Kenya until three years ago. "This is very opportunistic and it should be totally disregarded."
[Salim] Lone, Odinga's spokesman, said cousins in the African sense is very different from cousins in the American sense, so they might be distant relatives.
The Washington Times editorial board baselessly claims this week that “many liberals who not so long ago derided anyone who questioned President Obama’s American birth as a ‘birther’ are asking similar questions now about Mr. Cruz’s eligibility.” The paper fails to name any prominent liberals who have actually made this argument.
In yesterday’s editorial, subtitled “Now a new version of ‘birtherism’ settles on the left,” the Times echoes Sean Hannity’s attack on imaginary liberal questioners of the Canadian-born Cruz’s eligibility.
Of course, the whole story is ironic since the birther movement centers around a conspiracy theory — backed by a majority of Republicans — that Obama was born abroad, probably in Kenya, and is therefore not eligible to be president even though his mother was an American citizen. Since Cruz was born in Canada to an American mother and Cuban father, birthers are now quickly trying to backtrack.
The Washington Times editorial defending Cruz is especially ironic since one of the conservative newspaper’s top columnists, Jeffrey Kuhner, wrote a 2011 column arguing that Obama was not born in the US and is consequently an illegitimate president:
If Mr. Obama was not born in America, then it would serve as the final damning indictment of the establishment media’s complicity with the Democratic Party. Not only would it bring the Obama presidency down, but the entire liberal power structure as well.
Moreover, it would spark a constitutional crisis. The Constitution is absolutely clear that to be president one has to be a “natural born citizen.” Therefore, every major initiative implemented during the Obama administration - the health care overhaul, the massive stimulus package, the government takeovers of the auto companies, big banks and insurance firms, the sweeping anti-carbon regulations, allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military, the nearly unprecedented expansion of state power, the new START Treaty - would be invalid and possibly illegal. It would drive a stake through the heart of Mr. Obama’s regime, triggering impeachment and his removal from office. This is why liberals ferociously insist that the birth issue must be buried at almost any cost.
The birth issue is slowly casting a shadow over Mr. Obama’s presidency; it threatens to undermine public confidence in his legal and moral authority to govern. Several states are pushing to pass laws compelling future presidential candidates - including Mr. Obama - to fully disclose all documents proving their natural born citizenship status. This desire for greater political transparency and accountability is healthy.
It is time Mr. Obama came clean. At a minimum, if he does not reveal his birth certificate, he cannot - and should not - be allowed to run for a second term.
Birther congressman Steve Stockman says he’s not a birther after all, now that Canadian-born Sen. Ted Cruz is considering a run for president. The Texas Republican, who is crafting a birther bill with Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL), said his home state senator is indeed eligible for the presidency even though he was born outside of the US.
The debunked birther conspiracy theory centers on the idea that President Obama forged his Hawaiian birth certificate to hide his foreign birth to an American mother and Kenyan father, which would make him ineligible to be president. Cruz, who also has an American mother but unlike Obama was actually born abroad, would therefore also be deemed ineligible if birthers had any logical consistency, which apparently they don’t.
Stockman told the arch-birther website WorldNetDaily that he has no problem with Cruz’s likely presidential bid, noting that they are both friends and attend the same church.
To hear Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, describe it, the difference between President Obama and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas – on the question of their eligibility for the highest office in the land – may be a case of comparing apples and oranges.
The congressman said with Cruz, it is a legal question of whether he is eligible to serve as president – whereas the issue with Obama is not really about where he was born, but whether his documentation is authentic.
Cruz released a copy of his birth certificate Sunday to the Dallas Morning News, as some have begun questioning the possible presidential contender’s eligibility, just as many have questioned Obama’s eligibility since 2008 when the argument was first raised by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
The Cruz birth certificate shows he was born in Canada in 1970 to an American mother, which gave him American citizenship.
Obama, on the other hand, is the subject of Stockman’s proposed legislation calling for a congressional investigation of both the president’s constitutional eligibility and the authenticity of the birth certificate he released to show he was born in Hawaii.
In an exclusive interview with WND, Stockman said, in the case of Obama, it is more of a question about the validity of the documentation as well as his forthrightness, whereas with Cruz, it is more of a matter for legal and constitutional scholars to decide.
Stockman was happy to talk about his fellow Texan and tea-party favorite, saying, “He’s a good friend of mine and a great guy. In fact, I believe we go to the same church in Houston.”
The congressman said he doesn’t really know if Cruz is eligible for the presidency, but Cruz has been upfront and Obama was not.
Stockman noted that it took a long time for Obama to produce a document, and even now, questions linger.
“One of the things I always questioned was the documentation of the president, whether that was fraudulent,” he explained. “But I don’t question Cruz. Ted came right out and said, ‘Here’s the documentation.
Stockman mentioned another element that separates the case of Cruz and that of the president: the persistence of reports that Obama was listed as a foreign student in school and the fact he has yet to release records that would disprove that.
Lord Monckton, a WND commentator, even insisted that he was never a birther — despite having repeatedly claimed [PDF] that Obama’s supposed foreign birth made him ineligible to be president — and is fine with a Cruz presidency.
WND columnist and former adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher Lord Monckton also has said the issue with Obama is not where he was born, but whether his documentation is authentic.
Monckton has claimed the birth certificate Obama finally produced after years of prodding is “plainly a forgery” and could be dismantled with software.
Monckton, of course, just last year wrote in WorldNetDaily that people who are not born on US soil could not be president:
This is what your Constitution says:
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
No ifs. No buts. This is the ancient and sensible ius soli: you are a citizen of the nation on whose soil you were born. Not born here? Go and play president somewhere else.
Unless, that soil is Canada and your name is Ted Cruz, apparently.
The possible 2016 presidential candidacy of Canadian-born Texas Sen. Ted Cruz presents something of a conundrum for the birthers who have spent the past several years declaring that President Obama was born in Kenya and therefore ineligible for the presidency. While the Congressional Research Service [PDF] and many others hold that Cruz is eligible since his mother is a US citizen, birthers contend that Obama is ineligible to be president since they believe—without any real evidence—that he was born abroad to an American mother.
This weekend, arch-birther Donald Trump tried to avoid a question about Cruz’s eligibility, saying that he wasn’t sure where Cruz was born.
But Lord Christopher Monckton, columnist for the birther “news” site WorldNetDaily, seems to have no qualms about Cruz’s eligibility, writing that he wants to erect a statue of Cruz and can already envision the Texas senator as a successful two-term president:
Ted Cruz is one to watch. And let us not wait until after he has served two spectacular terms as President of the United States before we engage some rising Michelangelo to carve a noble statue of him.
For the newly minted senator from Texas, who has already gotten off to a good start by speaking out against killing little children in their mother’s womb and has proposed to defund ObamachaosTM, now proposes to sweep away the hated, corrupt Infernal Revenue “Service” and replace today’s graduated income tax with a flat-rate tax that is the same for everyone.
Poverty endures solely because the left gain votes from it. Ted Cruz is one of the few politicians in either House of Congress who understand this. And he cares enough to do something about it. That is why he deserves his statue.
But at the same time, Monckton is perfectly happy with building a Michelangelo-inspired statue of Ted Cruz even before “he has served two spectacular terms as President of the United States.”
UPDATE: More of Yoho's far-right comments here.
Speaking at a town hall meeting earlier this month, Florida Republican congressman Ted Yoho promised that he would support possible birther legislation floated by Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX), telling the audience that after learning about a potential birther bill from Stockman while attending a Tea Party meeting, he called the congressman and agreed to back it.
In audio recorded by an audience member and posted on YouTube, Yoho can be heard telling the crowd that the issue of President Obama’s birth certificate was a “distraction” from topics like the national debt, he said he was hopeful that a birther investigation could bring down the whole government: “They said if it is true, it’s illegal, he shouldn’t be there and we can get rid of everything he’s done, and I said I agree with that.”
Yoho also seemed to embrace the right-wing claim that Obamacare is “racist” because it taxes tanning beds, explaining that if he goes tanning then he will be “disenfranchised because I got taxed because of the color of my skin.”
I had a little fun with [John] Boehner and told him about the sun tanning tax. He goes, ‘I didn’t know it was in there,’ and I said, ‘Yes, it’s a ten percent tax.’ He goes, ‘Well, that’s not that big of a deal.’ I said, ‘It’s a racist tax.’ He goes, ‘You know what, it is.’ I had an Indian doctor in our office the other day, very dark skin, with two non-dark skin people, and I asked this to him, I said, ‘Have you ever been to a tanning booth?’ and he goes, ‘No, no need.’ So therefore it’s a racist tax and I thought I might need to get to a sun tanning booth so I can come out and say I’ve been disenfranchised because I got taxed because of the color of my skin. As crazy as that sounds, that’s what the left does right. By God, if it works for them, it’ll work for us [inaudible].
Guest-hosting the Family Research Council’s Washington Watch last week, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said that he doubted President Obama’s Christian faith and American heritage. After making a bizarre argument about the incompatibility of marriage equality and evolution, Gohmert claimed that Obama is merely a “proclaimed Christian” and contended that the president has “gone to war with Christianity.”
“The gloves have come off, there really is a war by this administration against not just the Catholic Church but the Christian Church,” he said. Gohmert charged that under Obama “you can’t practice what you believe about birth control, about abortion, this administration will tell you what religious practices you can participate in and what you can’t.”
He also suggested the government may begin collecting personal information such as medical and phone records and emails of Christians to use against them:
Speaking with anti-immigrant activist Mark Krikorian later in the program, Gohmert said that Obama should follow in the footsteps of Woodrow Wilson to “completely secure the border.” Of course, Wilson was president during the 1910s and exercised military intervention into Mexico.
Gohmert said Obama would have known about Wilson’s success if he wasn’t such a foreigner: “I understand that when you grow up in Indonesia a lot of times you don’t get the American history that the rest of us got growing up here but it was secure.”
The program ended with the congressman receiving a call from a listener who asked him to investigate the treatment of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a birther who was discharged from the Army for refusing to obey orders from the president, and sign his petition canceling the last election based on the findings of Sheriff Arpaio’s “posse” that Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent.
Gohmert said that he would “look into” Lakin’s prosecution but insisted that he was not a birther, claiming that legislation he cosponsored requiring candidates for president to submit their original birth certificates was inspired by a 2008 New York Times story about John McCain. The Times story examined whether McCain was eligible for the presidency since he was born in the Panama Canal Zone. It had nothing to do with whether McCain had a valid birth certificate.
Gohmert swore that he is not a birther… just someone who wants “a president who is a lawful president.”
“They continue to call me a birther, which I’m not, but I do want a president who is a lawful president,” Gohmert lamented. “But I think at this point it’s time to take on these crushing issues.”
We already know that Rick Wiles considers President Obama to be a Nazi, Communist, America-sodomizing, “devil from Hell,” and now we can add to that list a “shadow person” who “doesn’t exist.” While speaking with Mike Zullo, who is leading Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s birther investigation, Wiles said Obama is “not just a smooth talking, jive talking, street thug that talked his way into the White House, it means that he was placed here, he was deliberately placed here as a child” as a “foreign plant.”
Zullo said that he and Arpaio are urging Congress to hold hearings about their birther investigations, which Wiles warned could be the only way to prevent the “overthrow of the Republic.”
Zullo: It’s just really a very murky background that is very difficult to follow and that background could not get you a job as a janitor in the White House, let alone a President of the United States.
Wiles: This persona that he operates under simply doesn’t exist. He is a shadow person. For this to take place, and I’m in complete agreement because these are the kind of things that we have talked about on this program through the years, then what it means is he’s not just a smooth talking, jive talking, street thug that talked his way into the White House, it means that he was placed here, he was deliberately placed here as a child. His identity was concealed, there were traces of identity made for him, whether college or other ways, but he never existed in any of those things, he is a manufactured person and the conclusion I have come to is that he is a foreign plant.
Zullo: You’ve got to get your arms around our constitution; you’ve got to understand what is being done here: you are being conditioned to accept things that perhaps are not really legal. You get into the natural born issue, you get into the First Amendment rights, you’re starting to be told what you can and cannot do or what is acceptable and not acceptable regardless of what that founding document says.
Wiles: And that is an overthrow of the Republic.
Zullo: I agree with you, it’s something to be very concerned about and the American people do have to realize that there does come a tipping point where when you wake up it is too late to wake up and we are getting very, very close to that. Something has to be done with thus and Sheriff Arpaio and I are making a desperate push now to get this in front of Congress.
On Monday, we reported on the recent Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association convention, a gathering of Tenther law enforcement officers at which Gun Owners of America director Larry Pratt presented such prizes as the “High Noon Award” and “Nullifier of the Year” to opponents of federal gun laws.
Today we learn that the convention also featured two lengthy presentations by Mike Zullo, the lead investigator on Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse,” which seeks to keep alive the movement questioning President Obama’s birth certificate and citizenship.
In an interview after the event with right-wing Internet broadcast PPSimmons radio, Zullo explains that he had a great stroke of luck when the convention’s keynote speaker, Republican Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas, attended his presentation. Not only did Stockman attend, Zullo reports, he was “deeply concerned about it and he really does want to have a lengthy, lengthy discussion about this.” Zullo said that he is planning a trip to Washington to meet with Stockman “in the near future,” adding that the congressman’s support is “going to really, really move things forward for us.”
Only the “hand of God,” the host replies, could have arranged for Stockman to be at the convention to hear Zullo’s speech.
PPSimmons: This meeting at this National Sheriffs’ Convention… and Peace Officers’ Convention…was just icing on the cake. I mean, you’ve been working on some other meetings that are coming up and some other big promises that have been made, you’ve been going full steam on that. And then about five weeks ago, this opportunity is dropped into your lap. And unbeknownst to you, one of the people you and I spoke with at CPAC and on Capitol Hill was Congressman Steve Stockman, and he winds up being the keynote speaker at this event, and so he winds up hearing all of your presentation material. And I understand that he has asked for another meeting with you and that he is deeply concerned about this. Am I correct about all of that so far.
Zullo: You’re correct. It looks like there’s going to be another trip to Washington in the near future. He is deeply concerned about it and he really does want to have a lengthy, lengthy discussion about this, so I’m sure that something’s going to happen very, very soon about that. In addition, there were some other things that you had mentioned or alluded to, that you and I had worked on some other avenues. One of those avenues was just pushed wide open as a result of this, a key player happened to be here as well. And that’s going to really, really move things forward for us.
PPSimmons: And Mike, I just can’t help but to see the hand of God in this. This just seems so providential. Because you could not have arranged to have one of the congressmen that we spoke to wind up being the keynote speaker, you could not have arranged for him to be in the presence of scores and scores of constitutional law enforcement officers, you could not have arranged to have had a better sit-down meeting with a congressman and constitutional attorneys and sheriffs and police chiefs. I mean, you can not have made that happen, but I can really see the hand of God in this.
Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy dedicated his Washington Times column today to a letter demanding another investigation into the attack at the US Mission in Benghazi. The letter relies on debunked conspiracy theories and Gaffney amusingly argues that “this is not an effort to settle political scores:
It has been nearly eight months since jihadists attacked U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed, and many more were badly injured. That is pretty much all we know for sure about an incident that has let’s face it been subjected to the most comprehensive and successful cover-up in modern political history.
Now, 700 heroic special operations veterans have written an open letter to Congress calling for the creation of a new investigative committee to establish the truth. They want to know, in particular, why warriors like them weren’t allowed to aid our countrymen in their hour of need.
This is not an effort to settle political scores. Neither the Democrats who run the Senate nor Republicans who run the House have conducted the needed “full accounting.” What is required is more than just a postmortem on a national security debacle, however.
As one of the SOF community’s most revered leaders in both war and peace retired Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin, put it recently: “I have seen men take great risks to save a fellow warrior. I have even seen men die trying to do so. The lack of accountability regarding the Benghazi event disturbs me greatly and bears the earmarks of a cover-up.
“America is entitled to a full accounting of this egregious attack on our people with some explanation as to why there was no effort to save the Americans in [Benghazi] or at least to recover their bodies before they fell into Libyan hands. Our Congress has yet to fulfill its responsibility to provide a complete analysis of the attack or to provide answers as to what exactly happened. A bipartisan special committee is needed to determine the truth about Benghazi.”
But that isn’t a problem for Gaffney, as he too is a birther.
As for Boykin, the former general and current vice president of the far-right Family Research Council initially claimed that David Petraues resigned his position at the CIA not as a result of his affair but because he was about to expose Obama, who was blackmailing him, for “covering up” the Benghazi incident and “reached a point where he was unwilling to continue spouting the party line [on Benghazi] to the American public and continuing to breach his own integrity.”
Of course, that never happened and Boykin was completely wrong.
But that is one of Boykin’s tamer conspiracy theories, as he also believes that Obama won the election as a result of a plot by an international “cabal” led by George Soros and is creating a paramilitary force through the health care reform law to take control of America.
The American Family Association’s Sandy Rios last week joined other conservative leaders in arguing that President Obama doesn’t love America, and went one step further by asserting that Obama doesn’t love the country in the same way as “people who were born and did grow up here.”
After suggesting Obama wasn’t born here, she then said: “Now I’m not saying that he wasn’t born here…I think that’s certainly a question we can ask.”
Rios went on to say that Hawaii is “very different” from the rest of America because “it’s not the mainland.”
She concluded her rant by asserting that Obama is “not that offended when Americans are killed” in places like Afghanistan, “He doesn’t have the same sense of protection and anger over it.”
Rios: People that didn’t grow up here don’t have the same kind of love for the country. I’m sorry, I think that includes our President, I don’t think he loves the country like people who were born and did grow up here. Now I’m not saying he wasn’t born here, I’m not even going to get into that, I think that’s certainly a question we can ask. But we do know that he spent a lot of his earlier years in Indonesia, in Hawaii, you know, it’s not the mainland, it’s very different.
I have always said from the time he was running that he doesn’t love this country enough to be its president. I stand by that, I said it a very long time ago, I stand by that statement. He’s not that offended when Americans are killed. He doesn’t have the same sense of protection and anger over it.
WorldNetDaily must be pleased with this “scoop”: former GOP congressman and third party presidential candidate Virgil Goode has joined Alabama Republican activist Hugh McInnish in filing a lawsuit arguing that President Obama is not eligible to be president.
But the story gets better: the attorney representing them is Larry Klayman.
And the story gets even better: the judge hearing the case is none other than Roy Moore.
Moore, who was recently returned to office as chief justice of Alabama’s state Supreme Court after he was removed from the post in 2003 for refusing to obey a court order to remove his Ten Commandments monument, is no fan of Obama.
WND also notes that Moore has defended birther hero Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who said he won’t follow deployment orders because he deemed any order from Obama to be illegitimate, and the increasingly unstable Klayman has praised Moore’s “integrity and legal acumen.”
Now, 2012 Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode and Alabama Republican Party leader Hugh McInnish are asking the state’s highest court to force Secretary of State Beth Chapman to verify that all candidates on the state’s 2012 ballot were eligible to serve.
Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of the Washington, D.C.-watch dog Judicial Watch and now head of Freedom Watch, filed the appeal Tuesday with the Alabama Supreme Court, asking for oral arguments.
“We are hopeful that Chief Justice Moore and the rest of the jurists on the Alabama Supreme Court will follow the law,” Klayman told WND.
Klayman says he and his team “have great respect for Chief Justice Moore and his integrity and legal acumen.”
“He is one courageous and brave man. There are few in this country.”
The case is an appeal of a dismissal by the Montgomery Circuit Court.
In his brief, Klayman says “credible evidence and information from an official source” was presented to Chapman before the election indicating Obama might not have been qualified for Oval Office.
The complaint argues Chapman failed her constitutional duty as secretary of state to verify the eligibility of candidates.
Moore is on the record questioning Obama’s eligibility.
In an interview with WND in 2010, he defended Lt. Col Terrence Lakin’s demand that President Obama prove his eligibility as commander in chief as a condition of obeying deployment orders.
Moore said he had seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a natural-born citizen and much evidence that suggests he is not.
Moore said Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty.”
“And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful,” he said.
Klayman asserts the secretary of state “has an affirmative duty that stems from her oath of office under both the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions, to protect the citizens from fraud and other misconduct by candidates.”
As a result of her refusal to investigate the qualifications of candidates for president, Klayman says, “a person believed to be unqualified for that office has been elected.”
The remedy, he said, “is to require each candidate to do what every teenager is required to do to get a learner’s permit.”
“It is to produce a bona fide birth certificate … and the Secretary of State is the official to cause that to happen.”
McInnish is a member of the Madison County Republican Executive Committee and also sits on the state Republican Executive Committee.
Citing the investigation of Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse, Klayman says Chapman “gained knowledge from an official source that there was probable cause to believe the Barack Obama had not met a certifying qualification.”
The appeal brief notes McInnish visited the secretary of state’s office Feb. 2, 2012, and spoke with the deputy secretary of state, Emily Thompson, in Chapman’s absence.
Moore told WND in an interview after his election last November that the country must return to a standard in which the rule of law prevails over politics.
He said Obama violated the Constitution when he bombed Libya, because the Constitution stipulates only Congress shall declare war.
“No president has the power to violate constitutional restraints of power,” Moore said.
“The Constitution is the rule of law, and [my job is] to uphold the rule of law.” Government’s job, Moore said, is to secure and protect those rights.
“There is little regard for the Constitution in the courts today, even the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Well this comes as no surprise.
Larry Klayman, the birther attorney who is now calling for an armed revolution against President Obama, is representing a new group of Tea Party members defending Sheriff Joe Arpaio from a potential recall election.
The Judicial Watch founder is threatening to sue activists who are collecting petitions to recall the Maricopa County, Arizona sheriff. In a video posted by Arizona Nightly News, Klayman ironically calls Arpaio opponents “vigilantes” who seek to “harass” the sheriff and distorts state election law to claim that the recall attempt is illegal.
Poor legal advice aside, Klayman’s selection to represent the group may not be a boon to the image of Arpaio, who is currently under fire for hiring a child-sex offender for his armed posse to guard schools, since Klayman himself has been accused of child sexual abuse.
Sen. Rand Paul isn’t the only prominent Republican hanging out with birthers these days. Next month, RNC chairman Reince Preibus and Wisconson Sen. Ron Johnson will travel to Alabama to headline a dinner hosted by state GOP chairman Bill Armistead. Armistead raised eyebrows last year when he publicly recommended “Dreams From My Real Father,” a “documentary” that promotes the alternate birther theory that President Obama somehow inherited a Marxist worldview from his “real father” Frank Marshall Davis. Somewhat unbelievably, Armistead stated that he had “verified that it is factual, all of it.”
Interestingly, Priebus and Johnson will be stepping into the middle of a fight over whether Armistead will keep his job. (He faces a challenger backed by his longtime rival, state House Speaker Mike Hubbard.) Charles Dean at the Birmingham News reports that Priebus might be attending as a political favored to Armistead:
Some saw Tuesday's late announcement by Armistead that Priebus had accepted the invitation to attend the dinner as a sign that maybe Armistead had convinced the GOP national party chairman to support him.
Late last week Armistead announced that he was supporting Priebus for a second term as Republican Party Chairman. So far Priebus is unopposed for a second term but rumors have persisted for months that a challenger might step up.
UPDATE: The RNC tells the Birmingham News that Priebus is not taking sides in the party chairmanship race.
After unsuccessful attempts to knock President Obama off the ballot and defeat Obama after the election by throwing the Electoral College into chaos, WorldNetDaily now is petitioning Chief Justice John Roberts to refuse to administer the presidential oath of office. WND commentator Craige McMillan said that if Roberts doesn’t withhold the oath, he will face “impeachment and eternal dishonor.” He even compared the current state of the U.S. to Nazi Germany by warning that America will have its own Nuremberg Trials to prosecute those who had been “violating their own oath of office, continu[ing] the sham through a second presidential term”
Dear Mr. Roberts,
When you administered the oath of office to Barack Obama for his first term as president, you could have been excused for believing that Mr. Obama was qualified under the Constitution to hold the office of president, which he had sought and won. After all, Obama’s opponent, John McCain, never raised the issue of Mr. Obama’s qualifications.
Now that Mr. Obama has been re-elected and is preparing to serve a second term of office, there can be no doubt regarding his qualifications. This is because by Mr. Obama’s own admission, his father was of Kenyan nationality and perhaps holding British citizenship as well.
Your own oath of office, sworn before God and the American people, requires you to uphold the Constitution. (If not you, then who?) If you now administer the oath of office for the presidency to a man who by his own admission fails to meet the natural born citizen requirement imposed by that Constitution, you have violated your own oath of office and are rightly subject to impeachment by any House of Representatives, at any time, now or in the future.
If you choose the easy course of ignoring our Constitution, it does not change the fact that Mr. Obama is barred by that same Constitution from acting as president. I am sure that if you turn your judicial mind to the ramifications of this fraud, both foreign and domestic, you will understand that the harm you will have done insures your impeachment and eternal dishonor at some point down the road: If not this House of Representatives, then the next, or the next, or the next.
These things do not end well. One need only look to the aftermath of World War II and the Nuremberg Trials to see what awaits. Illegal wars. Illegal debts. Illegal laws. Will the rest of the Supreme Court’s justices, now knowing they are violating their own oath of office, continue the sham through a second presidential term? How, then, is the highest court of law in the nation any different than that pictorial proverb in Japan of the three monkeys who see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil?
Given the gravity of this situation, we therefore urge you to take the honorable course of action and refuse to administer the oath of office to Mr. Obama. And yes, this will also require you to explain to the nation in the clearest possible terms why you have been compelled to take this most extraordinary action.
Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, for your consideration.
Karl Rove, whose American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS spent hundreds of millions of dollars attacking President Obama’s economic record without avail, has become something of a punching bag for a defeated and embittered Religious Right. Shortly after the election, Gary Bauer faulted Rove for focusing on the economy rather than on abortion rights and marriage equality and radio host Janet Mefferd expressed concern that “we didn’t even talk much about radical Islam.” A few days later, the American Family Association’s Sandy Rios even accused Rove of moderating the GOP’s previous focus on anti-gay policies.
Today, Joel Gilbert, director of the widely distributed anti-Obama movie “Dreams From My Real Father,” joined the pile-on. In an interview with Renew America’s Cliff Kincaid, Gilbert argued that Rove made a fatal mistake by focusing his attacks on the economy rather than on Gilbert’s theory that the president’s real father was communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis. "If Republicans had made Obama's Marxist agenda and personal background the main issues of the campaign, Americans would have had a much clearer understanding of the choice between American values and Marxism,” Gilbert said.
"I heard complaints from Rove's conservative donors four weeks in advance of the election," filmmaker Joel Gilbert told Accuracy in Media. "They kept asking, 'where is the money being spent?'" The questions intensified after Obama's victory and the Democrats achieved a larger 55-45 majority in the Senate.
Gilbert, who directed the documentary "Dreams from My Real Father," about Obama's Marxist roots, notes that Rove had argued to conservative donors that the winning strategy for Republicans was to place ads focusing on the poor economy.
Gilbert's film, which was distributed to millions of voters and argued that Obama's real biological and ideological father was Communist Party USA propagandist Frank Marshall Davis, attempted to expose Obama's character and background. But Rove, Romney and Republican leaders did not want to raise these issues. In fact, Rove had argued that calling Obama a socialist or left-winger would backfire.
Gilbert argued that Obama was a pop-culture phenomenon with a high "likability" factor and that "Voters perceived Obama as a nice man with an inspiring family story." The right strategy, he says, was to expose Obama's Marxist views, the role of Frank Marshall Davis in molding Obama's political philosophy, and Obama's questionable statements about his own upbringing.
Gilbert says, "If Republicans had made Obama's Marxist agenda and personal background the main issues of the campaign, Americans would have had a much clearer understanding of the choice between American values and Marxism."
Filmmaker, Bob Dylan enthusiast, and all-purpose conspiracy theorist Joel Gilbert has been getting plenty of attention recently for his film, “Dreams From My Real Father,”which presents his theory that President Obama’s real father was Communist organizer Frank Marshall Davis, who groomed the president from birth to lead a “revolution to end capitalism.” Gilbert has taken advantage of an undisclosed source of funds to send copies of his movie to 4 million swing-state households, where it has been met with decidedly mixed reviews. Gilbert’s film has earned effusive praise from the chairman of the Alabama Republican Party and Fox News’ Monica Crowley, but was panned by a Republican focus group, which found it “revolting.” A public screening of the film organized by a county commissioner in Texas has drawn promises of protests.
In the midst of this hubbub, though, Gilbert hasn’t neglected his continuing research into the president’s history. This summer, he speculated to Alex Jones that the Obama administration might have been behind the Aurora movie theater shooting. Earlier this month, he put on his “expert in Islamic history” hat to uncover a secret “Islamic inscription” on the president’s wedding ring. And today, he drops another bombshell to World Net Daily’s Jerome Corsi: the president got a nose job (a.k.a. "facial forgery") because he was “concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older.”
Filmmaker Joel Gilbert contends President Obama has altered his facial profile for the national stage of American politics, citing two nationally known cosmetic surgery experts he consulted who concluded Obama had a “nose job.”
“It appears Obama had some aesthetic refinement,” said plastic surgeon J. David Holcolm.
“Obama has gone to great lengths to obscure his past,” Gilbert said. “Now, in addition to the alleged document forgery and photographic forgery by Obama to hide his true identity, we now have evidence of facial forgery.”
Gilbert suspects Obama had the surgery because he was “concerned he was looking too much like Frank Marshall Davis as he got older.”
“I don’t think it was a coincidence that Obama chose to undergo a rhinoplasty before running for U.S. Senate and facing the national spotlight,” Gilbert said. “If Obama was identified as Davis’ son, it would connect the Marxist dots of Obama’s entire life journey.”
Gilbert said Obama “needed the Kenyan father fairy tale to misdirect the public away from the fact that he is a red diaper baby, the child of a Communist Party USA propagandist and Soviet agent.”
As evidence, Gilbert presents a somewhat unconvincing side-by-side photograph array.
The New York Times today offers up the wide distribution of Joel Gilbert’s “Dreams From My Real Father” as a case study in “how secretive forces outside the presidential campaigns can sweep into battleground states days before the election.”
According to the Times, Republican strategist Frank Luntz, at the behest of unnamed conservative activists, focus-group tested Gilbert’s film this summer, along with Dinesh D’Souza’s “2016” and “The Hope and Change,” a Citizens United joint featuring interviews with disaffected Obama supporters.
“The Hope and the Change,” directed by Stephen K. Bannon and produced by Citizens United, the conservative political advocacy group, tested highest with focus groups and is running on local cable stations. It was shown here just before Monday’s debate.
Many conservatives also loved Mr. D’Souza’s film and wanted it to have wider distribution. It tested poorly, however, and Mr. Luntz warned his clients that it could undermine their cause.
Focus groups were revolted by “Dreams From My Real Father,” with its conspiracy theory paranoia and dubious evidence. It compares photos of the president and Mr. Davis, noting that they have similar noses and freckles. It also purports to have uncovered nude photos of Mr. Obama’s mother in a bondage magazine.
Mr. Luntz’s clients were not surprised. Their thinking was, “I want to know if it’s as bad as I think it is,” Mr. Luntz said.
The opinion of Luntz’s focus groups mirrors that of at least one Florida voter who got Gilbert’s movie in the mail and found it so disgusting he decided to vote for Obama.
Gilbert, for his part, remains convinced that he will come out with the upper hand, and perhaps beat out The New York Times for a Pulitzer:
Mr. Gilbert will not say where he received the money to distribute his movie — he claims to have sent out four million copies. “It’s a private company, so we don’t disclose who’s part of it,” he said. He also blamed the mainstream media for not looking deeper into the story he uncovered, telling The New York Times, “I hope you’re not angry or jealous that I beat you to it and might win the Pulitzer Prize.”