1) So @JonathanTurley is just now coming around to the lack of actual "law" knowledge of the Usurper Hussein Obama, a supposed "Constitutional scholar".
2) The academics in the Ivory Tower of Academia should have explained to everyone back in 2007 that Hussein Obama was NOT an eligible natural born Citizen, and NOT eligible for the Presidency.
3) By his own story (which is not "proven"), he was supposedly born of a Kenyan NON US Citizen father, who was NEVER a US Citizen or Legal permanent US Resident, Barack Obama Sr., and an American Kansas born mother, Anne Dunham.
4) There is plenty of evidence that the "birth certificate" posted at the WH .gov website is an utter fraud. Sheriff Joe submitted these findings to Cong., who didn't care.
5) Regardless of place of birth, by his own story, Hussein Obama is NOT an eligible natural born Citizen, because he was born British, of a British subject father (Kenyan, pre Independence), Even if he was delivered on the Oval Office desk, and delivered by JFK.
6) The very purpose of the requirement is "prevention of foreign influence", so it is impossible that one born in a foreign country, or of foreign parent, is eligible. SEE Federalist 68.
congress.gov/resources/disp…
congress.gov/resources/disp…
7) "Improper ascendant"- the improper influence of a foreign parent. "A creature of their own"-- is that the son of an anti-colonialist Kenyan British subject here on a student visa?
@michaelvolin @Patriotress @im2byteme @naturalbornhere @blusie
@michaelvolin @Patriotress @im2byteme @naturalbornhere @blusie
8) It is obvious that Obama was not eligible, and had intentions that were not good for America, yet those in the Ivory Tower of Academia failed to warn America. Obama even told us all in his book "Dreams From My Father" that he was not eligible.
9) Obama has NEVER claimed to be a natural born Citizen, only "Citizen from birth", and the Democratic Party has never claimed he was either-- only "Duly Elected" on election certificates.
10) Turley will never respond to those who cite Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, 167 (1875), as the only precedent decision on the meaning of nbC, "born in the US of US Citizen parents."
11) And Turley will continue the lie that Wong Kim Ark held that anyone born in the US is a US Citizen. He's wrong. The case held that those born of legal permanent resident aliens are US Citizens (169 US 649, 693).
12) And he seemingly does not know that Wong Kim Ark cited the definition of M v.H multiple times (169 US 649, 655, 679, 680 (1898)).
13) It makes one wonder whether all of the "law profs" in the country are lockstep allowing the invasion of those who have no cultural relation to and want no part of, the culture and mores of this country. They and Congress allow the illegal magnet of "birthright Citizenship".
14) Now Turley and Congress have allowed a foreign interloper, who's origins and credentials are totally unknown into the WH. Is Obama really a "Constitutional scholar"? Did he really go to Occidental, Columbia and Harvard, and get a degree? It's as unknown as his place of birth.
15) #Obamagate is the product of "law profs" like Turley and Congress, who allowed an ineligible Foreign invader into the WH by concealing who Hussein Obama really is.
16) @realDonaldTrump is about to expose all of his crimes., and he will end birthright citizenship to the children of non resident aliens in his second term, which will be the first step towards a reckoning of the real meaning of natural born Citizen.
