Follow up on Prof Ronald Rotunda story
Posted on | September 17, 2010 | 6 Comments
| Redd |
Submitted on 2010/09/17 at 4:28am
You are quite popular. I am wondering what your take is on this article that came out in the Chicago Tribune yesterday by your friend Rotunda? https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-oped-0916-birthright-20100916,0,4594378.story |
State Representative Cynthia Davis R-MO and writer Jane Jamison signed up as my friends on my new Facebook page 0 # |
Answer from Orly:
Yesterday an article appeared in Chicago Tribune. It was authored by a famous Constitutional law professor Ronald Rotunda, who previously signed up as my friend on on my new Facebook page (after Facebook blocked me from my own old page), he also sent an e-mail, that he voted for me as a Republican candidate for CA Secretary of State and he recommended several elections attorneys to help me in my legal action against my opponent Damon Dunn who committed elections fraud during Republican primary.
After this information became public, Professor Rotunda was attacked and besieged by Obama operatives, demanding that he write to me and ask me to remove information about him from my blog. Clearly,Professor Rotunda’s support is a blow to Obama. It looks bad for Obama, that a famous constitutional law scholar is supporting me. Until now Obama brown shirts in the media called me crazy for doubting Obama’s legitimacy for U.S. Presidency.
It looks that under pressure professor Rotunda has written an article in Chicago tribune, however this article does not negate anything I said and anything I stand for. This article only talks about illegal aliens and their children “anchor babies’, who got U.S. citizenship.
there are 2 distinct issues:
1. Did 14th amendment envision an invasion of 40-60 million illegals, draining and bankrupting U.S. treasury by collecting billions of dollars of benefits for health care, education and social services for millions of their children born in this country? 14th amendment only dealt with the children of the slaves residing in U.S., it was a finite number, it did not envision and infinite invasion.
2. An article by prof. Rotunda does not deal with the Natural Born Clause and Vattel theory. This article only deals with the “U.S. citizen” it does not deal with “natural born citizen” clause, which is not mentioned in the 14th amendment. It is mentioned only in Article 2 section 1 of the Constitution.
3. Even if one does not subscribe to Vattel theory, which requires one to have both parents as U.S. citizens and be born in US to be qualified as Natural Born citizen, even if one is of an opinion that it is enough to be born in the country to foreign parents and have dual citizenship at birth, there are still two problems and impediments, that would make Obama illegitimate to U.S. presidency:
a. he and his mother Ann Dunham relinquished their U.S. citizenship in order to get Indonesian citizenship, when they immigrated to Indonesia. His school registration in Indonesia shows him to be citizen of Indonesia, which did not allow dual citizenship
b. all evidence points to his birth in Kenya, not U.S.
Minister of lands of Kenya James Orenga stated during March 25th meeting of the Parliament of Kenya that Obama was born there. Three experts show that the social security number 042-68-4425, that Obama is using today in the white House was given to another individual in CT (first three digits 042 signify the state of CT). Obama never consented to release of his original long form birth certificate from HI, which is supposed to show the name of the hospital where he ws allegedly born, the name of the attending physician and the signatures of people in attendance.
So, my message to Obama and his operatives: “stop harassing professor Ronald Rotunda, stop harassing me, stop harassing my supporters. Obama, it is time for you to show the Nation your CT social security application and explain, how living in HI, you ended up with Ct social security application, unseal and present to the Nation your LONG FORM birth certificate with the name of the doctor and the name of hospital. If you have nothing to show, go home.” My message to the Federal Courts and the Supreme court: “It is time to hear the issue of the meaning and interpretation of the 14th amendment and the Natural Born Citizen clause”
Comments
6 Responses to “Follow up on Prof Ronald Rotunda story”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
September 17th, 2010 @ 10:56 am
Hi, Orly. Just taking a few minutes out of my busy day to look over your blog so that I can direct my operatives on the next course of action to take against you.
You want to know how I got my social security number? That’s easy to answer. I took a trip up to Boston to visit my father’s alma mater. During that visit, I went to visit some of his old friends in Connecticut. When I was there, I was thinking about getting a job and that’s when I applied for my social security number. Not that it is any of your business, but that’s what happened.
As far as the number supposedly being that of a 108 year old man. I can’t answer that. You don’t have my actual social security number anyway. None of the 39 numbers that you published are mine nor were ever mine.
But don’t let this information stop you. We are all having a great time reading your blog and are always interested in what your flying monkeys have to say.
All the best,
Steve
September 17th, 2010 @ 11:54 am
who comes up with this BS anyways? Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod? I thought they had higher IQ than that. I am guessing it comes from some low rank operatives.
Enough, people! Better to go home in peace, be pardoned, than be criminally indicted and prosecuted. Make a deal and go home people.
September 17th, 2010 @ 2:59 pm
Hi Steve and thanks for posting. But don’t you have better things to do, like chewing on live wires or bobbing for french fries?
February 22nd, 2014 @ 10:55 am
SHEEPLE don’t get it yet…NOBODY cares where Cruz was born!
Obama has made a President Cruz possible!
I am a Patriot who no longer cares, So What! Cruz told us the truth
unlike usurper Obama! Since America has suffered through usurper
pResident Obama’s reign of terror it no longer matters where a potential
President was born until we elect President Cruz! SHEEPLE must be so
worried about Ted Cruz that they have become what they hated the most,
Birthers!
Payback is going to be so beautiful!
March 17th, 2015 @ 8:25 pm
It is indeed stunning that Prof Rotunda, one of the great American Constitutional scholars, possesses such a gaping blind spot as regards the history, content, substance, meaning, and import of the Natural Born Citizen Clause, Art II, Sec 1, Cl 5, COTUSOA.
In any and all of his public statements on the issue that I, for one, have uncovered — including but not limited to his Chi Trib Op-Ed, cited supra, and his exchanges with O T — in eight years of study, it is the fact that Prof R overlooks both Vattel’s <> as well as the dictum of the Supreme Court in Minor v Happersett, written by the CJ for a unanimous Court, which tells posterity, in terms which could not be more clear and straightforward, precisely what the Framers actually mean in their use of the phrase ” natural-born citizen”.
What they mean, per Minor, is that POTUS can only qualify if s/he is born on American soil — jus solis — to American citizen parents — jus sanguinis. POTUS and POTUS ONLY must meet BOTH qualifications — because the Founders, per their correspondence & etc — about which another time — were abundantly clear that the loyalty to country of the Chief Executive and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces must be without any doubt whatsoever, tested by BOTH traditional grounds of said loyalty, that is, by place of birth AND citizenship of PARENTS, plural.
That is, the ONLY authoritative guidance that we have to date on this still unresolved issue — dictum which has not been questioned in any case since — means that any and all discussion of citizenship out of specific ” natural-born ” context is irrelevant and immaterial. Thus — and this OUGHT to be as obvious as one of Prof R’s distinctive bow ties — cases and commentaries dealing with citizenship per se, e.g. per the Fourteeth Amendment, are not relevant or material in answer of the specific Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 query ” Who is a natural-born citizen qualified for the Presidency ? ” That is so, in both logic and textual analysis, because the Presidential qualification is, as it was meant to be, UNIQUE and DISTINCT, and UNRELATED to ‘ lesser ‘ citizenship requirements found elsewhere in the Constitution. If the Founders meant to lump POTUS citizenship qualification with any other type, kind, or sort of citizenship qualification they would not have employed the distincterminology ” natural-born citizen ” . Jefferson and his colleagues on the drafting committee are universally recognized to have been careful and purposeful masters of language — to say what they mean and mean what they say.
Thus, the MYRIAD issues surrounding the timing, ‘ production ‘, and subsequent history of the so-called long-form birth certificate — which will have to wait for another intervention by Yours Truly — are, in themselves, eclipsed on the jus sanguinis ground, for it is conceded by even the most convinced Obamapologist that the father { if in fact it was Barack Hussein Obama I } was, at the time of barry’s birth, wherever that was, a Kenyan citizen carrying a British passport and not an American citizen.
The other jurisprudential issue in all of this which for me shocks the conscience is, of course, the unwillingness of the courts to litigate the merits of the case, hiding behind narrow, outmoded
standing doctrines to dodge obvious responsibilities. This course of behavior constitutes a most regrettable setback for the Rule of Law in a nation so proud of itself as regards same.
Let me conclude politically, and personally.
I am a lifelong Democrat, scion of a family of Democrats on both sides as far back as we go in the New World. I’ve been politically active all of my life, including years on the Presidential campaign trail in Scheduling & Advance and Fundraising. In ’08 I was with Hillary, one of those ranting and raving at Washington to ” TAKE OBAMA OUT ! ” But she couldn’t — or wouldn’t, as all the while he skillfully manipulated his way around the essential matter of Constitutional qualification. There is much more water under this bridge, but suffice it for now to say that for some of us, at least, the issue is as alive as it was when first raised. It is not an issue of race, or of party. It is an issue of Truth Telling — and I believe that one day, sooner or later, ‘ The Truth Will Out ‘.
March 17th, 2015 @ 9:24 pm
I hope you are right and the truth will come out. All we need is 1 honest judge