Looks like Andrew Breitbart might be turning into a birther
Posted on | May 4, 2010 | 2 Comments
Anti-birther Breitbart blurbs book by WND’s Klein, who devotes chapter to “Issues of Eligibility”
May 04, 2010 5:51 pm ET by Terry Krepel
Remember when Andrew Breitbart got into an argument with WorldNetDaily’s Joseph Farah at CPAC over birtherism? Breitbart dismissed Farah’s birther obsession as “self-indulgent”, “narcissistic,” and “a losing issue” for Republicans, despite the fact that discussions of President Obama’s birth certificate were also promoted on Breitbart’s own websites.
Well, Breitbart has contradicted himself again. He contributed a blurb — prominently placed on the back cover — to the new WND-published book by WND reporter Aaron Klein, The Manchurian President: Barack Obama’s Ties to Communist, Socialist and Other Anti-American Extremists. Breitbart declares the book to be “a frightening yet vital primer for those now willing to look behind the curtain to see who is the leader of the free world.”
And what does Klein (and co-author Brenda J. Elliott) do? Devote an entire chapter of the book to “Issues of Eligibility.”
Klein uses the book to embark on a multi-page examination of whether Obama is a “natural born citizen,” which Klein says is in doubt because Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen. He writes, “In trying to understand what the Founding Fathers meant by ‘natural born,’ some have turned to prominent legal tomes of the day,” specifically citing Swiss philosopher Emmerich de Vattel’s 1758 text The Law of Nations to claim that “by de Vattel’s standards, Obama arguably would not be eligible to serve as president.” By “some,” however, Klein seems to mean birthers; Leo Donofrio, a lawyer whom Klein’s employer describes as having “brought one of the first legal challenges to Obama’s eligibility to be president and unsuccessfully tried to get the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved at the time of the election,” also cites The Law of Nations as part of his argument for “why Obama is ineligible.”
An August 2009 WND article outlining the “natural born issue” notes that another birther lawyer, Mario Apuzzo, “points to Vattel’s work as the framework for the Founders’ intent and the justification for requiring a president not only be born on American soil, but also to American parents.”
Klein also bizarrely cites the Dred Scott decision (aka Scott v. Sandford) for ruling that “citizenship is acquired by place of birth, not through blood or lineage” (which Klein adds “notoriously excluded slaves, and their descendents, from possessing Constitutional rights”). Klein then notes that “much of the decision … was overturned in 1868.” So why mention it at all? Perhaps because it too surfaced in a birther-related case; notorious birther lawyer Orly Taitz referenced the case in one of her many court filings. (As one California bar complaint filed against Taitz notes, Taitz “does not indicate in any way that the Dred Scott case was overturned, overruled, or even subsequently criticized/distinguished.”)
Klein also references the 1874 Minor v. Happersett case, which Donofrio also references. Klein then adds: “According to this definition, and scores of other Supreme Court rulings, Obama may not be eligible to serve as president.” Yet Klein doesn’t see fit to cite any of those “scores” of “rulings”; the most recent one he cites is the 136-year-old Happersett case.
Klein concludes this section by stating: “The authors of this book are not constitutional lawyers (though President Obama is), and while we did consult with some, we do not purport to be experts in constitutional law.” Nevertheless, Klein goes on to assert that “a layman’s reading of readily available legal resources … clearly indicates a series of legitimate questions abouty Barack Obama’s eligibility for the presidency, given that Obama’s father was not an American citizen.”
Credible legal scholars, meanwhile, have dismissed Klein’s arguments. For instance, conservative-leaning attorney Eugene Volokh has stated that since Obama was born in Hawaii (a point Klein concedes elsewhere in the chapter), he is clearly a natural born citizen and eligible to be president. Volokh also has noted that while most courts have dismissed claims against Obama’s eligibility on procedural grounds, one court that looked at it substantively has rejected the claim that Obama is not eligible to become president because his father was not a U.S. citizen, with reasoning that Volokh describes as ‘persuasive.’ ”
Does Breitbart even read the books he blurbs?
Tags: Andrew Breitbart, WorldNetDaily, Aaron Klein
Comments
2 Responses to “Looks like Andrew Breitbart might be turning into a birther”
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
May 5th, 2010 @ 1:51 am
Here’s the thesis:
NBC is birth in the sole jurisdiction of the government established by the Constitution of the Untied States, without inheriting rights or privileges from any other governments either as a result of place of birth or parentage.
Here’s the justification:
The Constitution is consistent with itself. With regard presidential eligibility, the Constitution did not “grandfather” anyone who did not need “grandfathering”. That is, the Constitution exempts certain people from the requirement of being NBC for the sole reason that they are not NBC. This includes people, such as Zachary Taylor, who were born in the United States.
Why does the Constitution “grandfather” people like Zachary Taylor if the Constitution intended them to be NBC? Because they were not NBC.
Why were they not NBC? What is it about Zachary Taylor that makes him not NBC. He was born in the US, right? Yes. Is NBC more than just birth in the United States to parents who are its citizens?
YES
The Constitution requires the president to swear an oath to the Constitution. It’s a requirement. The oath is itself a requirement of eligibility.
The Oath is not simply to the Country, but rather to its second government, that one established by the Constitution. (The first government of the United States was that established by the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. The Constitution as in essence a peaceful revolution, overthrowing the first government for the second one.)
So, if the Oath is a test of allegiance to the government established by the Constitution, why would the requirement of natural born citizen be any different? Both are allegiance tests: one based upon the circumstances of birth which are incurable, the other is a promise for continued allegiance to the government established by the Constitution.
Natural born citizen demands more than simply birth solely in the Untied States. It demands birth solely in the Constitution of the United States. This is why Zachary Taylor, who was born solely in the Untied States, was grandfathered – he was not NBC because he was born in the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.
The Constitution may be at odds with Swiss philosophers who unilaterally expound “laws” of nature. Indeed the Constitution may defy Swiss philosophers, as is its right and privilege. But, the Constitution cannot be at odds with itself. Both the president’s oath and the terms upon which the grandfather clause expire point to one conclusion: the Constitution requires allegiance to more than just the Untied States – it requires undivided allegiance to the government which it established, both at birth and again upon inauguration.
So, NBC is birth in the sole jurisdiction of the government established by the Constitution of the Untied States, without inheriting rights or privileges from any other governments either as a result of place of birth or parentage.
May 5th, 2010 @ 6:32 am
“…conservative-leaning attorney Eugene Volokh has stated that since Obama was born in Hawaii (a point Klein concedes elsewhere…)”
Conservatives who so easily concede the Hawaii ‘birth’ question simply have not done their homework or don’t want to. The claim has more holes than swisscheese.