BREAKING! Federal Judge Rules in Obama SSN CASE! Says It doesn’t matter if Prez broke law… the Manchurian President is alive and well!
See: Video Report
This is beyond frightening the all 3 branches are complicit in placing and leaving a usurper in the White House!!
The judge basically said that Orly was correct but this wasn’t her lucky day…. in reality it was not America’s lucky day
President Obama
Announcing it’s “not her lucky day,” a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has told an eligibility attorney he has dismissed her case demanding information from the SocialSecurityAdministration regarding President Obama’s Social Security number, sought because of suspicions it may be fraudulent.
The case was filed by California attorney Orly Taitz,who has battled many of the major court challenges to Obama’s eligibility based on a lack of evidence that he qualifies under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that apresident be a “natural-born citizen.”
The case at hand was filed against the Social Security Administration because Obama’s number indicates a Connecticut residency, yet there is no evidence he ever lived in the state. He claims he grew up in Hawaii and apparently had a Social Security number there, as he reported he worked in a Honolulu ice-cream shop.
There has been no evidence he ever lived in Connecticut, and investigators have described the circumstances as suspicious.
The judge, Royce Lamberth credits Taitz for her dedication to her cause, but boasted that “today is not her lucky day.”
He concluded that there’s no real interest in determining whether the Obama Social Security Number is genuine or fraudulent, and the need for secrecy for the president trumps all else.
“The SSA explained that the Privacy Act of 1974 … protects the personal information of social security number holders,” he wrote. “The SSA determined … the plaintiff had identified no public interest that would be served by disclosure.”
“Plaintiff makes no secret of her intention to use the redacted Form SS-5 to identify the holder of social security number xxxx-xxx-4425 – or, as plaintiff puts it, to confirm her suspicion that the president is fraudulently using that number,” the judge wrote.
But Lamberth wrote in the case against Michael Astrue, Social Security commissioner, whether Obama is using a fake number isn’t his concern.
“Even if plaintiff’s allegations were true, an individual’s status as a public official does not, as plaintiff contends, ‘make exemption 6 irrelevant to him and his vital records.'”
He said he would “disregard” documents from the Selective Service and the Social Security Number Verification System suggesting there are problems with Obama’s number because he “concludes” they were obtained “under false pretenses.”
Taitz told WND she is submitting a motion for reconsideration based on new evidence that includes an affidavit from an individual who obtained a government affirmation that the number Obama is using doesn’t match his name.
She said it is important to the public because it could provide evidence of fraudulent IRS returns, fake election documents and Social Security fraud, should the allegations prove accurate.
Taitz also has filed a state court action on similar grounds in the state of Hawaii,where there had been a hearing scheduled in September on orders from a federal judge to address the state’s refusal to comply with a subpoena for Obama’s original birth documentation.
Her Petition for Writ of Mandamus, if granted, would require the state Department of Health to turn over to her the original 1961 Obama birth records the agency has kept from the American public.
A mandamus action is something to compel an official or government officer to perform a duty demanded by the petitioner. And in this situation, the case is in support of her subpoena for the birth records for the president.
In submitting the Writ of Mandamus, Taitz filed 48 pages of pleadings and exhibits before Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Nishimura.
It is separate from the Astrue case, which she said would be appealed.
Taitz has maintained that by releasing his long-form birth certificate to the American public on April 27, Obama has waived all privacy restrictions that would prevent the Hawaii DOH from making public the original 1961 birth records the agency has on file.
“I decided to file the state case for mandamus because this is a separate case that stands on its own,” Taitz told WND.
Taitz charged that if the long-form birth certificate the White House released on April 27 is not on file in a 1961 original copy in the Hawaii DOH, then a criminal felony has been created.
“I don’t believe there is any 1961 typewritten birth certificate document for Obama on file in the Hawaii DOH that looks anything like what the White House released,” she asserted. “Why else would the Hawaii DOH fight me so hard to keep us from seeing whatever birth records are on file?”
Time to support Orly Taitz and others like her who are bravely fighting our battles. And it is past time to clean house of all in Congress, the Judicial Branch and the White House who spit in our faces and ignore our laws to destroy America. We also know that Obama does not qualify for the office he holds because he does not meet the standards of “natural born citizen” (see below), plus there is the question of being adopted by a foreigner. Remember he went to college here as a foreign student. If we do not stand up for such obvious fraud, the fraud will continue. In fact voter and election fraud will be our greatest problem in the upcoming election!! The door our lack of vigilance opens if these facts continue to be ignored and the fact that we would allow this is probably making our Founding Father’s spin in their graves. Many experts have now ruled that the birth certificate Obama produced is fake or altered and a judge now essentially said that there is something wrong with Obama’s social security number… but ruled it is too bad for America and the law. Wake up my friends, we are being had! If we do not stand up ‘en mass’, when the worst happens we can blame no one but ourselves! Where are the cries for impeachment at all levels in all 3 branches of government… Silent. Why?? Where are our voices? (Someone might want to ask Germany how that worked out for them when they let a foreign born Austrian take over their country!).
Source: WND – Bob Unruh
Both major political parties are scrapping the Constitution, and the Republican elite will not challenge Obama on eligibility in 2012. Here’s why. ..
Maybe now Americans will stop asking me why Republicans never challenged Barack Obama’s clear constitutional ineligibility for the presidency.
The answer is one of the following:
- They are too ignorant to understand that the definition of a “natural born citizen” is an American born to U.S. citizen parents; or
- They are willing accomplices in the dumbing down of a simple constitutional requirement for their own political reasons – so their own ineligible candidates can run.
I don’t know any other choices that make sense today as the Republican Party establishment along with leading candidates begin active consideration of vice-presidential nominees who are just simply ineligible to assume the top job.
Two candidates for the job are mentioned over and over again – two wonderful, charismatic public servants whose only problem is they are not constitutionally eligible to be president.
They are Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana (just like now shamed but one time charismatic favorite Arnold Schwarzenegger wasn’t eligible because he was a naturalized citizen… there are laws and rules for reasons!).
Don’t get me wrong. I like both of these guys. If I were eligible to vote in Florida or Louisiana, I would vote to re-elect them. I would support either one for almost any job in America. But there is one job for which they are, by chance of birth, 100 percent, totally and inarguably ineligible to hold office – and that is the presidency of the United States.
Why?
Because both are sons of parents who were not U.S. citizens when they were born.
It’s just that simple. To be a natural born citizen means to be the offspring of U.S. citizen parents at the time of birth.
Since the vice president, by definition, must be able and willing to assume the presidency in time of a national emergency, and because the vice president is often seen politically as an heir apparent for the top job, it makes absolutely no political or legal sense to nominate a vice presidential candidate who is not constitutionally eligible to become president.
But that’s just what is happening in Republican circles and media circles – without even a hint that both Jindal and Rubio are ineligible.
Now maybe you can understand how the political and media establishment missed the biggest U.S. story of the last 50 to 100 years – the illegal inauguration of an American president wholly ineligible to take office.
I guess the Constitution has just been rendered moot by default.
What are they thinking about?
Is it because the son of a visiting foreign student was able to usurp office illegally that now anything goes?
Do we just totally disregard the simple rule book that forms the foundation of American governance?
Is it only the American people who care about the Constitution and the rule of law?
Is this a bipartisan conspiracy to make it easier and easier to operate outside the confines of the law and the Constitution’s strict definition of limited government?
Do Republican elitists have any idea how widespread the concerns of Americans are about matters of constitutional integrity?
Are they willing to lose millions of votes from people who still revere and cherish every jot and tittle of the Constitution and especially the very minimal requirements for seeking the office of the presidency?
This is nuts!
But it explains a lot.
For more than three years – both during the 2008 campaign and the first two years of Obama’s fraudulent administration – Republicans have been virtually mute on the scandal of his ineligibility.
Now we know why.
They don’t care.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
They’re ready to take full advantage of this latest nail in the coffin of the Constitution.
They’re going to continue to thumb their noses at the Constitution and all those who believe in it by pretending that their own favorite sons are something they are not – namely, eligible for the presidency
By Joseph Farah
Posted: August 29, 2011
1:52 pm Eastern © 2011
Source: WND
The next question is if we ignore this… what is next? Check this out: ‘FEC Drafts Opinions for Guyana-Born Man About Presidential Run’ As Obama’s Eligibility Case Quietly Moved to Supreme Court
And if you haven’t read it, check out Jerome Corsi’s: Where’s the Birth Certificate? As well as The Manchurian President . And for anyone who thinks changing to Hillary would be any better… you need to read The Shadow Party.
askmarion 
The judge in the case, U.S. District Chief Judge Royce Lamberth, was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
That is interesting!! But they all make mistakes with their appointments and people change. I really don’t know much about the judge, but he basically said that Orly was right but he was dismissing the case anyway. And I do know that Orly Taitz is thorough, which the judge also said. So something is not right!
Re: “but he basically said that Orly was right but he was dismissing the case anyway. ”
NO. You did not read the ruling. Read the ruling. The judge said that the Privacy Act of 1974 has rules on what documents are private, and the Social Security numbers are under the provisions of the Privacy Act and hence they are private and cannot be released by the Social Security Administration. That rule applies to everyone, so it applies to Obama.
If you do not like the Privacy Act of 1974 or want to make exceptions in it, you have the constitutional right to try to convince your congressman and senators and the other congressmen and senators to change the law. But, unless they do change it, it is the law. The Privacy Act of 1974 applies and the Social Security Administration cannot release the number.
As far as the House or Senate taking up this ‘whole’ matter (which is much more complicated than just the SS#), they are either too ignorant to understand that the definition of a “natural born citizen” is an American born to U.S. citizen parents; are willing accomplices in the dumbing down of a simple constitutional requirement for their own political reasons – so their own ineligible candidates can run, or are cowards! And it is up to us, the American public and the small group of media who do their jobs to demand it. Whether our president is eligible to be president and secrets behind all the questions of where he was born, why he has a social security number for Connecticut, why he refused to release his documents in the first place (like every president does) and has since spent millions in legal fees to keep from producing them, why he attended Occidental as a foreign student, being adopted by a foreigner including a name change, his families possible CIA connections, a parade of experts who virtually all now say that the birth certificate he finally did produce is a fraud or forgery, etc are a Hell of a lot more important than Bill Clinton having an affair!!
You are right that I did not read the entire ruling but the fact that the judge verbally congratulated Orly Taitz and basically said (if you read between the lines) that there was a problem… means there is a problem; that along with the endless fire of questionable information regarding all this records that just doesn’t go away.
When you become President of the United States, your personal information from medical records to school, birth, SS, military, and all eligibility records become our business. I am not a “birther” per say but have followed this fairly closely because I have met Orly Taitz and am good friends with a friend of hers.
As far as the Connecticut SS #, they have the number… they even know who the person was that died that it used to belong. I will go back to see if I can find the article on that; many of then vanish and I don’t think I re-posted it. So now determining why he has that # is already questionable and therefore not a clear cut Privacy Act of 1974 situation ( I will go back and read it), if a judge decided to make the bridge. Let’s face it, the reason there are presidents for attorneys and judges to go back to, is because along the way judges make exceptions, break the rules or apply their power and judgement to over-rule laws and precedents because of the situation.
I am glad that Vicki (below) said and believes the judge is an honest judge, there are too few, but a judge can pretty much do and say in his courtroom what he wants and I’ve seen them do it. So if we/he believes a person’s identity is in question and that possibly makes him an illegal occupant of the highest office in our land, in my opinion this would be the time to assert your power. The social security issue is just on part of a much bigger picture being kept from us.
Sorry that I’ve rambled… I lost my entire response once and just wrote as things came to me.
I for one have many times and will continue to write, fax and call not only my congressman and senator(s), but the full gamut to take up this matter in full… with its questionable issues. I am a true believer in respecting the Office of the Presidency and in my opinion making sure that the occupant is eligible would be at the top of the list out of that respect and is the responsibility of all Americans.
Related: https://askmarion.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/how-did-obama-obtain-a-social-security-number-from-connecticut/
Re: “the definition of a “natural born citizen” is an American born to U.S. citizen parents.”
Who told you that? It is wrong. The meaning of Natural Born in America (not Switzerland) at the time that the Constitution was written referred to citizenship due to the place of birth, only the place of birth, not parents.
Here is an example of how it was used in 1803, shortly after the Constitution was written:
“Prior to the adoption of the constitution, the people inhabiting the different states might be divided into two classes: natural born citizens, or those born within the state, and aliens, or such as were born out of it. The first, by their birth-right, became entitled to all the privileges of citizens; the second, were entitled to none, but such as were held out and given by the laws of the respective states prior to their emigration. …St. George Tucker, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA. (1803)
As you can see Natural Born Citizens were “those born within the state.”
And here is an example of how it was used in 1829:
“Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”—William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)
And, here is how it is used in the book of Edwin Meese, Ronald Reagan’s attorney general:
““Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
“natural born citizen” as it applies to eligibility for the presidency includes being born to two American citizens (they can be naturalized citizens) and that was more clearly defined and voted on when when Congress took up the issue (which really never was) about McCain’s eligibility to run. It was clearly stated and voted on by the Senate, including Sen Barack H. Obama that he was eligible because he was born to two American Citizens in the Canal Zone where is father was stationed for the U.S. military. Again, I posted an article on that a while back and will try to find it. I am in the middle of moving and packing up an office, so am a bit time tapped for the next week or so, but will try to get to it and find it later today… if I can.
Loosely Related: https://askmarion.wordpress.com/2011/05/17/anchor-babies/
I KNOW THIS JUDGE, GREW UP WITH HIM AND HIS TWIN BROTHER, WENT TO SCHOOL WITH HIM AND GRADUATED WITH HIM IN THE SAME CLASS. I AM SO DISAPPOINTED IN THIS RULING. HAVING SAID THAT I DO KNOW THAT IN THE PAST HE HAS FOLLOWED THE LAW REGARDLESS OF WHO A PERSON IS. I HAVE BEEN TOLD HE IS THE ONLY HONEST JUDGE IN D.C. AND THAT IS SAD TO KNOW THAT THERE AREN’T MORE
This is not the post I was looking for but will do:
Obama’s McCain resolution demands ‘American’ parents
Perhaps it’s a good thing that the U.S. Senate didn’t take up a resolution on Barack Obama’s status as a “natural born Citizen” in 2008 – as members did for GOP candidate Sen. John McCain while both were seeking the U.S. presidency.
The Democrat might not have qualified under the requirements the Senate, including Obama, a co-sponsor and then-senator, put in the resolution, including the demand that the candidate have “American citizen” parents.
The candidates’ circumstances were not the same: Questions were raised over McCain’s eligibility under the Constitution’s demand that a president be a “natural born Citizen,” because he was born to American citizen military parents while they are on assignment overseas.
Be the first to get the new eligibility book signed by Jerome Corsi and help get TV commercials on the air to bust this issue wide open!
The specific allegations have been placed online by YouTube participate PPSimmons, who previously has analyzed and provided commentary on the issues of eligibility to the presidency:
Video: http://youtu.be/VJgY86nmEHc
Questions over Obama’s have arisen because of his almost total concealment of documentation from his life – including his passport records, kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, University of Chicago articles, Illinois State Bar Association records, Illinois State Senate records and schedules, medical records, Obama/Dunham marriage license, Obama/Dunham divorce documents, Soetoro/Dunham marriage license and adoption records.
Specifically, because of the lack of documentation, it was suspected he might not have been born in Hawaii, or might have another circumstance that would preclude his eligibility under the Constitution’s “natural born Citizen” requirement, such as a loss of that status by taking Indonesia citizenship during his childhood, or relinquishing that status by using a foreign passport during his college years. Or that he didn’t qualify because of a dual citizenship inherited from a foreign national father.
He only released a copy of his “Certificate of Live Birth” from Hawaii this week because, he said, those questions were distracting him from the nation’s problems, such as massive spending, job instability and others.
That document is this: (go to site to see it as well as the resolution)
The text of the resolution is:
2d Session
S. RES. 511
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 10, 2008
Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
April 24, 2008
Reported by Mr. LEAHY, without amendment
April 30, 2008
Considered and agreed to
RESOLUTION
Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.
Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States;
Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;
Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;
Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;
Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country outside of our national borders;
Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and
Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.
The statement was sponsored by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., who was joined by Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.; Thomas Coburn, R-Okla.; Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.; Jim Webb, D-Va.; and Obama.
Leahy issued a statement at the time that praised the action, but mentioned Obama only as a cosponsor and did not address questions over his eligibility.
His statement cited The New York Times for “publishing a report calling into question the legality of McCain’s presidential run based on whether he is a ‘natural born Citizen,’ as required by the Constitution.”
“This bipartisan resolution erases any doubt that Senator McCain is eligible to run for president,” said Leahy. “The Senate was right to quickly pass this measure, and we can now put to rest any question of his eligibility.”
“There’s no question in my mind that Senator McCain is eligible to become president, and I’m proud that my colleagues in the Senate came together on this resolution to help quickly put this debate to rest,” McCaskill stated at the time.
Leahy’s statement was specific on the issue of U.S. parents.
“Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen. I recently asked Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, a former federal judge, if he had any doubts in his mind. He did not,” he said then.
The video cited Vattel’s The Law of Nations, writings from which the U.S. Founders drew both ideas and definitions. There, “natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens,” according to Book 1, Chapter 19, Paragraph 212.
But plaintiffs and lawyers who earlier brought a lawsuit against Obama alleging he is ineligible to be president, say he failed to meet the “natural born Citizen” requirement because his father is a foreign national, and the understanding of “natural born Citizen” at the time the Constitution was written was a citizen offspring of citizen parents.
That’s also what Obama, as a cosponsor, included in his Senate Resolution 511 in 2008 regarding McCain.
The statement includes two references to “Americans” as parents or “American citizens” as parents.
“Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President,” it states.
Source: WND – Obama’s McCain resolution demands ‘American’ parents http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=292901#ixzz1WkfzliuC
More on the Eligibility: The Kenyan’s DEPARTMENT OF “JUST US” MANAGES TO DISMISS SUIT REGARDING FRAUD
FRAUDULENT SSN
THIS IS TRULY, TRULY, UNBELIEVABLE. READ THE IDIOTIC JUDGEMENT RENDERED BY THIS JUDGE, PASS THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW, AND START CONTACTING EVERYONE YOU CAN IN THE CONGRESS. PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEO CLIP ON THIS PAGE – IT WILL STUN YOU MORE THAN ANYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST 2 1/2 YEARS.
WE ARE ON THE VERGE OF THE COMPLETE COLLAPSE OF OUR CORRUPT COURT SYSTEM. THE CONGRESS SITS IN STUNNED STUPIDITY WHILE A CRIMINAL OCCUPANT OF THE WHITE HOUSE RUNS ROUGHSHOD OVER THEM, AND THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA. LOCK AND LOAD, FOLKS; THERE IS MASSIVE CHAOS COMING.
http://conservativebyte.com/2011/08/judge-rules-on-obamas-social-security-number/
HERE ARE SOME OF THE FACTS:
An investigation has revealed the identity of the man whose Social Security number (SSN) has been illegally used by Obama: Jean Paul Ludwig, was born in France in 1890, emigrated to the United States in 1924, and was assigned SSN 042-68-4425 on or about March 1977. Ludwig lived most of his adult life in Connecticut . His SSN begins with the digits 042, which are among several reserved for Connecticut residents. Obama never lived or worked in that state, so there is no reason for his SSN to start with the digits 042.
Now comes the best part. Ludwig spent the final months of his life in Hawaii , where he died. Conveniently, Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Payne Dunham, worked part-time in the Probate Office in the Honolulu Hawaii Courthouse, and therefore had access to the SSNs of deceased individuals. The Social Security Administration was never informed of Ludwig’s death, and because he never received Social Security benefits there were no benefits to stop and no questions were raised. The suspicion, of course, is that Dunham, knowing her grandson was not a U.S. citizen, either because he was born in Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia upon his adoption by Lolo Soetoro, merely scoured the probate records until she found someone who died who was not receiving Social Security benefits, and “selected” that SSN for Obama.
Pingback: Eligibility Rulings Vanish from Net | askmarion