Just one day earlier, WND reported that members of the Congressional Research Service have launched a campaign to encourage people to belief that Obama is qualified, even though some critics contend he wasn’t born in Hawaii (and his birth document is forged) so he would not meet the constitutional requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen,” which is a requirement beyond being a “citizen” or a “native-born” citizen.

The CRS argued that anyone “native-born,” including the offspring of who illegal immigrants, is the same as “natural born citizen.”

Others say even if Obama was born in Hawaii, by demanding “natural born citizen” the Founders excluded from eligibility anyone born a dual citizen. Obama’s father, Barack Obama Sr., was a citizen of Kenya and subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at his birth.

WND has reported that there were multiple attempts in Congress during the years that Obama was building a power base and staging his bid for the White House to remove from the Constitution that requirement. A law firm worker where a partner worked on Obama’s finance committee also lobbied to have the change made.

The Alabama document explains the jurisdiction for vetting candidates “valls squarely on the shoulders of your office as head of the voter fraud unit and it is your sworn duty as a leader of honor and public servant to protect and defend the Constitution.”

The complaint says the fraud allegations come not only from allegations regarding Obama’s birth documentation, but also from his use of a “bogus” Social Security number of Connecticut.

“The SSN discrepancy is worthy of investigation. His naturalization, if it ever occurred, is another issue since he was officially adopted by Indoensian Lolo Soetoro. These additional two issues alone would constitute the need for further investigation.”

The complaints notes the significance of the approval of the state secretary of state.

“Leading Americans, including some judges, have incorrectly concluded that the voters are the final arbviters of whether an indvidiiual is qualified to hold office. This is simply not correct. America is a constitutional Repbulican, not a democracy without a constitution. The Consttiution is an anti-majoritarian document; meaning that it protects idnividiuals from invasions and usurpations of the majority.”

WND previously has reported that historically, in both New Hampshire and California, candidates have been removed from ballots for ineligibility. And there even was a case in North Dakota where a chief officer, the governor, was removed from office after he was elected and installed, because of ineligibility.

That case involved Thomas H. Moodie, who was elected. But later it was revealed that he had not lived in the state the needed five years before running for office. “Because of that ineligibility, he was removed from office and replaced by the lieutenant governor,” state records reveal.


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.