Why Obama evasion means he’s unfit

By Joseph Farah

“Fatetur facinus qui judicium fugit.”

If your Latin is a little rusty, that means, “A person who flees judgment confesses guilt.”

It is a principle of the law that can be traced back at least to Black’s Law Dictionary, published in 1718 and immensely influential to America’s founders.

It is almost a self-evident principle, but because we live in an age in which much of what was previously self-evident has become obscured, it’s worth mentioning again – particularly with regard to Barack Obama’s determined effort block any effort to ascertain whether or not he is actually constitutionally eligible to serve as president of the United States.

When American citizens demand proof that Obama is indeed a natural-born citizen, as the Constitution requires, it’s not like a criminal indictment of someone who is presumed innocent until proven guilty. In this case, the burden of proof is on Obama – and he has done everything humanly possible to avoid releasing that proof to controlling legal authorities and the people he serves.

Think about it.

When did government officials start ignoring our national charter – and why does it continue? Find out in “Who Killed the Constitution?”

Obama was elected to serve you under the parameters of the Constitution, to which he took a sworn oath to uphold. (We all watched him botch it so badly he was forced to do it again – in private.)

Yet he steadfastly refuses to provide the evidence of his own eligibility under that Constitution. No one has seen it – not the Federal Elections Commission, not the secretaries of state who presided over his elections, not the Supreme Court of the United States, not the governor of Hawaii who has refused to release what she claims is a birth certificate that would end this matter of supreme public interest, and not the Congress of the United States, whose members – both majority and minority – are apparently too afraid of public ridicule to do what they are sworn to do, enforce the Constitution.

What does that tell you?

According to the aforementioned principle of the law, Obama is a kind of fugitive, a kind of scofflaw, someone who is deliberately, and with malice aforethought, undermining the rule of law.

There are some people who insist none of this is really important. They will tell you Obama won the election fair and square and that ends the debate. They will tell you that pursuing this constitutional issue is a waste of time, a dead end. They will even tell you that anyone devoted to pursuing the truth is some kind of whack-job conspiracy nut.

I couldn’t disagree more vehemently.

There is a vital principle at stake. It’s called the sanctity of the Constitution and the rule of law. I am well aware of the many ways Washington has averted its eyes from the literal words of the Constitution throughout our history in an effort to do whatever it wants – legal or not. This is certainly not the first time.

But think of what it means if Obama is permitted to get away with his deliberate evasion of the law. He is, as president, the man charged with administering the law, with enforcing the law. Is he himself above it? Apparently he thinks he is – and that attitude has already manifested itself in a thousand ways in just the first 100 days he has illegitimately held office.

A president who is hiding secrets subjects himself, and, thereby, the best interests of our country, to blackmail. And there is no question Obama has a secret. I’m not sure what that secret is, but it apparently involves the circumstances of his birth and probably much more.

If he was truly born in Hawaii, it’s a simple matter to prove. It is nearly an impossible task to disprove it without that simple long-form birth certificate that every American is forced to show when they first obtain a driver’s license or attend school, to participate in organized sports activities or to obtain even a low-level government job.

Don’t you think it’s time the president of the United States came clean with us and released his?

If you agree with me, I urge you to sign our growing petition, now exceeding 350,000 names. Keep up the pressure. Don’t let this issue die. If it does, another little piece of the Constitution dies with it.

Joseph Farah

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND. He is the author or co-author of 13 books that have sold more than 5 million copies, including his latest, "The Gospel in Every Book of the Old Testament." Before launching WND as the first independent online news outlet in 1997, he served as editor in chief of major market dailies including the legendary Sacramento Union. Read more of Joseph Farah's articles here.