By Doc Vega
With the Presidential inauguration looming in January, the US media has done a great job refusing to report the latest developments that could cause the oval office to still change hands. It is interesting to note that with many irregular activities over the course of the election, that still GOP governors, prosecutors, state attorney generals, or election officials themselves have not made a case for fraud and election violations. One must come to the conclusion that President Obama, regardless of his reckless 4 years of legal, social, and economic assaults seems to have remained beyond the reach of the law. After more than 4 years, still the question of Obama’s proof of birth, his forged online White House version of his birth certificate, thanks to Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation, Obama’s falsified selective service card, and a fraudulent social security number persist in being unaddressed, and unprosecuted.
Two opportunities for justice to be done
Now, there are still two remaining legal challenges to President Obama’s refusal to prove his citizenship and thus constitutional qualification over his natural-born citizen status. In the state of Alabama a charge that Secretary of State, Beth Chapman, failed to serve the interests of the people under her jurisdiction when she approved Barack Obama for the state ballot ignoring the allegations of a lawsuit challenging the President’s legitimacy to hold office according to plaintiff Hugh McInnish. Attorney, Larry Klayman, representing his client, is filing a law suit requiring President Obama to produce a genuine birth certificate that has not been proven electronically altered or fraudulently fabricated. The suit was dismissed by a lower district court Judge Eugene Reese, who tried to eliminate an actual proceeding by declaring the matter already decreed rather than considering the evidence of presented by Klayman.
State Supreme Court Justice agrees there is a case
Now a justice who considers that there is merit to the cause that Obama’s eligibility in indeed in question is answering the call. State Supreme Court Justice, Tom Parker, does consider that significant discovery of evidence for the case exists and has filed a concurrence over the issue. Tom Parker is a staunch constitutionalist who not only believes that the federal government should rule by the US Constitution, but that our rights come from God. Justice Parker’s interpretation of constitutional law is that the document limit’s the power of government in order to limit the abuse by those in the government over the rights of the people. Like most constitutionalists, Parker sees the government as already having way too much power just as Thomas Jefferson did in his day.
The cold posse strikes again
Hugh McInnish, in his petition, included crucial evidence produced by lead investigator Mike Zullo of Sheriff Arpaio’s cold case posse. Justice Tom Parker acknowledged in his concurrence that evidence submitted by McInnish could cast serious doubts upon the authenticity of President Obama’s short form and long form birth certificates. Parker indeed references Sheriff Arpaio’s cold case posse findings in his public findings on the challenge that has been legally filed with the state of Alabama.
Alabama Chief Justice weighs in
Now, newly elected Chief Justice, Roy Moore, will weigh in on the case as well. Moore, like Parker believes that the US government should get down to the business of upholding the US Constitution as well as the state of Alabama recognizing its own state constitution in the course of legal due process. This could spell trouble for the Presidency of Barack Obama, especially as Chief Justice Moore states that his court has the power of writ to control jurisdiction over the proceedings. The Chief Justice acknowledges that the US Constitution is almost ignored within the course of business within the US government while insisting that our God-given rights are protected by restraining the misbehavior of those in the federal government.
Will the Supreme Court of Alabama succeed in making a case against the unconstitutional Presidency of Barack Obama? Every other state in the union capitulated in a matter that should have been decided without political influence or pressures by the existing administration. Yet, it is most apparent that such influence did indeed affect the actions of the state ballots committees, state attorney generals, and district courts. Perhaps the Supreme Court of Alabama will see fit to pursue its duty and hand down a verdict accordingly.
In Part II we will discuss another current legal challenge to the fraud and forgery that surrounds the Constitutional eligibility of President Obama.