Archive for April, 2009


April 27, 2009

between the lines Joseph Farah The Obama eligibility cover-up

Posted: April 27, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

Everyone reading this column knows that the news service over which I preside has been virtually alone in covering one of the biggest electoral scandals in American history – maybe the biggest.

I’m talking about the question of Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president.

Even many of Obama’s political opponents and harshest critics continue to pretend this is a non-issue, that it’s a matter that has somehow been settled, that it is a question only people who wear tin-foil hats are discussing.

I know that’s not the case, given a petition I began demanding proof Obama is a “natural-born citizen” has now attracted more than 360,000 signees.

Yet, the cover-up continues.

The rest of the media care not.

They have no idea how much concern there is for the sanctity of the Constitution out there throughout America.

But just to point out the duplicity of my colleagues in the establishment press, I would like to ask a rhetorical question: Did the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune and ABC News cover a story about questions over a presidential candidate’s constitutional eligibility during the long campaign last year?

Surprisingly, perhaps, the answer is “Yes, they did.”

They all covered the question over John McCain’s eligibility as a “natural-born citizen.”

Back on Feb. 28, 2008, the New York Times covered it.

That very same day, the Wall Street Journal covered it.

The Chicago Tribune covered it 10 days earlier.

And, just over a year ago, ABC News covered it.

As I have pointed out before, John McCain’s constitutional eligibility was considered important enough that congressional hearings were held on the matter – with Barack Obama eagerly signing up as a co-sponsor of legislation declaring his opponent fit to hold the office of the presidency.

Yet, no such hearings were held to demand Obama prove he was born in Hawaii as he claimed – despite his refusal, right up to today, to provide something as simple, innocuous and non-invasive of his privacy as a long-form birth certificate that would lay all such questions to rest.

Instead, all Obama ever released to select media was a “certificate of live birth,” which, as we all know, could have been issued to a resident of Hawaii for a foreign birth.

Why the lack of curiosity then?

Why the lack of curiosity now?

Why is everyone so eager to put this chapter of American political history behind us when it potentially cheapens our collective respect for the Constitution and potentially places the current occupant of the White House in a compromised position – even subject to blackmail if indeed he is not telling the truth about where he was born?

It would be so easy for Obama to settle this matter.

Instead of fighting lawsuits from citizens, including some currently serving in the military services right now in Iraq and Afghanistan who have serious concerns about the eligibility of Obama to serve in office, why won’t he just release the long-form birth certificate?

Why is that so difficult?

Why is that so onerous?

Doesn’t he realize that even though his friends in the media and many of his weak-kneed political opponents dare not breathe word of this controversy other than to denigrate those who do, it just ain’t going away?

If you are like me and believe the Constitution actually means what it says, I urge you to get the latest issue of Whistleblower magazine by subscribing to WND’s groundbreaking monthly or purchasing the single copy for just $7.50. It represents the most complete and comprehensive investigative report on this matter yet undertaken by any news organization. (It is also the first issue of the magazine in its new glossy 48-page format – entirely devoted to this one topic.)

Get it today. Share the information. Spread the word. Do it for your country.


April 7, 2009

between the lines Joseph Farah Why Obama evasion means he’s unfit
Posted: April 07, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

“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.