WND/
Bob Unruh
Florida, the battleground for many elections, has an opportunity right now to resolve the issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility, according to a court filing in a case brought by a Democrat under state law that allows such challenges.
Florida, the battleground for many elections, has an opportunity right now to resolve the issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility, according to a court filing in a case brought by a Democrat under state law that allows such challenges.
“On Nov. 6, 2012, the state of Florida held its 2012 general
election. On Nov. 10, 2012, defendant Barack Hussein Obama was declared
the official winner of the Florida general election. Yet defendant Obama
has never established his eligibility for the presidency of the United
States,” says a filing today from attorney Larry Klayman.
“Indeed, neither defendant Obama, nor the Democratic Party of
Florida, has even stated that defendant Obama is a ‘natural born
citizen,’” the filing said. “The only evidence of defendant Obama’s
alleged birth within the United States has come in the form of an
electronic version posted on the Internet. However, there has been
evidence to show that this ‘birth certificate’ has either been altered
or is entirely fraudulent.”
The filing was a response to state officials’ motion to dismiss the
case brought on behalf of Michael C. Voeltz. The case was filed before
the election, and was thrown out by a judge who said it wasn’t timely.
It was refiled after the election, and the current document seeks an
immediate hearing, as provided by state law.
“Section 102.168(7), Florida statutes, provides that ‘any candidate,
qualified elector, or taxpayer presenting such a contest to a circuit
judge in entitled to an immediate hearing,” Klayman wrote. “Plaintiff
Michael Voeltz specifically requested an expedited hearing in his prayer
for relief. … Yet even if he had not specifically requested such
relief, which he did, the Florida statutes still mandate that plaintiff
is entitled to an immediate hearing by law simply through the act of
filing the lawsuit in front of a circuit judge.”
The case challenges Obama’s presence on the 2012 presidential
election ballot because of questions over his constitutional
eligibility.
“Defendant Barack Hussein Obama is a direct threat to the safety and
security of the United States, and its Constitution, which plaintiff
must protect and defend by oath,” according to the complaint.
As WND reported, Voeltz,
who identifies himself as “a registered member of the Democratic Party,
voter and taxpayer in Broward County,” has challenged Obama’s
eligibility, arguing that the “natural born citizen” clause was rightly
understood in historical context to mean a child not only born in the
U.S., but born to two American-citizen parents, so as not to have
divided loyalties. Obama, however, readily admits to being born a dual
citizen because of his father’s British citizenship.
The original case sought to exclude Obama from the 2012 ballot.
Klayman and Voeltz claimed that Obama is not a natural born citizen as
required by Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, because he
was born a British subject.
The case cited the evidence produced by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s
special investigative unit, which has asserted that the birth
documentation from Hawaii that Obama claimed was “proof positive” of his
Hawaiian birth is not real.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario