“Eligible” Obama – Questionable “Official Certification Of Nomination” (OCON)
By JB Williams
When I first became aware that the Democratic National Committee prepared, signed and notarized two slightly different Certification of Nomination documents for the Obama-Biden ticket in the 2008 election, I was shocked and after verifying both documents as real, I wrote about it in The Theory is Now a Conspiracy and Facts Don’t Lie released on September 10, 2009.
The question was obvious – Why TWO different DNC Obama certification documents, and why did one have proper certification of constitutional eligibility in it, while the other had that certification deleted?
The Obama camp had been using the defense that the DNC had properly vetted and certified Obama’s eligibility for months. Judge after judge had used that claim and the fact that Obama’s COLB (Certification of Live Birth) had been “Snoped – FactChecked – blogged and twittered” as “legal proof” that Obama was eligible for office, despite the very real fact that Obama has never released any authenticated proof on the subject.
Then we find out that the DNC did NOT certify Obama as eligible under Article II – Section I of the Constitution, in 49 of 50 states. The DNC had only filed such certification in the state of Hawaii, Obama’s alleged birth place. The other 49 states received a Certification of Nomination which did NOT certify Obama as constitutionally eligible for office.
This story caused a firestorm of interest, comment and speculation across the web, leading Bob Unruh at World Net Daily to ask, What does Pelosi know about Obama’s eligibility?
On September 15, I released a follow up report, The Theory is Now a Conspiracy—II in which I was able to provide answers to many of the questions swirling around the two DNC docs.
- Both docs were real and both docs had been filed with Election Commission offices
- Only the doc filed in Hawaii certified Obama as constitutionally eligible
- Nancy Pelosi did in fact sign both documents, indicating awareness
- Both documents had been used before by the DNC, in 2000 and 2004
- Different states have different state statutes on the matter
- But the Constitution is clear, and the DNC ignored it
More interesting however, is the news I got back from a document and handwriting expert, a graphologist, which asserted the following in a detailed analysis of both documents.
In short, the answer to Bob Unruh’s question at WND seems to be yes, Nancy Pelosi knew that she was signing a false statement on behalf of Obama. But she also knew that this false statement of eligibility would only be filed in Hawaii, which has a very specific state statute that requires that each party certify the constitutional eligibility of their candidates, using specific text.
It further appears that this Certification of Nomination which includes text concerning constitutional requirements is the basis for statements made by Hawaii officials, who have proclaimed that Obama is a “natural born citizen” on the basis that Nancy Pelosi said so in her false Certification of Nomination.
After all, NO actual birth certificate has ever been released by Obama. A COLB, which anyone born anywhere in the world could purchase from Hawaii in 1961, in fact at least two different COLB’s from Hawaii, are all that has been offered by Obama.
The Story Continues
After releasing Parts I and II of this ongoing investigative report, literally hundreds of American citizens have taken it upon themselves to call their state Election Commission office and request copies of what the DNC filed in their state. Many of those documents have since been faxed or emailed to me.
In all cases except Hawaii, the DNC form without certification of constitutional eligibility was filed by the DNC. Meanwhile, everywhere we look, the RNC used one universal certification document which included full certification of constitutional eligibility in every state, in 2000, 2004 and 2008.
The following explanations have been offered on the subject.
- Only Hawaii has a state statute requiring such language
- Other states don’t require certification of constitutional standing for office
- The DNC certified Obama during the primary process
- Certification is “implied”
Obviously, while Hawaii’s statute requires that such language be there in the certification of nomination, no state statue requires that such language not appear in the document. So, why didn’t the DNC use one universal doc like the RNC?
Upon further investigation, we did indeed learn that some state primary filings do include language of constitutional eligibility by each candidate. However, that is a statement made by each candidate, not a certification of compliance made by the Party which had vetted the candidate and certified.
And, I can’t believe that anyone needs me to explain the significant difference between “implied” and “certified?” A personal check “implies” that you have money in your account, which may or may not be true. But a “certified” check guarantees that you have that money in your account.
We are talking about the highest office in this land and the most powerful office in the world. “Implied” won’t cut it when the US Constitution itself has very specific requirements for this office, even if Snopes, FactCheck and Obama bloggers don’t care, the rest of America should.
NO DNC Certification in many States
Not only did the DNC NOT certify eligibility in their Certification of Nomination for 49 states, they didn’t certify during the primary process in many states either. In fact, in most states, it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false.
While the RNC filed the same proper certifications in all states with 100% consistency, the DNC filed a variety of improper documents which essentially certified nothing. They certainly failed to certify that Barack Hussein Obama met all legal requirements for the office.
There is NO argument about it now.
Barack Hussein Obama fails to meet Article II – Section I requirements for the office of President because he is NOT a “natural born citizen” according to the foundation for that clause, the Law of Nations based upon Natural Law, which requires that one be the natural born child of TWO US citizens, born on US soil.
Whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, he is NOT the natural born citizen of TWO US citizens. He is the natural born son of a father who was at all times, a citizen of Kenya. Just as he adopted by natural law, his fathers name, he also adopted by natural law, his fathers citizenship. The efforts by Obama fans to use “anchor baby” arguments, claiming Hawaii as his birth place, fall short of the actual qualification.
But even more important, we now know that the DNC never certified to the contrary, except in Hawaii. The DNC never “certified” that Obama met all legal requirements for the office of president, like the RNC did for McCain.
Even in the primary filings, Obama filed documents like this one filed in Arkansas, which certifies absolutely nothing and isn’t even dated correctly at the signature line, also received from the Election Commission in Arkansas in November 2007, but allegedly signed by Obama in November 2008.
At no point in the string of documents filed by the DNC or Obama, did anyone certify to the state of Arkansas that Obama was eligible for the office he sought. This is true in many states… though not all 50 states have been reviewed as of this writing.
The US Senate never passed a resolution affirming that Barack Hussein Obama is a “natural born citizen” in accordance with the same definition the Senate used to make just such an affirmation on behalf of John McCain during the 2008 election.
Everyone in America knows who John McCain is, who his parents are, where he was born and that he is a true American war hero. Still, the Senate felt it necessary to pass a resolution affirming McCain’s “natural born citizen” status on the basis that he was the son of TWO US citizens, born on American soil at a US Navy base in Panama where his father was deployed at the time of John’s birth.
But nobody knows who Obama is or where he came from, as even his family in Kenya claim to have been present at his birth in Kenya, and no authenticated proof to the contrary has ever been presented.
Many Americans, at home, in congress and in the media, have assumed that Obama meets all qualifications because the DNC said he did. But in 49 states, they never said it, at least officially!
If you ask Nancy Pelosi, on what basis did she “certify” Obama as eligible under Article II, she would simply state that she never made any such certification, except in Hawaii… and she would be telling the truth!
The language necessary to certify Obama as eligible was omitted from the documents filed at 49 Election Commission offices, and in most of those cases, such certification was also missing in the primary filings.
Now, to be fair, the DNC had been omitting that language from their official filings for years. Refusing to certify their candidates as “constitutionally eligible” has been a practice of the DNC for at least a few election cycles now. Why?
The Final Questions
- Why did the DNC certify Obama’s eligibility only in Hawaii?
- Why did no state DNC office, DNC elector, or Election Commission office catch it?
- Since the DNC made no such certification, on what basis do we assume Obama to be eligible?
- Without any such certification, isn’t it more important than ever to see the actual birth certificate and ask the courts to make an official ruling on the definition of “natural born citizen?”
- Why did the DNC use TWO different docs, one incomplete, when the RNC used the same complete doc nationwide?
- On what basis will the media continue to claim that Obama is eligible?
- Why did Nancy Pelosi show signs of stress in her Hawaii certification of Obama?
- When will every American demand answers to these and many more questions?
After four weeks of investigation, we certainly know a lot more than we did four weeks ago. Still, this three part report raises more questions than answers.
At the end of the day, we clearly have a political Party currently in power which gained that power by ignoring or intentionally subverting the US Constitution. At a minimum, they were very sloppy and derelict in their duty. At worst, they are complicit in a crime of monumental proportions.
Article II requirements exist, they are quite clear, the parties are obligated to vet and certify their candidates, and yet the DNC failed miserably in all categories. Still, the nation assumes that all was above board. On what basis do we now make that assumption?
This is the last in this three part report. If any more answers are to be found, the American citizens will have to demand them, the courts will have to agree to allow discovery in the matter and Obama will have to become the transparent president he promised so many Americans he would be.
Armed with this information, it is now up to the American people to decide what to do with this information. But one thing is vividly clear, nobody in the DNC wants to address any of these questions and Obama’s Department of Justice is too busy running interference for their Messiah to be bothered with such minor details as the rule of constitutional law.
Source: Canada Free Press