David Gregory Wonders Why John Boehner Doesn’t Hit Birthers With His Gavel and Lock Them in a Closet
**Written by Doug Powers
I was hoping when Gregory asked Boehner how come he doesn’t spend more time lecturing people who aren’t entirely convinced President Obama was born in Hawaii that Boehner would have replied, “You probably see Chris Matthews more than I do, David, why don’t you do it?” But it wasn’t to be:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Since when is John Boehner responsible for Bill Maher’s opinion?
Bob Schieffer must have thought this give and take was the epitomy of shoddy journalism — David Gregory didn’t even ask John Boehner why he won’t quit smoking! A gross dereliction of MSM duty.
Writes Treacher: “I don’t recall anybody ever asking Nancy Pelosi if it was her job to correct any of the myths and misinformation that were spread about George Bush.”
**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Elizabeth Warren touted Cherokee heritage in 1984 collection of recipes
May 17, 2012 10:26 AM by Doug Powers
124 Comments
Palin-endorsed Deb Fischer wins Nebraska Senate primary; will face Bob Kerrey in November
May 16, 2012 11:02 AM by Doug Powers
46 Comments
NY Senator: Honor Mother’s Day by supporting pro-abortion group
May 12, 2012 10:44 AM by Doug Powers
86 Comments
CNN anchor astonishment after student in viral photo with Obama won’t say she’s voting for him
April 27, 2012 05:51 PM by Doug Powers
53 Comments
Legislation introduced to remove references to word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
April 26, 2012 06:56 PM by Doug Powers
83 Comments
Categories: Media,Media Bias,Politicians
Babalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearRedstate
» Kimberlin’s Associates Caught on Tape?
What if he is still legally, Barry Soetoro, Indonesian citizen?
Everyone knows this is a can of worms, that’s why no one wants to touch it.
It also helps explain why even his putative political opponents assist with the cover-up.
When the Presidents minions were lying to smear Sarah Palin and the Tea Party with blood libel did Gregory call for him to settle them down, multiple times, like a drunken patsy?
Nope.
“Barry Bill” goes down in Arizona:
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/02/three-republicans-kill-arizona-birther.html
No need to prove presidential eligibility. Yes, the Constitution says you must be a natural born Citizen, but no one does anything to insure that is the case….go for it, America is yours for the taking.
We are doomed…..not enough people care
what happens ro America……politics is hopelessly bad and worse.
We have no control anymore, not even the illusion of control.
On February 14th, 2011 at 5:16 pm, swede said:
Note what Obama did, and did not say. He said “I believe in — that Jesus Christ died for my sins…”, but there is a big difference between believing just that Jesus died and believing that Jesus rose again. Everyone dies. But only those that God raises from the dead are resurrected. Belief in Jesus Christ’s resurrection is central to Christianity:
Again, note that Obama did not confess that Jesus is Lord, and while Obama confessed that he believes Jesus died, Obama did not confess that he believes that God has raised Jesus Christ from the dead.
You said, “From your point, Obama’s a Christian.”
I disagree.
Obama has not not confessed belief in Jesus Christ’s Lordship and resurrection.
But Obama has confessed the Islamic confession of faith (regarding Allah and Mohammed), in Arabic – which he KNOWS is interpreted by the Islamic world as a confession of faith in Islam as the only true faith.
There is no getting around that.
Obama wants the Muslim world to believe that he is a Muslim, the Christian world to believe he is a Christian, and the secular progressive world (a la Bill Maher) to believe that he is a secular progressive.
Oh, and no need to apologize about your comment being “OT” (off-topic). The video in this post shows David Gregory attacking Speaker Boehner because a significant percentage of people believe that Obama is a Muslim. So discussion of Obama’s faith is very much on topic for this thread.
Congress never inspected a hard copy COLB. Never, ever, ever. They accepted a URL link to some .JPG images as sufficient, even though you couldn’t get a job anywhere else with that “documentation”.
And while the Constitution doesn’t explicitly require hard copy documentation, it does require the Congress to ensure that the President and Vice President qualify (see Section 3 of the 20th amendment).
Current immigration law DOES require ALL employees (no exceptions) to produce hard copy documentation to prove their employment eligiblity.
Combine the legal requirements of:
… and you see that Obama and Biden are legally required to produce hard copy documentation of not only their eligibility to work in the United states but also their eligibility to hold the office of President. And Congress has the legal responsibility to ensure that the President and Vice President have qualified.
No, the onus of proof of eligibility is on the employee, not the employer.
Agreed.
For over 2 years I have sought two things:
1) For the Legislative Branch to verify the “Obama birth narrative” by inspecting an original, initial birth certificate.
2) For the Judicial Branch to rule on the Founder’s intent of the Constitutional requirement that the President and Vice President be “a natural born citizen”.
Obama obtained a Diplomatic Passport. It is my understanding that he did not have to provide any documentation in order to obtain a Diplomatic Passport… all he had to do was win an election.
Read what Vattel said about the Law of Nature as it applies in this situation:
By the Law of Nature, if the “Obama birth narrative” is true, then he was born a natural born subject of the United Kingdom, not a natural born citizen of the United States.
On February 14th, 2011 at 5:22 pm, spaceycakes said:
Diplomatic Passport:
http://wtpotus.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/diplomatic-passport.jpg
On February 14th, 2011 at 5:59 pm, nail49 said:
Very, very interesting, nail49!
FactCheck.org assumed that Obama let his Kenyan citizenship expire at age 21. And when Leo Donofrio did his own fact checking of the Kenyan constitution, Leo forced FactCheck.org to make a correction because the Constitution allowed a two-year window after reaching age 21, which really meant he had until age 23. But still, FactCheck.org assumed, without evidence, that Obama must have kept U.S. citizenship and renounced Kenyan citizenship.
Leo Donofrio is of the opinion that Obama never “lost”, nor renounced, his status as a citizen of the UKC (United Kingdom and Colonies).
And then there is the issue of Indonesian citizenship… when Obama attended school in Indonesia, only Indonesian citizens were allowed to attend. And his school registration shows:
Name: Barry Soetoro
Citizenship: Indonesia
Religion: Islam
It is entirely possible that Obama has had passports from four different countries:
UK
Kenya
Indonesia
US
This rivals Jason Bourne.
On February 14th, 2011 at 9:25 pm, BOB said:
Agreed.
I hit that wall when McCain came back from the dead and got the GOP nomination. It’s all kabuki theater to distract from the SHTF.
Keep in mind that Barry was adopted not once, but twice.
First, by Lolo Soetoro.
Second, by Hartford and Mary Black Eagle in May 2008.
Mary did not want to do it, but was forced to do so. Why?
Why was Mary told she “had to” adopt Barack Obama?
(Washington Post article permanently archived here.)
On February 15th, 2011 at 9:17 am, Virginia Patriot said:
Remember this…
Fred Thompson was McCain’s stalking horse.
And Mitt Romney quit the race and released his delegates to McCain when he didn’t have to. Romney sold his soul in the hopes of getting the VP nod. It would have been better for Romney to stay in the race and try to force a brokered convention, from which we could have picked a more conservative nominee than McCain.
You want to know who wasn’t part of the kabuki theater? The only two candidates who stayed in the race all the way until McCain clinched the nomination with 1191 pledged delegates… Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.
Say what you want about them, but they were the only two who went the distance against McCain.
Bottom line is there is no birth certificate, if it existed we would not be having this conversation. Point 2) the sockpuppet may or may not be a muslim, but is definetly a Muslim sympathizer.
RedPill,
I agree that they were not in on the fix.
I don’t know how we are going to get anywhere without taking down the two-headed monster that mascarades as D and R.
This is the most profoundly dishonest man to occupy the White House in my lifetime…and that goes back almost to WWII.
Sure, Bill Clinton told some bald-faced lies. And JFK was dishonest in his marriage and at the ballot box, when necessary. Nixon…they didn’t call him “Tricky Dick” for no reason at all. None of them, including Ike, could be entirely trusted on the golf course.
Obama’s dishonesty has not been as flagrant as Clinton’s, but infinitely more pervasive. Clinton lied about specific acts; but everyone could see who Clinton was. They knew where he came from, what his momma and daddy and brother were, what a total, schmoozing, classic, dirtbag politician he was. Anyone who watched his face learned to spot the insincerity in his bitten lip. And they knew his politics, that he was a solid Democrat, mostly about uplifting people like his momma.
None of his lies worked. Everybody knew, even before Monica, that they couldn’t leave their daughter alone with him; and only a fool would get into a land deal with him and Hillary. He could not hide who he was.
But Obama is different from all the others. He is the president who has no history. He arrived from a cloud of obscurity. And he has lied and lied and lied about who he fundamentally is and what he believes. All politicians shade the truth and do some strategic dodging. But this man is not a committed Christian, not a committed believer in capitalism, and not a proud American. (No disgrace about not being a Christian…just a disgrace in being a ~sham~ Christian.) The man got his “dreams from my father,” dreams of an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-Western, pro-third world, socialist future and works every day to bring those dreams to fruition.
No other president ever fundamentally concealed his basic beliefs and sympathies and visions. Obama, of course, is not a magician and none of this would have been possible without the willing suspension of disbelief by the fawning press corps. This cynical liar of a president played the ultimate race card: He coasted into the White House on the deep craving of the American people to redeem a republic founded with slavery by finally elevating a black American to our highest office. But he could barely stand to pin that American flag in his lapel even in the campaign and resisted it as long as he could. Of course, he shares Jeremiah Wright’s view of the world! Why else would he have gone to his church for all those years and had a close relationship with him. Of course, he shares the views of the long string of radical anti-Americans in his past and in his present. No, he is not a Muslim, IMO, but he is at least as comfortable with Islam as he is with Christianity.
Yes, he is the one they were waiting for, the one who would take the slave profits from the white man and give them out to “the community.” He was the one who would chop the United States down to size. He was the one who would fulfill all these dreams.
But they weren’t, of course, American dreams (except maybe for Malcolm X and such types). And every bit of it had to be lied about and concealed. So he stuck the flag in his lapel and got on with the undermining of the United States.
He is smart, though, always seeking to avoid confrontation. He knows that the press will always read things his way and not inquire too deeply or be critical. So he sells is lies with a soft voice.
But he is one lying dog, lying with every public word he utters.
And by law of the United States, what Vattel said on the subject is irrelevant. If the founders wanted Vattel’s definition, they could have easily referred to it and/or been more specific. Lacking that, the text is ambiguous and it is up to the courts to decide the issue. They have, and not in your favor. You really need to get over at least this birther argument.
Here’s your chance, press, to ask Obama the questions that David Gregory thought Speaker Boehner should answer…
Ask Obama why he took Shahada…
Ask Obama why he has never released his birth certificate from Hawaii to the U.S. Congress…
With the help of three
RepublicansRINOsExtremely well put IR.
chappy, by your definition, any child born to illegal aliens, raised to have only allegiance to Mexico(or any other country)can be President. Is that what you really think the founders intended?
Breaking news on the subject; Hawaii Governor Abercrombie is on MSNBC announcing that there is no birth certificate, the Soetero dog ate it. WOW, guess that settles that.
@120
And then, unfortunately for history, the Soetero dog got hungry again and ate Obama’s college transcripts.
The founders didn’t intend a lot of people to be president (blacks, women, non-property owners). Their intent is irrelevant. The criteria they established is. And the criteria said “natural born citizen” without providing any further definition. Did they mean Vattel? Maybe. But, as I cited before, British common law (which was controlling authority up until the revolution and was still the bedrock of our common law after (and continues to be today) had a very different take on the matter. The Supreme Court plainly stated that the English rule was adopted in the Colonies and continued to do so even after the Constitution was developed.
And that pretty much ends it. The SC today, if given the choice of following well cited dicta in an already decided SC ruling or trying to extrapolate what the founder’s intent was through what letters they wrote or what books they had in their libraries are going to side with the former. Hands down. Not even close.
They did not think it to be a possibility sufficiently high to bother to prevent. It would have been clutter.
They did not anticipate:
1) Getting to America would become so ludicrously easy.
2) The People would fail to Amend the Constitution to reflect how easy coming to America while still maintaining ties and loyalties to the immigrant’s old nation had become.
3) The People would elect someone who clearly loathed America as its President.
Check this out; Rudy calls John Boehner’s office about Obama’s eligibility.
We need more Rudys!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtLkzMf19Ds
On February 15th, 2011 at 12:27 pm, chapoutier said:
1) I recommend that you read The Founding Fathers and Slavery.
2) You seem to be ignoring the 15th and 19th amendments.
3) The Constitution never said that you had to be a property owner in order to be qualified to vote and/or hold public office.
That’s the first time I’ve seen you admit that maybe they did intend the Natural Law definition, as explained by Vattel.
You have a very different interpretation of the Wong Kim Ark case. The Supreme Court did not claim that Wong Kim Ark was a “natural born citizen”. They expressly avoided doing so, and only said that Wong Kim Ark was a “citizen”, as that was all they needed to address for that case.
This is different.
The court needs to resolve this issue regarding Presidential eligibility.
They didn’t need to at the federal level. The states all had them.
What do the 15th and 19th amendments have to do with the founding fathers?
I know the case did not rest on the definition of “natural born.” Nevertheless, the court expressly laid out its definition of that term therein.
The text of a properly passed and ratified Constitutional amendment trumps the intent of the founding fathers in that particular area. That’s the whole point of a Constitutional amendment.
The 15th and 19th amendments trump the Founders’ intent in those areas.
(And let’s not pretend that all of the Founders intended for blacks to be denied the right to vote… many blacks voted before the 15th amendment).
And speaking of amendments, it’s interesting that back in 2008, the Obama campaign proudly claimed “Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment“.
For some reason, they later decided to scrub that reference to the 14th Amendment.
Even today, that site does not call Obama a “natural born citizen”, but rather “a native citizen of the United States of America.”
What’s interesting about the claim that
“Obama became a citizen at birth under the first section of the 14th Amendment” is that first section of the 14th Amendment says:
“…and subject to the jurisdiction thereof…”
Yet, Obama was born subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom…
Oh, and Obama supporters probably don’t want to look to closely at Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, as that would likely disqualify Obama if if were actually enforced.
Like I said, you want our eligibility requirements to be dictated by foreign law.
Like I said, Obama was born a British subject by BOTH Natual Law and British law.
He was born a natural born British subject, NOT a natural born U.S. citizen.
He was born subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country, because his father was subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country.
It’s interesting how you pass right over the fact that the Obama campaign scrubbed their reference to the 14th amendment.
Not going to respond to that, Chap?
You make a bold statement asserting the intent of our Founding Fathers in lieu of fact:
Downplaying your claim by saying their intent was irrelevant does not excuse you from making such a false and decidedly inflammatory statement.
This historic revisionism that all the fouding fathers loved and respected and held black people as equals would be kinda cute in an “awww…how naive…” way if it were coming from a four year old.
In adults, its just pathetic. Even the ones that did not own slaves were complicit in perpetuating the system for generations more.
For anyone not wanting to read the article, it can be summed up thusly:
Almost all the founders hated slavery. Some even hated it so much that they continued to hold slaves. Despite the overwhelming hatred of slavery, apparently the folks from the Carolinas and Georgia (the only ones who liked slavery) were some sort of He-Men or had Jedi mind trick powers. How else to explain how such a small minority could thwart the will of the vast majority?
Interesting, Obama and McCaskell sponsored SB2678 to make military dependents born overseas eligible to be President. If failed.
The Senate did pass Res. 511, stating that McCain was eligible, even though he was born in Panama, citing his parents both being citizens.
Obama knows he’s not a natural born citizen. He’s so far pulled off the biggest fraud in history.
New poll shows birthers alive and well:
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/02/romney-and-birthers.html
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=263973
Instead of fighting Obama and his Socialist/Marxist policies one at a time, with, of course, “compromise”, while he pushes even harder with his Czars and executive orders, the issue of Obama’s ineligibility and the fraud that accompanied getting him elected could be used to stop the agenda and reverse the damage already done.
The satisfaction of seeing the people involved wearing prison orange would be priceless. The American people are finally starting to wake up and this can be done, even working against Congress and the media, we just need more American citizens to wake up, speak out, and take action.
I am doing my part each and every day, whether it seems to be effective or not…and I won’t be stopping.
On February 15th, 2011 at 10:49 pm, BOB said:
No surprise to me at all. The ranks of those who are Constitutional Republicans (who expect the Constitution and the Rule of Law to be supported and defended) has only grown, despite being labelled as “birthers” by the MSM (Marxist Soros Media).
What David Gregory was trying to do in this interview was to get Speaker Boehner to publicly condemn those who legitimately question Obama’s religious beliefs and Constitutional (in)eligibility. I am one of the people that David Gregory wanted Speaker Boehner to condemn, even though my legitimate questions are based on Obama’s own words and actions!
Obama’s campaign admitted he was born a British subject. Obama himself has not authorized the release of his birth certificate directly from the State of Hawaii to members of Congress.
Obama himself confessed the Shahada in Arabic (which Muslims around the world consider a confession of belief in Islam).
It’s not crazy to make those observations.
What is crazy is that David Gregory ignores those observations. It’s crazy that David Gregory asks Speaker Boehner to condemn those who do make those observations.
Speaker Boehner would be wise to support and defend the Constitution and the Rule of Law by performing his duties under Section 3 of the 20th Amendment and ensuring that the President and Vice President qualify to hold the office of President under the United States Constitution.
In the words of President Ronald Reagan,
Speaker Boehner would be wise to support and defend the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which requires:
Speaker Boehner would be wise to ask for the State of Hawaii to send him the vital records for Barack Hussein Obama II.
I remind Speaker Boehner that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, and his duty to support and defend the Constitution trumps any Hawaiian state law.
The State of Hawaii can not tell any member of the U.S. Congress that they do not have a “tangible interest” in the vital records of Barack Obama/Barry Soetoro.
Every member of the U.S. Congress has a “tangible interest” in those records, in order to support and defend:
… and Red Pill Wonders Why John Boehner Doesn’t Hit David Gregory With His Gavel and Lock Him in a Closet…
Oh, that’s right… Christian conservatives don’t do that kind of thing to journalists…
… but Egyptian Muslims do far worse things to journalists…
BOB,
Despite the very best Alinsky efforts by The Usurper and all his supporters, including those who wear an R jersey, they have been unable to squash, humiliate, embarrass, or silence people like us. It’s driving them crazy. Witness Gregory and O’Reilly.
Thr truth of the fraud will come out eventually.
It will be delicious to watch them squirm.
On February 15th, 2011 at 10:49 pm, BOB said:
Drudge has it at the top of the third column:
(See this archive of the Drudge Report, cached: 2011-02-16 )
While the reporting focuses on just the birthplace, the larger issue is those who think Obama is not qualified to hold the office for either of two reasons:
I’m suspecting his Indonesian citizenship doesn’t help, either.
True.
And his Kenyan citizenship, that “FactCheck” assumes, without evidence, that Soetoro/bama let expire at age
2123.(Leo Donofrio forced “FactCheck” to correct their error of when they thought Kenyan citizenship would expire under the Kenyan constitution).
It’s good to see that Leo Donofrio has a new post up:
The latest from attorney Mario Apuzzo: