He's Not My President?

Thoreau: "Government is Best Which Governs Least"

Posts Tagged ‘nbc

Request to DOJ for Quo Warranto Action


In reading extensively the laws regarding the natural born citizen issue surrounding Barack Obama, and in particular reading Leo Donofrio’s opinions on the matter, (following Donofrio’s own letter to the U.S. Attorney) I decided to email U.S. Attorney Taylor with carbon copy to Attorney General Holder.  I will also be following up with hard copies via certified mail with return receipts requested tomorrow.  I think for anyone that truly believes this issue is important, you should also construct your own original correspondence to U.S. Attorney Taylor and Attorney General Holder.  I think it is important to not just copy and paste a letter but to come up with our own well thought out appeal based on the facts.  I have included my letter here but highly encourage you to write your own correspondence as well.  Anyone seeking help with their own original correspondence can post their letter in the comment section, and I will be happy to review it and provide editorial notes.

 March 16, 2009 

United States Attorney Jeffrey Taylor
United States Attorney’s Office
555 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Cc:  Attorney General, Eric Holder

Dear U.S. Attorney Taylor,

During last year’s Presidential election, many of us questioned the eligibility of several candidates placed on the ballots of various states for the Office of President of the United States.  It became even more troublesome to some of us when Barack Obama placed the following statement on his own website Fightthesmears.com:


“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4, 1982.”

At that point, some of us saw this statement as the first factual statement that might prove Mr. Obama is in fact not a natural born citizen.  Many scholars and legal minds believe that to be a natural born citizen of this country and therefore eligible under Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution to be President of the United States that both parents must be U.S. Citizens at the time of the child’s birth and the child must be born on U.S. soil.  Although citizenship has been adjudicated in the courts, and has been referenced in the U.S. Constitution and its amendments, a definition for natural born citizen has never been completely and clearly defined in the U.S. Constitution, nor in its amendments nor in the courts.  In fact, it seems that with respect to the U.S. Constitution, its amendments and court cases that one would lean more toward the definition above then otherwise.

As a result, there are many in the United States and abroad that fear that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and is therefore usurping the Office of President of the United States.  This present situation does not mean that President Obama is aware that he may not be a natural born citizen nor that he is aware that he may be usurping the office.  It simply means that his eligibility is in question and that this question in turn has important if not critical implications for our Constitution, our Republic and our Country.

Case in point, there are numerous lawsuits already in the courts regarding President Obama’s eligibility.  In one, if not more of those suits, military personnel have been called upon to join the lawsuits as plaintiffs in order to meet standing requirements.  In one instance, it was misreported via the Internet that an Officer Easterling was defying Presidential orders leaving him open to potential prosecution under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  Our military is made up of honorable men and women whom may believe they have a special duty to pursue litigation to determine President Obama’s eligibility thereby opening themselves up to potential prosecution.

After researching the matter, and in particular reviewing the research of Attorney Leo Donofrio, it has been determined that members of the U.S. Military hold no special duty or standing to bring about litigation regarding President Obama’s eligibility.  What has been determined is that once President Obama was elected (not by popular vote or by state popular vote but) by the electoral college system provided for in the U.S. Constitution (and subsequently took the oath of office), the means by which to remove a usurper of the Office of the President of the United States is the District of Columbia’s Quo Warranto statute.  Furthermore the statute states in part that:

only the United States attorney and/or the US Attorney General have the authority, without requesting leave of the court, to institute this action.

Furthermore, the following sums up the research done with respect to Quo Warranto and citizenship issues:

1.    In accordance with the separation of powers (Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches) of our government as put forth in the U.S. Constitution, the United States Congress exercised their legislative power to deal with a usurper including but not limited to the President of the United States by establishing the Quo Warranto statute, DC Code Sections:  16-3501, 16-3502 and 16-3503.

2.   Only you Mr. Taylor and/or present Attorney General Mr. Eric Holder have the proper jurisdiction and Constitutional and judicial powers to adjudicate this matter in the best interests of this nation and her citizenry.  You have a special duty to bring forth this action.

3.    No case can be brought directly by the U.S. Supreme Court on this matter as the U.S. Supreme Court does not possess original jurisdiction to issue a writ of Quo Warranto and would be violating separation of powers of the three branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches).  The Congress has exercised their legislative powers and you and Attorney General Holder now hold the judicial means under Quo Warranto to proceed with the matter.

4.    Finally, many have argued in accordance with the 14thAmendment to the U.S. Constitution that President Obama is a natural born citizen; however, it seems that this line of thinking cannot be argued because according to the 14thamendment it is inadmissible to assume no effect of the wording “natural born citizen” in Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution as articulated as well as precedent setting in Chief Justice John Marshall’s written opinion in the seminal case of Marbury V. Madison.

Sir, I do not envy the burden placed on you by virtue of your present position as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.  Mr. Taylor, you and/or Attorney General Holder have a duty to bring resolution to this matter via the judicial branch of our government through the Quo Warranto statute.  Lacking such an action on the part of you or Attorney General Holder will jeopardize upholding the supreme law of the land (our United States Constitution).  It is an awesome burden placed upon you and Attorney General Holder, but I hope that you will act on this matter to secure our laws.  If the U.S. Constitution is not upheld, then what laws will be left in our land that must be adhered to?  A nation without laws is no longer a nation.  I appreciate any consideration you give to this matter.


Name Withheld in this Post

Email Address for Attorney Taylor:  dc.outreach@usdoj.gov

Email Address for Attorney General Holder:  AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

Update 3/18/2009

In order to assist you with writing your own original letter to U.S. Attorney Taylor and Attorney General Holder, your letter should follow this general construction:

  • Introduction — The introduction should include the primary element that you are requesting which is that they initiate a quo warranto action due to Barack Obama not being a natural born citizen.  The introduction can be several paragraphs long but should be tightened up as best as possible.  My Introduction really takes up about half of what I wrote and is intermixed with the crux of my arguments that should have been clearly separated into the body of my letter.  My letter could be cleaned up considerably on this point.
  • Body — The body should utilize the research from Leo Donofrio’s site clearly showing that the law leans toward the fact that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and that the quo warranto statue is the only means to remove a usurper from the Office of the Presidency of the United States.  The body can also make use of the military concerns as to why this action must be brought forth.  My letter has the Introduction and Body too much intertwined.  You can write a much better and more coherent letter than mine following these simple basic constructions of essays/letter writing.
  • Conclusion — The conclusion should reiterate that U.S. Attorney Taylor or Attorney General Holder must act on this matter.  You can utilize passionate pleas here but it also important to ensure that you are keeping to the facts of the matter in your passionate discourse.

Written by KJ Kaufman

March 16, 2009 at 8:37 pm




As Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States of America, there are still those who believe he is not eligible due to Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution that he just pledged to uphold.  The relevant passage states in part:

No person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…

There are those who believe that President Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be President of the United States of America.

What really is at question here is not the definition of what it is to be a natural born citizen but loyalty to the United States of America for the crux of the issue that surrounded the inclusion of the Natural Born Citizen mandate for the Office of President in our Constitution was in fact an assurance of loyalty to this new Nation.  It was imperative to the success of our Nation that its citizenry be loyal and that the highest office of the land be held by one of unquestionable loyalty.  This is truly the issue before us today.

To simply state that Barack Obama is not loyal to this country without a preponderance of evidence is to potentially lack loyalty yourself.  It is a question that cannot be answered in a few words, a few sentences or a few paragraphs, but rather a long discourse with arguments from all sides surrounding issue.

First the question must be asked, what does it mean to be loyal to the United States of America?  This in itself is a profound asking but can probably be most effectively summed up as freedom, freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness, freedom to prosper as an individual and as a collective, freedom to ensure that these self-evident truths remain intact for all our citizenry and future generations.

To outrightly dismiss Barack Obama’s loyalty to the United States of America is naïve at best, dangerous at its worst but remains an intellectually prudent exercise.  To not look upon the Inauguration of America’s first African-American President, to deny the struggles of this Nation in its quest for equality is a cynical exercise on a historical day.  So with the breadth and the depth of the history made today, and with the struggles and triumphs of a Nation of people, all people, we will exercise our prudence and at least look if only for a moment at the important question of loyalty, specifically, loyalty to the United States of America.

Barack Obama was born to Barack Obama Sr., a Kenyan native and British Subject and Stanley Ann Dunham, a Kansas native and resident at the time of his birth of the 50th state of the Union, Hawaii.  Barack Obama’s father left his mother when President Obama was 2 years old and was never a physical presence in President Obama’s life.  Stanley Ann Dunham seemed to have a persuasion to foreigners as she later married Lolo Soetoro an Indonesian citizen and moved the family to Indonesia.  President Obama lived in Indonesia for several years returning to Hawaii to live with his grandparents.

I provide this brief parentage synopsis to point out that President Obama did not have your standard issue American life and was subject to a more global world at an early age than many of his fellow citizens.  Like those before him with a world view and who have lived outside of the United States, you either grow a deeper appreciation for our country or recognize and learn from the world outside of ours or you do both.

There are many questionable characters in President Obama’s life including but not limited to:  Frank Marshall Davis, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi, William Ayers, Samantha Power, and the list can go on.  Many of these characters we would not categorize with the American loyalty crowd; however, it may yet to be seen how their influence will affect Mr. Obama’s Presidency.

On this day, at this time, I do not possess the energy nor the inclination to tackle the question of President Barack Hussein Obama’s loyalty to this country.  The occasion is too great, the stakes too high to make misstatements or contort the record. 

What I believe we saw today is the representation of who we are as Americans.  We cast aside our racial bias to elect the first African American President.  We see represented in our 44th President a diversity of background.  We find ourselves with yet another lawyer as President of the United States.  And we see the common man elevated to our country’s highest position.  For that we are grateful.

If you feel this day does not warrant the above reverence, if you are still concerned about holding the highest office of the land requirements be met, if you fear the liberal left will lead this country to damnation, then you should start today to change the ideological views of its populace from as our President states “the bottom up” rather than the “top down.”  For no one man can entirely change this country in just one term or two.  No one man, no matter his power, can thwart the will of the people in a free and just nation.  No man is the bastion for what is right or what is wrong, what is good or evil.  The citizenry of this country are free; we will remain free, and will fight for that freedom regardless our leadership.  That is the promise of our Constitutional Republic, and our promise to ourselves.

Written by KJ Kaufman

January 20, 2009 at 11:58 am