Archive for May, 2011

Natural BornTruth.

Posted in Uncategorized on May 31, 2011 by naturalborncitizen

Recently, I wrote an article wherein I condemned Professor Lawrence Solum, an esteemed Constitutional scholar, for tampering with an article he published in the Michigan Law Review (September 2008) which focused upon the issue of whether John McCain was eligible to be President despite his birth in Panama.  That article did not mention Barack Obama.

The opening paragraph of the article stated:

“What was the original public meaning of the phrase that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States? There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.’” (Emphasis added.)

Shortly after that report was published, Obama’s dual nationality issue started to get legs when I petitioned the US Supreme Court to review his eligibility (as well as the eligibility of John McCain and Roger Calero, the Nicaraguan born Socialist Workers Party Candidate) just before the 2008 election.  Up until that petition, Obama’s dual nationality issue wasn’t on the national radar.

Solum was caught in a rather delicate situation as the issue developed national awareness since he clearly indicated Obama was not a member of the class of persons whose eligibility fit within the “core meaning” and “general agreement” of the natural born citizen clause.  As a result of the attention, Solum scrubbed the two citizen parent reference.  You can read the whole sordid story in my previous report.

Solum’s original report had it right:

– all persons born on US soil to US citizen parents are – beyond question – eligible to be President

–  all persons who were not US citizens at the time of their birth are – beyond question – ineligible to be President

The eligibility of everyone else is questionable.

That was the truth when Solum first wrote the article.  And it’s the truth now.  And I always want to know the truth and to speak the truth.  So, having come down so hard on Solum, I recently challenged myself to go back and review the relevant judicial history to see if I had overlooked anything important that would help establish the case for Obama’s eligibility.  I also set my gaze upon searching for anything I might have previously overlooked which strengthens arguments against his eligibility.


As a result of this effort, I’ve developed new insights and analysis which strengthen my opinion that the original meaning and intention of the natural born Citizen clause would exclude Obama from eligibility.

But I’ve also had an important insight which helps the case for Obama.

I have not seen this particular analysis discussed before.  I Googled the appropriate terminology, and there is nothing I can find that previously discerns this particular insight.  It appears both factions of the argument have been short-sighted as to this point.  It is new.  Therefore, I have an ethical duty to bring it to your attention.

There is a great body of historical, judicial, academic and journalistic evidence which indicates that only a person born in the US to parents who are US citizens is a “natural born Citizen” eligible to be President.  But the media, academia, Congress and a supporting circus of blogosphere attack dogs have tried – in vain – to marginalize anyone who speaks truthfully about the issue.  Hell, Solum marginalized his own reputation over it.

I never want to be rightfully accused of doing that – of twisting the legal evidence to fit a stubborn conclusion.  The very notion is sickening to my core.

These new insights are very technical and difficult to explain.  This is particularly true of the new analysis which helps the case for Obama’s eligibility.  The technicality involved certainly posed an ethical challenge.  If I just kept my mouth shut, it would probably remain obscured.  Who knows, it might remain obscured even after I discuss it.  But I will do my best to make it clear for posterity.

I am a lawyer who understands true ethics.  And such a lawyer is obligated to reveal cases and facts to the opposition which are damaging.  This is the way the Bar and the Bench should behave.  The truth must come before the desired outcome.  Unfortunately, that’s not the way it is in our judicial system.  But it will be the way of this blog.

Leo Donofrio Esq.

OBAMA Indicates Not All “Native Born” Are Eligible To Be President.

Posted in Uncategorized on May 27, 2011 by naturalborncitizen

Unlike the more sensational conspiracy theory regarding Obama’s birth certificate and place of birth (I believe he was born in Hawaii… but I certainly do not believe he’s provided any legal document which passes forensic scrutiny which proves so), I am recognized for the legal argument that Obama is not eligible to be President because he was a dual citizen at the time of his birth.

Article 2 Section 1 of the US Constitution lists the requirements for President:

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; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The key phrase here is “born”.  Either – at the time of your birth – you were born as a US citizen, and you are eligible, or you are not.  It can’t be cured at a later stage.  The word “born” is unequivocal.  You must be a US citizen at the time of your birth… the moment you enter the world determines eligibility.

Obama fully admits that his birth “status” was governed by the United Kingdom.  I have always wondered how it is possible a person whose birth status was governed by the United Kingdom can be considered a natural born citizen of the United States?  I feel that is a very rational question to ask.  The contradiction is self evident.

Obama eligibility supporters seek to redefine the Constitutional requirement listed in Article 2 Section 1  – “natural born”  – to mean “native born”.   And Obama supporters would argue that all native born are natural born.  “No exceptions”. Their argument rests on a very simple claim:

If – at the time of your birth – you are born on US soil, then you are a US citizen at the time of your birth and therefore you are eligible to be President.

But President Obama does not agree with that simple definition.

Obama is on record as denying that all native born on US soil are – at the time of their birth – US citizens.  Perhaps you missed it, but Obama announced a new Constitutional requirement for President that is not contained in the actual Constitution.  According to President Obama, his supporters are wrong and it is not enough just to be born on US soil.  Obama requires more.

I am referring to Obama’s stand against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA) back in March 2001 when he was a Senator in Illinois.  That act sought to grant equal protection under the law to all those born alive after an abortion attempt failed and the child was delivered into the world alive.  The BAIPA sought to recognize that such persons were US citizens deserving of equal protection under the law so that these infants could not be murdered after they were born.

Obama fought against those born alive from being recognized as US citizens.  He fought against them having equal protection under the law.  And in doing so, he therefore added a more stringent requirement to POTUS eligibility than is listed in the US Constitution.  According to Obama, if one is born into the world (“native born” on US soil) prior to being viable, then one is not a US citizen.  If one is not, at the time they are born, a US citizen, then one is not eligible to be President.

I know that both Obama and his supporters have sought to revise history regarding Obama’s statements on the Illinois Senate floor as to this issue.  And as much as I (and any rational person should) believe that he was advocating infanticide, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt for the purposes of this report and will limit  my discussion and analysis of his statement to the ramifications of his testimony on Presidential eligibility.



This bill was fairly extensively debated in the Judiciary Committee, and so I won’t belabor the issue. I do want to just make sure that everybody in the Senate knows what this bill is about, as I understand it. Senator O’Malley, the testimony during the committee indicated that one of the key concerns was — is that there was a method of abortion, an induced abortion, where the — the fetus or child, as — as some might describe it, is still temporarily alive outside the womb. And one of the concerns that came out in the testimony was the fact that they were not being properly cared for during that brief period of time that they were still living. Is that correct? Is that an accurate sort of description of one of the key concerns in the bill?

Senator O’Malley.

Senator Obama, it is certainly a key concern that the — the way children are treated following their birth under these circumstances has been reported to be, without question, in my opinion, less than humane, and so this bill suggests that appropriate steps be taken to treat that baby as a — a citizen of the United States and afforded all the rights and protections it deserves under the Constitution of the United States.

Senator Obama.

Well, it turned out — that during the testimony a number of members who are typically in favor of a woman’s right to choose an abortion were actually sympathetic to some of the concerns that your — you raised and that were raised by witnesses in the testimony. And there was some suggestion that we might be able to craft something that might meet constitutional muster with respect to caring for fetuses or children who were delivered in this fashion. Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further, and so I just want to suggest, not that I think it’ll make too much difference with respect to how we vote, that this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny. Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute...

Obama makes these statements with regard to abortion, and partial birth abortion (which is an abortion that takes place when part of the child has already entered the world – a gruesome practice I firmly stand against with every fiber of my being).

Therefore, according to Obama, only those who are born AFTER full viability may be considered US citizens with equal protection under the law.  His exact quote above is “… a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution“.  Of course, this would include Article 2 Section 1.  Therefore, Obama has crafted a completely heretofore unknown POTUS requirement which states that not all of those who are “native born” in the USA are eligible.

To be President, one must be – at the time of their birth – a US citizen.

According to Obama, one is not “born” a US citizen unless they are able to survive on their own after being born.  Since Article 2 Section 1 requires the President to be a natural born citizen, only those who are delivered after a full term, are – at the time of their birth – US citizens.  Hence, it is not enough to be native born in the US to be President.  According to Obama, one must be native born after an appropriate time in the womb.  If one is born prior to that time period, one is not a US citizen according to Obama.

It may be the case that the federal BAIPA law and the various State BAIPA laws grant various human rights and protections to those born prior to a nine month term, but Obama has never renounced his statements on the Illinois Senate Floor from March 2001.  And, as far as I can tell, Obama – to this day – does not believe a person born before a full nine month term in the womb is a US citizen.


I ask this rhetorically because I know damn well that any child that comes into this world is a human being, not a “previable fetus”.  Notice how Obama says, “…where the — the fetus or child, as — as some might describe it…”  Count me in as one who describes it as a child.  (It’s hard to believe that these quotes are real and not part of some horror film.)

Please don’t go around making this argument as if it really would determine eligibility.  I’m not trying to make this a genuine issue.  There is a ton of sarcasm present.  Yet, these are the President’s own words, not mine.  The POTUS said this crap… freaks me out, people.


Now let’s look at this from one more angle.  Obama’s statements above from the Illinois Senate Floor, besides just being gruesome and insane… fail to take into consideration that the rights and protections being denied to those children are equally denied to children born prematurely to parents who desperately want them.  Obama and those who would deny US citizenship and equal protection to these, the most fragile among us, because they were born prematurely, make no distinction in their application of the law between those who were almost aborted and those who were miraculously saved via incubation.

If they did make such a distinction, then that too, according to Obama’s logic above, would lead to a restriction on abortion. If you are trying to bring a child into this world and there are complications… the child is born much too early, placed into incubation and given no chance to live… according to this psychotic logic, the child has no equal protection under the law.  Has anyone thoroughly discussed the horror which the law would condone if the prematurely born had no rights?

Either you are a native born US citizen when you enter this world, despite your chances of survival or this world is hell and Satan’s angels are running the place.  Kick them out next November.  I digress  (sort of…)

Meanwhile, Obama needs to prove he was in the womb for nine months.  If he’s not going to prove his nine months in the womb, then he ought to retract his ghoulish creepy testimony.  He claims to have been protecting the rights of women, right?  Well, what about those little baby girls delivered alive despite a failed abortion attempt?  Women’s rights don’t mean anything for them?

You can’t make make this crap up, people.  It’s dark out there.

Leo Donofrio, Esq.

I’m Not Who You Think I Am…

Posted in Uncategorized on May 24, 2011 by naturalborncitizen

I have to get this off my chest.  Many of my readers seem to be under the false impression that I am a Republican pundit conservative.  I’m really sick of that.  I have absolutely no respect for either the GOP or the DNC.  The only political party I can relate to in any way is the Libertarian party, but I don’t agree with them on every point either.  I have a simple rule that works for me: I severely distrust all politicians all the time… always, every single one.

For those who wish to put me in a political right wing corner, who ask me to speak at political functions, who want me to join the tea party movement — stop.  You really don’t know me.  I’m not who you think I am.  So, let me update you on a few things.

I’ve just written and directed a feature film about two beautiful girls who fall in love in the post apocalyptic aftermath of a cellular apocalypse and who make a baby just by kissing.  Yes, it’s a lesbian film and I am one of those people who believes consenting adults should be able to marry each other regardless of sexual affiliation.

Whoops, there goes a bunch of support.  Lets see, what can we bring up next?  Oh yeah, as an artist I once wrote a journal called Onelovestory where I claimed the drummer from my favorite rock and roll band was the Messiah and that I was the Paraclete (aka the Holy Ghost).  That was a conceptual work of performance art.  Just Google it and I promise you will have a new opinion of me.  If some people think it was real, let them believe it.  That was the whole point — to mix up reality with fantasy and never let the audience know if you were taking the piss, or losing your mind.  Bwahahaha…

Oops, there goes a bunch of other readers.  Let’s alienate a few more people.

I don’t believe the official 911 story and I don’t trust the Government at all in that regard.

I think drugs should be legalized along with prostitution, all forms of gambling and driving while talking on your cell phone.  Meat helmets and scribes should also be back in vogue, but I’ll let Dr. Evil work that crowd.

Back when George Bush was President, I wrote a blog called “Citizenspook” (aka citizen spy) where I regularly argued that Bush administration officials should have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act for Treason by outing our own spys in the Plame affair.  I was very disappointed that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald didn’t go the whole nine yards.  At that time, I  also wrote an article about the power of a “sitting” Federal Grand Jury to issue presentments which would bring illegal government activity to trial.

I don’t recall any democratic bloggers having a problem with that argument when Bush was President… but they sure do now.  Hypocrites abound.  I also believed that Plame and her husband helped out her own network when she went on Vanity Fair and put a face to the name thereby endangering field agents even more.  Non-partisan paranoid freak, that’s me. My Citizenspook blog was hacked on or about January 13, 2009 and I have no way of getting back into that blog.

When a bunch of freakers thought they could form their own grand jury lynch mobs to prosecute anyone they liked, I was blamed.  But it’s not my fault people didn’t read what I actually wrote.  The Constitutional power of presentment is only available to a grand jury that has already been impaneled by a US Federal Court.  When I wrote the article in 2005, it was hyped at Democratic Underground.  Yup, I was a darling blogger of that forum during my Treasongate infatuation when Bush was President.  Now the Dem blogs want to hang me for putting their guy through the same scrutiny.  Hypocrites abound, man.  Seriously.  Who do you think you are kidding?  Surely, not the Paraclete.  I got Holy Ghost power goin’ on here in mutant overload.

The Sex Pistols changed my life.  I am a punk rocker who distrusts everything “official”.  I sued to stop both John McCain and Obama from being President.   One was born in Panama and the other admits  his birth status was governed by the United Kingdom.  Since the most direct United States Supreme Court decision on this issue – Minor v. Happersett – states that a “natural born citizen” is one born in the US of parents who were citizens, I believed Obama not to be eligible and I petitioned the courts to review the issue… as to both candidates… prior to the election, before we knew who would win.  Non-partisan distrustful freak of nature… that’s me.

I’m not who you think I am.

While I do believe in Jesus with all of my heart, I don’t think you go to hell if you don’t believe in him… as long as you do believe in love.  If you’re in love, you’re in the stream.  And it’s not important to the source of the stream that you know who the source really is.  Just be in the stream of love.  But that’s not easy.  And it requires that you love your enemies.  I love mine.  I pray for them all the time.  I pray for Satan as well.  That’s probably why he hates me so much.

More readers gone?  Yup.

So, if you’re still reading… let me tell you this.  As for Obama, I don’t see his evils as being any greater than the evil doers residing in the White House before him.  They all suck to me.

The SCOTUS doesn’t care about Obama’s eligibility issue so the precedent now appears to be that a natural born citizen is one born in the US to at least one citizen parent.  I hope that goalpost does not move further to accommodate Rubio or Jindal, neither of whom had even one citizen parent at the time of their birth.

There goes a few more readers.  Please come back!

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that, despite Obama’s wacky weird and freaky birth document scans (cause that’s all he’s really provided – see what happens if you try to present a scan for a passport), I have always believed he was born in Hawaii and still do.  Ooops, there goes a bunch of readers again.

As it stands right now… as long as Obama doesn’t try to change the Constitution by running for a third term… and he doesn’t try to give US sovereignty away to world Government, or take my favorite rock drummer’s thrown as da Messiah… I do not care about this issue anymore.  I am moving on.  The issue is known and unknown.  But now I sound like Rumsfeld.


with love, Leo Donofrio (aka…  your Paraclete 🙂

PS:  After having taken off from poker in 2010, my return to the tables (in order to finish financing my film) is off to a good start, having just won event #10 at the Delaware Poker Classic.  I also came in 19th out of 544 players in event #2 for a modest $460 win,  Check out the Old testament beard shot… yowza!