tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post2707324697047139300..comments2024-03-02T14:24:03.076-05:00Comments on Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers: Congress and the Media Have Placed America at Risk of Being Attacked from WithinMario Apuzzo, Esq. http://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-24450072038772394452009-11-09T21:36:35.791-05:002009-11-09T21:36:35.791-05:00yes I could but not in this forum, perhaps If I co...yes I could but not in this forum, perhaps If I could get to sent an attachment to you or Mr. Charles Kechner, then I could explain my investigation. The base conclusion is that he had according to US law dual nationality, to prove that I use Indonesian law either about mixed marriage before present marriage law, Indonesian civil law and Indonesian citizenship law no.62/1958. It's all there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-6012793226417686112009-10-31T23:12:13.770-04:002009-10-31T23:12:13.770-04:00tigerzhou,
You have my curiosity. Can you please...tigerzhou,<br /><br />You have my curiosity. Can you please expound a bit.Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-73476203032255894672009-10-31T23:04:57.191-04:002009-10-31T23:04:57.191-04:00yes indeed but I also could strengthen my opinion ...yes indeed but I also could strengthen my opinion that this is the breakerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-55486096035367005492009-10-21T07:19:13.143-04:002009-10-21T07:19:13.143-04:00Manfredzhou,
I believe I understand what you a...Manfredzhou, <br /><br /> I believe I understand what you are trying to emphasize. However, he cannot “retain” NBC status simply because he “never” had it. Pertaining to his citizenship in Indonesia will most likely be shown through his passport information and/or college records if he used such status. Indonesia is not going to “cooperate” with any U.S. attorney and hand over records, no more than Kenya did. It is difficult enough attempting to gain such records right here in the U.S., little lone a foreign country. <br /><br />As far as the “Case Closed” situation, this will be a slam dunk once any of the cases get into the merits and not be dismissed on technicalities, ie.., Standing, jurisdiction, ect…Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323325248452082223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-81557139952023143862009-10-20T22:05:14.071-04:002009-10-20T22:05:14.071-04:00if that so, then you had the case close if you pur...if that so, then you had the case close if you pursuit on the matter I said to you. but you must put the base of US constitution that said directly that he is indeed if had dual nationality cannot retain his natural born citizen status.<br />On the other hand you also must make sure that all the civil law in Indonesia related to this matter is on your hand. otherwise his man could denies this. and please obtained, copy and paste the law and the source written on that site asap before his tugs erase that and make them destroyed like the obamabirther.com that had the translation written about the marriage law in Indonesia that connected to him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-72368742468052520992009-10-20T07:42:49.510-04:002009-10-20T07:42:49.510-04:00Manfredzhou,
I am not quite confident where yo...Manfredzhou, <br /><br /> I am not quite confident where you are headed here? Are you asking/implying whether or not duel citizenship plays a role in determining/defining a Natural Born Citizenship status? You Said (in part)……<br /><br />[….“but if the natural born citizen status cannot be denied by dual nationality then he is eligible as POTUS no matter what.”]<br /><br />My quick response to this would be to question whether or a “Naturalized Citizen” can run for POTUS? The answer is no, of course not. The question then becomes why not? Because they have duel loyalties from birth and for that very reason, not having a single loyalty, disqualifies them. <br /><br />Therefore does a Citizen at Birth which has duel loyalties qualify for POTUS when the other does not? The answer is no, they don’t and for the very same reason. <br /><br />Only a Natural Born Citizen has a single loyalty to a Country and that is obtained by having parents which are citizens of that County and the child of said citizens being born on the Soil of that Country. Anything else is not NBC status.Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323325248452082223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-38199127802579253662009-10-20T00:29:54.072-04:002009-10-20T00:29:54.072-04:00last but not the least:
www.kitlv-jurnals.nl http:...last but not the least:<br />www.kitlv-jurnals.nl http://www.kitlv-journals.nl/index.php/btlv/article/viewFile/2349/3110>]; <br />this site contains explaination of the dutch law that were applied before 1974 marriage law were applied in Indonesia (uu no.1 tahun 1974) the law it self were on this location (of course in dutch language) <br />You must also obtaining the fully translation of:<br />1. UU no 1 tahun 1974 applied since 1974 till now.<br />2. Regeling op de gemengde Huwelijken S. 1898 No. 158<br />to this law seek to the dutch embassy to obtain this one on their archives. <br />Asked if they had the real (dutch text) and the english version on this law get the copy and their <br />stamp in order to make it official; do it ASAP <br />and finally the translation of UU no.62 tahun 1958; on the address : <br />www.unhcr.org on www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae6b4ec8.htm<br />and here's some other site that really could help thee on this subject:<br />[asnic.utexas.edu in asnic.utexas.edu/asnic/countries/indonesia/ConstIndonesia.html <br />contains the real Indonesian constitution before amendment <br />www.us-asean.org/Indonesia/constitution.htm] <br />contains Indonesian constitution after amendment in 2002 <br />www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MULR/1999/21.html <br />docs.google.com in docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:LPS07fHZ2MEJ:<br />www.reunite.org/edit/files/Islamic%2520Resource/Indonesia%2520Text.pdf+indonesian+marriage+law%2B1974&hl=en>] <br />The bottom line is Although according to Indonesian law he is/ was an Indonesian but according to US law he had dual nationality and if I wasn't mistakenly seek that according to US law if some one on other land forced to renounced his US citizenship, under US law he is considered has dual nationality. this I read on the site called travel.state.gov at travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html. <br />The key issue to solved this case is to make sure that according to US law dual nationality could annulled natural born status of a person. if dual nationality cannot renounced natural born citizen then this one had no effect at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-11217807237876002202009-10-20T00:15:20.991-04:002009-10-20T00:15:20.991-04:00the potus said he is briefly stays in Indonesia wh...the potus said he is briefly stays in Indonesia when he was a child. and Indonesian gov denies that he even once an Indonesian citizen. But this confuse me a lot with the Indonesian citizenship law that being applied during his time in Indonesia and only recently being revoked by UU no 12 of 2006 and also the newer law could only act retroactively within 3 years before and not after.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-10045154376793815872009-10-20T00:02:56.038-04:002009-10-20T00:02:56.038-04:00if any one of you wanted to use this one to make a...if any one of you wanted to use this one to make a law suit base on this fact from this forum; then you must knowing first either dual nationality of some one can or cannot annihilated the natural born status. if this one can then he even cannot be defended by his lawyers at all, but if the natural born citizen status cannot be denied by dual nationality then he is eligible as POTUS no matter what. the key is once again can or cannot dual nationality denies some one natural born citizen status.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-64987927966006330082009-10-19T23:25:06.885-04:002009-10-19T23:25:06.885-04:00*DUAL NATIONALITY*
Dual nationality can occur as ...*DUAL NATIONALITY*<br /><br />Dual nationality can occur as the result of a variety of circumstances. The <br />automatic acquisition or retention of a foreign nationality, acquired, for <br />example, by birth in a foreign country or through an alien parent, does not <br />affect U.S. citizenship. It is prudent, however, to check with authorities <br />of the other country to see if dual nationality is permissible under local <br />law. Dual nationality can also occur when a person is naturalized in a <br />foreign state without intending to relinquish U.S. nationality and is <br />thereafter found not to have lost U.S. citizenship: the individual <br />consequently may possess dual nationality. While recognizing the existence <br />of dual nationality and permitting Americans to have other nationalities, <br />the U.S. Government also recognizes the problems which it may cause. Claims <br />of other countries upon dual-national U.S. citizens often place them in <br />situations where their obligations to one country are in conflict with the <br />laws of the other. In addition, their dual nationality may hamper efforts to <br />provide U.S. diplomatic and consular protection to them when they are <br />abroad. connect those laws and this one I got from the Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality<br /><br />The Department of State is responsible for determining the citizenship <br />status of a person located outside the United States or in connection with <br />the application for a U.S. passport while in the United States.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-11985861449786120032009-10-19T23:19:32.275-04:002009-10-19T23:19:32.275-04:00those are the law in Indonesia as preliminary prov...those are the law in Indonesia as preliminary prove v thy potus. How ever this shall work if thou had law that said that dual nationality could in fact denies the natural born citizen status of potus. here's your job mr appuzo and kechner along with the marriage law under comments on the American thinker site titled obama and the tugs on the comments lineAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-89660061483955371532009-10-19T23:02:52.408-04:002009-10-19T23:02:52.408-04:00law no.62 of 1958, the law of Indonesian citizensh...law no.62 of 1958, the law of Indonesian citizenship<br />Article 14.<br /><br />(1)If the children as mentioned in article 2 and article 13 reach the age of 21, they loose the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia again, if and when they make a statement as to that effect. Said statement shall be made within 1 year after the children have reached the age of 21 to the Pengadilan Negeri of Representation of the Republic of Indonesia at their residence.<br /><br />(2)The provision of para 1 is not applicable if said children become stateless with the loss of the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-59200413354456677212009-10-19T22:58:33.126-04:002009-10-19T22:58:33.126-04:00law no.62 of 1958; the law of Indonesian citizensh...law no.62 of 1958; the law of Indonesian citizenship<br />Article 14.<br /><br />(1)If the children as mentioned in article 2 and article 13 reach the age of 21, they loose the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia again, if and when they make a statement as to that effect. Said statement shall be made within 1 year after the children have reached the age of 21 to the Pengadilan Negeri of Representation of the Republic of Indonesia at their residence.<br /><br />(2)The provision of para 1 is not applicable if said children become stateless with the loss of the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-82685872439053492322009-10-19T22:57:02.588-04:002009-10-19T22:57:02.588-04:00Law no.63 of 1958
Article 13.
(1)Children who ha...Law no.63 of 1958<br /><br />Article 13.<br /><br />(1)Children who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet, who have a legal family relationship with their father before said father has acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, also acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, after they reside and are in Indonesia. The statement as to their residence and being in Indonesia is not valid for children who because their father acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia becomes stateless.<br /><br />(2)The citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia acquired by a mother also applies to her children who have no legal family relationship with the father, who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet after they have resided and are in Indonesia. If said citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia is acquired with the naturalization by a mother who has become a widow because of the decease of her husband, the children who have a legal family relationship with said husband, who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet also acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia after they reside and are in Indonesia. Statements as to their residence and being in Indonesia are not valid for children who because their mother has acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia become stateless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-87686737527138601252009-10-19T22:52:06.618-04:002009-10-19T22:52:06.618-04:00Article 13.
(1)Children who have not reached the ...Article 13.<br /><br />(1)Children who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet, who have a legal family relationship with their father before said father has acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, also acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, after they reside and are in Indonesia. The statement as to their residence and being in Indonesia is not valid for children who because their father acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia becomes stateless.<br /><br />(2)The citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia acquired by a mother also applies to her children who have no legal family relationship with the father, who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet after they have resided and are in Indonesia. If said citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia is acquired with the naturalization by a mother who has become a widow because of the decease of her husband, the children who have a legal family relationship with said husband, who have not reached the age of 18 and are not married yet also acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia after they reside and are in Indonesia. Statements as to their residence and being in Indonesia are not valid for children who because their mother has acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia become stateless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-20260915763171374642009-10-19T22:41:35.007-04:002009-10-19T22:41:35.007-04:00Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the ...Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia<br /><br />Article 14.<br /><br />(1)If the children as mentioned in article 2 and article 13 reach the age of 21, they loose the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia again, if and when they make a statement as to that effect. Said statement shall be made within 1 year after the children have reached the age of 21 to the Pengadilan Negeri of Representation of the Republic of Indonesia at their residence.<br /><br />(2)The provision of para 1 is not applicable if said children become stateless with the loss of the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-2025387316522927592009-10-19T22:39:11.998-04:002009-10-19T22:39:11.998-04:00Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the ...Law No. 62 of 1958, Law on the Citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia<br />Article 1. Citizens of the Republic of Indonesia are:<br />b.persons who at their birth have a legal family relationship with their father, a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia, with the understanding that said citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia starts as from the existence of that legal family relationship and that said legal family relationship is created before the persons concerned have reached the age of 18 or before they are married at an earlier age;<br />Article 4.<br /><br />(1)Aliens born and domiciled in the territory of the Republic of Indonesia whose father or mother, in case they have no legal family relationship with the father, is also born in the territory of the Republic in Indonesia and is a resident of the Republic of Indonesia, may present a petition to the Minister of Justice in order to acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia if they, after having acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, have no other nationality or at the time that they present a petition they also make a statement as to having released another nationality which they may possibly possess, in accordance with the legal provisions prevailing in the country of their origin or according to the provisions of the Agreement on the settlement of the bi-nationality between the Republic of Indonesia and the country in question.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-77453197403295042112009-10-19T22:17:44.760-04:002009-10-19T22:17:44.760-04:00Potus case in my opinion is a case close one. But ...Potus case in my opinion is a case close one. But if both plaintiff could answer to me in simple and plain english do or do not some one that is forced to had other nationalityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-6099487921904628742009-10-19T20:40:09.472-04:002009-10-19T20:40:09.472-04:00Thank you Charles and Mario for your enlightening ...Thank you Charles and Mario for your enlightening answer re Quo Warranto.TruthExistshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09396552507193225084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-13809724801286414392009-10-19T18:22:48.060-04:002009-10-19T18:22:48.060-04:00Thanks Mario and Charles...Thanks Mario and Charles...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-45083147962327430712009-10-18T21:34:04.563-04:002009-10-18T21:34:04.563-04:00Mr. Curiosity said:
"Mario,
My question ...Mr. Curiosity said: <br /><br />"Mario, <br /><br />My question is:<br /><br />Why, in your opinion, didn't all GOP lawyers address the issue of Obama's presidential eligibility in 2008 to prevent the mess we are in now?" <br /><br />Mr. Curiosity."<br /><br />There is no one answer to this question. Some of the reasons that I can think of are ignorance, apathy, fear, prejudice, ambition, and profit.Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-91426256581617530962009-10-18T21:26:12.039-04:002009-10-18T21:26:12.039-04:00TruthExists,
Some mistakenly argue that a quo wa...TruthExists, <br /><br />Some mistakenly argue that a quo warranto action may be filed and prosecuted only in the DC district court in Washington, D.C. That statement would be true only if a party does not have a cause of action that gives the court original juridiction otherwise than through the quo warranto action. In other words, the D.C district court would have exclusive original jurisdiction over such a petition only if a party is not able to prove that a district court other than the DC court has original jurisdiction in the case any other way. <br /><br />If a party wants to avoid having to file its action under the DC code in the DC district, that party must show the selected court that it has original jurisdiction by way of some other statutory or constitutional provision. This means that the party cannot rely upon the quo warranto action alone to try to prove that the selected district court has original jurisdiction. If the party can prove that the court has original jurisdiction otherwise by showing that it has an underlying claim based on some other statutory or constitutional provision which gives that court original jurisdiction, the party is neither compelled to use the DC statute nor the DC district court, but rather can file the party’s quo warranto petition in any properly venued district of the United States seeking relief in conjunction with that underlying statutory or constitutional provision which is the basis for the court to assert original jurisdiction in the first instance. <br /><br />In such later case, the quo warranto jurisdiction is said to be ancillary to the court's original jurisdiction that rests on a separate and distinct statutory or constitutional provision in the first instance. Under such circumstances, the district court would obtain ancillary jurisdiction over the petition for quo warranto under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1651(a) (the All Writs Act which authorizes the court to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law"), for the court would already have original jurisdiction over plaintiff’s other claims. Under such circumstances, the All Writs Act may be used because the party is not using the act to augment the jurisdiction of the court but rather only petitioning the court that it issue the quo warranto writ as an aid to the court's already existing original jurisdiction. <br /><br />As far as showing that the Court has original jurisdiction otherwise than through the quo warranto action, one has to put forward a cause of action based on the Constitution or federal statute that gives the court that original jurisdiction. In the Kerchner complaint, I have included various original jurisdiction constitutional claims, one of which rests on the 9th Amendment as a basis to further support the quo warranto action. Quo warranto is an ancient common law writ. The 9th Amendment, which preserves for the People their remedies under the the ancient common law writs, takes the place of the D.C. statute. <br /><br />There are other issues involved with a quo warranto action. I will not address those, for I have only answered your question. <br /><br />I hope this helps in better understanding how a quo warranto action works. <br /><br />Mario Apuzzo, Esq.Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-52232048383266615852009-10-18T20:29:26.334-04:002009-10-18T20:29:26.334-04:00TruthExists,
As I understand it Quo Warranto can ...TruthExists,<br /><br />As I understand it Quo Warranto can be used in a complaint as an adjunct to other charges in the complaint in a case brought under the All Writs Act. Since we have brought 12 counts in this complaint the Quo Warranto is not a stand alone action in this case and is being brought with other charges and counts. Thus under the All Writs Act, Quo Warranto can be used in our case. That is my understanding and as I remember it what I said on a prior radio show. Now I am not a lawyer so if I have it wrong or slightly wrong or mostly wrong, I will let Mario address it further, if he so chooses. This is also a historic and precedence setting type of case to support and defend the Constitution under the 9th Amendment and We the People have an inalienable right as the true "sovereigns" to bring a Quo Warranto count or charge to force elected officials under our Constitution and contract between the federal government and we the sovereign people, that they are complying with the rules, i.e., the Constitution. If the elected and appointed officials ignore the People and usurp the Constitution, We the People have an inalienable right to challenge them under ancient common law and the 9th Amendment, since WE ARE THE SOVEREIGNS in our nation. Intervening modern statutory laws and ruling must fall by the wayside for a historic and precedence setting situation and case like this one where the person sitting in the Oval Office has usurped the Constitution and ignored the eligibility clause of the Constitution and he as leader of the executive branch then stifles the DOJ from protecting the Constitution and the Congress shirks its Constitutional duties and oath. This will all be up to our Judge and in the end the U.S. Supreme Court. But this case will make new law, imo, which will over-ride existing statutes for cases of a constitutional matter of this type.<br /><br />People who say enforcing the Constitution is restricted by some statute pass by Congress do not understand the U.S. Constitution as the fundamental law of our nation and that We the People are the Sovereigns ... not the Congress and their statutory laws.<br /><br /> But if Atty Apuzzo feels revealing the interlaced hooks in our complaint and counts would reveal too much of our strategy or arguments before we get to address the judge in a hearing or trial, then I would understanding his not wanting to discuss it in any greater detail. We do not discuss details of the case tactics or strategy in this blog as per the Blog Rules.<br /><br />Charles Kerchner<br />CDR USNR (Ret)<br />Lead Plaintiff<br />Kerchner v Obama & Congress<br /><br />P.S. Please help me get the word out to the general public. Visit this website and help if you can and send it to your friends too:<br /><a href="http://www.protectourliberty.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.protectourliberty.org/</a>cfkerchnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02941086863044892649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-48241275815898771992009-10-18T18:55:33.843-04:002009-10-18T18:55:33.843-04:00Honestly, it really helps to read Mario's arti...Honestly, it really helps to read Mario's articles, especially when I so often feel discouraged on this issue. Thank you Mario and Charles.<br />I also want to tell you that I listened to your radio interview on Friday, and wanted reassure you that all of us in the know are cognizant that it is Mario who has written the definitive essays on Natural Born Citizen, not someone else. Additionally, I really appreciate the way you refrain from talking about other Attorneys' cases. Not only does that show your class, but it keeps you from assisting the evil empire (as others have done).<br />I have a question for you. On one of your radio interviews, I heard Charles state that there was some reason why you could use Quo Warranto outside of the D.C. jurisdictional issue. Could you either tell me how that is, or direct me to one of Mario's writings where that question is answered?<br />Thank you both so much for all that you are doing.TruthExistshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09396552507193225084noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-8430723660687119082009-10-18T16:51:46.244-04:002009-10-18T16:51:46.244-04:00I appreciate Mario writing these fabolous essays. ...I appreciate Mario writing these fabolous essays. I just wish it were possible that Mario could help Orly or Kreep with a possible Amicis Curie Brief. I am sure his legal input into this issue would prove most valuable.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01793622722554168489noreply@blogger.com