Well, another congressman has given Deputy Mike “The Arizona Kid” Zullo the brush off. This time Jeff Fuller of Florida backed out of a planned meeting. The Birthers are trying to make something sinister out of it. I first read the story at Market Ticker, where we find this excerpt:
Gallups indicated that his first reaction was utter shock. “I was flabbergasted,” Gallups said. “I had been on the phone and sending and receiving emails for days – directly from the Congressman’s office and then the Chief of Staff calls me and says something to the effect of ‘we don’t remember any such arrangements.’ It was utterly astounding. I reminded the Chief of Staff that I possessed the entire email trail, including emails from him. The phone went silent. I don’t think he had thought of that. The whole conversation was surreal. I told him that it was surreal. The Chief of Staff never relented on his story – he continually insisted that no such meeting was ever arranged. He would not address the fact that I was in possession of the email chain.”
Gallups (pictured at left) said, “This is the very kind of political shenanigans that Washington does not need. The voters in this Congressman’s district need to know the dishonesty of his office and his highly unethical political dealings. The nation needs to know. If the Congressman had simply been forthright and called me up and explained that he had changed his mind and would rather not meet with Zullo and me – I would have not said a public word about it. That would have been his absolute prerogative. I no desire to ‘strong-arm’ anyone to meet with us. The problem stems from the fact that the Congressman apparently had his Chief of Staff call me and basically call me a ‘liar.’ I felt as though he was questioning my ‘sanity.’ That is where he crossed the line with me. I will not be strong-armed either. Nor will I will be told that a conversation never took place that was witnessed by Lt. Zullo, the Congressman, the Chief of Staff and myself and also recorded in official government email and phone conversations.”
The story was also carried at Poo Poo Simmons, and ObamaReleaseYourRecords. My GUESS is, that after making the appointment, somebody in Fuller’s office realized that Zullo and Team Arpaio were a complete bunch of nuts, and decided to bail out. Plus, who wants to listen to 16 hours of blather about pixels and mysterious postage dating stamps from the 1980s. I suspect that people in Washington have been getting bombarded by all kinds of flaky Birthers and are just fed up with them. Hopefully, this is what all the FEMA Camps are for, emergency mass institutionalization of mentally ill Birthers. However, I am not sure they can be treated.
Anyway, the Birthers are bristling at the snub. I have no sympathy for them. They have brought this disrespect down on their own heads with their stupidly stubborn pursuit of nonsense, and their absolute refusal to accept the reasoned decisions of various courts out of deference to a 250+ year old European legal treatise.
Kark Denninger, the guy who runs Market Ticker, is a very intelligent person who sadly flirted with the two citizen parents nonsense. I am not sure if he is still of that persuasion, or if he maybe wised up after a few more courts threw the nonsense out. I told him that it was crap, and got “DQ’ed” for it, which is about the same thing as a ZOT! over at Free Republic. I did an article here when it happened.
At one point, he was convinced that the long form image had been manipulated, but did not go so far as to call it a forgery. He did some kind of radio discussion with Deputy Jerome Corsi, and either Butterdezillion or Mara Zebest (I forget which) versus John Woodman. He did make this comment at the above link:
If you remember at CPAC in May there was a bit of a political stir when Mike Zullo and crew (Sheriff Arapio’s “Cold Case Posse”) got a sitting Congressman (who they didn’t name) to agree to meet with them to present the case against Obama and his birth certificate (along with the at least as serious selective service record anomalies.)
Sooo, I am not sure how much he is still flirting with Birtherism. He does not yet stoop to calling any of the documents “forgeries,” and is content to simply label certain things as “anomalies.” I just try not to think about all that, and still read his website daily. He makes some good common sense observations about the economy, and politics.
Note 1. The Image. This is from the 1948 Red Skelton movie, The Fuller Brush Man. The actress is Janet Blair. Back in the olden days, Fuller Brush salesmen went door to door salesmen. Started in 1906, the company seems to still be in business.
Here is a more in depth historical report by CNN if anyone is interested:
August 15th, 2013 at 7:23 am
I can understand how you work Artsie. “THINK TANK” is accurate, you honestly do this stuff while you are “tanked” as you claimed.
Its pretty obvious.
August 15th, 2013 at 7:44 am
Cogent and biting commentary, js.
August 15th, 2013 at 7:48 am
Upon independence from Great Britain, the United States “were bound to receive the law of nations, in its modern state of purity and refinement. Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199. 199, 281 (1796). In The Nereide, Justice Marshall stated that the “Court is bound by the law of nations, which is part of the law of the land.” 13 U.S. 388, 423 (1815). “The courts have always considered the law of nations to be part of the law of the United States.” M. J. Glennon, Constitutional Diplomacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 1990), at 245. There are numerous other authorities that state that the law of nations became the national law of the United States. Even William Blackstone recognized the importance of the law of nations which he considered “universal law” and the life blood of a nation wanting to be part of the “civilized world.” 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 67 (1769). Hence, the law of nations, when not codified into any Act of Congress, became the common law of the United States.
The Framers did not define an Article II “natural born Citizen” because they did not see a reason to. It was a term that was well defined by the law of nations and well-know by civilized nations. Given that citizenship affects “the behavior of nation states with each other” (Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004), all civilized nations knew what the definition of citizenship was. The Founders believed that the common law was discoverable by reason and was forever present, a “discoverable reflection of universal reason.” Sosa. So since the Constitution did not define “citizen” or “natural born Citizen,” “resort must be had to the customs and usages of civilized nations” found in the law of nations, as defined by scholars, jurists, and commentators of the time who devoted “years of labor, research and experience” to the subject. The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 700 (1900).
We know from the historical record and from the way the Constitution is framed that the Founders relied heavily upon Emmerich de Vattel and his highly acclaimed treatise, The Law of Nations or Principles of the Law of Nature (1758), as a crucial and fundamental guide in knowing what the law of nations was. Alexander Hamilton was the key organizer of the movement to hold the Constitutional Convention that produced the Constitution. No one played a more important role than Hamilton in the adoption of the Constitution. Of all the Founders, he was the one most influenced by Vattel. http://east_west_dialogue.tripod.com/vattel/id5.html. In 1784, Hamilton, as the lawyer for the defense, arguing in the case of Rutgers v. Waddington, quoted prolifically from E. Vattel’s, The Law of Nations. The Waddington case shows how Vattel shaped Hamilton’s thinking. Hamilton argued that the law of nations was part of the common law and that the decisions of the New York Legislature must be consistent with the law of nations. Hamilton used Vattel as the standard for defining the law of nations. Hamilton argued that state law was superseded by national law and the law of nations. He also argued that the intent of the state legislature had to be that their laws be applied in a fashion that was consistent with national law and the law of nations. Judge James Duane in his ruling described the importance of the new republic abiding by the law of nations, and explained that the standard for the court would be Vattel. He ruled that the New York statue passed under the color of English common law must be consistent with the law of nations.
(RE: Mario Apuzzo in “‘The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law’ as U.S. Federal Common Law Not English Common Law Define What an Article II Natural Born Citizen Is “)
In fact, the Constitution gives Congress the power to enforce the Law of Nation, while it doesn’t mention English Common Law 1 time. That little fact which you criticize “birthers” about while you are tanked is indeed found in the law of nations. The founding fathers put it into the Constitution at a time when the term citizen was literally alien to the English, as what we refer to as citizens were subjects of the Crown. The entire concept of citizenship itself was based on an alien concept which is not found in English Common Law, and its definition was nowhere to be found in Britain.
All the while, the French language was the language used almost world wide for diplomats. Negotiations and treaties were written primarily in French, and the Law of Nations, written by Vattel, was also written in French.
c.1314, from Anglo-Fr. citezein (spelling alt. by infl. of denizen), from O.Fr. citeain, from cite (see city), replacing O.E. burhsittend and ceasterware. Sense of “inhabitant of a country” is late 14c. Related: Citizenry (1819).
August 15th, 2013 at 8:53 am
Followed by a lengthy screed of bullshit – 2 for 2, js!
August 15th, 2013 at 12:15 pm
This doesn’t compute. One would think a high caliber attorney with a $600-an-hour law practice such as yourself would of graced all of us with a 1st class rebuttle pointing out with explanations the details that are incorrect.
Lawler, you da man!
August 15th, 2013 at 1:50 pm
Ike: ” One would think a high caliber attorney…”
The best attorneys know when to keep their mouth shut and let the other side hang themselves. JS does that quite well and doesn’t need any help.
August 15th, 2013 at 6:35 pm
Still haven’t picked up on the obvious yet, Rambette? I guess that’s no surprise.
No hints on this one – you’ll have to rely on your wit, such as it is.
August 15th, 2013 at 1:32 pm
Well, your legal theories are nice, but guess what? The Courts don’t agree with you, beginning back in 1844 with Lynch-Clark, and continuing through to Wong Kim Ark (1898) and then to Ankeny in 2009, etc.
If you think the courts have been wrong, the first logical step is for you to realistically understand what the courts actually hold. Which is that it don’t take two citizen parents to be an nbc. Then, you can begin the process to change their minds with your Vattel theories.
However, what I find is that 99.99% of Birthers are unable to accomplish that first step, and are still stuck in some sort of Legal Purgatory, where they claim the current legal standard is that nbc requires two citizen parents.
Sooo, in pursuit of determining your particular understanding, do you admit that the courts, rightly or wrongly (including WKA), have “conflated” 14th Amendment “born here and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” citizens with “natural born citizens”??? And, do you admit that according to that standard, flawed or not, Obama is legally eligible for the Presidency???
August 16th, 2013 at 5:38 am
Where’s the blog post where you called Travon Martin supporters Nazis?
August 16th, 2013 at 12:05 pm
I took it off this blog because it was really hurting the feelings of people who I like. Plus, it was way too harsh for what is supposed to be a fun blog. I put it over on my general political blog which I haven’t written much for over a year or so and where there are only one or two readers every month.
Here is the link if you are interested:
August 17th, 2013 at 12:04 am
Is Jeff Wizard real, or did you just want to let people know where that post was?
August 16th, 2013 at 8:50 am
I posted on my blog the entire portion of Mike Volin’s Blog Talk Radio interview of Carl Gallups. Gallups covered the exchange with Rep. Miller and his aids. He also mentioned the Xerox evidence. He says “it is of no concern”. The evidence was so “of no concern” that he had to repeat “it is of no concern” about 5 times. 😆
Carl Gallups claims “The Xerox evidence is of no concern”
August 16th, 2013 at 1:41 pm
Is anyone having trouble posting comments using their WordPress identity? I mean on other WordPress blogs. Not your own.
August 16th, 2013 at 2:18 pm
Hi Fred Muggs!!!
I have seen some problems with the Word Press filters elsewhere. The one here seems to stop comments with 2 or more links, and sometimes I can’t figure out why it puts some comments in moderation, because it is the same people who have commented before.
August 16th, 2013 at 2:56 pm
I think you can change the number of links in the Discussion settings. I had to raise it on my blog.