The Cypress Times
Bill Turner

Dear Leader is a liar. B. Hussein Obama is a fraud. His lies are coming undone and the wheels are falling off of his shiny, Chinese made wagon. We all know Obama lies, we have seen him, heard him and read his lies, as reported fact, by the state run media. But, now the stories are unraveling and the truth is being told. It is just being told online, because the state run media made him into a messiah and they will not let him come undone, not yet, not while America is still standing and hasn’t been completely destroyed. On the other hand, I will rip away at the cover and expose the man-child as the fraud he is.

The anointed one, the ‘smartest president ever’ is a mere cardboard cut out, caricature of a man. We all know Obama won’t release his birth certificate. So what? We know he won’t release his transcripts, big deal (Even John Kerry released his “D“ laden transcripts). We know he was not a professor or Constitutional scholar. Well, we know it now. B. Hussein Obama was an instructor, a lecturer, not a professor. The professors, the real professors disliked the man-child and did not want him around. Chicago law school faculty have described Obama as ‘lazy, unqualified, never attending meetings and using his politically appointed position as a mere stepping stone’. Barry applied for a position as adjunct professor and was never considered for it. However, a few weeks later the Board of Trustees called the law school and told them ‘find him an office, put him on the payroll and find a class for him to teach’. Professor(s) described him as having ‘the lowest intellect’ in the building. It is doubted that Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Obama’s fraudulent past exposed:

Was he the editor of the Harvard Law Review: If so, he was the first editor of an Ivy League Law Review to never publish an article in the journal he allegedly edited.

B. Hussein Obama, the alleged former editor of the Harvard Law Review: Has not been an attorney since 2008 when he surrendered his law license to escape fraud charges.

Charges against B. Hussein Obama: Knowingly making a misstatement of material fact in applying for his license. Committing a criminal act that reflects poorly upon his fitness to practice law. Conduct involving dishonesty, deceit, fraud and misrepresentation. Engaging in prejudicial activity. Engaging in activity that brings the courts into disrepute.

Constitutional Law Professor: Not exactly. The Chicago Sun Times reports that Obama wasn’t even a professor, he was an occasional lecturer.

University of Chicago Law School: In 2008 they released a statement calling Obama a law professor, then a spokesman confirmed he was a part time lecturer.

Former Lecturer: Obama, the former lecturer, during his State of the Union Address quoted from the Constitution he professes to have taught, except the quote was from the Declaration of Independence.

State of the Union Address: The Liar in Chief scolded the Supreme Court for a case, giving an example of how they blew it, except the example was “not true”. He also managed to call our “unalienable rights” ‘notions’ and ‘promises’.

When you are a fraud, it is hard to keep the facts straight.

Obama, the most “transparent” president ever (just ask him, he will tell you), ordered his bar records redacted, leaving a mere trace record of him. The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission has been wiped clean as well.

First Lady, Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993. Voluntarily surrendering ones license is something that is typically done in exchange for whatever wrong doing you are about to be found guilty of, being dropped. Bill Clinton “voluntarily surrendered” his law license too, right before it was taken from him.

So, we have a president who lied about his being editor, lied about his being a professor and Constitutional professor, lied during the State of the Union Address, and surrendered his law license after being charged with serious offenses and major character flaws. Combine this with his unwillingness to release his transcripts, despite John Kerry releasing his transcripts, filled with “D’s” and Obama’s campaign website, which contained his ‘resume’ for the position of president, which only listed five dates of notoriety, one of which is his birth date and a portrait of a serial liar, fraud and unethical person emerges.

B. Hussein Obama has violated the law, the Constitution and his oath of office in incidents too many to list. He has lied to Congress, the Supreme Court, and the American people. Dear Leader has appointed people to positions of power within the White House, without having them approved by the Senate. What laws he has not broken, he has circumvented, up to and including the health care bill. The legislative and executive branch of the government are to remain separate. The president is not to hold “Health Care Summits” and try to influence the legislative process. The president is to approve or veto legislation as it comes out of Congress. Impeach Obama now. Do not wait. Every day that passes and articles of impeachment are not filed against B. Hussein Obama is a day each member of the House of Representatives is in violation of their oath of office.



Bill Turner
US West Regional Director


Court told ‘citizen’ Obama actually may be alien

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Forget the dispute over the “natural born citizen” requirement of the U.S. Constitution for presidents, Barack Obama may not even be a “citizen,” according to a new filing in a long-running legal challenge to his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

“Under the British Nationality Act of 1948 his father was a British subject/citizen and not a United States citizen and Obama himself was a British subject/citizen at the time Obama was born,” says a new filing in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in the case Kerchner v. Obama.

“We further contend that Obama has failed to even conclusively prove that he is at least a ‘citizen of the United States’ under the Fourteenth Amendment as he claims by conclusively proving that he was born in Hawaii.”

The submission comes from attorney Mario Apuzzo, who is handling the case. His brief argues against the earlier document from Obama’s attorneys demanding that the case be dismissed.

WND reported when the lawyer argued that the most common reason judges have used to dismiss cases against Obama – a lack of “standing” – is just wrong.

Obama’s argument for dismissal relies almost exclusively on standing.

“How can you deny he’s affecting me?” Apuzzo said recently during an interview with WND. “He wants to have terror trials in New York. He published the CIA interrogation techniques. On and on. He goes around bowing and doing all these different things. His statements we’re not a Christian nation; we’re one of the largest Muslim nations. It’s all there.”

The case was brought by Apuzzo in January 2009 on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr.

Named as defendants are Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives, former Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which “provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate ‘elected’ by the Electoral College Electors.”

The complaint also asserts “when Obama was born his father was a British subject/citizen and Obama himself was the same.” The case contends the framers of the U.S. Constitution, when they adopted the requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen,” excluded dual citizens.

In a statement on his blog, Apuzzo said the next step in his case is a decision from the court.

“We will now wait and see if the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals grants my request for oral argument and if so when the oral argument will be,” he said.

His latest filing also has been posted online.

It argues that the district court decision as well as Obama’s arguments “are nothing more than presentations of general statements on the law of standing which do not address the specific factual and legal content of plaintiffs’ claims. … The defendants in much of their brief basically tell the court that the Kerchner case should be dismissed because all other Obama cases have been dismissed.”

He said it is “self-evident” under the Constitution that “anyone aspiring to be president has to conclusively prove that he or she is eligible to hold that office. Part of that burden is conclusively showing that one is a ‘natural born citizen.’ Hence, the citizenship status of Obama is critical to the question of whether plaintiffs having standing, for it is that very statute which is the basis of their injury in fact.”

He noted the case was filed before Obama became president.

“At this time he was still a private individual who had the burden of proving that he satisified each and every element of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. That plaintiffs filed their action at this time is important for it not only sets the time by which we are to judge when their standing attached to their action against Obama, Congress and the other defendants … but also to show that Obama has the burden of proof to show that he is a ‘natural born citizen’ and satisfied the other requirements of Article II,” Apuzzo wrote.

“At no time in these proceedings or in any other of the many cases that have been filed against him throughout the country has Obama produced a 1961 contemporaneous birth certificate from the state of Hawaii showing that he was born there … We must conclude for purposes of defendants’ motion that since Obama is not a 14th Amendment ‘Citizen of the United States’ let alone an Article II ‘natural born citizen,’ he is not eligible to be president and commander in chief. Not being eligible to be president and commander in chief he is currently acting as such without constitutional authority. It is Obama’s exercising the singular and great powers of the president and commander in chief without constitutional authority which is causing plaintiffs’ injury in fact.”

The argument cites warnings from both George Washington and John Jay about the “insidious wiles of foreign influence” in the White House.

WND reported earlier when the appeals court indicated it was listening to arguments in the case and granted special permission for an extra-long document to be filed.

The judges approved Apuzzo’s request to submit arguments totaling 20,477 words, when the normal limit is 14,000 words.

He said the arguments are not complicated.

“We maintain that Obama is not an Article II ‘natural born citizen’ because he lacks unity of citizenship and allegiance from birth which is obtained when a child is born in the United States to a mother and father who are both United States citizens at the time of birth,” he said.


Investigation reveals numerous bogus claims on Obama resume


In what is being called ‘the biggest hustle in human history,’ a special investigation has discovered numerous bogus claims on Barack Obama’s resume, including the outright lie that he was a ‘Constitutional scholar and professor.’

The claim turns out to be false.

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon).

As investigators delve further into the background of Barack Obama, a disturbing picture is emerging of a man who is not who he claims to be.  The information the public has been told concerning Obama is turning out to be false–fabrications and inventions of a man and an unseen force behind him that had clear ulterior motives for seeking the highest office in the land.

According to a special report issued by ‘the Blogging Professor,’ the Chicago Law School faculty hated Obama.  The report states that Obama was unqualified, that he was never a ‘constitutional professor and scholar,’ and that he never served as editor of the Harvard Law Review while a student at the school.

The real truth is that Barack Obama was merely an ‘instructor’ at Chicago Law School, not a professor.  Commonly, instructors are non-tenure-track teachers hired by colleges and universities to teach certain courses for a salary that is well below that of Associate Professors or full Professors.

In the hierarchy of higher education, the status of instructors is below that of associate professors and professors because they lack the credentials.

In fact, it can be safely concluded that the claims of Barack Obama concerning his educational credentials and work history in higher education are a complete sham.  The President of the United States is a complete fraud.

According to Doug Ross:

I spent some time with the highest tenured faculty member at Chicago Law a few months back, and he did not have many nice things to say about “Barry.” Obama applied for a position as an adjunct and wasn’t even considered. A few weeks later the law school got a phone call from the Board of Trustees telling them to find him an office, put him on the payroll, and give him a class to teach. The Board told him he didn’t have to be a member of the faculty, but they needed to give him a temporary position. He was never a professor and was hardly an adjunct.

The other professors hated him because he was lazy, unqualified, never attended any of the faculty meetings, and it was clear that the position was nothing more than a political stepping stool. According to my professor friend, he had the lowest intellectual capacity in the building. He also doubted whether he was legitimately an editor on the Harvard Law Review, because if he was, he would be the first and only editor of an Ivy League law review to never be published while in school (publication is or was a requirement).

Thus,  the question arises, was the claim that Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review a ‘put-up job’ as well, allowing the student to claim he held this prestigious position without having the qualifications or meeting the requirements of holding that position?  And why?


Consider this: 1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no longer a “lawyer”. He surrendered his license back in 2008 possibly to escape charges that he “fibbed” on his bar application.

2. Michelle Obama “voluntarily surrendered” her law license in 1993.

3. So, we have the President and First Lady – who don’t actually have licenses to practice law. Facts.

4. A senior lecturer is one thing. A fully ranked law professor is another. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, “Obama did NOT ‘hold the title’ of a University of Chicago law school professor”. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law professor at the University of Chicago.

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March, 2008 saying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “served as a professor” in the law school, but that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.

These are highly disturbing facts, verified facts from the people who know at the Chicago Law School.

There is more from Ross, however:

6. “He did not hold the title of professor of law,” said Marsha Ferziger Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago School of Law.

7. The former Constitutional senior lecturer cited the U.S. Constitution recently during his State of the Union Address. Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

8. The B-Cast posted the video.

9. In the State of the Union Address, President Obama said: “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in ourConstitution: the notion that we are all created equal.”

10. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence and it reads: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments later in the same speech?

When you are a phony it’s hard to keep facts straight.

Obama has made sure that all of his records are sealed tight.  And apart from the courageous souls at the various educational institutions who dared to speak the truth, the schools Obama claimed to attend unanimously refuse to release transcripts, records, or other bits of evidence concerning Obama’s presence in their institutions.

BREAKING DEVELOPMENTjust as these disturbing facts come to light about Barack Obama, the White House is busy making deals with numerous ‘journalists,’ promising unprecedented access to the President in exchange for refraining from reporting certain information ‘they may discover.’