Senator Jim DeMint, United States Senator, SC senator, Ian Headley, Aide Headley, Obama ineligible, US Constitution, Congress, Electoral votes, South Carolina constituents, The WHY initiative, Restore the Constitutional Republic

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and
the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service
of their country; but he that stands now, deserves the love and
thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict,
the more glorious the triumph.” —Thomas Paine 1778

We

Are Watching

Congress

 

Citizen Wells Intro to WHY initiative

We are moving ahead with the “WHY” initiative to hold Congress
accountable now and moving forward. Dean Haskins has set up
Restore the Constitutional Republic under a .com for organizational
purposes and we are finalizing plans to challenge congressmen across
the nation now and henceforth. Dean Haskins, the Citizen Wells blog,
other internet websites, attorneys, businessmen, the military and
millions of Americans are united to uphold and defend the US
Constitution. We are determined to get answers from congressmen.

Why did they believe that Obama is eligible?

Why did no member of Congress challenge the Electoral votes?

Despite our many concerns about policies and actions such as the
so called stimulus bill, we are determined to uphold the US
Constitution and make Congress accountable. This effort will move
forward through the 2010 elections.

Millions of Americans were stunned as every institution in this
nation connected with the 2008 election, ignored the US
Constitution and pleas from masses of the public to vet Senator
Obama. Congressmen ignored their constituents, as if part of
some conspiracy to ensure that Obama got elected.

So we are asking WHY.

The obvious red flag that most people get, the one I am certain a
5th grader could understand is, if Obama was eligible, why did
Obama employ an army of attorneys and spend great sums of money
beginning with Philip Berg’s lawsuit in August 21, 2008, to avoid
proving his eligibility. All Obama had to do is what John McCain
did, provide Congress with a vault copy of his birth certificate,
i.e., a real birth certificate, not a record of a birth certificate
like Obama has tried to do.

If you’re not as smart as a fifth grader then consider the following:

Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 on an Indonesian passport.

Obama’s father was Kenyan, under British rule.

Obama became an Indonesian citizen.

There is no legal proof that Obama was born in Hawaii.

If Obama was born in Kenya, his mother did not meet the eligibility
requirements for Obama to be a natural born citizen.

Consider this letter from a Brigadier General:

 
Charles E. Jones
Brigadier General US Air Force, Retired
Lifetime subject to recall for active duty
Recipient of the Distinguished Service Medal (AF)
02.04.09

“We the People of the United States of America” are entitled to know
the legal qualifications of the President and Commander in Chief. 
For the better good and National Security of “We the People of the
United States” and for Absolute Command of the Military Forces of the
United States, I whole heartedly support the efforts of Dr. Orly Taitz,
ESQ for taking legal action to determine whether or not Barack Hussein
 Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Citizen of Indonesia and possibly citizen
of Kenya, is eligible to become President of the United States and
Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.

We were notified today that 4 TN state representatives
have agreed to cooperate with Orly Taitz in her lawsuit.
Eric Swafford, Stacy Camfield, Glen Casada and
Frank Niceley  have signed a document demanding Obama
produce his documents:

Dean Haskins and I have begun the process of contacting
congressmen and we started with Representative Sue Myrick
and Senator Jim DeMint. We have been discussing possible
reasons why so many senators were misinformed or apathetic.
Perhaps much of the information sent to them was filtered
or blocked by their aides. Regardless, we want answers. Here
is a dialogue that Dean Haskins had with Ian Headley, an
aide to Senator DeMint. Please remember that we have not
yet spoken to Senator DeMint.

Beginning of dialogue:

 
I recently had an interesting exchange with one of SC Senator Jim DeMint’s staffers.  Now, understand, as far as legislators go, I think Senator DeMint is one of the better ones we have; however, on this particular issue, he appears to be either as uniformed, or as willfully negligent, as the rest of them.  At this point, I’m not sure which.  And I say that, understanding that it is possible he is not even aware this exchange even occurred (although I’d be surprised if, by my last two posts to him, Mr. Headley didn’t alert Senator DeMint of the “situation” he had just created). 
 
Some of us are now wondering just how many of our communications actually make it to the elected officials to whom we write.  It looks like the staffers provide quite a firewall between their bosses and We the People.
 
If this weren’t such a tragically dire situation for our country, it would be quite humorous.  It seems Mr. Headley wasn’t in the mood for a logical argument, but he obviously got a nice workout dancing around my questions.
 
So, see if you can tell where a bit of rudimentary logic pulled the wheels off his wagon.
 
Note: I start my letter by referencing my late brother who, until his death in 2000, was the Speaker Pro Tem of the SC State House.  He died of cancer at age 45.
 
********
Dear Senator DeMint:
 
By way of introduction, I am Terry Haskins’ brother.  I live in Virginia, and work in music production, ad and website design, and writing.  I am also the chairman of Restore the Constitutional Republic.  I pray that I may gain your consideration in this matter, simply because I understand you respected my brother, as he did you.  Before this last election cycle, I have never been a political “activist,” however, this issue has grabbed my attention, and I believe that, if he were alive today, Terry would have heartily joined me in the profound concern I have in this.
 
By now, I’m sure you are aware of the growing mass of concerned citizens throughout the U.S. who have legitimate questions about Mr. Obama’s natural born citizen status.  Many volunteers in several organizations worked tirelessly to provide the members of Congress with the pertinent information, and since you’ve recently been included as a defendant in one of the many lawsuits that have been filed across the country (Kerchner v. Obama), I’m sure you are aware of the constitutional issues that are being raised.
 
Senator DeMint, we are not conspiracy theorists, and we do not don tinfoil hats, as the liberal mainstream media would have everyone believe.  We are just everyday citizens who know something is not right, and who highly regard our Constitution.  I believe that you are a very intelligent person, but I don’t believe it even takes that much common sense to understand that someone doesn’t hire high-priced law firms to battle dozens of lawsuits if he does not desire to keep the very thing being asked for hidden.  There is obviously something on that document he does not want us to know—as well as all the other documentation he has sealed from public scrutiny.
 
That being said, this letter is really not intended as a vehicle by which to defend or expound the numerous claims that are being proffered.  This letter is more of a personal request.
 
I am in fairly frequent contact with many of the leaders of this grassroots movement, and, frankly, we have been dumbstruck at the obvious lack of inquest by any of our elected officials.  We know many of those leaders to have been quite vocal about unpopular matters in the past, and we are now trying to understand why not one member of Congress uttered even a whimper about this.
 
We know there must be a reason, and that is the purpose of this letter.  We would like an opportunity to sit down with you, face to face, and have you explain to us why this bizarre series of events unfolded as it did.  There simply must have been something that prevented an honest, open discussion about this, and we’d certainly appreciate knowing what that was.
 
I look forward to your response.
 
For our Constitution,
 
Dean C. Haskins
www.restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.com
www.deanhaskins.com
 
P.S.  I don’t know if you are aware that I designed a website in Terry’s memory.  If you haven’t seen it, it is located at www.terryhaskins.com
 
********
Mr. Haskins,
 
Thank you for your note.  Your brother meant so much to so many of us in South Carolina.  One of the highest points of Senator DeMint’s career was receiving the Terry Haskins award from the SC Republican Party.
 
I heard from Senator Thomas’ office and appreciate you contacting me.
 
I cannot speak for other Members of Congress and neither can Senator DeMint.  However, Senator DeMint has looked into the claims with regard to Barack Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President.  Multiple court cases have reached the Supreme Court, through the legal framework of our nation.  Each case has since been dismissed.  It appears from all evidence available, the President was qualified under the Constitution for Congress to certify the electoral college vote.
 
You would need to contact other Members of Congress, if you have questions about their thoughts and actions on this issue.  Neither I, nor Senator DeMint, are in a position to explain their actions.
 
I wish you all the best, and encourage you to keep fighting to have the right policies implemented in our nation.
 
Sincerely,
 
Ian Headley
 
********
Mr. Headley,
 
Thank you so much for your speedy reply.  I genuinely appreciate it.  I would also like to express my gratitude for your kind sentiments about my brother.  I still miss him very much.
 
Please know that I mean absolutely no disrespect here, but your response is precisely the type of misinformation about which I spoke.  Since none of the cases dealing with the natural born issue have even had their merits heard, what standard of truth did Senator DeMint use to determine that Mr. Obama is, indeed, a natural born citizen?  Each of those cases was dismissed over issues of “standing.”  One can determine nothing of the merits of a case when it is dismissed on a procedural technicality.  Has Senator DeMint physically verified something to which nobody else has had access?
 
And, since the only proof Mr. Obama has proffered to date has been verified by two separate forensic document examiners to be a forgery, again, I ask, what is Senator DeMint’s standard of truth?  Please see this.
 
Your statement also seems to imply that there are presently no active lawsuits, which is simply not true.  Please look here.  In addition to the fact that Senator DeMint is one of the defendants in a procedurally active case (Kerchner v. Obama), please know that there continue to be new actions filed.
 
Please watch my video dealing with this issue here.
 
Mr. Headley, what has happened to common sense?  It appears no longer to exist.
 
Kindest regards,
 
Dean Haskins
 
********
Mr. Headley,
 
I just wanted to follow up and ask if I can expect an answer from either you or Senator DeMint regarding what specific evidence Senator DeMint used to determine, conclusively, that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen, since none of the dismissed cases had any of their merits heard.  I’m sure you can understand my concern, because a plaintiff not having standing to bring a case is certainly not the same thing as evidence being weighed by a court.  Your previous response seemed to indicate that Senator DeMint determined that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen simply because the Supreme Court believed the plaintiff’s were not legally able to have their cases heard. 
 
Please provide the evidence that Senator DeMint used to come to the conclusion he did.
 
Thank you,
 
Dean Haskins
 
********
Mr. Haskins,
 
I understand you are not satisfied with the results of the various unsuccessful court cases with regard to this issue.
 
However, you initiated this communication stating, “this letter is really not intended as a vehicle by which to defend or expound the numerous claims that are being proffered.”
 
Relying on your statement, I did not intend my response to engage in a discussion about the finer points of said ‘numerous claims’, nor will I do so now.
 
I believe my original response was clear as to the questions Senator DeMint is capable of answering.
 
I wish you all the best.
 
Sincerely,
 
Ian Headley
 
********
Mr. Headley,
 
I apologize that I apparently have not communicated well, and there seems to be a bit of a “disconnect” between us.  My statements have nothing to do with my level of “satisfaction” about the outcomes of cases that have been dismissed; merely that those “outcomes” had nothing to do with the natural born citizenship issue—only whether or not the court believed the person(s) bringing the cases had standing to do so.
 
And, I am not “defending or expounding the numerous claims that are being proffered;” I am simply asking for you to explain your original answer.  You said,
 
“However, Senator DeMint has looked into the claims with regard to Barack Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President.  Multiple court cases have reached the Supreme Court, through the legal framework of our nation.  Each case has since been dismissed.  It appears from all evidence available, the President was qualified under the Constitution for Congress to certify the electoral college vote.”
 
To which I questioned what the evidence was that Senator DeMint used to determine that Obama is a natural born citizen, other than the various plaintiffs’ ineligibility to have their cases heard (which, again, is not evidence of natural born citizenship).  Having provided no additional information about evidence, your statement could easily be understood to be that Senator DeMint actually relied on no evidence whatsoever by which to come to his conclusion.
 
If that is what you are saying, then I will accept it at face value.  And, I actually already suspected that to be the case.  That is what prompted my original request for a conversation with Senator DeMint, to determine why he chose not to demand that evidence be provided, knowing that there were so many unanswered questions surrounding the issue.  I believe that the truthshould be within the scope of answers Senator DeMint is capable of providing, and it appears you have now provided that.
 
Thank you,
 
Dean Haskins
 
********
Mr. Headley,
 
I certainly did not desire to end our discussion on such a disagreeable tone; although, with just a bit of elementary logic, you should be able to see the fundamental flaws in your answers to me.  Actually, yours is not all that different from the numerous other replies we’ve received from the offices of Congress members. 
 
It truly is a sad commentary that none of our elected officials actually bothered to ask for the most basic proof that Barack Obama is constitutionally eligible to be our president.  We firmly believe he is not, and he continues to obfuscate anything that might possibly prove us wrong.  And my reason for contacting Senator DeMint was to find out exactly what his reasoning was not even to ask for such basic proof.  It’s not as if the members of Congress weren’t alerted about the problem, for we have people across this country who sent them certified letters, and then retained the documentation proving their letters were sent.
 
The 20th Amendment states, “If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified . . .” Obviously, our forefathers envisioned a scenario in which someone would have attained the status of “President elect,” and then failed to qualify.  That would mean that, after he won the Electoral College vote, the founding fathers expected the members of Congress to verify that he was constitutionally qualified.  That simply did not happen with Barack Obama.
 
And we now believe we are in the midst of a constitutional crisis; hence the continued legal challenges, and the growing swell of military personnel (active and veteran) who are demanding this calamity be addressed.
 
Please don’t get me wrong, I admire and respect Senator DeMint.  I believe he is a fine statesman, and that is why I continue to labor over these communications.  In light of the fact that he is one of the many named defendants in Kerchner v. Obama, I believe Senator DeMint is in a singular position to get in front of this matter and lead our country out of this disaster. 
 
Senator DeMint could start a process to right this wrong by immediately calling for a congressional investigation into this matter.  He could declare to the joint houses of Congress that “We have erred by not exercising our constitutionally prescribed due diligence in this.”  Certainly, you can see the personal legal benefits he could derive from such actions; but, more importantly, he would go down in the annals of history as the one true patriot who actually fought for our Constitution.
 
I still desire to have a conversation with him.
 
For our Constitution,
 
Dean Haskins
Chairman, Restore the Constitutional Republic

End of dialogue

If you have been frustrated by congressmen that have ignored
your pleas to examine Obama’s eligibility problems, take
comfort in the fact that Dean Haskin’s brother was heavily
involved in SC politics. However, as will become obvious soon,
we do not give up easily. We, on behalf of the American public,
demand straight answers and we intend to get them. All of this
correspondence will be recorded and all congressmen will be
accountable sooner or later. There will be a day of reckoning
at least by the 2010 elections.

This is going to be a nationwide effort. We will be asking for
volunteers and hope to have an organization for each state. If
you have the desire and the resolve, go to the Restore the
Constitutional Republic site (new .com) and check often. In the
forum, there is a place by state where you can interact and sign
up. We have another site set up to collect and gather information
about each congressmen. We will use this going forward as a
clearing house for all efforts to hold congressmen accountable.
Details will follow soon.

http://restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.com/

Continue to contact your congressmen as you want. One thing that
we are trying to do with the WHY intiative, is to notify
congressmen that we will meet with them or otherwise establish
a dialogue and we will speak on authority. Citizen Wells and
Dean Haskins are initially available. We will be contacting
Orly Taitz and others to form an expert panel to answer any
questions or challenges provided. Orly has been doing some
of this already.

I know that many are impatient and frustrated. As I have stated
on numerous occasions, these problems did not come about overnight
and will not go away overnight. However, each step that we take
brings us one step closer to a safer, more just country.

God bless.






Related News

  • “Hillary Clinton is Evil Incarnate” David Schippers Free Republic radio April 2002, Chief counsel of impeachment of Bill Clinton
  • Schippers Exposes Impeachment Debacle, David Schippers interview by Insight Magazine December 8, 2000, Democrat Schippers book Sellout
  • Rosemary Jenks testimony April 30, 1997 before the Immigration and Claims Subcommittee, Judiciary committee of the US House of Representatives
  • Starr says Clinton ‘chose deception’, Clinton lied under oath obstructed justice and attempted to thwart not just Paula Jones’ sexual harassment lawsuit but Starr’s grand jury probe as well, House Judiciary Committee, CNN November 18, 1998
  • Judicial Watch finds pattern of lying by Clinton allies, Stephanopoulos sanctioned, Carville rebuked by court, Stephanopoulos warned on national TV of “Ellen Rometsch strategy” by “White House allies” to “bring down” perceived adversaries of Clinton Administration, Judicial Watch August 20, 1998
  • The Podesta cover-up, Top Clinton aide fighting impeachment, Implicated in cover-up of sale of Clinton Commerce trade mission seats for campaign contributions, Nolanda Hill testified in sworn affidavit and in open court, Judicial Watch September 23, 1998
  • Why is Clinton White House afraid of Dolly Kyle Browning?, Paula Jones witness prepared to testify in senate trial, Browning can testify to Clinton perjury threats and obstruction of justice, Judicial Watch January 11, 1999
  • Declaration of Dolly Kyle Browning March 6, 1998, Paula Jones’s lawyers released, Sexual relationship with Bill Clinton from mid-1970’s until January 1992, 1994 high school reunion encounter, “I agreed not to tell the true story about our relationship”
  • Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked as *

    *