DEVELOPING!!!

Pulls support for Johnny Isakson over Obama Birth Certificate issue

"The truth is really quite simple: the man who is in the White House is there illegally"

From Eric Dondero:

Carl Swensson is the Chairman of the Clayton County Republican Party. He gave an interview to Sharon Rondeau. She started the interview:

You have quite an announcement to make today, Carl. What were the events leading up to it?

Partial Text of Swensson's response from Post & Email:

The way this started out, as for many of us, was the battle over eligibility, trying to figure out if the person in the White House is actually legally eligible to be there. We all know that Article II, Section 1, clause 5 clearly states that the president must be a “natural born Citizen.” Now there are plenty of people out there who will try to pervert the meaning of that by citing things within the 14th Amendment, where, by the way, the term “natural born” is not used. “Native born” is. However, we don’t care about “native born.” We’re talking about a president who is not “natural born” by his own admission. He’s already told us in his book that his father was Kenyan, a British subject, when he was born, giving him dual allegiance.

We also know without a doubt that Senate Resolution 511 back in April 2008 was passed in the Senate wherein they acknowledged John McCain as being “natural born,” and they did that based on the fact that both of his parents were U.S. citizens. Then, of course, they went a step farther and claimed that the military base in Panama was American soil, and there are still some serious misgivings about that interpretation.

The more important aspect is that they clearly recognized in a unanimous vote, in which Obama participated, to bestow that “natural born” citizenship upon him, and all communications concerning this, as you have probably read time and time again, indicate that the people who were defining “natural born” at the time had a much clearer understanding of it when they stated that to be “natural born,” both parents have to be U.S. citizens.

Based on that alone, we put forth calls, meaning everybody that I know and knew who has been concerned with this. The calls went out to our congressmen; they went out to senators. I personally served my senators with the citizens’ grand jury presentments, and I clearly included there all of the salient points about Obama’s ineligibility; also included in that were criminal complaints, one from Cmdr. Walter Fitzpatrick. Those complaints were added to those of four other military men who signed their own criminal complaints for treason and fraud.

We have not been able to get anything back from congressmen or senators, specifically on the Republican side. I don’t expect the Democrats to have anything to do with this because it’s not in their best interest as they try to dismantle this country. We know that they’re Marxists; we know that they’re anti-American, so you can expect little else from them. But when it comes to Republicans, there’s a higher bar for them. The bar is that they are going to uphold their oath. It’s really quite simple. They take it, and it’s a contract with America, with their constituents, with the voters who put them in office. Yet we have witnessed time and again that these Republican senators, from Georgia, in particular, have sent me letters and emails concerning Obama’s eligibility, and both of them parroted the same thing that they’ve always said: and that is, “Well, he’s shown his birth certificate, and we believe him to be “natural born,” so we’re dropping it.”

I firmly believe also that these letters are being generated by the interns within their offices and they never see them. However, that does not take them off the hook. It is coming from their offices, and they are responsible for the content of those letters.

So I focused in on one person in particular, and that was Johnny Isakson. He’s coming up for re-election. I would like to say that I’m a part of the Republican Party here in Clayton County, GA. During a meeting on July 7, a motion was put forward to withdraw the support of the Clayton County GOP for Johnny Isakson because of his failure to vet and to stand up for us concerning the eligibility issue of Barack Obama.

Later in the interview:

So Bob [Holtzclaw] came up with the motion to withdraw support for Isakson. Since we had no other candidate running for this Senate seat, we decided to shift our support over to the Libertarian candidate, Chuck Donovan. The meeting went well; the motion was put forth, and it carried. It was passed by a vote of 3-2 with several others abstaining at that point, not knowing which way to go on it. That’s history, true and correct history.

A source has indicated to Libertarian Republican that this may be more of a case of "radical Libertarians" winning over a local Republican group, and asserting themselves into the endorsement process, rather than longstanding Republicans being persuaded to back the Libertarian.

Editor's Note - We have been unable to fully confirm the information in this article. However, our source, says that the endorsement is "highly likely" to be accurate. This, despite the fact that Swensson is of a somewhat questionable character.