“Ignorance is not bliss.”
“Knowledge is Power.”
Minnesota could soon be famous for another 2008 Election
controversy aside from the Al Franken, Norm Coleman
senate race controversy. The Certificate of Voters must
be signed and mailed to the US Senate. If Minnesota uses
the same Certificate that was used in 2004, they had better
rethink sending it in without complying with the reference
to the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution. There are
2 places in the Twelfth Amendment that refer to presidential
eligibility:
“as in the case of the death or other
constitutional disability of the President.”
“But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of
President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the
United States.”
Everyone involved in the presidential election has an obligation
to uphold the US Constitution. MN has taken it one step further
and explicitly included it in their certificate.
One might ask how MN Electoral College Electors would know this.
The Citizen Wells blog along with organizations like Democratic
Disaster and many other people have been notifying election
officials in all 50 states regarding the serious eligibility
issues surrounding Barack Obama and the duties of all responsible.
In addition there are many court cases in state courts as well
as before the US Supreme Court. So, ignorance of the facts or
duties will be no excuse. Check the Certificate for signatures.
Those signing the 2008 Certificate without ensuring they are
complying with the Twelfth Amendment, are most certainly
guilty of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” and certainly removal
from office.
California Certificate of Voters is questionable
Do we have any takers?
Anyone want to call the Governor or Secretary of State’s office in Minnesota?
Recall initiatives, impeachment, removal from office?
2004 MN Certificate of Vote
Citizen WElls 
This is best yet, since this form makes clear that the Electors know (that is, “made certain” so they can “certify”) they are not voting for an “ineligible” candidate — the Electors, certifying “eligible” candidates.
If it can be shown that they failed that test, they have made themselves susceptible to a complaint for fraud and misrepresentation.
This will require a competent attorney, but really they are “certifying” that they “made certain” they knew what they were doing, and I do not know how they got the evidence that they did, when no one else demanding it got it either.
They would have been better off to withhold their vote, then to go ahead and do what they did here.
Thanks Bob.
That is my position.
I just sent of an email to the office of the Minnesota SOS asking if the same from was used.
Interesting CitizenWells. I continue to hold to the smallest glimmer of hope “a” court will take action.
However, the last resort remains that Dr. Vieira set out:
If I were a criminal defense lawyer that had a case involving a law that Obama signed, I would certainly be raising loudly.
http://newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin186.htm
In sum, if the statute does not guarantee (within human competence) that a correct answer to the question be had, then it cannot be deemed to be the exclusive remedy in the premises if (as will be discussed below) a better remedy is available. Moreover, even if the statute is employed to hear and decide challenges to Obama’s eligibility, the resulting “decision[s]” must provide assurances to a moral certainty that the correct answer has indeed been obtained in both fact and law—otherwise, further inquiry needs to be had in other fora. For the consequences of an incorrect answer on the ultimate issue, later exposed as such, are far too serious to allow for any lesser degree of surety. Never were the stakes from a game of “truth or consequences” higher than they are now.
Assume, however, that no inquiry, or only a perfunctory inquiry, or only an obviously tainted inquiry takes place at the stage of counting the Electors’ votes. Is the issue then forever foreclosed? Not at all. For a extensive class of litigants who absolutely do have “standing” to challenge Obama’s eligibility will come into existence, and demand relief as a matter of undeniable constitutional right and practical necessity, as soon as Obama’s Department of Justice attempts to enforce through criminal prosecutions some of the controversial legislation that the new Congress will enact and Obama will sign—such as statutes aimed at stripping common Americans of the firearms to which (in Obama’s derisive terminology) they “cling.”
For example, in a criminal prosecution under a new statute that reinstates the Clinton “assault-weapons ban” (or some equally obnoxious affront to Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16 and the Second Amendment), the defendant will undeniably have “standing” to challenge the indictment on the grounds that no statute imposing such a ban even exists, because the original “Bill which * * * passed the House of Representatives and the Senate” was never “presented to the President of the United States”, and therefore could never “become a Law,” inasmuch as the supposed “President,” Barack Obama, being constitutionally ineligible for that office, was then and remains thereafter nothing but an usurper. [See Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 and Article II, Section 1, 4]
Sorry for the mistakes.
However, the last resort remains the one that Dr. Vieira set out:
If I were a criminal defense lawyer that had a case involving a law that Obama signed, I would certainly be this objection raising loudly.
Well, at least Minnesota put it in writing, which is more than any other state had the guts to do! Now, if they fail to come through and have vetted Obama, they have no one to blame but themselves.
LadyHawke.
Good job!
Thanks Zach.
It’s good to have you back in the saddle (ouch) again.
Does anyone know of any instance that an “elector” of any state did not vote for Obama. I know some states require an “elector” to sign a pledge that they will vote for their parties candidate. Anyone have any info on how the “electors” that are on the CA lawsuit voted, with CA being one of the states that, by law, requires to vote as pledged.
An elector that does not vote as “pledged” can be prosecuted, however, I believe, in most states, it is just a misdemeaner. However, to the best of my knowledge, no “elector” has every been prosecuted.
It would have been great to test the system in terms of witholding a pledged Obama vote to see if there were any criminal charges. That truly would allow the “brave” elector to use discovery to get at the truth.
Please, anyone….can you offer any insight?
The state laws are clearly unconstitutional.
citizenwells wrote:
The state laws are clearly unconstitutional.
How can the state laws be clearly unconstitutional when the Constitution clearly leaves the appointing of electors entirely up to the state legislatures?
The only constitutional restriction is on the number of electors.
k
State laws are subordinate to the US Constitution and federal laws.
koyaan…
You over here too? I’ll get to your Orly post manyana. It’s a worthy post by the way . Till then…
What if the State requirements were that if an elector didn’t hold to the party vote (the election’s winner), his property would be confiscated… just for instance? Would there be a federal Constitutional issue that would trump State law? Or would you hold to the idea that the State law is supreme?
Confiscation occurring indicates probably a felony for which confiscation is State retribution. Now scale it down to a misdemeanor. Let’s say a fine is imposed for breaking with the political party’s candidate, who won the election… the same thing as before, only a different penalty. Is that fine proper if you considered confiscation not to be? Leaving alone “cruel and unusual punishment” and looking at even any punishment, what is the Constitutional basis for punishing one who votes one’s mind?
So that can’t a case for unconstitutionality be made?
msjkulig:
I’m presuming the “electors” that are party to the CA lawsuit are people that were pledged to Alan Keyes, hence they didn’t actually become electors because Keyes didn’t win in CA.
With 13,561,900 votes cast in CA, Alan Keyes got 40,673, which was ‘only’ 8,233,800 behind Obama and 4,971,108 less than McCain.
That may also put a dent into the idea that he has standing. Pretty hard to show that the fact Obama was on the ballot damaged his chances of winning.
L Apple
Ca allows any candidate on the ballot to challenge, it doesn’t specify how many people were duped, opps, voted for one candidate or another. Also, since there are what 31 million people in CA, there are FAR MORE CALIFORNIANS who didn’t vote and whose Constitutional rights are being trampled on by LESS THAN ALMOST A FOURTH who voted for OBAMA.
do the math before you post ok?
A simple question (I guess): Can the 100,000 people who signed one of the petitions (or a large group of us) sue all electoral college voters, who voted for Obama, for damages should they occur?
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMPLAINT AGAINST BARACK OBAMA:
1. FILL OUT THE FORMAL COMPLAINT WITH YOUR INFORMATION
2. FILL OUT A COPY OF THE COVER SHEET
3. FAX A COPY TO CLERKS OFFICE BELOW AND SEND BY CERTIFIED MAIL
4. HE HAS 14 DAYS TO ANSWER-HE WILL GIVE UP HIS LICENSE AND NOT ANSWER
5. YOU HAVE STANDING BECAUSE HE CAME INTO YOUR STATE AND SWORE TO YOUR SOS THAT HE WAS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
6. I’LL BET YOU EVEN DONATED $20 TO HIS ELECTION FUND WITH A DEBIT CARD YOU COULD ADD THAT IN AT THE END OF #12 …and that I was defrauded and encouraged to donate even more substantial sums of money to his campaign.
https://www.iardc.org/htr_reqforinvestig_form.html
https://www.iardc.org/co_clerksofcsvc.html#1
Illinois attorney board for complaints
https://www.iardc.org/ardcroll.asp
Obama law license
http://www.clr.org/cjg.html
Example of Illinois complaint
http://www.iardc.org/rulesSCT.html
Rules governing legal profession in Illinois
http://www.state.il.us/court/supremecourt/rules/art_viii/
RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
The Clerk’s Office is located in the Commission’s Chicago office at 130 East Randolph Drive, Suite 1100. The Clerk’s office open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., on all days except Saturday, Sunday and Commission holidays. You may contact the Clerk’s Office by telephone at the Commission’s general phone number (312) 565-2600, or within Illinois, at 800-826-8625. The Clerk’s Office facsimile number is (312) 565-1806.
_____________________________________________________________________________BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD
OF THE
ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION
AND
DISIPLINARY COMMISSION
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Petitioner Case No. To Be Assigned
vs (See Note 1 and 2)
Barack Hussein Obama
Attorney Respondent.
,
FORMAL COMPLAINT
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Petitioner, upon information and belief, states the following:
COMPLAINT
1. Respondent, Barack Hussein Obama, claims to be licensed to practice law in Illinois in 2008, and by virtue of alleged license is a member of the State Bar of Illinois who is subject to the jurisdiction of the Illinois Supreme Court and the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission in matters of discipline for professional misconduct.
2. Respondent last maintained an office for the practice of law in the County of Cook, Illinois State.
3. As an attorney subject to the rules and regulations of the Illinois Supreme Court, respondent is subject to the standards for discipline set forth in Article Vlll of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct.
4. As attorney subject to the rules and regulations of the Illinois Supreme Court, respondent is charged, with the following duties and responsibilities:
a. To refrain from engaging in conduct prejudicial to the proper administration of justice;
b. To refrain from engaging in conduct contrary to justice, ethics, honesty, or good morals;
c. To refrain from engaging in conduct that subjects the legal profession to obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach.
COUNT ONE
5. On or about December 17, 1991, Barack Hussein Obama was admitted to practice law in the State of Illinois. On his Bar Admission Application he stated that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born in Kenya, Africa. At no time has Barack Hussein Obama attempt to correct his mistakes or to inform the Commission or Courts of his dishonesty.
6. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct:
a. conduct that violated Rule 8.1 (a) (1 and (2) Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters of the Rules of Professional Conduct; and
b. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; and
c. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice, or to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute, in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771: and
d. Including, but not limited to, these laws including Obstruction of Justice, RICO, racketeering laws, laws against filing false information in the public records, laws against fraud upon the Court, negligence, and The Penal Code making it a felony for a public official (officer of the Court)to violate offenses at common law i.e. Obstruction of Justice (Blackstones , Commentaries(1890),pp(161-177):
1. Perjury
2. Barratry
COUNT TWO
8. Petitioner re-alleges, as if recited verbatim, the factual statements set forth in Count One of this Complaint.
9. On or about December 17, 1991, Barack Hussein Obama was admitted to practice law in the State of Illinois. On his Bar Admission Application he did not declare that he was also known as A/K/A: Barry Soetoro; Barry Obama; Barack Dunham; and Barry Dunham. At no time has Barack Hussein Obama attempt to correct his mistakes or to inform the Commission or Courts of his dishonesty. Furthermore, these A/K/A names were used on passports and college applications to receive foreign student aid.
10. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct:
a. conduct that violated Rule 8.1 (a)(1 and (2) Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters of the Rules of Professional Conduct; and
b. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; and
c. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice, or to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute, in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771: and
d. Including, but not limited to, these laws including Obstruction of Justice, RICO, racketeering laws, laws against filing false information in the public records, laws against fraud upon the Court, negligence, and The Penal Code making it a felony for a public official (officer of the Court)to violate offenses at common law i.e. Obstruction of Justice (Blackstones , Commentaries(1890),pp(161-177):
1. Perjury
2. Barratry
COUNT THREE
11. Petitioner re-alleges, as if recited verbatim, the factual statements set forth in Count One and Two of this complaint.
12. During 2008, Barack Hussein Obama declared to 50 Secretary of States , including Illinois that he was eligible to run for the office of the Presidency of the United States and was a “natural born citizen” even though it was common knowledge that his father was a Kenyan citizen.
Barack Osama’s 2008 Presidential website clearly states that he had dual citizenship and his father was a Kenyan/British citizen. This is a violation of the US Constitution Article ll, Section l, Clause 5.
13. By reason of the conduct outlined above, Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct:
a. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; and
b. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice, or to bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute, in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771: and
c. Including, but not limited to, these laws including Obstruction of Justice, RICO, racketeering laws, laws against filing false information in the public records, laws against fraud upon the Court, negligence, and The Penal Code making it a felony for a public official (officer of the Court)to violate offenses at common law i.e. Obstruction of Justice (Blackstones , Commentaries(1890),pp(161-177):
1. Perjury
2. Barratry
COUNT FOUR
15. Petitioner re-alleges, as if recited verbatim, the factual statements set forth in Count One through Three of this complaint.
16. That these representations made by Respondent were false, and were known to Respondent to be false at the time they were made. “Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional Right from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.” Owen v Independence 100 S.C.T. 1398
17. That Respondent acting in concert with other state actors, by slander, impersonating a state official, bias, intimidation, fraud, mail fraud, unauthorized practice of law, have violated Petitioner’s Constitutional Rights, as well Unfair Trade Practice Laws and the Consumer Protection Act Laws and barratry.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
18. A Temporary Restraining Order restraining Respondent from exercising any duties of any state or federal office held, or the practice of law, pending disposition of this Petition.
19. That Respondent is denied any and all emoluments he may have been entitled to.
20. That the Respondent be declared in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. {{} {} 2382, and 2384 and the 14th Amendment, {}3 of the Constitution of the United States of America.
21. All other relief that Petitioner is entitled to pursuant to F.R.C.P. 54(c)
22. Any and all other relief that the Court deems equitable and just in the interest of justice.
23. Whoever, having taken an Oath before a competent tribunal officer or person in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an Oath to be administered, willfully and contrary to such Oath, states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true, is guilty of perjury and shall be fined no more than $2,000.00 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
Wherefore, Respondent should be subjected to such discipline as may be warranted by the facts and circumstance of such misconduct.
Dated December 19, 2008
Anywhere, USA xxxxx
_________________________________
XXXXXXXXXXXX
c/o 123 Oak St
Anywhere, USA
XXXXX
COMPLAINT
Note 1
Lawyers and judges are required to file a request for investigation if they have knowledge of “A significant violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to (a) Lawyer’s honesty, trust, worthiness, or fitness as a lawyer …”
COMPLAINT
Note 2
There is no statute of limitation or any concept of latches as a bar to prosecution. ABA Standards for Lawyer Discipline and Disability Proceedings Standard 4.6(1979) states that “Lawyer discipline and disability proceedings should not be subject to any statute of limitations.” In Re Smith, 73 Kan 743; Anne Arundel Cty Bar Ass’n v Collins 272 MD 578; State Ex Rel Nebraska State Bar Ass’n v Bates 162 Neb 652 and in Re O’Hara, 63 AD 2nd 500 (1978).
COVER SHEET FOR FORMAL COMPLAINT
1. IN THE DETAILS AREA SAY “SEE ATTACHED” OR N/A
2. STREET ADDRESS, COOK COUNTY, IL
Filing a Request for an Investigation of an Attorney | Effect on Your Legal Rights | Other Information Provided by the ARDC
REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION OF A LAWYER FORM
Request an investigation of an Illinois lawyer by printing, completing and returning this form to the Chicago or Springfield ARDC offices. The Chicago office is located at 130 East Randolph Drive, Suite 1500, 60601-6219. The Springfield office is located at the One North Old Capitol Plaza, Suite 333, 62701-1625.
1. Your name: ____________________________________________
Street Address: ____________________________________________
City: _____________________ State: _____ Zip: ________________
Home Phone Number: ________________________________
Cell Phone Number: __________________________________
Business Phone Number: _______________________________
2. Name of Lawyer you are complaining about: __________________________________
Name of Law Firm: _____________________________________________________
Street Address: ________________________________________________________
City: ____________________ State: _____ Zip: ___________________
Phone Number: _______________________________
3. Did you employ the lawyer?
Yes _____
If yes, when was the lawyer hired? ______________________
How much did you pay for the lawyer? ___________________
No _____
If no, what is your connection to the lawyer? _________________________
4. If your complaint relates to a lawsuit, please give the following:
Name of court (for example: Circuit Court of Cook County): ________________________________________________________________
Name of case: _____________________________________________________
Case number: ______________________________________________________
5. Please describe what the lawyer did or failed to do that you believe may have been improper. If you employed the lawyer, explain what you employed the lawyer to do. Include important dates and names, addresses and telephone numbers of witnesses and other people involved. Do not include opinions or arguments. Attach copies of any documents that support your complaint, such as fee agreements, receipts, checks, letters and court papers.
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Date: ____________________ Signature: __________________________________________