Category Archives: Attorney General

Obama kept on GA ballot by Secretary of State Brian Kemp, Kemp upheld Judge Malihi ruling, Obama attorney Jablonski on Kemp Advisory Council

Posted on February 7, 2012 | 128 comments

Obama kept on GA ballot by Secretary of State Brian Kemp, Kemp upheld Judge Malihi ruling, Obama attorney Jablonski on Kemp Advisory Council

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

“Why did Indiana Appeals Court Judge Elaine B. Brown place the following in her ruling: “The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.””...Citizen Wells

From the Obama Ballot Challenge February 7, 2012.

“Kemp Upholds Deeply Flawed Georgia Ballot Challenge Ruling”

“Well, it appears tha GA Secy of State Kemp has upheld Malihi’s denial of the ballot challenges.

Last Friday’s ruling (see hearing video, transcripts) on the Obama Eligibility Challenge cases of attorneys Hatfield, Irion and Taitz was so over the top absurd, that it may cause tectonic shifts in the movement’s aproach to Obama’s obvious ineligibility.

Attorney Mark Hatfiled offered his strong RESPONSE to the Friday ruling by Malihi.

Taitz offered her APPEAL. No attorney has fought more battles in this war, nor suffered more defeats and ridicule.

Kemp, who previously said he would follow the recommendations, was presented with a dilemma. The question was, would he follow recommendations which obviously not only ignored, but twisted law and facts into a pretzel shape? Now we know the sad answer. There are precedents for SOS overruling of administrative judge rulings, even for Judge Malihi.

There appeared to be reasons for hope, when the Secretary of State assigned the Ballot Challenge cases to Malihi, when Malihi struck down motions to dismiss, to cancel subpoenas for Obama’s appearance in court and to compel providing documents.

When Obama attorney Jablonski tried to make an end run around Mahili’s court and quash the entire hearing, Kemp fought back and even said Obama and his attorney’s boycott would be at their peril.

In judge’s chambers, Mahili supposedly wanted to declare default judgment and the attorneys resisted, favoring an open hearing with evidence formally read into the record. They had only two hours to plead the biggest political scandal in history.

At this point, reasonable people need to contemplate whether we even have rule of law anymore and whether it could even be restored via working within the system. I am hearing much talk of extraordinary measures. God help us.”

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/kemp-upholds-deeply-flawed-georgia-ballot-challenge-ruling

And what a surprise this will be to you….right.

Michael Jablonski, General Counsel, Democratic Party of Georgia, who represented Obama in the Georgia ballot challenge and who defiantly refused to attend the hearing with Judge Malihi, is on the GA Secretary of State Elections Advisory Council.

http://www.sos.ga.gov/GAEAC/

 

Thanks to commenter SueK

128 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, corruption, Courts, Election, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Obama GA ballot ruling Judge Malihi, Attorney Mark Hatfield letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp, Flaws in ruling

Posted on February 7, 2012 | 14 comments

Obama GA ballot ruling Judge Malihi, Attorney Mark Hatfield letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp, Flaws in ruling

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

From the letter from Attorney Mark Hatfield  to Georgia Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp, February 7, 2012.
“Dear Secretary Kemp:

As you are aware, Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi issued
a “Decision” in the above-referenced matters on this past Friday,
February 3, 2012, holding Defendant Barack Obama eligible as a
candidate for the presidential primary election. Because you are
now charged, pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(c), with making a
final determination of Defendant Obama’s eligibility to appear on
the ballot in Georgia, I am writing to respectfully point out
several significant flaws in Judge Malihi’s findings and
conclusions.

Initially, I would note that although Judge Malihi ordered my
clients’ cases severed, as a unit, from the cases of Plaintiffs
Welden; Farrar; Lax; Judy; Malaren; and Roth, and although Judge
Malihi conducted a separate hearing as to my clients’ cases as
requested, he nevertheless erroneously issued a single “Decision”
applicable to all of the Plaintiffs’ cases, despite the fact that
the evidence; testimony; and legal argument advanced by my
clients differed from that offered by the other Plaintiffs.

The adverse impact upon my clients of Judge Malihi’s erroneous
issuance of a single “Decision” as to all Plaintiffs is
immediately apparent when one reviews certain alleged “facts”
which were “considered” by Judge Malihi (“Decision,” p. 6).
Specifically, Judge Malihi found as “fact”: 1) that Defendant
Obama was born in the United States; and 2) that Defendant
Obama’s mother was a citizen of the United States at the time of
Defendant’s birth. Both of these “facts” found by Judge Malihi
constitute a second significant flaw in the judge’s ruling and
serve as the stated factual basis for his erroneous conclusion
that Defendant Obama is eligible for the presidency.

Simply put, a review of the record in my clients’ above -captioned
cases reveals no evidence of Defendant’s place of birth and no
evidence of Defendant’s mother’s citizenship at the time of
Defendant’s birth. My clients did not enter into evidence any
copy of Defendant Obama’s purported birth certificate in these
cases. And while my clients’ evidence did include a copy of the
divorce proceedings between Defendant Obama’s parents, and while
these divorce records did establish the identities of Defendant’s
parents and the date of Defendant’s birth, the divorce records
did not establish the location of Defendant’s birth or the
citizenship of his mother at the time of his birth.

As you know, Defendant Obama and his attorney, Michael Jablonski,
failed to appear for the trial of these actions and failed to
submit any evidence or testimony into the record. Moreover, they
failed to appear notwithstanding the fact that I timely served
defense counsel with a Notice to Produce, directing his client to
appear at trial and to produce certain documents and items to be
used as evidence by the Plaintiffs. Defense counsel, in fact,
never objected to the Notice to Produce and never moved to quash
same. He simply, and purposefully, ignored it.

However, as you are also aware, Mr. Jablonski did attempt to
“back door” into the record two (2) electronic images of
Defendant Obama’s purported “long form” and “short form” birth
certificates by attaching same to a letter addressed and emailed
to you on January 25, 2012, the day before the trial, essentially
informing you that he and his client would not appear for trial.

Nevertheless, Mr. Jablonski’s attempt to inject these “documents”
into the record is legally ineffective. O.C.G.A. § 50 – 13 – 15 (1)
provides in pertinent part that “[t]he rules of evidence as
applied in the trial of civil nonjury cases in the superior
courts shall be followed.” Additionally, O.C.G.A. § 50-13-15 (2)
provides that “[d]ocumentary evidence may be received in the form
of copies or excerpts if the original is not readily available.
Upon request, parties shall be given an opportunity to compare
the copy with the original or have it established as documentary
evidence according to the rules of evidence applicable to the
superior courts of this state” (emphasis supplied). In the
instant cases, Plaintiffs’ Notice to Produce, served on January
19, 2012, had already requested Defendant Obama to produce one
(1) of the two (2) original certified copies of Defendant’s “long
form” birth certificate in his possession, as well as all
medical; religious; administrative; or other records of or
relating to Defendant’s birth. Of course, Defendant Obama and
his lawyer deliberately ignored Plaintiffs’ valid requests, and
Mr. Jablonski’s misguided attempt to inappropriately place
documents into the record through the “back door” should likewise
be ignored.”

Read more:

http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFiles/file/Powell-SwenssonvObamaAttorneyHatfieldLetterBrieftoGeorgiaSecretaryofStateRegardingDecisionbyJudgeMichaelMalihi2-7-2012.pdf

 

14 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, Election, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Judge Michael Malihi ruling, Indiana Appeals court lies, US Constitution Vs English common law, Supreme court opinions, More Indiana corruption?

Posted on February 5, 2012 | 91 comments

Judge Michael Malihi ruling, Indiana Appeals court lies, US Constitution Vs English common law, Supreme court opinions, More Indiana corruption?

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

Indiana has been in the news recently for political corruption.

From Fox News October 18, 2011.

“Shocking election fraud allegations have stained a state’s 2008
presidential primary – and it took a college student to uncover them.

“This fraud was obvious, far-reaching and appeared to be systemic,”
22-year-old Ryan Nees told Fox News, referring to evidence he
uncovered while researching electoral petitions from the 2008
Democratic Party primary in Indiana.

Nees’ investigation centered on the petitions that put then-senators
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on the ballot. As many as 150 of the
names and signatures, it is alleged, were faked. So many, in fact,
that the numbers raise questions about whether Obama’s campaign had
enough legitimate signatures to qualify for a spot on the ballot.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/18/college-student-credited-with-uncovering-possible-election-fraud-in-indianas
Who wrote the Indiana Appeals Court decision that Judge Michael Malihi of Georgia quoted? The Obama camp? Mainstream media?

Did a judge actually write this?
STEVE ANKENY AND BILL KRUSE, Appellants-Plaintiffs,

vs.

GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Respondent.

November 12, 2009
OPINION – FOR PUBLICATION
BROWN, Judge

CRONE, J., and MAY, J., concur.
“B. Natural Born Citizen

Second, the Plaintiffs argue that both President Barack Obama and Senator John McCain are not “natural born Citizens” as required for qualification to be
President under Article II, Section 1, Clause 49 of the U.S. Constitution”

“As to President Obama‟s status, the most common argument has been waged by members of the so-called “birther” movement who suggest that the President was not born in the United States”

Did a judge actually write the above? If so it is at best unprofessional and inaccurate and at worst biased.

“Specifically, the crux of the Plaintiffs‟ argument is that “[c]ontrary to the thinking of most People on the subject, there‟s a very clear distinction
between a „citizen of the United States‟ and a „natural born Citizen,‟ and the difference involves having [two] parents of U.S. citizenship, owing no foreign
allegiance. Appellants‟ Brief at 23. With regard to President Barack Obama, the Plaintiffs posit that because his father was a citizen of the United Kingdom,
President Obama is constitutionally ineligible to assume the Office of the President.”

Once again, did a judge write the above? First, there is a clear distinction between citizen and natural born citizen. Secondly, the judge cannot possibly know what most people think. Thirdly, the law is not based on what a group of people think.

“It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the
present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the
protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was
born.

III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States
afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.”

The following

“and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.”

is a damn lie!

Anyone who has studied law and or history, anyone who has followed the natural born citizen debate, knows that although American Law was influenced by British Common Law, once we broke from the British Empire, we developed our own set of laws that are not identical to those of our ancestral lands.

For example:

US Constitution

Article I Section 2

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Third Congress,  1795 .

“…children of citizens  of the United States…shall be considered citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States…”

Further evidence can be found here:

Citizen Wells January 6, 2011.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/112th-congress-ron-paul-et-al-do-your-damn-job-us-constitution-natural-born-citizen-obama-eligibility/

From Sam Sewell of The Steady Drip.

“The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

The first was decided in A.D. 1814, at the beginning of the republic, by men who were intimately associated with the American Revolution.”

Being witnesses and heirs of the Revolution, they understood what the Framers of the Constitution had intended.

The Venus case regarded the question whether the cargo of a merchantman, named the Venus, belonging to an American citizen, and being shipped from British territory to America during the War of 1812, could be seized and taken as a prize by an American privateer.  But what the case said about citizenship, is what matters here.

WHAT THE VENUS CASE SAYS ON CITIZENSHIP

In the Venus Case, Justice Livingston, who wrote the unanimous decision, quoted the entire §212nd paragraph from the French edition, using his own English, on p. 12 of the ruling:

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…”

From attorneys and legal scholars:

From Attorney Mario Apuzzo February 3, 2012.

“Georgia State Administrative Law Judge, Michael M. Malihi, issued his decision on Friday, February 3, 2012, finding that putative President, Barack Obama, is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary election under O.C.G.A. Sec. 21-2-5(b). The decision can be read here, http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/02/judge-malihi-rules-against-plaintiffs.html

I must enter my objection to this decision which is not supported by either fact or law.

The Court held: “For purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny [sic meant Ankeny], he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.”

But there is no evidence before the Court that Obama was born in the United States. The court can only rest its finding of fact on evidence that is part of the court record. The judge tells us that he decided the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims. But he does not tell us in his decision what evidence he relied upon to “consider[]” that Obama was born in the United States. The judge “considered” that Obama was born in the United States. What does “considered” mean? Clearly, it is not enough for a court to consider evidence or law. It must make a finding after having considered facts and law. The judge simply does not commit to any finding as to where Obama was born. Using the word “considered” is a cop out from actually addressing the issue. Additionally, we know from his decision that neither Obama nor his attorney appeared at the hearing let alone introduced any evidence of Obama’s place of birth. We also know from the decision that the judge ruled that plaintiffs’ documents introduced into evidence were “of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiff’s allegations.” Surely, the court did not use those “insufficient” documents as evidence of Obama’s place of birth. Nor does the judge tell us that he used those documents for any such purpose. The judge also does not tell us that the court took any judicial notice of any evidence (not to imply that it could). The judge did find that Obama has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party. But with the rules of evidence of superior court applying, this finding does not establish anyone’s place of birth. Hence, what evidence did the judge have to rule that Obama is born in the United States? The answer is none.

The court did not engage in its own thoughtful and reasoned analysis of the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen,” but rather relied only upon Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana, 916 N.E.2d 678 (Ind. Ct.App. 2009), transfer denied, 929 N.E.2d 789 (2010), a state-court decision which erred in how it defined a “natural born Citizen.””

Read more:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/02/all-that-is-wrong-with-georgia-state.html

From Attorney Leo Donofrio February 4, 2012.

“There is no “clearly expressed intention” to deem 14th Amendment citizens “natural born”. Those words were intentionally left out of the 14th Amendment. And Judge Malihi has simply overruled the U.S. Supreme Court by suggesting that the general citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment governs the specific requirement to be President in Article 2, Section 1.

Both clauses are not given separate effect by Malihi. His opinion holds that the 14th has the exact same effect as the natural-born citizen clause, while the 14th Amendment does not include the words “natural born Citizen”. Persons claiming citizenship under the 14th Amendment are deemed to be “citizens”. Malihi has added the words “natural born” into the Amendment. This is absolutely forbidden, according to Malihi’s own opinion in the Motion to dismiss, wherein he held:

“In the absence of words of limitation, words in a statute should be given their ordinary and everyday meaning.’ Six Flags Over Ga. v. Kull, 276 Ga. 210, 211 (2003) (citations and quotation marks omitted). Because there is no other ‘natural and reasonable construction’ of the statutory language, this Court is ‘not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.’ ””

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/02/04/a-rat-called-tandem/

I recommend to the Georgia Secretary of State to have the Attorney General of GA read the Malihi ruling and that Judge Malihi be drug tested.

91 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Court of Appeals, Courts, Election, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Leo Donofrio, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC

Tagged , , , ,

NC elections 2012, Ballot challenges, North Carolina election law, SBOE, State Board of Elections, Laws bias or corruption, Part 1

Posted on February 3, 2012 | 152 comments

NC elections 2012, Ballot challenges, North Carolina election law, SBOE, State Board of Elections, Laws bias or corruption, Part 1

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

NC elections 2012

North Carolina election law

Laws, bias, corruption

Part 1

I begin Part 1 of this series on NC Elections 2012, NC election law at a historic moment. As I sit here in NC writing this, Judge Michael Malihi may still
be pondering his decision for a ruling on the Obama ballot challenges in Georgia. His ruling is expected soon and the GA Secretary of State, Brian P. Kemp,
has stated he will abide by the judge’s decision. Regardless, this is significant for 2 main reasons. First, it the the first time I am aware of that a judge
is ruling on Obama’s eligibility based on merits and not some other issue like standing. Second, regardless of the ruling, there are stated avenues of appeal
in the GA Statutes.

Another historic aspect of NC elections and election law in 2012 is the Democrat National convention being held in Charlotte, NC this year. Obama won NC by a
very narrow margin in 2008. So small that had the outcome made a difference in the election, I would have been more involved in disputing it. Nevertheless,
individuals were indicted in 2011 in the Raleigh area for flagrant voter fraud in 2008. There was much controversy in Alamance County and other areas about
illegal aliens beeing allowed to register to vote. There is no reason to believe this has diminished.

In 2008, I read the election statutes of approximately one half of the states, emailed nearly all Secretary of States or other appropriate departments and
contacted several offices by phone. My intent was to inform them of deficiencies in the eligibility of Barack Obama and to get clarification of their
statutes. I also insured that they were forewarned so as not to have ignorance as an excuse later.

I am now focusing my energy on NC statutes and performance of duties. Sadly, in my home state, the aura of corruption in high and lower places must be
addressed. This has become a multi part series for several reasons. One is the sheer volume of items to be addressed. Another is going through protocols,
channels in an orderly fashion. However, I did not want to let much time elapse before informing you of the methodology and progress.

In 2008 I and others contacted the NC Secretary of State as well as SBOE, State Board of Elections. I must admit that my expections were low and the state
met them. However as I stated above, they were warned and consequently will be held accountable. It is no wonder that since then, former Governor Mike
Easley has been indicted and convicted of other infractions. Current Governor Beverly Perdue just announced that she will not run again. It is no wonder she
is backing off. Her administration has been plagued with scandal, some of which is tied to the NC State Board of Elections.

I will be addressing 2 main areas of concern as I attempt to get clarification of our statutes. One is the powers and duties of the board, not as tradition
dictates but as the US Constitution and State Law demands. The other is the level of corruption and bias within the board and other departments.

What will rule the priorities of NC Government this year? Will it be the US Constitution, State Laws and the rule of law

or

will it be the Democrat Party and the desire to look good hosting the Democrat Convention.

Our state motto is:

“Esse quam videri”

To be rather than to seem.

I guess we will find out.

From John Hammer of the Rhino Times February 2, 2012.

“North Carolina Gov. Beverly “Dumpling” Perdue announced last week that to benefit the school children of North Carolina she was not going to run for reelection. One might assume that Perdue thinks the school children of North Carolina will be better off without Perdue in the governor’s mansion. I agree with her, but for some reason I don’t think that is what she meant.

She tried to say in her terse announcement that by being a lame duck governor she would be better able to fight for school children. It makes no sense. There is a reason why they call someone in office who is not running for reelection a lame duck and that is because they don’t have much power. They cannot threaten to make opponents’ lives miserable for the next four years or threaten to veto legislation coming up in the next session. They can beg and plead, but a governor can do that whether they are running or not.

There are only two reasons that come to mind that would explain why a sitting governor who has repeatedly said she was going to run for reelection would, two weeks before filing opens, announce she isn’t going to run. One is health. I have it on good authority that the governor is not stepping down because of any health issues.

The other is because she has learned that she is about to be indicted. Her mentor, former Gov. Mike Easley, was indicted after leaving office and was convicted of a felony.

Several of Perdue’s 2008 campaign staff have been indicted: Her finance chairman, Peter Reichard, who is the former president of the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, was convicted of one felony in connection with the 2008 Perdue campaign. Two other people associated with the Perdue campaign were also indicted.

It is certainly possible that Perdue agreed not to run for reelection as part of a deal. Perhaps the US attorney agreed not to indict her until after she served her term if she agreed not to run for reelection

Of course it could be that Perdue realized there was no way she was going to beat Pat McCrory again and decided not to prolong the agony. However, that seems highly unlikely. Candidates almost always think they are going to win. They may say that they know they don’t have a chance but in their hearts they have this belief that somehow at the end of the night they will be declared the winner. I have interviewed candidates on the eve of the election who finished with less than 20 percent of the vote but they could explain in detail why despite the odds they were going to win.

Perdue beat McCrory once, even though the polls had said early on that McCrory was ahead.

One theory is that the National Democratic Party asked Perdue to step aside because she couldn’t win, and not having a strong candidate would hurt President Barack Hussein Obama’s chances of winning North Carolina. Right now it looks like Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton is going to be the Democratic candidate, and although he holds statewide office the vast majority of the people in the state have no idea who he is.

It just doesn’t seem possible that the National Democratic Party is so out of touch that it believes Dalton would help Obama more than Perdue. Of course, someone should tell the Obama campaign that they are not going to win North Carolina. Four years ago the Republicans ran an extremely poor candidate and the Democrats had an extremely charismatic one. Plus four years ago Obama was making history by becoming the first black person elected president of the United States. He can’t do that again.

Four years ago no one could blame Obama for the economy. Today people do blame Obama for the economy and it appears that his solutions have not worked, although he is going to campaign like they have.

It doesn’t look like Obama has much chance in North Carolina, but then again the Republicans could nominate a candidate who will give the race to Obama.”

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-Columns-c-2012-02-01-210912.112113-Under-the-Hammer.html

 

152 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Board of Elections, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, democratic convention, Democrats, Election, Election 2008, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Government, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, NC, NC primary, NC voters, News, North Carolina, Obama, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, US Constitution, voters

Tagged , , , , , ,

Obama NC ballot challenge, GA ruling Judge Michael Malihi, North Carolina Secretary of State and Election Board warned in 2008, Governor Easley conviction

Posted on January 29, 2012 | 264 comments

Obama NC ballot challenge, GA ruling Judge Michael Malihi, North Carolina Secretary of State and Election Board warned in 2008, Governor Easley conviction

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

It is timely and appropriate to reprint an article from 2008 on NC election law. In 2008 I contacted the NC Secretary of State’s office as well as the Board of elections multiple times. I provided information about the Philip J. Berg lawsuit as well as Obama eligibility concerns. The gentleman from the Board of Elections office was aware of the lawsuit. One of the state officers listed in the article, former Governor Mike Easley, has since been indicted and convicted of other crimes. His successor, Beverly Perdue, an Obama Democrat, was recently cited for receiving government employment reports prematurely. She has just indicated she will not run for office again.

I just perused the NC Election statutes looking for any significant changes and found none. NC still has a reference to replacing an ineligible candidate but no clear protocol for challenges. The state of Georgia is to be commended for provisions allowing ballot challenges in accordance with the US Constitution. We await a ruling from Judge Michael Malihi in GA on such challenges to Obama’s eligibility.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/judge-michael-malihi-ruling-obama-ga-ballot-challenges-january-26-2012-summary-judgement-entered-brian-p-kemp-georgia-secretary-of-state/

Of course, the Democrat National Convention will be held in Charlotte, NC this year. You can bet that the State of NC will prioritize that event over upholding the US Constitution.

Politics as usual.

There are some challenges underway in NC and I will keep you apprised of their progress. More information can be found here:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/complaint-in-nc-underway

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/election-complaint-filed-in-north-carolina-nc-page-updated-with-law

The State of NC was warned in 2008, ignorance is no excuse.

From Citizen Wells November 17, 2008.

NC State Officers and Election Officials are in Violation of the Law
2008 Presidential Election

Eligibility for presidency

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”

How President is elected

UNITED STATES ELECTION LAW

“The following provisions of law governing Presidential Elections are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended):

§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.”

The states are responsible for the primaries, general election and events leading up to the Electoral College vote

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

NC Officials responsible for upholding the US Constitution and Federal and State Election Laws

Governor Mike Easley has overall responsibilities as well as Electoral College certification.

Attorney General Roy Cooper is charged with compliance with all Federal and State laws.

Secretary Elaine Marshall is responsible for the NC Election process.

NC Board of Elections is responsible for the NC Election process.

NC Electoral College Electors are responsible for complying with Federal and State laws.

NC Judges ruling on election matters are bound to uphold the US Constitution and Federal and State laws.

Laws that apply to NC State Officials

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1. Presidential eligibility.

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1. States are responsible for Presidential Elections up to Electoral College vote.

Federal Election Law dictates that Electors must vote in a “manner directed by the Constitution.”

Article VI of the US Constitution states:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislators, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by
Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;”

NC Statute § 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election.

“If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:
Position

President 

Vacancy is to be filled by appointment of national executive
committee of political party in which vacancy occurs”

NC Statute § 163‑19.  State Board of Elections; appointment; term of office; vacancies; oath of office.

“At the first meeting held after new appointments are made, the members of the State Board of Elections shall take the following oath:

I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States; that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of North Carolina, and to the constitutional powers and authorities which are or may be established for the government thereof; that I will endeavor to support, maintain and defend the Constitution of said State, and that I will well and truly execute the duties of the office of member of the State Board of Elections according to the best of my knowledge and ability, according to law, so help me, God.”
NC Statute § 163‑23.  Powers of chairman in execution of Board duties.

“In the performance of the duties enumerated in this Chapter, the chairman of the State Board of Elections shall have power to administer oaths, issue subpoenas, summon witnesses, and compel the production of papers, books, records and other evidence. Upon the written request or requests of two or more members of the State Board of Elections, he shall issue subpoenas for designated witnesses or identified papers, books, records and other evidence. In the absence of the chairman or upon his refusal to act, any two members of the State Board of Elections may issue subpoenas, summon witnesses, and compel the production of papers, books, records and other evidence. In the absence of the chairman or upon his refusal to act, any member of the Board may administer oaths. (1901, c. 89, s. 7; Rev., s. 4302; C.S., s. 5923; 1933, c. 165, s. 1; 1945, c. 982; 1967, c. 775, s. 1; 1973, c. 793, s. 4.)”

The following facts and conclusions are self evident:

  • The State of NC, State Officials and Election Officials are responsible for the Presidential Election in NC up to and including the vote by the Electoral College Electors of NC.
  • The Electoral College Electors of NC are bound by the US Constitution and Federal and State Election law to vote for an eligible presidential candidate.
  • The Governor’s office, the Secretary of State’s office, the NC State Board of Elections and the Electoral College of NC has been notified in public and private of major issues surrounding the eligibility of
    Barack Obama.
  • The office of the Secretary of State and Board of Elections was notified multiple times, prior to the general election, of the Philip J Berg lawsuit and facts regarding Barack Obama’s ineligibility. The
    notification was via telephone conversation and emails as well as notification on the internet. The Board of Elections stated they had been aware of these issues for several months.
  • There are pending lawsuits in NC courts, other state courts, as well as US Supreme Court, challenging the eligibilty of Barack Obama.
  • Barack Obama has refused to supply legal proof of eligibility.
  • Pending or dismissed lawsuits have no bearing on the obligation of NC officials to uphold the rule of law.
  • Failure of NC officials to uphold the law and their election duties may result in the disenfranchisement of millions of voters.
  • The state of NC has complete control of the presidential election process in NC up to and including the Electoral College vote.
  • Placing a candidate on the ballot at the direction of a major political party does not relieve NC election officials of their duty to ensure eligibility of candidates.
  • The state of NC in NC Statute § 163-114 provides for replacing a candidate that “for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified”.
  • The Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution gives power to the people not reserved for the federal government or the states.
  • The laws on the books not only allow, but require that NC officers and Elections Officials demand proof from any presidential candidate of eligibility.

If the officers and Election Officials do not perform their legal obligation to demand proof of eligibility from Barack Obama or any other presidential candidate, they will be subject to one or more of the following:

  • Prosecution
  • Lawsuit
  • Impeachment
  • Recall
  • Expulsion
  • Dismissal

Citizen Wells will be providing this information to the officers and Election officials of NC. If a satisfactory answer is not received soon, petitions will be initiated to remove non compliant officials from office. Judges are not immune.

What is the alternative?

The answer is in the Declaration of Independence.
 
 
 

264 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen Journalism, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, constitution, Election, Election 2008, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Eligibility, FEC, Government, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, NC, News, North Carolina, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama ballot challenge cases update, Obama eligibility, Natural Born Citizen Status, Georgia New Hampshire cases, Orly taitz

Posted on January 4, 2012 | 105 comments

Obama ballot challenge cases update, Obama eligibility, Natural Born Citizen Status, Georgia New Hampshire cases, Orly taitz

“Why did Obama, prior to occupying the White House, employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to assist him in avoiding the presentation of a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells


“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

From Citizen Wells January 3, 2012.

“The Obama motion to dismiss the Georgia ballot challenge has been denied.”

“On December 15, 2011, Defendant, President Barack Obama, moved for dismissal of Plaintiffs’ challenge to his qualifications for office. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this contested case pursuant to Chapter 13 of Title 50, the “Georgia Administrative Procedure Act.”

For the reasons indicated below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/03/obama-motion-to-dismiss-georgia-ballot-challenge-denied-david-farrar-et-al-vs-barack-obama-judge-michael-m-malihi/

Here is another excellent report from The Post & Email on the Obama ballot challenge cases in Georgia and New Hampshire.

“Is Barack Hussein Obama constitutionally eligible to serve as president?”

“Atty. Orly Taitz has provided an update on six active cases, the first of which has a hearing on January 6 in Hawaii. In Taitz v. Fuddy, Taitz has filed a Motion for Reciprocal Subpoena Enforcement against Loretta Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, which she has requested be heard in addition to the scheduled motion for “production of documents.”

The Reciprocal Subpoena motion is a request for Fuddy to comply with a subpoena issued to her by the state of Georgia in a case there. Taitz reported that Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine wrote a letter to Taitz stating that her client, Fuddy, “will not comply with a a subpoena from Georgia,” which Taitz is attempting to enforce.

Taitz has requested to inspect the original birth record of Barack Hussein Obama as well as the original long-form birth certificate of a deceased infant born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961, Virginia Sunahara, whose long-form birth certificate was not provided to the family and the short-form birth certificate, which was provided, contained a number which was suspiciously out of sequence.

The Georgia case is scheduled for trial on January 26, 2012. Taitz represents a registered voter, David Farrar, and four presidential candidates in a lawsuit against Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp and the Executive Committee of the Democrat Party of Georgia. “There is one more presidential candidate who might join as well,” Taitz said. “The case began as a ballot challenge by one person, and it was transferred to the Administrative Court of the state of Georgia. It’s currently a legal action seeking declaratory relief and an injunction which would prevent Obama from being on the ballot in Georgia.”

Taitz reported that after David Farrar filed his challenge, the judge joined his case with two others cases, challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility. One case is being brought by Atty. Mark Hatfield, who is also a Georgia State Representative; the other has been filed by Atty. Van Irion, who has also filed lawsuits against the DNC in three states on behalf of Liberty Legal Foundation. Taitz stated that separation of the cases was requested by the other attorneys. She said it was granted to one of them, and the other request is pending.”

“Taitz stated that she believes there has to be a holding issued directly on point in regard to the definition of “natural born Citizen” as it applies to the US Presidency, there has to be a holding, as to whose responsibility it is, to vet Constitutional and factual eligibility of candidates. ”I believe that based on the writings of the Framers of the Constitution, their intent was to include children of citizens, not children of foreigners. The court needs to come up with a holding directly on point in regards to this issue, in regards to children of one citizen parent, their eligibility for the U.S. Presidency.

In New Hampshire, Taitz has filed, an appeal with the state Supreme Court regarding its recent denial to hear a case brought against the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission. “Actions of the Ballot Law Commission were outside the norm of what is normally done by the agency,” she said. She filed an application for stay which the court denied. She stated that she “will be going further, either with a Motion for Reconsideration in New Hampshire or straight to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

In the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Taitz is planning to file a Motion for Rehearing en Banc in which she represents former Ambassador Alan Keyes, ten state representatives, and 30 members of the military. The case was heard on May 2, 2011, by a three-judge panel, which issued a decision stating that presidential contenders have the right to challenge another candidate’s eligibility during the campaign period.

Two cases filed in Washington, DC are Taitz v. Astrue and Taitz v. Ruemmler, which are currently in the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia Circuit, in which Taitz stated that she is waiting for the schedule which contains the docket of pleadings.

Regarding the costs and hours of work involved in the various cases on which she is working, Taitz said, “People don’t realize how much time it takes to prepare the filings and exhibits. The filing with the New Hampshire Supreme Court came to almost 300 pages. I had to prepare seven books for the New Hampshire Supreme Court which had to be printed, bound and mailed, and filing fees have to be paid. People have no idea how much I’m spending. Travel to New Hampshire and all of the other trips is very, very expensive. I am spending hundreds of hours as well; it took me a full week to prepare the New Hampshire filing. I had to spend $1,221 for my plane ticket to Honolulu. I ask that people donate to this cause.””

Read more:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/01/02/atty-orly-taitz-upcoming-actions-on-six-obama-eligibility-cases/

105 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Judges, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

2011 most corrupt politicians, Judicial Watch list, Obama Holder et al, Obama’s corrupt Chicago dealings continued to haunt him in 2011

Posted on December 29, 2011 | 11 comments

2011 most corrupt politicians, Judicial Watch list, Obama Holder et al, Obama’s corrupt Chicago dealings continued to haunt him in 2011

“Why did the Illinois Senate Health & Human Services Committee, with Obama as chairman, create and push Bill 1332, “Illinois Health Facilities Planning Act,” early in 2003, which reduced the number of members on the Board from 15 to 9, just prior to rigging by Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

From Judicial Watch December 26, 2011.

“Judicial Watch Announces Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2011”

“Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2011 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” The list, in alphabetical order, includes:
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL)
Former Senator John Ensign (R-NV)
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
Attorney General Eric Holder
Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
President Barack Obama
Rep. Laura Richardson (D-CA)
Rep. David Rivera (R-FL)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Rep. Don Young (R-AK)

Dishonorable Mentions for 2011 include:

Former Senator John Edwards (D-NC)
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA)
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA)
Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY)
Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY)
Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius”

“President Barack Obama: President Obama makes Judicial Watch’s “Ten Most Wanted” list for a fifth consecutive year. (The former Illinois Senator was also a “Dishonorable Mention” in 2006.) And when it comes to Obama corruption, it may not get any bigger than Solyndra. Solyndra was once known as the poster child for the Obama administration’s massive “green energy” initiative, but it has become the poster child for the corruption that ensues when the government meddles in the private sector. Solyndra filed for bankruptcy in September 2011, leaving 1,100 workers without jobs and the American taxpayers on the hook for $535 million thanks to an Obama administration stimulus loan guarantee.

Despite the Obama administration’s reticence to release details regarding this scandal, much is known about this shady deal. White House officials warned the president that the Department of Energy’s loan guarantee program was “dangerously short on due diligence,” nonetheless the Obama administration rushed the Solyndra loan through the approval process so it could make a splash at a press event. The company’s main financial backer was a major Obama campaign donor named George Kaiser. While the White House said Kaiser never discussed the loan with White House officials, the evidence suggests this is a lie. And, further demonstrating the political nature of the Obama administration’s activities, the Energy Department pressured Solyndra to delay an announcement on layoffs until after the 2010 elections. Despite the public outrage at this scandalous waste of precious tax dollars, President Obama continues to defend the indefensible and has refused to sack anyone over the Solyndra mess.

President Obama continues to countenance actions by his appointees that undermine the rule of law and constitutional government:

Despite a ban on funding that Obama signed into law, his administration continues to fund the corrupt and allegedly defunct “community” organization ACORN. In July 2011 Judicial Watch uncovered a $79,819 grant to AHCOA (Affordable Housing Centers of America), the renamed ACORN Housing which has a long history of corrupt activity. In absolute violation of the funding ban, Judicial Watch has since confirmed that the Obama administration has funneled $730,000 to the ACORN network, a group that has a long personal history with President Obama.In 2011, JW released a special report entitled “The Rebranding of ACORN,” which details how the ACORN network is alive and well and well-placed to undermine the integrity of the 2012 elections – evidently with the assistance of the Obama administration.

Barack Obama apparently believes it is his “prerogative” to ignore the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law when it comes to appointing czars. According to Politico: “President Barack Obama is planning to ignore language in the 2011 spending package that would ban several top White House advisory posts. Obama said this ban on “czars” would undermine “the President’s ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” In other words, Barack Obama believes he must ignore the U.S. Constitution to protect the U.S. Constitution. Many Obama administration czars have not been subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate as required by the U.S. Constitution. In 2011, JW released a first-of-its-kind comprehensive report on the Obama czar scandal, entitled “President Obama’s Czars.”

In an historic victory for Judicial Watch and an embarrassing defeat for the Obama White House, a federal court ruled on August 17, 2011 that Secret Service White House visitor logs are agency records that are subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell issued the decision in Judicial Watch v. Secret Service. The Obama administration now will have to release all records of all visitors to the White House – or explain why White House visits should be kept secret under the law. The Obama White House continues to fight full disclosure and has stalled the release of records by appealing the lower court decision.(Judicial Watch gave Obama a “failing grade” on transparency in testimony before Congress in 2011. (Read the testimony in full as well as additional congressional testimony during a hearing entitled “White House Transparency, Visitor Logs and Lobbyists.”))

In 2011, the Obama National Labor Relations Board sought to prevent the Seattle-based Boeing Company from opening a $750 million non-union assembly line in North Charleston, South Carolina, to manufacture its Dreamliner plane. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) showing this lawsuit was politically motivated. Judicial Watch uncovered documents showing NLRB staff cheerleading for Big Labor, mouthing Marxist, anti-American slurs and showing contempt for Congress related to the agency’s lawsuit against Boeing, including email correspondence attacking members of Congress. And it starts at the top. Obama bypassed Congress and recess-appointed Craig Becker, who is connected to the AFL-CIO, the SEIU and ACORN, to the NRLB.

Obama’s corrupt Chicago dealings continued to haunt him in 2011.Obama’s real estate partner, campaign fundraiser and Obama pork recipient Antoin “Tony” Rezko was finally sentenced to jail this year as was former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, who is now set to serve 14 years for attempting to sell Obama’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder. The FBI continues to withhold from Judicial Watch documents of its historic interview of then-Senator Obama about the Illinois corruption scandal. The FBI interview was conducted in December, 2008, about one month before Obama was sworn into the presidency.”

“Attorney General Eric Holder: Attorney General Eric Holder now operates the most politicized and ideological Department of Justice (DOJ) in recent history. And revelations from the Operation Fast and Furious scandal suggest that programs approved by the Holder DOJ may have resulted in the needless deaths of many, including a federal law enforcement officer.

Fast and Furious was a DOJ/Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “gun-running” operation in which guns were sold to Mexican drug cartels and others, apparently in hopes that the guns would end up at crime scenes. This reckless insanity seems to have resulted in, among other crimes, the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, who was killed in a shootout with Mexican criminals in December 2010. Fast and Furious guns were found at the scene of his death.

The Fast and Furious operation by itself should have resulted in Holder’s resignation, but it is the cover-up that has prompted serious calls for Holder’s ouster.

On May 3, 2011, in a House Judiciary Committee hearing chaired by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), Holder testified: “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.” Newly released documents show he was receiving weekly briefings on Fast and Furious as far back as July 5, 2010. It appears Holder lied to Congress. (Judicial Watch sued the DOJ and the ATF to obtain Fast and Furious records. The Judicial Watch investigation continues.)

Unfortunately, when it comes to Holder corruption and abuse of office, Fast and Furious is just the tip of the iceberg.

On February 23, 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that DOJ lawyers would no longer defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), as applied to homosexual couples. DOMA had passed Congress by a vote of 85–14 in the Senate and a vote of 342–67 in the House. President Clinton signed the act into law on September 21, 1996.

Judicial Watch filed two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the DOJ (including one on behalf of the Family Research Council) for records related to this pro-homosexual marriage decision. This failure to defend this federal law is unprecedented and raises serious questions as to whether President Obama and Eric Holder are upholding their oaths of office and following the Constitution’s command to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

The DOJ continues to stonewall the release of information regarding Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan’s participation in Obamacare discussions when she served as Solicitor General. In addition to forcing Judicial Watch to file a lawsuit to obtain this information, Holder’s DOJ thumbed its nose at Congress by failing to release this material to the Senate Judiciary Committee during Kagan’s judicial confirmation hearing. Holder continues to personally resist requests from Judicial Watch and Congress for additional information on this controversy. Kagan’s role in these discussions is especially significant now that the U.S. Supreme Court has announced it will consider challenges to the constitutionality of Obamacare in Spring 2012.

New revelations emerged in 2011 about the DOJ’s Black Panther scandal. Judicial Watch uncovered evidence that the liberal special interest group National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) may have had an inappropriate amount of influence on the DOJ’s decision to drop its voter intimidation lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense. This comes on the heels of sworn testimony that the Civil Rights Division of the Holder DOJ makes enforcement decisions based upon race.

Most recently, Judicial Watch obtained shocking documents suggesting the Holder DOJ is conspiring with scandal-ridden Project Vote (President Obama’s former employer and ACORN front) to use the National Voter Registration Act to increase welfare voter registrations. One former ACORN employee (and current Project Vote Director of Advocacy), Estelle Rogers, is even helping to vet job candidates for the Justice Department’s Voting Rights Division! (ACORN and Project Vote have a long record of voter registration fraud.)

Seeming to affirm ACORN’s hijacking of the DOJ, Holder recently said in a speech that he plans to use “the full weight” of the agency in 2012 to attack states that are enforcing laws that protect against fraud in the voting booths. This speech ended the pretense that the DOJ is independent from the Democratic National Committee and the Obama campaign – as it repeated almost verbatim the partisan arguments made by the Democratic Party against voter ID laws.

Holder must go. Pick your reason – Black Panthers, race-based decision making, abandoning the Defense of Marriage Act, Fast and Furious killings and lies, or turning the DOJ into an arm of the radicalized left – but Holder must go.”

https://www.judicialwatch.org/corrupt-politicians-lists/washingtons-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-for-2011/

 

11 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Barack Obama, Chicago, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, corruption, Eric Holder, Illinois, Judicial misconduct, Justice, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama thugs, Pay to play politics, politicians, Rezko, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

NC lawsuit challenges marriage licenses, North Carolina marriage laws require state license, Jeff Thigpen, Reverends Keeney, Peeples, Koenig

Posted on December 14, 2011 | 68 comments

NC lawsuit challenges marriage licenses, North Carolina marriage laws require state license, Jeff Thigpen, Reverends Keeney, Peeples, Koenig

The spirit of freedom is still alive in North Carolina.

From the Greensboro News Record, December 14, 2011.

“Suit challenges marriage licenses”

“Guilford County Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen and 10 other people filed a lawsuit last week that challenges a requirement that marrying couples in North Carolina obtain a state-issued license.

The complaint, filed in Guilford County Civil Superior Court on Dec. 8, names state Attorney General Roy Cooper as the defendant. The plaintiffs include three Greensboro ministers and seven heterosexual and homosexual residents from Greensboro, Winston-Salem and Mocksville.

They argue in the complaint that state general statutes violate the U.S. Constitution and the principle of separation of church and state by requiring marrying couples to seek marriage licenses, by requiring religious leaders to fill out and sign them, and by prohibiting religious leaders from solemnizing the marriage of same-sex couples.

The complaint comes about five months before North Carolinians vote on a proposed amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex marriage. The referendum will occur during the May Republican primary.

The complaint reads, “In order (to) adequately and fully protect the personal liberty and religious freedom of citizens of North Carolina and the United States, there must be a de-coupling and disentanglement of the state from the personal and religious institution of marriage. The institution of marriage should be solely in the dominion of citizens and their religious and secular organizations, except that the state should be permitted to carry out prohibitions of marriage for infancy, insanity, bigamy or polygamy, and incest, and marriage as a result of fraud, duress, joke or mistake; and the state should be permitted to adjudicate rights relating to support, child custody, and property in connection with marriages and their dissolution.””

http://www.news-record.com/content/2011/12/13/article/local_elected_official_joins_lawsuit_over_state_marriage_licensing_requir

From the print edition.

“The suit is not challenging the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage, said Guilford County Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen and others in the lawsuit. Voters will decide that issue in next year’s primary.”

“”It’s not part of anybody else’s agenda,” said Norman Smith, a Greensboro attorney. “It’s part of the agenda of people in this suit who don’t like the state getting into people’s religious and personal affairs.”

“Thigpen said he joined the suit because of his concern about state -imposed obstacles that some people must overcome to get married. He acknowledged his involvement could risk his re-election in November.”

“Why would I want to do this?” asked Thigpen, whose office handles marriage licenses. “These issues have come to me, and I have the obligation to respond to them in a way that is reflective of what’s going on and be a leader in dealing with it.”

“What happens in that sanctuary is between me, the couple, those who are witnessing , and God, “Peeples said. “It has always struck me as very strange, if not contradictory, that I have to sign a legal document and act as an agent of the state. …What we are saying is let’s make a clean separation between those two acts.”

68 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Citizen, Citizen News, CitizenWells, Civil Complaint, constitution, Courts, Government, Lawyers, NC, News, North Carolina, Religion, Religious freedom, voters

Tagged , , , , ,

Obama administration most corrupt in lifetimes, Holder US Justice Department corruption, Blagojevich Rezko Zagel Fitzgerald, et al

Posted on December 8, 2011 | 19 comments

Obama administration most corrupt in lifetimes, Holder US Justice Department corruption, Blagojevich Rezko Zagel Fitzgerald, et al

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

There is so much to write about today Thursday, December 8, 2011. I just heard Rush Limbaugh state that this is the most corrupt administration in his lifetime. Rush had just remarked about the emails that have surfaced indicting Obama, Holder and the US Justice Department in an effort to push gun control in the US.

Yesterday Rod Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years for some of the  corruption that he was involved in in Chicago and Illinois with Tony Rezko, et al and with cooperation from Barack Obama. We also learned yesterday that Tony Rezko is appealing his conviction.

Today, December 8, 2011, former senator and NJ Governor Corzine stated that he doesn’t know where the money is.

Judge James Zagel, Patrick Fitzgerald, Eric Holder and the entire US Justice Department have done their best to protect Obama. By waiting to prosecute Blagojevich, crafting 2 trials while dropping counts 1, 2 and 4, they have insured that even if Blagojevich appeals his conviction, it will be defered until after election cycles affecting Obama.

Rush, I am older than you. This is the most corrupt US Administration in my lifetime or that I have read about in history in this country.

More details to come.

19 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Blagojevich, Blagojevich trial, Chicago, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, corruption, Court of Appeals, Eric Holder, Federal Court, Illinois, Judges, Lawyers, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Patrick Fitzgerald, Pay to play politics, Rezko, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Border agent Jesus Diaz persecution, US Justice Department corruption, Obama motive Hispanic vote, Citizen Wells opinion

Posted on October 28, 2011 | 23 comments

Border agent Jesus Diaz persecution, US Justice Department corruption, Obama motive Hispanic vote, Citizen Wells opinion

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and other innocent people were killed as a result of project “Fast and Furious.” Eric Holder is under investigation. The likely purpose of the project was to appeal to the far left, Obama’s core support, by creating the need for more gun control. The disregard for border agents and securing our borders is due to the fact that Obama wants the Hispanic vote. It comes as no surprise that the Justice Department, at the urging of the Mexican Government, has chosen to persecute Border agent Jesus Diaz.

I have read the evidence that is available, I have listened to an interview of his wife and this is my conclusion:

Based on the available evidence, Border Patrol Agent Jesus Diaz should have at the most been given a reprimand and clarification of department policy.

My personal opinion is that it would be ok to shoot the illegal, criminal violator of our sovereignty and multiple statutes in the leg. The young man invaded our country and agent Diaz was protecting us. I believe that he deserves a medal.

The Mexican Government and our government are treading on very thin ice.

Thomas Jefferson comes to mind.

23 Comments

Posted in Attorney General, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Enemy combatant, Eric Holder, illegal aliens, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,