Category Archives: Citizen

Assange outs Hillary Clinton part two, We out Hillary at polls, Citizen journalism requires mass participation, Spread the word and inform the citizenry, We can’t sit around and let others like Wikileaks do all the work, Assange has more to reveal

Posted on September 27, 2016 | 16 comments

Assange outs Hillary Clinton part two, We out Hillary at polls, Citizen journalism requires mass participation, Spread the word and inform the citizenry, We can’t sit around and let others like Wikileaks do all the work, Assange has more to reveal

“So Hillary’s doctor —who says Hillary’s Health is “excellent”— just claimed Hillary had an imaging study that doesn’t exist. Oops.”…Dr. Milton Wolf

“As I stated earlier, this is not about sex or private conduct, it is about multiple obstructions of justice, perjury, false and misleading statements, witness tamperings and abuses of power, all committed or orchestrated by the President of the United States.”…David Schippers report to House Judiciary Committee

“The devil’s in that woman.”…Miss Emma, Clinton’s cook, governor’s mansion

 

Just as in the American Revolution, we are part of a new revolution, citizen journalism.

Just as in the American Revolution, this will require ordinary citizens to step up, take risks, participate to defeat the common enemy, evil and ignorance.

I had not planned on writing the article yesterday about Assange outing Hillary Clinton by the debate yesterday, September 26, 2016. It is being widely read and I want to clarify what Julian Assange has stated and what his role is.

I am reminded of an exerpt from the debate last night.

Trump criticized Obama and Hillary for the vacuum created by pulling our troops out of Iraq.

I wish that he would have reminded her that part of the job of the President and Secretary of State is responding to changing conditions and not blaming the former president for decisions made earlier under different circumstances.

So it is with Assange.

He has chosen his words carefully and as he stated already provided enough information to out Clinton under a reasonable Justice Department.

This more recent interview more closely reflects the latest circumstances.

Now for the most important part.

We ultimately can defeat Hillary Clinton at the polls.

That will require educating our citizenry.

The great middle of the country, most of whom will listen to reason.

Wikileaks provides a great service but Julian Assange can not do this task alone.

I never would have envisioned years ago that I would be writing an article like this to so many people.

I do this because I care, so do you.

We have so many avenues of sharing information on the internet.

Use them.

Share what you learn on the internet in everyday life as you interact with family, friends and total strangers.

With appropriate humility and false modesty aside, I present some of my larger efforts to expose the real Hillary Clinton.

Scrubbed articles resurrected.

Many articles, scrubbed from the internet and not found doing searches, have been placed on Citizen News and referred to in Citizen Wells articles. This includes most of the Bill and Hillary “gate” controversies and criminal activities. One you may not be familiar with is Commercegate where Hillary devised the plan to sell Commerce seats for campaign contributions. This ultimately led to the death of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown.

Hillary “birther” involvement and truth behind Obama records and eligibility.

Multiple witnesses prove that the Clintons were challenging Obama’s eligibility by 2008. I am actually part of this story due to recording witness Bettina Viviano testimony to me in early 2009. I have also provided conclusive proof that Obama has provided zero proof of US birth and used many Justice Dept. attorneys at taxpayer expense to keep his records hidden. One of those attorneys, Tony West, was rewarded with the number 3 position in the Justice Dept.

Hillary health and “health records.”

Citizen Wells has challenged the authenticity of alleged health records provided by the Hillary Campaign. The latest “Dr. letter” was analyzed with the conclusion that it was probably forged.

Hillary doctor letter author Ashley Neff marketing social media rebranding specialist, Did Neff rebrand Clinton’s health?, Hillary September 2016 health statement fraudulent, Procedures don’t exist and signatures don’t match

We can’t sit around waiting for someone else to out Hillary.

Each and every one of use can play a role.

One person can make a difference.

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

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

16 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen Journalism, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Clintons, Election, Election 2016, Eligibility, Hillary Clinton

Tagged , , , , ,

Charlotte Bathroom ordinance NC HB2 fact vs fiction, North Carolina laws derived from established science not feelings, Charlotte ordinance number 7056 allowed transgenders to use bathroom of choice, Convicted sex offender proponent of LGBT access

Posted on April 9, 2016 | 15 comments

Charlotte Bathroom ordinance NC HB2 fact vs fiction, North Carolina laws derived from established science not feelings, Charlotte ordinance number 7056 allowed transgenders to use bathroom of choice, Convicted sex offender proponent of LGBT accessCharlotte

“Any biological man – regardless of whether he “identifies” or “expresses” himself as a man OR as a woman – now has the legal right under the City’s amended ordinance to access the most intimate of women’s facilities (and vice versa). Under the ordinance, Charlotte businesses may no longer offer or enforce sex-specific facilities and face penalties if they do.”…NC House Member Dan Bishop

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

I looked for quite some time to find an article that linked to the Charlotte, NC ordinance allowing transgender folks to access the bathroom of choice, ignoring the safety of women and children.

Safety of women and children threatened?

One of the proponents of the ordinance was a documented sex offender. A man convicted of molesting underage boys.

Here he is with the mayor of Charlotte, Jennifer Roberts.

SeveranceMayorRoberts-Turner-1024x683

As Sean Hannity stated in 2008, “journalism is dead in this country.”

The articles I found in numerous searches, quoted or paraphrased the ordinance or quoted other articles doing so.

So I will begin by presenting access to Charlotte Ordinance Number 7056, passed on February 22, 2016 and intended to become effective April 1, 2016.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/307542321/Charlotte-Bathroom-ordinance-April-1-2016-Number-7056-allows-transgender-people-to-use-bathroom-of-their-choice

The ordinance can also be found here:

Click to access February%2022,%202016.pdf

Dan Bishop is a current member of the NC State House, District 104 and a lifelong citizen of Charlotte. His educational and professional background includes:

  • 25 years experience litigating complex business and local government controversies.
  • Ten times voted to Business North Carolina “Legal Elite.” Seven times selected by “Super Lawyers.” 2013-14 Best Lawyers.
  • Erwin, Bishop, Capitano & Moss, 1996-present.
  • Robinson, Bradshaw & Hinson, 1990-96.
  • University of North Carolina, J.D., high honors, 1990. Member, North Carolina Law Review.
  • B.S. Business Administration, highest distinction, 1986.

From Dan Bishop February 24, 2016.

“All Men Now Have a Legal Right to Access Women’s Facilities and Vice Versa

This past Monday night, Charlotte City Councilmembers thumbed their noses at the Governor and state law by adopting an illegal and state-preempted ordinance which creates special rights for persons who “identify” or choose to “express” themselves as the opposite sex, including the right to access bathrooms and showers contrary to their biological sex.

But it’s even worse than I have outlined previously – and it’s even worse than has so far been reported in the press. Let me explain…

Numerous commenters at Monday’s City Council meeting expressed their valid concern that males can pose as transgenders to gain access to women’s and girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, etc. In reality, the amended ordinance, as adopted, outlaws sex-specific facilities completely.

In other words, just as it would be illegal for a business to discriminate by saying “whites only,” it is now illegal within Charlotte city limits to have “male only” or “female only” bathrooms, showers, etc.

Any biological man – regardless of whether he “identifies” or “expresses” himself as a man OR as a woman – now has the legal right under the City’s amended ordinance to access the most intimate of women’s facilities (and vice versa). Under the ordinance, Charlotte businesses may no longer offer or enforce sex-specific facilities and face penalties if they do.

Before the amendment, the public accommodations ordinance had two separate parts.

The first part prohibited denying anyone “the full and equal enjoyment of the … facilities … a place of public accommodation because of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

The second part prohibited discriminating on the basis of sex, but exempted “[r]estrooms, shower rooms, bathhouses, and similar facilities which are in their nature distinctly private.”

Adding the new categories of “sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression” to the second part of the public accommodations ordinance would not have suited the objectives of radical activists to overhaul existing bathroom policy. Therefore, City Council eliminated the second part of the ordinance completely, including its bathroom and shower exemptions.

They moved “sex” to the first part and added the new classifications. So, the new language is just this:

“It shall be unlawful to deny any person the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation because of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or national origin.”

“This is a boneheaded blunder and a further embarrassment to Charlotte.”

If “gender identity” and “gender expression” mean that a transgender must be allowed to use the bathroom and shower of choice, then “sex” means that ALL men must be permitted to use women’s facilities and vice versa. The City Attorney says that’s not what was intended, but it is what the language says.

This is a boneheaded blunder and a further embarrassment to Charlotte.

If you live in Charlotte, please ask your City Council representatives what they were thinking. If you don’t live in our city, be vigilant that your own city council does not create a national media circus for your hometown.”

https://www.votedanbishop.com/news/2016/02/24/blunder-new-charlotte-ordinance-prohibits-all-sex-specific-bathrooms-and-showers-inside-of-city-limits-000041?AID=7979

Dan Bishop letter to Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts on February 1, 2016.

Click to access dan-bishop-letter.pdf

NC House Bill 2.

Click to access H2v1.pdf

From NC Governor Pat McCrory March 25, 2016.

“Myths vs Facts: What New York Times, Huffington Post and other media outlets aren’t saying about common-sense privacy law.”

“1. Does the new bill limit or prohibit private sector companies from adopting their own nondiscrimination policies or practices?

  • Answer: No. Businesses are not limited by this bill. Private individuals, companies and universities can adopt new or keep existing nondiscrimination policies.

2. Does this bill take away existing protections for individuals in North Carolina?

  • Answer: No. In fact, for the first time in state history, this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s. This also means that the law in North Carolina is not different when you go city to city. 

3. Can businesses and private facilities still offer reasonable accommodations for transgender people, like single occupancy bathrooms for instance?

  • Answer: Yes. This bill allows and does nothing to prevent businesses, and public or private facilities from providing single-use bathrooms. 

4. Can private businesses, if they choose, continue to allow transgender individuals to use the bathroom, locker room or other facilities of the gender they identify with, or provide other accommodations? 

  • Answer: Yes. That is the prerogative of private businesses under this new law. For instance, if a privately-owned sporting facility wants to allow attendees of sporting events to use the restroom of their choice, or install unisex bathrooms, they can. The law neither requires nor prohibits them from doing so.

5. Does this law prohibit towns, cities or counties in North Carolina from setting their own nondiscrimination policies in employment that go beyond state law?

  • Answer: No. Town, cities and counties in North Carolina are still allowed to set stricter non-discrimination policies for their own employees if they choose.

6. Does this bill mean transgender people will always have to use the restroom of the sex of their birth, even if they have undergone a sex change? 

  • Answer: No. This law simply says people must use the bathroom of the sex listed on their birth certificate. Anyone who has undergone a sex change can change their sex on their birth certificate.

7. I’m worried about how this new law affects transgender children or students in North Carolina. Does this bill allow bullying against transgender children in schools?

  • Answer: Absolutely not. North Carolina law specifically prohibits bullying and harassing behavior against children on the basis of sexual identity. 

8. Does this bill affect people with disabilities?

  • Answer: No. Statewide law also bans discrimination based on disability.

9. Why did North Carolina pass this law in the first place?

  • Answer: The bill was passed after the Charlotte City Council voted to impose a regulation requiring businesses to allow a man into a women’s restroom, shower, or locker room if they choose. This ordinance would have eliminated the basic expectations of privacy people have when using the rest room by allowing people to use the restroom of their choice. This new local regulation brought up serious privacy concerns by parents, businesses and others across the state, as well as safety concerns that this new local rule could be used by people who would take advantage of this to do harm to others.

In fact, the Charlotte City Council tried to pass this ordinance before but failed, and passed the same ordinance in February of 2016 despite serious concerns from state officials, business leaders and other concerned citizens.

10. What about parents or caregivers bringing children into the restroom?

  • Answer: The law provides exceptions to young children accompanied by parents or care givers.

11. Will this bill threaten federal funding for public schools under Title IX?

  • Answer: No, according to a federal court which has looked at a similar issue.

12. Will this bill prevent people from receiving medical attention in an emergency?

  • Answer: Absolutely not. Nothing will prevent people from receiving medical attention in public or private accommodations. 

13. Will this bill affect North Carolina’s ability to create or recruit jobs?

  • Answer: This bill does not affect companies in North Carolina. North Carolina was one of the top states to do business in the country before this law was passed, and preventing Charlotte’s bathroom ordinance from going into effect on April 1 won’t change that.

14. Why is the state telling cities and towns what it can and can’t do by repealing an ordinance the elected members of the Charlotte City Council passed?

  • Answer: North Carolina is one of at least 37 states like Virginia where cities and towns cannot pass rules or regulations that exceed the authority given to them by the state. In passing the bathroom ordinance, Charlotte was exceeding its authority and setting rules that had ramifications beyond the City of Charlotte. The legislature acted to address privacy and safety concerns if this ordinance was allowed to go into effect on April 1. 

15. Do any other regulations in North Carolina cities, towns or counties come close to what Charlotte was recommending?

  • Answer: No. Not that we are aware of. Therefore, nothing changes in North Carolina cities, towns and counties, including in Charlotte, regarding discrimination practices and protections now that this law has passed.

16. Did only Republicans vote for this bill?

  • Answer: No. 11 Democrats voted for this bill in the N.C. House of Representatives and no Democratic Senators voted against it. In fact, Democratic Senators walked out to avoid voting on the issue at all because many were going to vote for it and they did not want show their division. 

17. Why did the Legislature call a special session to overturn the bathroom ordinance?

  • Answer: The new Charlotte ordinance, which would have required all businesses to change their restroom policies and take away the expectation of privacy people have when using the restroom, was going to go into effect on April 1 if no action was taken.

18. Is North Carolina at a disadvantage when it comes to recruiting jobs because it does not have ordinances like the one Charlotte was proposing? 

  • Answer: No. In fact in the last 3 years without an ordinance like this, North Carolina has created the 6th most jobs in the country – over 260,000 net new jobs. We know of no examples of companies being recruited to North Carolina that have asked if the state has an ordinance like the one Charlotte was proposing.”

http://governor.nc.gov/press-release/myths-vs-facts-what-new-york-times-huffington-post-and-other-media-outlets-arent-0

NC Laws are based on facts such as biological science, not feelings.

How do you rule in a court of law on someone’s feelings, i.e., that they associate with another sex type?

Common sense and grounded legal principals expose the Charlotte ordinance as foolhardy and impractical.

Now to my warnings to Jennifer Roberts, Roy Cooper, Bruce Springsteen, PayPal and other entities  threatening the NC economy and business.

Two can play that game.

I will do my best to see that Roy Cooper is not elected governor.

Jennifer Roberts, you are history.

Bruce Springsteen, PayPal, et al, you can be boycotted too and I intend to do so and encourage others to do likewise.

 

 

 

15 Comments

Posted in Charlotte, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Lies, Sex

Tagged , , ,

Ted Cruz Vermont eligibility lawsuit update, February 19, 2016, Plaintiff H. Brooke Paige, Cruz not natural born citizen, Cruz born in Canada in 1970, Canadian Citizenship Act of 1976 Cruz born a Canadian Citizen AND a British Subject

Posted on February 19, 2016 | 79 comments

Ted Cruz Vermont eligibility lawsuit update, February 19, 2016, Plaintiff H. Brooke Paige, Cruz not natural born citizen, Cruz born in Canada in 1970, Canadian Citizenship Act of 1976 Cruz born a Canadian Citizen AND a British Subject

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Just in from Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in the Vermont Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio eligibility challenge:

“UPDATE – Paige v. State of Vermont, et al (Secretary of State, Jim Condos,
Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz and Marco Antonio Rubio)

Citizen Wells,

February 18, 2016 – All parties, the Vermont State Defendants, Cruz and
Rubio,  have responded each   with their own Motions to Dismiss, the first
effort of a disingenuous and desperate lawyer who wants to shield his
client from having to face the music.

It is exciting to have defendants who, because of their divergent
political leanings refuse to cooperate in developing a unified strategy to
extinguish the humble, tenacious plaintiff. Unfortunately, the attorneys
for Rubio and Cruz seem amazingly unfamiliar with the “natural born
citizen(ship)” subject matter – regurgitating the tripe and drivel
regularly posted on “obot” websites; while Daloz, the state’s Asst. A/G,
appears to be doing a “cut and paste” job from his 2012 effort. Truly sad
to see such vacuous “work product” for these high priced “Blackstone
Lawyers.” (Thomas Jefferson complained that “many a law student finds
Blackstone’s writings – a smattering of everything, and his indolence
easily persuades him that if he understands Blackstone , he is a master of
the whole body of law.”)

I have filed separate Opposition Briefs for each of the defendants’
Motions to Dismiss as each develops a differing approach to defend their
favorites particular “flavor” of natural born citizenship.

•       Vermont Assistant Attorney General Todd Daloz offering “born in country
with at least one citizen parent” to defend the democratic darling, Mr.
Obama.

•       “K’ Street Mouthpiece (D.C.) Brady Toensing, representing Rubio, arguing
that “native birth” (14th Amendment citizenship) alone is sufficient to
qualify his “son of Cuban parents” to serve as President.

•       Lastly, Gregory D. Cote, Esq., the Beantown Lawyer (“Redacted”) makes a
valiant attempt to convince anyone who will give him “the time of day”
that his Canadian Citizen client, Cruz,   is somehow more than merely a
“citizen of the United States” a condition granted to him by Congress, not
by his birth circumstances alone the condition necessary to be a Natural
born citizen (i.e. born in country to two citizen parents – Vattel, 1758).

Further it has come to light that since Cruz was born in Canada in 1970,
prior to the Canadian “Citizenship Act of 1976,” he was born a “Canadian
Citizen AND a “British Subject”  having “the right of abode” whereby he
could moved to the “British Isles” and gotten a job and taken up permanent
residence without needing to take any further action .
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/cit/overview/hist.asp

The Vermont Primary Election is held on Town Meeting Day, March  1st, and,
since the defendants have argued that the issues are not “ripe” until the
passing of the election,  our next move will be to ask the court to
prevent the Secretary of State from releasing the results of that election
until the court determines the qualification of candidates Cruz and Rubio
AND  whether their names appearing on the ballot has cause damage to the
other candidates, sufficient to alter the results of the election.”

79 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Canada, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electors, Eligibility, Natural born citizen

Tagged , , , , , ,

Ted Cruz Illinois court eligibility appeal, Lawrence Joyce plaintiff, Cruz not natural born citizen, Judge Maureen Ward Kirby will hear arguments at Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Cruz born in Canada

Posted on February 19, 2016 | 2 comments

Ted Cruz Illinois court eligibility appeal, Lawrence Joyce plaintiff, Cruz not natural born citizen, Judge Maureen Ward Kirby will hear arguments at Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Cruz born in Canada

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

From New York Magazine February 18, 2016.

“Lawsuit Over Ted Cruz’s Eligibility to Run for President Heads to Court”

“During Wednesday night’s CNN town hall, Ted Cruz dismissed the latest legal threat from Donald Trump, assuring a voter that he’s definitely eligible to run for president. “Under the law the question is clear,” he said. “There will still be some who try to work political mischief on it, but as a legal matter this is clear and straightforward.” Unlike Cruz’s right to air old footage of Trump on Meet the Press in a campaign ad, the issue raised by Cruz’s birth in Canada to an American mother actually isn’t settled — but now it looks like we may finally get an answer. CNN reports that an Illinois judge has agreed to hear arguments in a lawsuit challenging Cruz’s eligibility on Friday.

The lawsuit in question actually has nothing to do with Trump (though, it’s unlikely we’d be debating the obscure legal arguments over whether Cruz is a “natural born citizen” if it weren’t for the ex–reality star). Suburban lawyer Lawrence Joyce initially filed an objection to Cruz’s placement on the primary ballot with the Illinois Board of Elections, but it was dismissed earlier this month. Now the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago has agreed to hear the case.

Legal challenges over Cruz’s eligibility have been filed in at least three states. Joyce seems primarily concerned about the political fallout from the questions surrounding Cruz’s candidacy, rather than the possibility of a secret Canadian infiltrating the U.S. government. He told Chicago’s WLS that he’s concerned about what would happen if the challenge came from a Democrat in the fall after Cruz secured the GOP nomination. “At that point, all of his fundraising would dry up. And his support in the polls would drop dramatically. He may be forced at that point to resign the nomination,” he said.”

Read more:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/02/ted-cruz-eligibility-case-heads-to-court.html

2 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Canada, Circuit Court, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Court of Appeals, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records

Tagged , , , ,

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

Posted on February 9, 2016 | 95 comments

NH voters cast vote for ineligible candidate Cruz?, New Hampshire ballot commission rejected efforts to remove Ted Cruz, Law of eligibility murky, Neither US Supreme Court nor any authority has explicitly ruled on natural born citizen

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

Two state ballot entities recently ruled on Ted Cruz remaining on their ballots.

The Illinois state board of elections ruled that Ted Cruz is eligible as a natural born citizen.  IL is consistently listed as one of the most corrupt states in the US and the home of Obama, another non natural born citizen.

No surprise.

The New Hampshire ballot commission took a more honest approach.

“If there is a clear ruling on some issues that somebody clearly doesn’t meet, we would apply it. If there is a constitutional uncertainty about the meaning of something – which from my research and from all the stuff that was thrown at us at the commission there certainly is about the natural born citizen thing — we don’t undertake to make that decision,”

I was disappointed to find what I consider to be the most inaccurate article I have uncovered at American Thinker, February 5, 2016.

“Illinois and New Hampshire Agree Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen”

“Trump persists that Cruz’s citizenship is still an open question. It is not, and the election boards of two states, New Hampshire and Illinois, have now ruled, in response to complaints, that Sen. Ted Cruz is indeed, under the laws and Constitution of the United States, a “natural born citizen” fully eligible to be President of the United States. As the Washington Examiner reported:”

“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.””

“Indeed, it is unnecessary. The question of Cruz’s citizenship has been asked and answered. Is Trump saying that a baby born in Paris to a vacationing American family is not eligible to run for president and must be “naturalized” like some illegal alien from Guadalajara?

Some noted legal scholars would beg to differ from Trump’s concern that Cruz is not in fact a “natural born” citizen.

Jonathan Adler, who teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at Case Western University School of Law, writes in the Washington Post:

Ted Cruz was born in Canada. His mother was a U.S. citizen. His father, a Cuban, was not. Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.”

“Also agreeing with Cruz’s eligibility are two constitutional scholars who have argued cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. As the Washington Post reported:

Writing in the Harvard Law Review, two former top Supreme Court litigators, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement, said: “All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase ‘natural born Citizen’ has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.”

“Now two state boards of election have certified Cruz’s eligibility, which is beyond dispute, no matter how much Trump whines, pouts, and throws out groundless accusations.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/illinois_and_new_hampshire_agree_cruz_is_a_natural_born_citizen.html

Aside from being wrong on the definition of natural born citizen, this article is blatantly inaccurate:

New Hampshire did not rule that Cruz is a natural born citizen.

It omitted the opinion of constitutional expert Laurence Tribe of Harvard:

“Cruz says this is all settled law, but Harvard’s Laurence Tribe disagrees.

“It clearly is not settled law,” Tribe said in recent an interview.”

“That’s because Tribe says Cruz is a constitutional “originalist,” who believes the document should be followed to the letter. Tribe says jurists who share such a view might well conclude that Cruz is not eligible to be president — because he was not born in America.

According to Tribe, this shows that Cruz is trying to have it both ways.”

http://www.wbur.org/2016/01/15/donald-trump-ted-cruz-laurence-tribe-citizenship

From The Dallas Morning News November 24, 2015.

“The New Hampshire ballot commission today rejected efforts to kick Canada-born Sen. Ted Cruz off the primary ballot based on his birth outside the United States.

That clears a key legal and political obstacle as the Texas Republican seeks the GOP nomination for president. But it’s not a clear win on the question of eligibility.

Rather, the panel found that with the law of eligibility so murky, it can’t second-guess the senator’s own claims that he passes constitutional muster. Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other authority has explicitly ruled that someone like Cruz — born on foreign soil, with one American parent – can or cannot be president.

“It would be really nice if somebody would get this issue of law decided who has authority to decide constitutional issues, so every four years we don’t have this come up again,” said Manchester attorney Brad Cook, a Republican who chairs the 5-member New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission.”

Read more:

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/11/regardless-of-canadian-birth-ted-cruz-survives-ballot-challenge-in-new-hampshire.html/

AMERICAN THINKER OWES THE PUBLIC AN APOLOGY.

95 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electors, Eligibility, Harvard, Illinois, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution

Tagged , , ,

Illinois Cruz ballot challenge dismissal not court ruling, Citizen not equal or equivalent to natural born citizen, Citizen only worked in 1789 when constitution adopted, Citizen Wells rectifies Rush Limbaugh statements, Graham update

Posted on February 4, 2016 | 13 comments

Illinois Cruz ballot challenge dismissal not court ruling, Citizen not equal or equivalent to natural born citizen, Citizen only worked in 1789 when constitution adopted, Citizen Wells rectifies Rush Limbaugh statements, Graham update

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

***  Update February 4, 2016 at 1:45 PM  See Below  ***

I caught part of the Rush Limbaugh show yesterday and then went to the transcripts.

I thought that I heard Rush mumble something derogatory about the Cruz ballot challenge in Illinois and challenges to Cruz’s eligibility as a natural born citizen.

From Rush Limbaugh February 3, 2016.

”

Illinois Election Board Declares Cruz Eligible to Run

RUSH: It was, by the way, the Illinois Board of Elections that has declared Ted Cruz a natural born citizen.  “The state’s [Board of Elections] ruled that Cruz met the citizenship criteria to appear on the state’s primary ballot.  Two state residents, William Graham and Lawrence Joyce, challenged Cruz’s eligibility with the board, claiming his name should not appear on the March 15 primary ballot because his candidacy did not comply with Article II of the US Constitution.” The Board of Elections in Illinois told those two guys to pound sand. ”

Read more:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/02/03/quick_hits_page

Rush links to a Hotair article which quotes the Washington Examiner.

“Ruling: Ted Cruz is a ‘natural born citizen'”

“Texas Sen. Ted Cruz secured two major victories Monday, winning the Republican Iowa caucuses and also receiving a favorable decision from the Illinois Board of Elections, which confirmed his U.S. citizenship met the state’s primary ballot requirements.”

“Two Illinois objectors, Lawrence Joyce and Williams Graham, also agreed that Cruz’s citizenship did not meet guidelines in the Article II of the Constitution. But the board of elections disagreed and cleared Cruz’s name for the March 15 primary.

“The Candidate is a natural born citizen by virtue of being born in Canada to his mother who was a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth,” the board said, explaining Cruz met the criteria because he “did not have to take any steps or go through a naturalization process at some point after birth.””

“A ballot commission in New Hampshire also ruled in favor of Cruz in January, but the language in Monday’s decision by the Illinois board took a stronger tone than the previous ruling, warning other skeptics, “Further discussion on this issue is unnecessary.”

Joyce told the Huffington Post Tuesday that he does not plan to appeal the board’s decision.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/ruling-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/article/2582259

Did the folks in Illinois go to Harvard too?

There is only one time in the history of the US that one could be president as just a citizen. 1789, the adoption of the US Constitution.

“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 . . . .”

A US citizen is not equal to or equivalent to a natural born citizen.

The US Constitution eligibility clause has not been amended.

Provisions in US law to clarify citizenship do not alter the meaning of NBC.

Period!

From Bill Graham February 3, 2016 4:13 PM

“Graham v. Cruz, Graham v. Rubio. Was advised by an experienced IL election lawyer that an appeal by Monday would be logistically difficult and expensive. In the case of these objections, partly overruled because they were inconsistent with regulation, reversal of the Board’s decision would be very unlikely. Within Illinois politics, few individuals will make the career-ending risk to resist what we call the ‘Combine’.

This effort has been worthwhile as the qualification of natural born citizen has been raised on many major news sites and has increased voter awareness. Even Mr. Trump mentioned the IL challenge. It is unfortunate that so many discard the Constitution of our Founders, but the battle will continue and those who defend the Constitution will prevail. Please consider discussing this issue openly with family and friends. Voters can reject Presidential candidates who are not qualified and who lie about their status, such as Cruz and Rubio.

‘Natural born citizen’ was intended by the founders to mean born in the America of citizen parents; no law or regulation is required to endow or rescind such citizenship. Founders wanted to discourage foreign influence on our Commander in Chief, as had caused problems in Europe. Nothing, no Board ruling or court opinion or Harvard article, can change this qualification except for an amendment to the Constitution.”

***  Update  ***

From Mr. H. Brooke Paige, plaintiff in Cruz Rubio eligibility lawsuit in Vermont:

“Praise to Mr. Graham for his noble effort to “protect, uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.” Regardless of cost or loss each citizen should, as Mr. Graham understands, make every effort to insure that all branches of government submit to the authority and directions provided by the founders and framers of our great nation in their Declaration of Independence and the Constitution they authored, debated and ratified,

Mr. Graham, take solace in knowing that you are correct in you stand and no court, no legislature and no civil board has the right to alter or adulterate our great Constitution – except through the process of Amendment delineated in that document.

God Bless you Bill Graham !

H. Brooke Paige
Washington, Vermont”

 

13 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Illinois, Natural born citizen

Tagged , , , ,

Joyce and Graham Illinois ballot challenges overruled, February 1, 2016, IL state board of elections, Appeals next?, What was their basis in law for stating Cruz is a natural born citizen?

Posted on February 1, 2016 | 35 comments

Joyce and Graham Illinois ballot challenges overruled, February 1, 2016, IL state board of elections, Appeals next?, What was their basis in law for stating Cruz is a natural born citizen?

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

 

 

***  Update Feb 1, 2016 5:55 PM  ***

IL State board response (thanks to commenter 4zoltan)

Click to access 02_01_16SOEBAgenda.pdf

***

Bill Graham contacted Citizen Wells today with the results of his Illinois ballot challenge to Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.

February 1, 2016 1:33 PM.

“IL Election Board voted unanimously that Cruz and Rubio are NBC and rejected objections of Joyce (Cruz) and Graham (Cruz, Rubio)
Let’s keep up the pressure whenever we see the opportunity.”

From the IL state board of elections website:

“GRAHAM V CRUZ TED CRUZ PRESIDENT 1/8/2016 2:40 PM OVERRULED
GRAHAM V RUBIO MARCO RUBIO PRESIDENT 1/8/2016 2:40 PM OVERRULED”

Attorney Lawrence J. Joyce also had his challenge denied.

“JOYCE V CRUZ TED CRUZ PRESIDENT 1/6/2016 4:06 PM OVERRULED”

https://www.elections.il.gov/ElectionInformation/LatestObjections.aspx?id=50&pageindex=0

Will these decisions be appealed?

From WND January 22, 2016.

“A Republican attorney in Illinois, a supporter of Ben Carson, on Friday filed a motion with the Illinois State Board of Elections to have Sen. Ted Cruz’s name removed from the official Republican primary ballot for the Illinois GOP presidential primary set for March 15.

The legal challenge confirms fellow candidate Donald Trump’s argument that the issue of eligibility to be president under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution will dog Cruz as the Texas senator pursues the GOP nomination for president, and possibly a subsequent White House bid.

The motion from Lawrence J. Joyce, who makes his living as a pharmacist licensed in his state, notes that Cruz was born on Dec. 22, 1970, in the city of Calgary, in the Canadian province of Alberta, and that Cruz has been a citizen of the United States continuously since birth under § 301(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1401.

But Joyce’s motion challenges that Cruz is not a “natural born citizen” under the meaning of Article 2, Section 1, and as a result not eligible to be president.

The ‘nightmare scenario’

“I have principally two reasons for doing this,” Joyce explained to WND in an email. “First, I think Dr. Carson would make both a better president of the United States and a better nominee of the Republican Party.

“Second, I am terrified that if we don’t get this cleared up right now, if Ted Cruz does become the nominee, the Democrats will cherry-pick which court or election board they will petition to have him declared to be ineligible in September or October,” Joyce continued.

“The result could be that the Democrats may chalk up a string of three or four or five victories [in their election board petitions] in a row, potentially forcing Cruz to resign the nomination (if for no other reason than that fund raising would quickly dry up),” Joyce explained.

“Then Mr. [Karl] Rove and company would hand-pick his replacement as the nominee,” he concluded.”

Read more:

Motion demands Cruz be removed from Illinois ballot

 

35 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Board of Elections, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Illinois

Tagged , , , , ,

Illinois Cruz Rubio ballot challenge update, February 1, 2016, Bill Graham confronts IL Board of Elections, Sworn oath to support the Constitution, Indiana Law Review state may exclude presidential candidate if not qualified

Posted on January 31, 2016 | 31 comments

Illinois Cruz Rubio ballot challenge update, February 1, 2016, Bill Graham confronts IL Board of Elections, Sworn oath to support the Constitution, Indiana Law Review state may exclude presidential candidate if not qualified

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“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

 

 

Bill Graham has challenged Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio on their eligibility to be on the Illinois ballot as natural born citizens.

Here are more updates from Mr. Graham:

January 30, 2016 10:51 pm.

“Monday 10:30 I present to the IL Board of Elections that Rubio and Cruz lied in their Statement of Candidacy that they are NBC and qualified to serve as POTUS. The is fraud against the State. Hearing officer recommended Board deny my objections; legal counsel to Board concurred. I will make a brief statement that members would abandon their sworn oath to support the Constitution if they do not honor the Founders intent and Supreme Court rulings defining that NBC means born here to citizen parents. I regret that I may not be able to prevail, but pray the effort will get enough attention of the voters to make a difference in how they vote. Would be nice to have some patriots join me and Mr Joyce, who also raised an objection. State of Illinois building on Randolph, floor 14, suite 1400-100. Security check at ground level can take up to 30 minutes. Let’s keep up the fight to defend the Constitution!”
January 31, 2016 4:19 pm.

“IL Board Hearing officer said there are no particular restrictions in addressing the Board on Monday. I crafted two statements each ~1400 words. Cruz statement is focused on founders intent and responsibilities of the oath of Board Members to support constitution; Rubio is on these plus Wong Kim Ark and 14th Amendment. I claim a Board determination of NBC for either candidate is unlawful.”

From the Indiana Law Review:

“D. Whether a State May Refuse To Put a Presidential Candidate on the Ballot Because It Concludes the Candidate Is Not Qualified ”

” If a state chooses to evaluate the qualifications of presidential candidates, there is no inherent power of Congress standing in its way,”

“Just as there was historical precedent for states including unqualified candidates on the presidential ballot, so, too, is there precedent for states excluding unqualified candidates from the ballot. In fact, there has been a trend of state regulation increasingly scrutinizing the qualifications of presidential candidates, even apart from pending legislation in the “birther” context.”

“They arguably have the power to add qualifications to candidates seeking the office of President.359 The less intrusive step of examining existing constitutional qualifications is likely within the purview of state control.”

“The 20th Amendment does not prevent a state from excluding a presidential or a vice presidential candidate who is not qualified to hold the office.”

“A state inquiry into qualifications could take one of several forms.377 It might be simply ministerial, requiring candidates to verify that they are qualified. It could include a certification, such as a signature under penalty of perjury affirming that one meets the qualifications. It may require a low level of verification, such as an attachment of copies of documentary support for proof of residence and citizenship. Or it may require a high level of verification, such as original source documents (like a “long-form birth certificate”). The inquiry might be required as a disclosure when a candidate seeks to file for office, or as one that an election official is authorized to make under certain circumstances. Such state regulations would be permissible as long as they simultaneously existed within other constitutional boundaries.”

http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11145&context=ilj

 

31 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election, Election 2016, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Eligibility, Illinois, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records

Tagged , , , , ,

Trump will debate Ted Cruz when federal judge rules him eligible, Cruz is an arrogant fool for not addressing this earlier, Trump campaign manager sent message

Posted on January 30, 2016 | 58 comments

Trump will debate Ted Cruz when federal judge rules him eligible, Cruz is an arrogant fool for not addressing this earlier, Trump campaign manager sent message

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

Obama and Ted Cruz went to Harvard Law School.

That speaks volumes.

Ted Cruz should have gotten a ruling on his eligibiilty to be president as a natural born citizen many months ago.

Ted Cruz is an arrogant fool for not doing so.

From the Daily Mail January 29, 2016.

“Trump campaign manager to Ted Cruz: We’ll debate you one-on-one as soon as a judge says you’re eligible to be president!”

“Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Friday said his campaign will debate his closest rival for the party’s nomination head-to-head – but only if a federal judge says so.

Trump, the New York real estate tycoon who boycotted Thursday night’s presidential debate because of a long-running personal feud with one of the network’s reporters, signaled Friday that he would be happy to debate Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

DailyMail.com asked Trump if he was serious about resisting Cruz until a court decides on his presidential electability.

‘Well, I think you’ve got a real problem. I think Cruz has a real problem… I would do that. I would absolutely do that. But they’ve got to rule. He’s got to go for a declaratory judgment,’ Trump said aboard his private jet on the tarmac in Des Moines, Iowa.”

“Trump went on to joke that he would debate Cruz in Canada – ‘to give him home-field advantage,’ before pledging to attend next Saturday’s Republican debate in Manchester, N.H.

But already Trump’s campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, had dismissed Cruz’s proposal as nothing more than a ‘publicity stunt.’

‘What we’ve said to Ted Cruz: Go into court, seek a declaratory judgment to find out if you’re even legally eligible to run for president of the United States,’ he said Thursday in a Boston radio interview.

‘That’s the first thing. Once you’ve gotten that ruling from the federal judge and you’re the last man standing in this presidential contest next to Donald Trump, we’ll be happy to have a debate with you one-on-one, anywhere you want, because that’s the way the system works,’ Lewandowski said.

‘But, as it stands right now, we don’t even know if Ted Cruz is legally eligible to run for president of the United States.'”

Read more:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3422990/Trump-campaign-manager-Ted-Cruz-ll-debate-one-one-soon-judge-says-eligible-president.html

 

58 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election, Election 2016, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Federal Court, Harvard, Judges, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential debate, US Constitution

Tagged , ,

MSN Trump overstates Cruz challenges, Really?, Media discredits Trump protects Obama Democrats, Illinois ballot challenges update January 28, 2016, MSN quotes obot site instead of Citizen Wells

Posted on January 28, 2016 | 25 comments

MSN Trump overstates Cruz challenges, Really?, Media discredits Trump protects Obama Democrats, Illinois ballot challenges update January 28, 2016, MSN quotes obot site instead of Citizen Wells

“To his kind of judge, Cruz ironically wouldn’t be eligible, because the legal principles that prevailed in the 1780s and ’90s required that someone actually be born on US soil to be a “natural born” citizen. Even having two US parents wouldn’t suffice. And having just an American mother, as Cruz did, would have been insufficient at a time that made patrilineal descent decisive.”…Laurence H. Tribe, Harvard Law Professor

“Ted Cruz wrote the forward for U.S. Constitution for Dummies which clearly reveals that he is not a natural born citizen.”…IL ballot challenger Bill Graham

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

 

MSN and the media get a twofer on trying to discredit Donald Trump and prop up Ted Cruz on his eligibility.

The Obama and Democrat Party media would love for Cruz to get the nomination and then determine he is not eligible as a natural born citizen.

From MSN January 27, 2016.

“Trump Overstates Cruz Challenges

Donald Trump claims Illinois is “very seriously” looking at Sen. Ted Cruz’s eligibility to run for president and “may not even let him run.” That’s misleading. Illinois is following routine procedures for resolving ballot challenges against five presidential candidates, including Cruz.

Trump made his claim on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” part of his ongoing campaign to cast doubt on Cruz’s eligibility to run for president. Cruz was born in Canada, but, as we have written before, he most likely qualifies to run because his mother was a U.S. citizen when he was born.

Trump, Jan. 24: I guess you probably heard last night Illinois is looking at it very seriously. They may not even let him run in Illinois. They feel strongly about it. But other states are looking at it very seriously. There’s a real question as to whether or not Ted Cruz is allowed to run for president.

Trump, a construction and casino mogul, is overplaying his hand. It is not unusual for candidates to have their nominating papers challenged.

The fact is, the Illinois Board of Elections has received objections regarding five major presidential candidates, and it is following its routine procedure for resolving petition challenges. In addition to Cruz, Illinois has received objections regarding the nominating papers filed by Sens. Marco Rubio and Bernie Sanders, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

Cruz’s case gained some national attention recently because the conservative website WND.com interviewed Lawrence Joyce, a licensed attorney who makes his living as a pharmacist and says he supports Ben Carson for president. Joyce makes the claim that Cruz is not a “natural born citizen,” a requirement to be president.

Joyce is one of two people who filed an objection against Cruz’s candidacy. The other is William K. Graham, who, in addition to challenging Cruz, is also challenging Rubio, who was born in the U.S. to parents who were not U.S. citizens at the time.

Jim Tenuto was appointed the hearing officer to handle the objections filed against Cruz and Rubio. Philip Krasny will oversee the objection filed against Clinton, and Barbara Goodman will handle the cases involving Sanders and O’Malley, according to the board. (See the Jan. 14 letter regarding to appointment of hearing officers on page 38.)

Tenuto, the assistant executive director of the board, said none of the five challenges have been resolved, according to a Jan. 23 article in the News-Gazette. “We just called the cases on Wednesday and they’re looking at holding a meeting on February 11, possibly, to see if we can resolve as many as possible,” Tenuto told the paper. As a result, early voting may not start as scheduled on Feb. 4, the paper said.”

Read more:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-overstates-cruz-challenges/ar-BBoGNXT

The article also mentions the H. Brooke Paige lawsuit in Vermont but links to a highly biased obot site instead of Citizen Wells where the Paige lawsuit was first reported.

Here are some updates on the Illinois ballot challenge from Mr. Bill Graham:

January 27, 2016 10:24 PM

“Additional comment that resolution of objections might delay Feb 4 start of early voting.”

January 28, 2016 11:07 AM

“This morning from IL Hearing Officer for Election Board
“My Recommendations will be transmitted today. The information as to the location and time of the meeting will be set in detail in the Notice to be attached to the Recommendation. It will inform you that the Board will meet on Monday, February 1, 2016, at 10:30 am You can attend either in the Chicago or Springfield offices of the Board. In Chicago, the Board will meet in Suite 14-100. ( next to where the case management conference was held). You will have an opportunity to address the Board prior to them voting on my Recommendation.””

January 28, 2016 1:41 PM

“IL Board to Rule Monday 2/1 that Cruz and Rubio are NBC

Recommendations do not reject solely on administrative grounds and say Board has authority to decide if candidate is qualified as NBC.

Says Minor is dicta and can be ignored. (Interesting to me that Wong Kim Ark opinion accepted Minor)

Hearing is Monday, suggestions are welcome. Five days to file appeal.

Issue of Board Member oath and validity of statement of candidacy is not addressed in recommendation; may be moot of Board agrees both are NBC.

Will bring to hearing 2009 book Cruz wrote forward to which says on p 115 you must be born in US.”

 

25 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Democrats, Election, Election 2016, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, media, Natural born citizen, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records

Tagged , , , , ,