Category Archives: Civil Complaint

Judge David O carter, Obama not president, January 20, 2009, US Constitution, 20th Amendment, Joe Biden president, Obama not qualified, Chief Justice, John Roberts, US Supreme Court, Oath of office

Posted on October 29, 2009 | 189 comments

To:

Judge David O. Carter

All judges, congressmen, state election officials

and citizens of the United States

From:

Citizen Wells

On January 19, 2009 I posted the following article regarding the constitutional requirements to be sworn in as President of the United states, POTUS. There is much confusion about this among citizens, congressmen and most scarily, judges. The key phrase below is:

This comes direct from the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution.
“or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify,
then the Vice President elect shall act as President until
a President shall have qualified;”

Here is the complete article. Read it carefully.

 

US Supreme Court
Chief Justice

John Roberts

and

President Elect

Barack Obama

 

According to the US Constitution, the supreme law of the
land, Barack Obama will not be President of the United
States at 12:00 noon on January 20, 2009. No Chief
Justice administering the oath of office, no oath sworn
by a “president elect” makes one president. There are 3
mandatory requirements to achieve a legal inauguration.

  • A qualified president elect.
  • Sufficient votes by the Electoral College.
  • Certification and count of Electoral College votes by
    Congress.

 

At noon on January 20, 2009, Joe Biden will be president
until a president shall be deemed qualified. This comes
direct from the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution.
“or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify,
then the Vice President elect shall act as President until
a President shall have qualified;”

Further reading of the 20th Amendment reveals that Congress
may also determine if the vice-president is qualified. This
is part of the scenario of a constitutional crisis that
Philip J Berg and others have warned of. The language of
the 25th amendment includes options that may further heighten
the crisis level.

Amendment XX

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall
end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators
and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January,
of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article
had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall
then begin.

Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every
year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of
January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of
the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice
President elect shall become President. If a President shall not
have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his
term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then
the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President
shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the
case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect
shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President,
or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and
such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice
President shall have qualified.

 

Amendment XXV

Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or
of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become
President.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice
President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall
take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of
Congress.

Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro
tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to
discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he
transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such
powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as
Acting President.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either
the principal officers of the executive departments or of such
other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the
President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice
President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the
office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro
tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists,
he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the
Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of
the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by
law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their
written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide
the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if
not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after
receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not
in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to
assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his
office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as
Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers
and duties of his office.

 

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/obama-not-president-january-20-2009-us-constitution-20th-amendment-joe-biden-president-obama-not-qualified-chief-justice-john-roberts-us-supreme-court-oath-of-office/

189 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Birth Certificate, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Commander in Chief, Congress, Congress Watch, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, DC, Democrats, Election, Election 2008, Election Law, Election update, Federal Court, Founding Fathers, Government, Hawaii, Inauguration, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Judicial misconduct, Justice, Justice David Souter, JUSTICE SCALIA, Kenya, Lawyers, Lies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US House of Representatives, US Senate, Usurper, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Judge David O Carter, Orly Taitz, Captain Pamela Barnett V Barack Obama , Update, October 29, 2009, Dismissed, Judge Carter a coward?, Obama not natural born citizen, Citizen Wells challenge to Judge Carter

Posted on October 29, 2009 | 97 comments

I recently called Bill O’Reilly of Fox a Coward for his remarks about Orly Taitz. I called O’Reilly a coward for the manner in which he made his statements, for his lack of knowledge about the eligibility issues and for not covering the eligibility issues surrounding Obama.

Ex Marine or no ex Marine, Judge David O. Carter, is there any reason I should not refer to you as a coward for taking the easy way out and with using flawed logic and understanding of the US Constitution to join the ranks of those giving the usurper Barack Obama a free ride.

Today, october 29, 2009, Judge David O. Carter dismissed the case brought against Obama by Captain Pamela Barnett, et al. The lawsuit alleges that Obama is not a natural born citizen.

There is a preponderance of evidence that Obama is not a natural born citizen, from his father being Kenyan and a British citizen, to absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Here is the crux of Judge Carter’s decision:
“Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted under Article III. However, that very same Constitution puts limits on the reach of the federal courts. One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process. Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by We the People‚ sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.”

Read ruling:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/21808122/Judge-Carter-Ruling-on-MTD?autodown=txt
I posted the following on this blog earlier:
“There is at least one critical flaw in Judge Carter’s logic and ruling.

“One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be
removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process.”

The statement above is true.
However, only as it applies to the POTUS.
And, to be POTUS, one has to be eligible.
Winning the popular vote.
Winning the electoral college vote.
Getting the approval of Congress.
Being sworn in by a Supreme Court justice.
None of the above alone makes one POTUS.
First and foremost, one must be constitutionally eligible.
Therefore, Carter’s rational is incorrect.
Obama, as an illegal usurper, traitor and possible illegal alien
can be removed and arrested.”

Judge Carter is wrong. He could issue an order today for discovery to ascertain whether or not Obama is a usurper. Upon finding Obama ineligible, Judge Carter could issue an order for Obama’s arrest.

Judge Carter, are you a coward?

Is there some other excuse?

You might respond with “State election officials or party officials could have vetted Obama.”

They did not. That is why we have a system of checks and balances.

You might ask, “Who are you to question a judge?”

Answer:

A natural born citizen of the US.

An expert by training and many years of practice in logic.

I have prepared a motion, filed the motion, opposed an attorney and won.

Besides that, this is not rocket science.

Obama is not POTUS.

No tradition,

No ceremony,

No magic incantation,

Changes that.

Judge David O. Carter, you have the power and the constitutional obligation to ascertain if Obama is eligible.

If not eligible, you have the power and obligation to remove him.

Citizen Wells

97 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Bill O'Reilly, Bill of Rights, Birth Certificate, California, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Commander in Chief, Congress, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, DC, Democrats, District Court, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election, Election 2008, Election Law, Electors, Federal Court, First Amendment, Government, indictment, Indonesia, John Bingham, Judges, Judicial misconduct, Justice, Kenya, Law firms, Lawyers, Lies, Motion, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Standing, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US District Court, US Military, Usurper, voters, Washington DC

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Bill O’Reilly, Dr Orly Taitz lawsuit, O’Reilly uninformed, Fox, O’Reilly Factor, Obama not natural born citizen, Alan Keyes, Major Stefan Cook, YouTube video, So simple even O’Reilly can understand

Posted on October 28, 2009 | 187 comments

Bill O’Reilly’s

cowardly treatment of Orly Taitz

and the American Public

Part II

Last Night on the O’Reilly factor on Fox, Bill O’Reilly and two fawning females belittled Dr. Orly Taitz and millions of Americans who support the US Constitution and want proof that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen. Commenter Jacqlyn Smith of this blog has presented a video that explains Obama’s eligibility issues in a manner that even Bill O’Reilly can understand.
From the Youtube video:
“Life and Liberty PAC presents the Proof Positive Series with Molotov Mitchell. In this fifth episode, Molotov takes a closer look at the people Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman call “kooks” and “cowards”, Dr. Alan Keyes and Maj. Stefan Cook.”
“Proof Positive: Just Some Guy”

187 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Bill O'Reilly, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, constitution, Democrats, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, First Amendment, Fox news, Government, Hawaii, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Keyes lawsuit, Lawyers, Major Cook, media, Military officers, Motion, Natural born citizen, News, O'Reilly, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama thugs, Senator Obama, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US Military, Usurper, video, Washington DC, white house, YouTube

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Bill O’Reilly, Orly Taitz, Fox, Obama, Judge Land, Case Frivolous, Taitz fined $ 20,000, Lis Wiel, Kimberly Guilfoil, O’Reilly Factor, NO spin?, O’Reilly shooting messenger, O’Reilly coward, Obama not natural born citizen, Citizen Wells challenge

Posted on October 28, 2009 | 162 comments

“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”…Proverbs 16:18

 “There is an epidemic of shooting the messenger in this country.”…Citizen Wells

Bill O’Reilly, who has a sinecure, maligned Orly Taitz and anyone questioning the eligibility of Barack Obama last night, October 27, 2009, on his Fox TV show.

O’Reilly is well known for being a pompous ass.

Last night, Bill O’Reilly was a coward.

Neither O’Reilly or his female fawners, who agreed the case was frivolous and that Orly Taitz deserved what she got, have done sufficient research to make an intelligent, informed comment on the subject.
I criticize Bill O’Reilly for pontificating on a subject that he knows little about.

I also criticize O’Reilly for shooting the messenger.

Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, concerned active and retired military, myself, commenters on this blog and millions of concerned Americans are not the guilty party in this matter. Barack Obama is guilty.

Barack Obama

  • His father was Kenyan and a British Citizen.
  • Obama has not provided a long form birth certificate.
  • Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of someone’s money to fight proving eligibility.
  • Obama has consistently lied to the American people.
  • Obama is entangled in Chicago and IL corruption and should be indicted.
  • Obama’s further control of federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should alarm everyone.

So, Bill O’Reilly, quit shooting the messenger and do your damn job. After all, the Obama administration continues to shoot Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

 
O’Reilly, you coward, try picking on me. I am a natural born citizen of the US, close to your age, male, with a strong business background. I have thoroughly researched Obama’s background and eligibility issues and written about it. I am not receiving a large salary for doing this. I simply care about this country.

I hereby challenge Bill O’Reilly to a battle of facts.

I will, of course, be attacking an unarmed opponent.

Bill O’Reilly, please explain why concerned Americans should not boycott your show.

 

And now for the response from Captain Pamela Barnett, a lead plaintiff in one of Taitz’ cases:


“(Oct. 28, 2009) —  She was a captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to Military Intelligence; but now retired she’s fighting a war on two fronts.

Captain Pamela Barnett is lead plaintiff in a case that could lead to the removal and life-time imprisonment of Barack Hussein Obama on charges of high-crimes, election fraud, campaign fraud, and a laundry list of campaign financing violations.

But Captain Barnett is not shirking her duty to defend her fellow Plaintiffs in the case: no, she is rebutting the lies and falsehoods promoted by the widely followed, but often errant and politically correct, Bill O’Reilly of Fox News.”

“From Captain Pamela Barnett to Bill O’Reilly – October 28, 2009

I challenge you Mr. O’Reilly to interview me..

I am Captain Pamela Barnett U.S. Army Retired of Barnett v. Barack Obama.

I am sick and tired of you defaming our lawsuit and our attorney against the Resident in the Whitehouse Obama. 48 plaintiffs mostly military retired have brought this lawsuit to force the production of Obama’s vital records to determine if he is in fact a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN which is one of the requirements to be a legal POTUS and NOT an illegal USURPER. There is also a huge amount of information regarding fraud that Obama committed before being illegally sworn in as POTUS.

IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE TRUTH AT ALL.. YOU WILL CALL ME…

FROM WHAT I CAN SEE OF YOUR SHOW, THE TRUTH DOES NOT SEEM TO MATTER TO YOU OR THE REST OF THE SHILLS AT FOX. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE ONLY A COMMENTATOR, BUT AT LEAST GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE HURTING OUR CASE AND PROPAGATING LIES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Sincerely,

CPT Pamela Barnett, U.S.Army Retired”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/captain-pamela-barnett-issues-challenge-to-bill-oreilly/

Some of the initial comments on the Citizen Wells blog after O’Reilly’s remarks:
“How are these people like Lis, Bill, and Kimberly, on Fox, going to explain themselves to the public after Kerchner gets Obama thrown to the curb.
After hearing those idiots say Obama is legitimate I hope Obama is removed from office just so I can see the expressions on their faces, it will be priceless.”

bob strauss

“OWrongly just made me throw up a little in my mouth. How ignorant can he be? And that blond dimwit. It’s been repeatedly proved Obotomy was born in Hawaii? Looked into by Congress? WHAT???? And then they don’t even know what Natural Born even means? I don’t know why anyone watches that show.”

Paulajal

“O’Reilly sucks!”

zachjonesishome

“O’reilly sucks and double sucks!!
I stopped watching long time ago when he talked down to his audience and being an ex-teacher, as my daddy would say, ‘that don’t set right with me’.”

JJ

“O’Reilly has gotten way to big for his britches. That “nose up in the air” arrogance sickens me and reminds me of someone else we all know.”

Teedee

“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.”

bob strauss

“Yepppers,…. I have been losing my respect for o’reilly,……. this really nailed it shut. I have sent him emails telling him to find out the truth,…. but, it seems that he wants to remain ignorant on the facts of obamas birth. I will email him again and tell him he needs to change the name of his show. NO – SPIN…… what a joke.”

joyceaz

“Watched O’Reilly’s comments on Orly, I have been studying on this ever since. The comments were not fair or balanced. NOW Orly or one of her reps. should contact the No Spine Zone and have the opportunity to defend herself with the truth! The Big Leprachan is a know it all”

carmen

“joyceaz, Bill needs to change the name of his show to “The Spin Zone”.”

bob strauss

“After the 3 against 1 on O’Reilly I believe she should be on this week!”

carmen

“OK – O’Reilly was the show that started my turn from uninformed democrat to a strong conservative and for about the last year – I can hardly stand him. Now – he is dead to me. YKWIM

Thanks Venice and SueK for the welcome.”

DenisetheMenace

“Did anyone really expect anything different from O’Reilly?”

SueK

“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.

Thanks Bob. So it came down to an “O’Bloviate” segment only. Figures. He loves macho soundbites – but he’s definitely been looking old lately plus losing the hair more and more. They should give Beck his slot and put Lou Dobbs in Beck’s. None of them want to commit to the eligibility question though because they just don’t know Constitutional law or care and want to wait ’til the patriots get all bloodied up – then report it later and take the credit.”

Observer

“They have something on O’Reilly. There are too many reaasons why Obama’s COLB is suspect for him not to elaborate at all. They have something on him.”

Paxson

Additional comments from American citizens who are far more informed than O’Reilly:

“Obama law tab up to $1.7 million

‘Grassroots army’ contributions used to crush eligibility lawsuits?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114202”
Danny

“He’s full of it because those records were sealed shortly after Barky went to visit the dying Gramma Dunham. Does he really want us to believe that the State of Hawaii gave HIM the birth certificate?

He thinks we’re stupid; he has another thing coming.

Ratings or blackmail…take your pick. I’ll bet you a donut that he won’t consent to having Orly on to rebut his garbage.

Smug bastid.”
SueK

“His eyes go cross eyed when he even has the balls to bring this up. He says that he vetted it, but won’t publicly go into how he vetted it. He said that the state of Hawaii gave him a copy of the birth certificate (not certification). He said that he could find out the name of the hospital that President Obama was born in “tomorrow” (if he so chose). He’s a frigging liar. You can see it all over his face and he is being “black mailed” or his hands are tied to elaborate. Any normal person looking at this issue can see that something is up. Camille Paglia, noted LIBERAL, even accepts this fact. They can only keep their thumb in the whole of the dam for so much longer. They think we are stupid, and in the long run (whether during Obama’s term, or afterwards) the truth will be known. All of their careers will be over at that point.”
Paxson

“I am suspect about O’really picking Orly for a segment. At the very least I thought it would have simply been a gratuitous move.

No doubt it was meant to discredit her and the “movement.”

This on the heels of Judge Carter’s recent new hire. I can’t help but question if it’s not part of a bigger plan being implemented incrementally.”
JustMe
“I think O’Reilly is a jerk and I don’t like to watch him. He obviously is uninformed of what a NBC is and he thinks he knows it all. They like to discredit those who are trying to find out the truth because he thinks he knows the truth and says BO was born in HI so that makes him NBC. I don’t like O’Reilly. He is a fake conservative. He does not care about the country or the constitution, but he discredits those who do. He is lousy. I also think that Lou Dobbs should switch places with him.”

speedy

“BOYCOTT O’REILLY and let people know”
carmen

“O YOUR A PINHEAD!!!NEVER WILL WATCH HIM AGAIN!!!!”
GBAmerica

162 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Bill O'Reilly, Birth Certificate, Chicago, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, Commander in Chief, Congress, conservatives, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, Court of Appeals, DC, Democrats, District Court, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election, Election 2008, Election Law, Elitist remarks, Federal Court, First Amendment, Fox news, fraud, Glenn Beck, Government, Grassroots, Hannity and Colmes, Hawaii, Illinois, indictment, Indonesia, Journalism, Judges, Judicial misconduct, Kenya, Kerchner v Obama, Keyes lawsuit, Lawyers, Leo Donofrio, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, media, Military officers, Natural born citizen, News, O'Reilly, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama thugs, PHILIP J. BERG, Reform, Senator Obama, Smear campaigns, Standing, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US District Court, US Military, Usurper, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Kerchner V Obama, Update, October 27, 2009, Appeal Filed with Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA, Mario Apuzzo, Judge Jerome B. Simandle’s dismissal, Obama not natural born citizen

Posted on October 27, 2009 | 219 comments

Just in from Charles Kerchner, plaintiff in Kerchner V Obama, October 27, 2009.

“Kerchner Appeal Filed with Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA
This is to give notice that today, Tuesday, October 27, 2009, at 2:19 p.m., I filed an appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia PA of Judge Jerome B. Simandle’s dismissal of the Kerchner et al. v. Obama & Congress et al. case.

Recently, the Hon. Jerome B. Simandle decided the Kerchner case, granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the case. As I explained, through the dismissal, Judge Simandle avoided having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and eligible for the Office of President and Commander in Chief.

In the Kerchner complaint/petition, we allege that Obama has not conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. More importantly, we also allege that he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because when Obama was born his father was a British subject/citizen and Obama himself was the same, citing E. Vattel’s, The Law of Nations (1758) and John Jay’s letter of 1787 to then-General George Washington regarding providing a strong check on keeping foreign influence out of the Office of Commander in Chief by requiring that only a “natural born Citizen” occupy that critical and powerful office. As a naturalized citizen cannot be President because of being born subject to a foreign power, neither can Obama. It is important to understand that the Court did not rule in the Kerchner case that Obama has conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. It is also important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Rather, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ case because of jurisdiction (Article III standing and prudential standing) and the political question doctrine without commenting on the underlying merits of whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. The Court also did not rule that the plaintiffs’ claims are frivolous. By the Court finding that plaintiffs do not have standing and that their claims present a political question, the Court was able to avoid having to address the underlying merits of the Kerchner case. With such a decision, the American People unfortunately still do not know where Obama was born and whether he is an Article II “natural born Citizen” and therefore constitutionally eligible to be President and Commander in Chief.

A court cannot refuse to hear a case on the merits merely because it prefers not to due to grave social or political ramifications. As I have shown in my essay entitled, http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/real-kerchner-v-obama-congress-case-is.html, the Court’s opinion dismissing the Kerchner complaint/petition did not address the real Kerchner case but rather looked for a way to dismiss the case without having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” It is my hope that the public will take the time to read the Kerchner complaint/petition and the legal briefs that were filed supporting and opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss so that it can learn first hand what the Obama ineligibility case is really about and draw an intelligent and informed decision on whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

The case is now with the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in Philadelphia PA which court we hope will decide the real Kerchner case and thereby reverse the decision of the Federal District Court. The American people deserve to know whether Obama was in fact born in Hawaii. More importantly, even if he is born in Hawaii, given that he was born with dual allegiance and citizenship, the American people deserve to know whether he is an Article II “natural born Citizen” which would make him eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. It is our position that because Obama was born with conflicting allegiances and citizenships at birth (British and U.S., if he was born in Hawaii), he cannot be President and more so Commander in Chief of our military men and women.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831
October 27, 2009
Posted by Puzo1 at 12:15 PM  ”

Read more:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/kerchner-appeal-filed-with-third.html

219 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Commander in Chief, Congress, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, DC, Democrats, District Court, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, First Amendment, Government, Hawaii, indictment, Judges, Judicial misconduct, Justice, Kenya, Kerchner v Obama, Lawyers, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Military, Usurper, Voter fraud, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Kerchner V Obama, Congress, October 25, 2009, Charles Kerchner, Mario Apuzzo, The Real Kerchner v Obama & Congress Case Is On Its Way to the Higher Courts of Justice

Posted on October 25, 2009 | 162 comments

Just in from Charles Kerchner of Kerchner V Obama, October 25, 2009.

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
24 October 2009

“The ‘Real’ Kerchner v. Obama & Congress Case Is On Its Way to the Higher Courts of Justice”

An essay by Attorney Mario Apuzzo on the recent decision by federal Judge Simandle in the Kerchner v. Obama & Congress lawsuit.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/real-kerchner-v-obama-congress-case-is.html

I agree with my attorney, Mario Apuzzo.

The REAL case will soon be going to the higher courts on appeal, and then to Washington DC ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court. And the case the higher courts will hear on the merits will not be the imaginary straw-man version the case that Judge Simandle presented in his Opinion this week. The REAL case is about a core, basic, black-letter written, verbatim clause in the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, as to who is eligible to be the President and Commander-in-Chief of the military per our founders and framers of the Constitution. Our Constitution is the guarantor of our Liberty! We cannot let any part of it be ignored by a Usurper. Ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide this historic Article II case based on its merits, or our Constitutional Republic is history. And said history and “We the People” will record well and ultimately hold directly accountable those who are actively directly involved and also the enablers who are attempting to destroy our Constitution and Republic and participating in the cover-up. The facts and truth can only be sealed and hidden so long. Sooner or later the Obama fraud and cover-up will all be exposed. The truth will be told in a court of law and Obama and his enablers will be judged and held accountable for what they have done.

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
CDR USNR (Ret)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/

”

From Mario Apuzzo’s article:

“A court cannot refuse to hear a case on the merits merely because it prefers not to due to grave social or political ramifications. As we have seen, the Court’s opinion dismissing the Kerchner complaint/petition did not address the real Kerchner case but rather looked for a way to dismiss the case without having to reach the merits of the question of whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” It is my hope that the public will take the time to read the Kerchner complaint/petition and the legal briefs that I filed supporting and opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss so that it can learn first hand what the Obama eligibility case is really about and draw an intelligent and informed decision on whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. We are now working on filing our appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in Philadelphia which court we hope will decide our case dispassionately.”

162 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Birth Certificate, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Commander in Chief, Congress, constitution, Democrats, District Court, Election, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, First Amendment, Founding Fathers, Government, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Justice, Kerchner v Obama, Law firms, Lawyers, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Military officers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US District Court, US Military, Usurper, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , ,

Kerchner V Obama, Update, October 21, 2009, Charles Kerchner, Mario Apuzzo, Judge Simandle Has Granted the DOJ Motion to Dismiss

Posted on October 21, 2009 | 114 comments

***  Update below, October 21, 2009, 2:36 PM  ***

Just in from Charles Kerchner of Kerchner V Obama, October 21, 2009:

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Judge Simandle Has Granted the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss

Re. Kerchner et al vs. Obama & Congress et al lawsuit filed January 20th, 2009.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19914488/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-Table-of-Contents-2nd-Amended-Complaint

Judge Simandle Has Granted the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss. We will appeal.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/judge-simandle-has-granted-dojs-motion.html

Attorney Mario Apuzzo called me a few minutes ago. Judge Simandle has granted the DOJ’s motion to dismiss. More on this later. Mario will post some initial comments in the blog but he still has to read the Judge’s decision in full. I also need to read the full decision. But we will definitely appeal.

Like in the Battle of Long Island in the Revolutionary War, we have lost a battle. But we have not lost the war. The real decision on this will ultimately be made by the U.S. Supreme Court on the real crux of this matter … which is a legal issue, i.e., the legal question of what is a Natural Born Citizen per Article II of our Constitution per original intent, and is Obama one. I say he is not. Read this as to why:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html

Attorney Apuzzo will comment further once he has had a chance to read the full decision.

We have lost at this initial step. But now Attorney Apuzzo can move the case up the ladder in the court system and file an appeal.

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
CDR USNR (Ret)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/

***  UPDATE  ***

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
21 October 2009

For additional information contact:
Attorney Mario Apuzzo
Web: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Email:  apuzzo@erols.com
Tel:  732-521-1900
Fax:  732-521-3906

Attorney Mario Apuzzo Makes Statement Regarding Judge Simandle’s Decision to Grant the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Lawsuit.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/court-dismisses-kerchner.html

Court Dismisses Kerchner Complaint/Petition for Lack of Standing and Political Question. The Decision Will Be Appealed.

The Hon. Jerome B. Simandle of the Federal District Court in the District of New Jersey at 10:39 a.m., on October 21, 2009, filed his long-awaited opinion dismissing the Kerchner et al. v. Obama et al. complaint/petition. In the complaint/petition, we allege that Obama has not conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. We also allege that even if he was so born, he is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” because his father was a British subject/citizen when Obama was born and Obama himself was born a British subject/citizen, all of which makes him ineligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. We also allege that Congress violated it constitutional duty under the Twentieth Amendment to adequately investigate and confirm whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Judge Simandle ruled that the plaintiffs do not have Article III standing and that therefore the court does not have subject matter jurisdiction. The Court found that the plaintiffs failed to show that they suffered an “injury in fact.” It added that plaintiffs’ alleged injury is “only a generally available grievance about government” and “is one they share with all United States citizens.” Finally, it said that plaintiffs’ “motivations do not alter the nature of the injury alleged. . .”

By way of footnote, the Court said that even if the plaintiffs could show that the Court had Article III standing, they would not be able to show that the court should exercise jurisdiction because prudential standing concerns would prevent it from doing so.

Finally, the Court again in a footnote said that it cannot take jurisdiction of the issue of whether Obama is a “natural born Citizen” and whether Congress has acted constitutionally in its confirmation of Obama for President because the matter is a “political question” which needs to be resolved by Congress. The Court said that there simply is no room for judicial review of political choices made by the Electoral College and the Congress when voting for and confirming the President. The Court added that the plaintiffs’ remedy against Congress may be achieved by voting at the polls.

It is important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama has conclusively proven that he was born in Hawaii. It is also important to understand that the Court did not rule that Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Rather, the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ case because of jurisdiction and the political question doctrine without commenting on the underlying merits of whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. The Court also did not rule that the plaintiffs’ claims are frivolous. Given the nature of the Court’s decision, the American People unfortunately still do not know whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be President and Commander in Chief.

As promised, plaintiffs will be filing an appeal of Judge Simandle’s decision to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg, New Jersey 08831
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
October 21, 2009

For an outline and summary of the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al case see:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19914488/Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress-Table-of-Contents-2nd-Amended-Complaint

*** Later Update ***

Commander Charles F. Kerchner, U.S. Naval Reserve (Ret.) statement

114 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Democrats, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, indictment, Judges, Kenya, Kerchner v Obama, Lawyers, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Standing, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US District Court, US Military, Usurper, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , ,

Charles Kerchner, Sovereign Immunity, October 20, 2009, Kerchner V Obama, Mario Apuzzo, US Constitution, President and Congress not above the law, Quo Warranto charge against a usurper Putative President

Posted on October 20, 2009 | 96 comments

Just in from Charles Kerchner of Kerchner V Obama, October 20, 2009:

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
20 October 2009

Kerchner: On the Sovereign and Sovereign Immunity – by CDR Kerchner

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17049463/

Kerchner: On the Sovereign and Sovereign Immunity

In the case of constitutional issues We the People and/or the Constitution created by We the People are sovereign. The fundamental law of our nation, the Constitution, can only be changed by amending it by the process provided in that Constitution, not by a branch of the federal government usurping or ignoring it. Congress cannot amend the Constitution by itself and certainly not with a simple majority vote. It takes a vote of 2/3 the members of Congress to put forward such an amendment to the several states and ratification by 3/4 of the several states of our nation. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a pure democracy. All rights and power not given to the federal government by the Constitution is reserved to the several states and to the People. See the 9th and 10th Amendments in the Bill of Rights for the details on that fact. We the People created the federal government enabled by the founding document, the federal U.S. Constitution. The Congress or the President cannot arbitrarily ignore the U.S. Constitution and those branches of the federal government cannot hide behind sovereign immunity. For if they can the Constitution is then no longer the supreme law of the land and the Congress and the President have placed themselves above that supreme law. We would no longer be a nation of laws if the supreme law of the land can be ignored and not enforced by the whims of the simple political majority in control of Congress.

I believe that Article I, Section 6, clause 1 protects the individual Senators and Reps from arrest and/or charges due to their speech and debate. It does not grant sovereign immunity to the Congress as a whole or the Senate as a body or the House as a body to totally ignore the Constitution, the “fundamental law” as Vattel describes such laws, and the foundational law of our federal government and nation. The sovereign power in our Republic is “We the People” and the Constitution we established to limit the power of the Federal Government, and thus the Congress which is part of that. Thus the Congress as a body in our government is not sovereign and thus cannot have sovereign immunity regarding charges that it as a body did not do its constitutional duty and/or ignored parts of the constitution. Who or what is the USA. It is the several states and We the People and the Constitution. It is not the Congress and it is not the President. The Constitution is the supreme and sovereign law. Congress is not sovereign and neither is the President and thus they cannot use sovereign immunity to betray and undermine the constitution. If the Congress is sovereign, then Congress would be the ultimate power and even be above the constitution. That is not our system of government. And that is not what Vattel taught either and wrote about a republic with a written constitution. The elected officials are our representatives and we acquiesce to them to run the government as long as they obey the Constitution and not ignore any part of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and that these elected representatives act in a way to protect our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness which our patriot ancestors and many who have served since fought and died to obtain and keep for us. The written Constitution is supreme and sovereign as that contract was established by We the People acting through the several states. And it states it takes 3/4th of the several states via agreement of the People of those states speaking through their respective legislative body to change that sovereign law, the U.S. Constitution.

We the People are the sovereigns and the Constitution is the supreme, fundamental, sovereign law in our federal system. The President and Congress are not above the law. No executive order or statutory law passed by them is supreme to the Constitution and the inalienable rights of We the People. I did not swear an oath to defend a man or any particular person serving as the President or a piece land. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We the People retain the ancient right of the sovereign, which is us in our system, to bring a Quo Warranto charge against a usurper Putative President. And I did so in my lawsuit. Any order or law made by Congress or anyone else in our federal government which stands in the way of We the People’s inalienable right to protect our Constitution, which we created, from a usurper must fall. Those laws must fall by the wayside as subservient and that they are not applicable to blocking our inalienable rights and cannot be allowed to block the People getting answers in the federal courts to Constitutional questions. I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I intend to do so.

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
Commander USNR (Retired)
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/

“

96 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Commander in Chief, Congress, DC, Democrats, District Court, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, First Amendment, Founding Fathers, Government, Grand Juror, Grand Jury, Grand Jury Indictment, indictment, Judges, Kerchner v Obama, Lawyers, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Movies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Quo Warranto, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US Department of Justice, US District Court, US House of Representatives, US Senate, Usurper, Warrant, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett, Leo C Donofrio, Update, October 19, 2009, Stonewaled In Hawaii, Where’s World Net Daily On This Issue?, Stonewalled, Attorney client privilege, Public statement

Posted on October 19, 2009 | 176 comments

***  Update below ***

From Leo C Donofrio, October 19, 2009:

“Last week I published a report which established that Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett was invoking “attorney client privilege” as to the opinion issued to Department of Health Director Fukino wherein the AG reviewed and approved the July 27, 2009 press release which stated to the world that President Obama was born in Hawaii and is a “natural-born American citzen”.
 
Is there no story here?  Attorney client privilege was applied to a public statement?  How is that possible?  The statement was issued in a press release.  No privilege applies.
 
In part 3 of my UIPA report, I detailed the legal statutes and case law in Hawaii that demand the Attorney General opinion be made public.
Parts 1 and 2 of that same report explained how the Hawaii Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) gives “any person” standing to challenge in court the failure of a Hawaii state agency to release records which the public are entitled to.
 
Furthermore, I also detailed – here and here – how DoH Communications Director Janice Okubo has been running interference by failing to answer proper UIPA requests as is required by OIP administrative rules.
 
I am preparing a follow up on all of this which illustrates Okubo’s continued failure to answer UIPA requests under OIP administrative rules which has the effect of stopping all research.  Additonally, my appeals to the OIP have gone unanswered.
 
WHERE IS WND?
They are allegedly in possession of a petition with half a million names on it in support of political leaders investigating Obama’s POTUS eligibility.  My question to WND is – why don’t you investigate his eligibility by using the very simple devices listed in the UIPA?
 
All WND must do is write up a copy of the same questions we have asked… email it to Janice Okubo and then follow up with an OIP appeal and a judicial branch appeal (to be expedited to the front of the litigation calendar by statute).
 
I have always found the WND reporting on eligibility to be very convenient to the Obama administration.  They have chosen to focus on the sensational conspiracy theory aspects of the issue rather than the genuine legal problem he faces in that he was a British citizen at birth.  But if WND want to genuinely establish themselves as true  investigative reporters on the issue of Obama’s eligibility, all they have to do is make an effort to use the public disclosure laws available to “any person”.
 
I would be happy to write model UIPA requests, model appeals to the OIP and model judicial complaints to be filed in Hawaii Circuit courts for World Net Daily to act upon and to gather information.  Not only is Obama’s COLB available for discovery right now via these laws, but so is the Attorney General opinion which guided Fukino’s infamous July 27th press release as well as the original vital records she viewed which allowed her to state that Obama was born in Hawaii.
There’s no reason to be groping around in the dark looking for these documents in federal court rooms by people who have no chance of garnering standing.  Standing is granted to “any person” in Hawaii.  WND and all the other attorneys involved in POTUS eligibility should be using the UIPA laws in Hawaii, along with the OIP administrative rules and judicial precedent to get the information necessary for the country to have closure on Obama’s place of birth.
 
If Okubo tries to stonewall WND the way she stonewalls the rest of the public, then she can see her face and her replies spread over the front pages of WND.  And WND certainly has the resources to take this fight to the judicial branch in Hawaii.
 
Hawaii officials appear unwilling to work with me under their laws.  I will be filing law suits.  But I don’t see why WND and other interested attorneys continue to ignore the UIPA, OIP and judicial branch in Hawaii where standing is not an obstacle.  If your fight is to see the Obama birth records, then these laws make that possible.
 
I see a pattern emerging where the UIPA is ignored and the federal Quo Warranto statute is not followed properly.  It feels like a big attempt to keep public eyes away from true legal solutions while impossible exotic suits are brought in federal courts which have no subject matter jurisdiction for plaintiffs with undeniable standing issues.”

Read more:

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/stonewaled-in-hawaii-wheres-world-net-daily-on-this-issue/

*** Leo C Donofrio update at October 19, 2009, 2:45 PM **

“Point Made…

I’ve deleted my prior post so that the journal mentioned might reverse course now that I’ve made my point: that information is available from Hawaii for those who will call Hawaii to follow their own public disclosure laws.

No news journal can talk about this issue and deserve any respect if they aren’t willing to use the law available to them for research.  Research is to the media just as a hammer is to a carpenter – a necessary tool.  We shall now see if they are interested in doing their job or if they will continue to dodge that chore.”

176 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorney General, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Democrats, Election 2008, Election Law, Government, Hawaii, Health Department, indictment, Kenya, Lawyers, Leo Donofrio, Lies, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama records, Senator Obama, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, Usurper, voters, World Net Daily

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Charles Kerchner, Mario Apuzzo interview, October 16, 2009, Kerchner V Obama, et al, Lawsuit updates, MommaE blog radio

Posted on October 16, 2009 | 111 comments

Just in from MommaE Blog Radio, October 16, 2009:

“Hi,
 
I just want to remind you that MommaE Radio Rebels is on tonight!  MARIO APUZZO AND CHARLES KERCHNER WILL BE THE GUESTS TONIGHT!  MARIO AND CHARLES WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THEIR CASE AND ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO ANSWERING QUESTIONS FROM THE CALLERS!     It will be open lines for call ins with any questions you have as well as comments!!  It should be a hot, rocking and interesting show!
 
PLEASE POST THIS ON YOUR BLOGS OR WEB SITES AND ANY OTHER BLOGS OR WEB SITES THAT YOU ARE CONNECTED WITH AND SEND TO EVERYONE IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK. 
 
I look forward to seeing you all there!  Link, time and call in number for the show is below.
 
http://blogtalkradio.com/mommaeradiorebels
 
Call In # 347-237-4870
 
5:30 PM Pacific Time
 
6:30 PM Mountain Time
 
7:30 PM Central Time
 
8:30 PM Eastern Time
 
I hope to see you all.  Please join us in the Chat room!
  
MommaE”

 

A recent article by attorney Mario Apuzzo and information on Kerchner V Obama
“Why Should a Reputable Attorney Pursue the Obama Eligibility Issue?

I have been asked by one pro-Obama commentator on my blog who calls himself “kris” why a reputable attorney would pursue eligibility litigation against our putative President, Barack Obama.

In his argument, the commentator makes several correct statements. He is correct in stating that “Wong Kim Ark, while providing an expansive and controversial definition of a Fourteenth Amendment ‘citizen of the United States,’ simply does not and cannot retroactively change the Founders’ definition of a ‘natural born Citizen.'”

He is also correct in stating that the Founders never defined in the Constitution what a “natural born Citizen” is. What the commentator does not state is that the Founders believed in a Creator, who to provide order and justice, gave society natural law. That natural law manifested itself in the minds and hearts of men. What society was, who its members were, and what the ends of society were to be were all revealed through that natural law. Hence, there was no reason or motivation for them to write down what a “Citizen” or “natural born Citizen” was. Given the task of creating a new society after having won a revolution, for them it was intuitive that a “citizen” was a member of the new society and the children of the first citizens would in the future be the society’s “natural born citizens.” They also provided for others to join the new society in the future through naturalization and the children of those so joining the society would also be “natural born citizens.””

Read more:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-should-reputable-attorney-pursue.html

111 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, corruption, DC, Democrats, District Court, Election 2008, Election Law, Federal Court, fraud, Government, Hawaii, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Kenya, Kerchner v Obama, Law firms, Lawyers, Lies, Mario Apuzzo, Motion, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Senator Obama, Supreme Court Justice, Talk Radio, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, US District Court, US Military, Usurper, Voter fraud, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , , , ,