Category Archives: Civil Complaint

Senator Barbara Mikulski, Maryland, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged, MD senator

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 14 comments

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge
the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

 

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

A letter received from Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for getting in touch with me. It’s nice to hear from you.

I appreciate knowing of your concern over a rumor that President-elect Obama is ineligible to serve as President because he is not a U.S. citizen.

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Since President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii two years after it was admitted as the 50th state, he is a natural-born citizen. He has released a copy of his birth certificate and it has been authenticated by experts. Following Obama’s overwhelming and undisputed victory in the recent election, the Supreme Court has considered challenges to his citizenship and dismissed them as being without merit.

Thanks again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to let me know if I can be of assistance to you again in the future.

Sincerely,
Barbara A. Mikulski
United States Senator”
With this letter we have a whole new level of stupidity, ignorance
and/or political bias. There are five distinct parts to this letter
that are wrong:

1. “rumor that President-elect Obama is ineligible”
This is no rumor, it is a fact.

2. “Since President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii two years after
it was admitted as the 50th state, he is a natural-born citizen.”
Being born in Hawaii does not make Obama a natural born citizen.

3. “He has released a copy of his birth certificate”
He has not released a copy of his birth certificate!!!
Pay attention! He put up a highly suspect COLB on his site.
Learn more about Hawaii statutes below.

4. “it has been authenticated by experts”
You can’t authenticate what you do not have access to.

5. “the Supreme Court has considered challenges to his citizenship
and dismissed them as being without merit.”
The Supreme Court has dismissed none of the eligibility based
lawsuits on not having merit. Berg’s lawsuit is still before the
Supreme Court.

It is intuitively obvious why the approval rating of Congress is
approaching single digits and why so little good comes from it.
Senator Mikulski, you are ill informed on many important aspects of
the 2008 election and Barack Obama’s eligibility. If you have any
questions or comments please respond. A non answer will be the same as
an answer.

What you have stated is an embarassment to the entire country. If you
really care about this country, learn the facts and apologize for
your statements. Please respond with your questions and comments.

Why Obama is not eligible

What Hawaii Health Official really said

From the Alan Keyes lawsuit

“A press release was issued on October 31, 2008, by the Hawaii Department
of Health by its Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino. Dr. Fukino said that she
had “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of
Health has Senator Obama’s original birth certificate on record in
accordance with state policies and procedures.” That statement failed to
resolve any of the questions being raised by litigation and press accounts.
Being “on record” could mean either that its contents are in the computer
database of the department or there is an actual “vault” original.”

“Further, the report does not say whether the birth certificate in the
“record” is a Certificate of Live Birth or a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth.
In Hawaii, a Certificate of Live Birth resulting from hospital documentation,
including a signature of an attending physician, is different from a
Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. For births prior to 1972, a Certificate of
Hawaiian Birth was the result of the uncorroborated testimony of one witness
and was not generated by a hospital. Such a Certificate could be obtained up
to one year from the date of the child’s birth. For that reason, its value
as prima facie evidence is limited and could be overcome if any of the
allegations of substantial evidence of birth outside Hawaii can be obtained.
The vault (long Version) birth certificate, per Hawaiian Statute 883.176
allows the birth in another State or another country to be registered in
Hawaii. Box 7C of the vault Certificate of Live Birth contains a question,
whether the birth was in Hawaii or another State or Country. Therefore,
the only way to verify the exact location of birth is to review a certified
copy or the original vault Certificate of Live Birth and compare the name of
the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor against the
birthing records on file at the hospital noted on the Certificate of the
Live Birth.”

mdmikulski

14 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Citizen, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Constitution Hall of Shame, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Keyes lawsuit, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Senator Mel Martinez, Florida, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged, FL senator

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 22 comments

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation
or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge
the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

A letter received from Senator Mel Martinez regarding
Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Obama’s
citizenship. I appreciate hearing from you and would like to respond
to your concerns.

Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility
to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not
compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our
courts and political processes.

Article II of the Constitution provides that “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.” The Constitution, however, does not specify how that
qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter
recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On
October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama.
In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that
your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect’s birthplace.
Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to
produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.

The District Court dismissed Mr. Berg’s suit and held that the question
of Obama’s citizenship is not a matter for a court to decide. The court
further noted that voters, not courts, should decide whether a particular
presidential candidate is qualified to hold office.

Presidential candidates are vetted by voters at least twice – first in
the primary elections and again in the general election. President-Elect
Obama won the Democratic Party’s nomination after one of the most
fiercely contested presidential primaries in American history. And, he
has now been duly elected by the majority of voters in the United States.
Throughout both the primary and general election, concerns about Mr.
Obama’s birthplace were raised. The voters have made clear their view that
Mr. Obama meets the qualifications to hold the office of President.”

Mel Martinez

Senator Mel Martinez states the following:

“Like you, I believe that our federal government has the responsibility
to make certain that the Constitution of the United States is not
compromised. We must fight to uphold our Constitution through our
courts and political processes.”

Mr. Martinez is correct in that statement.

However, Mr. Martinez goes on to say:

“The Constitution, however, does not specify how that
qualification for office is to be enforced.”

That is absolutely false!
The Constitution and Federal Election Laws allow for challenges to the
Electoral College Votes when Congress convenes.

Mr. Martinez goes on to say that Judge Surrick indicated that voters should
vet presidential candidates and that the courts should not determine
citizenship. Mr. Berg’s lawsuit is still before the US Supreme Court.

Mr. Martinez then states:

“And, he has now been duly elected”

Perhaps Mr. Martinez should look up the definitions of duly and
elected.

Mr. Martinez, what about the millions of Hillary Clinton supporters
that were effectively disenfranchised when Obama stole the Democrat
Primary as an ineligible candidate.

Senator Mel Martinez, would you like to clarify what you stated?

Why Obama is not eligible

flmartinez

22 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Constitution Hall of Shame, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Federal Court, Florida, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Judges, Justice, Kenya, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Barack Obama must prove eligibility or step down, Obama not eligible, December 18, 2008, Citizen Wells request to Obama, Greatest Generation sacrifices, Obama me generation, Patrick Fitzgerald investigations, Will Obama be indicted?

Posted on December 18, 2008 | 33 comments

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 7

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

Barack Obama

Prove you are eligible

or

Step down

 

I have the utmost respect for the “Greatest Generation.” This is
the generation that weathered the Great Depression, saved the
world in World War II and set a standard of self discipline and
sacrifice that is a model for generations to come. John McCain
comes from a long history of family sacrifice for country. He
serves as a bridge from the “Greatest Generation” to the baby
boomers and subsequent generations. Contrast these models of
self sacrifice and giving to others with Barack Obama and his
core support, the “me” generation. With Obama and much of his
support, it is all about me.

I read the obituaries each morning for two reasons. One to see
if anyone I know or a family member of theirs is listed. The other
reason is to read the short accounts of servicemen in World War II.
There were two side by side this morning that caught my attention.
One had been in the Marines in the South Pacific and the other was
in the Army Infantry and fought in the Battle of the Bulge. Those
two men, who at a young age were thrust into a hell on earth,
and along with others of their generation, made it possible for us
to have an election this year. We came closer to Nazi domination
than most people realize.

Fast forward over sixty years to the 2008 election year. We have a
candidate, Barack Obama, that has consistently only looked out for
himself at the expense of others. This includes community organizing
that was just a front for political agendas. Consider these quotes
from a report to Catholic Bishops:

“To be eligible to receive CHD funds, a program must be run by the poor, benefit the poor, and change social structures that harm the poor.” However, in light of the politically oriented thrust of ACORN’s activities, it is fair to ask whether the CHD subsidies to ACORN are advisable and commensurate with the purposes of CHD.”

“This commentary does not oppose CHD funding of genuine, grassroots community organizations, run and supported by individual members of a parish or diocese. There is potential value and virtue in the collective voice. However, when the CHD funds Alinsky-style, church-based community organizations as in the best interest of the poor and supports organizations which advance other agendas, it divests the poor of their right to an authentic voice. This process tends to treat the poor as exploited units of human capital, rather than as human beings created in the dignity of God’s image.”

What Acorn and Community Organizers are really about

Think Obama has been looking out for you?

Barack Obama has taken advantage of all that this country has to
offer including education. What has he given in return? A history
of posturing himself for the presidency and association with crime
and corruption to further his career. Obama appeals to people who
are just like him, classic takers, not givers. Obama promises free
college and tax breaks for almost everyone knowing full well he can
not come through with those promises and that they are not good for
the country. Why does he promise all those things? Because it is
all about getting elected. Me me me.

The soldiers returning from World II received college educations. They
paid for their educations with blood and guts and the greatest sacrifices.

Barack Obama, the Patrick Fitzgerald investigations are closing in
on you. You will be required to prove your eligibility to be
president sooner or later.

 

Barack Obama, for once in your life, do something for the people of this
country.

Prove you are eligible to be president or step down.

 

33 Comments

Posted in Acorn, Acorn voter fraud, Announcements, Attorney General, Bailout, Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Blagojevich, Chicago, Chicago machine, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Community Organizer, Congress, corruption, Crime, Criminal Complaint, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FBI, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, Illinois, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

2008 Election Certificate of Vote, Electoral College Electors, Minnesota Certificate, Secretary of State, US Constitution, Twelfth Amendment, Governor, Obama not eligible, Citizen Wells, Democratic Disaster, December 16, 2008, Al Franken, Norm Coleman controversy

Posted on December 16, 2008 | 17 comments

“Ignorance is not bliss.”

“Knowledge is Power.”

Minnesota could soon be famous for another 2008 Election
controversy aside from the Al Franken, Norm Coleman
senate race controversy. The Certificate of Voters must
be signed and mailed to the US Senate. If Minnesota uses
the same Certificate that was used in 2004, they had better
rethink sending it in without complying with the reference
to the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution. There are
2 places in the Twelfth Amendment that refer to presidential
eligibility:

“as in the case of the death or other
constitutional disability of the President.”

“But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of
President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the
United States.”

Everyone involved in the presidential election has an obligation
to uphold the US Constitution. MN has taken it one step further
and explicitly included it in their certificate.

One might ask how MN Electoral College Electors would know this.
The Citizen Wells blog along with organizations like Democratic
Disaster and many other people have been notifying election
officials in all 50 states regarding the serious eligibility
issues surrounding Barack Obama and the duties of all responsible.
In addition there are many court cases in state courts as well
as before the US Supreme Court. So, ignorance of the facts or
duties will be no excuse. Check the Certificate for signatures.
Those signing the 2008 Certificate without ensuring they are
complying with the Twelfth Amendment, are most certainly
guilty of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” and certainly removal
from office.

California Certificate of Voters is questionable

Do we have any takers?

Anyone want to call the Governor or Secretary of State’s office in Minnesota?

Recall initiatives, impeachment, removal from office?

2004 MN Certificate of Vote

mncertofvote

17 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorney General, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, California, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Democratic Disaster, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, McCain Obama, Minnesota, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

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

Wrotnowski V Bysiewicz, US Supreme Court, December 15, 2008, Justices decide Cort Wrotnowski versus Connecticut Secretary of State Bysiewicz, Writ of Mandamus, Obama not eligible, Stay denied

Posted on December 15, 2008 | 59 comments

The US Supreme Court today, Monday, December 15, 2008, the same day
that the Electoral College is meeting to vote for president and vice
president, has decided:

 

08A469

 

 

WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE

 

 

The application for stay and/or injunction addressed

 

 

to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.

 

 

 

Most of the Electors believe, falsely, that they have an overriding
obligation to vote base on political party dictates and/or state laws
dictating they must vote based on the popular vote. The Electors owe
allegiance only to the US Constitution and the American public.

Electoral College Questions and Answers

Citizen Wells letter to Electoral College Electors

This is the opinion of Citizen Wells and I will stand by the following:

The US Supreme Court, on multiple occasions, in regard to several
lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president, have not
addressed three distinct constitutional issues that need to either
be ruled on or clarified:

  • Obama’s eligibility to be president and the relevance of natural
    born citizen.
  • Clarification of state powers and duties to ensure that Electoral
    College Electors have a qualified candidate on the ballot to vote for.
  • Applicability of oaths taken to uphold and defend the Constitution
    to the election process. Marbury V Madison is clear on oaths. Why are
    the states ignoring this?

I respect the institution of the US Supreme Court. That respect does
not automatically flow to the individual Justices. Respect must be
earned. Every citizen of this country has a duty to uphold the US
Constitution. Supreme Court Justices have the highest duty to
uphold the US Constitution. They are not above the law. We will hold
them accountable.

Unless I read something soon that encourages me to believe that the
US Supreme Court is functioning as it should, I am compelled to
believe that some or all of the Supreme Court Justices are guilty of
dereliction of duty, if not “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Here is the heart of the complaint

“HOLDING BY THE PLAINTIFF

 

Holding Regarding the Role of the State Supreme Court
 

The plaintiff asserts that Connecticut law is not explicit with respect to taking action against potential election fraud at the national level.  It neither authorizes nor prohibits.  In fact, it is silent on this important issue.  The only statutes providing direction are 9-323, and for Federal Election Disputes, sec. 10-13, 10-14, 10-15, and 10-17(a) (as found in  Connecticut Appellate Practice and Procedure, 3rd Edition, chapter titled:  Original Proceedings in the Supreme Court, pages 385-387.)

We do not have a federal ballot controlled by the federal government, we have Connecticut state election for electors who are pledged for a particular candidate which allows each state to determine how and in what manner they choose to project their power at the National Electoral College.

 
In the special case of individuals seeking the office of President of the United States, the US constitution prescribes a system of electors where citizens of the respective state have a state controlled election wherein electors representing the interest of the named individual on the state ballot are so elected as to represent the interests of the respective state at the Electoral College.
 

State law determines how the electors are determined and act. Since this is in actual fact a state election, our Secretary of State has prevue over certification of not just the counts of the ballots so cast for the named candidate for President, but also the veracity of the system which including publishing and promoting the ballot and for certifying or decertifying challenged candidates; in this case the electors who act as proxies for the candidate.
 

The plaintiff argues that the Connecticut constitution and statutes and enforcement should be consistent with the principles of the U.S. constitution.  When Connecticut law provides no guidance, then an electoral duty ascribed at the national level applies at the state level as well.  If there are national standards for preventing fraud in an election, then there need to be similar standards at the state level.  The state Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring that that Connecticut laws follows the U.S. Constitution.  In particular, Sec. 10-17(a) sets forth how the State Supreme Court can provide remedy.

 

Holding regarding Responsibility of the Secretary of State in National Elections
 

It is argued that the lack of language in the state law does not preclude the Secretary of State, as the Chief of Elections, from verifying national candidates for whom her constituents will vote especially so when allegations of blatant profound fraud is widely asserted.

 

She has threaded a path to inaction by her selective choice of words.  Hers is a “sin of omission” argument.  Estopple argument would say otherwise. Furthermore, without explicate legislative direction, there are still very clear “implied duties” that follow from Connecticut Statutes, Connecticut Constitution and  the U.S. Constitution that demand consideration and action from this independent branch of Government charged with action.

 

There are at least four statutes that set forth the duties of the Secretary of  State.  Plaintiff bolded passages in Sec. 9-3 for emphasis.

 

From:  Connecticut General Statutes

 

Sec. 3-77. General duties; salary. Office of Secretary full time.

…  provisions of section 11-4c. The Secretary may give certified copies of any entries in such records, files, books or other papers and of the files and records of said Superior Court and of the Supreme Court, remaining in the office, which copies shall be legal evidence. … The Secretary shall receive an annual salary of one hundred ten thousand dollars and shall devote full time to the duties of the office.

 

 Sec. 9-3. Secretary to be Commissioner of Elections. Presumption concerning rulings and opinions.

The Secretary of the State, by virtue of the office, shall be the Commissioner of Elections of the state, with such powers and duties relating to the conduct of elections as are prescribed by law and, unless otherwise provided by state statute, the secretary’s regulations, declaratory rulings, instructions and opinions, if in written form, shall be presumed as correctly interpreting and effectuating the administration of elections and primaries under this title, except for chapter 155, provided nothing in this section shall be construed to alter the right of appeal provided under the provisions of chapter 54.

 

 

The bolded language in Sec. 9-3  demonstrates that the legislature fully expected the Secretary of State to act independently and proactively to address situations germane to the task of executing elections consistent with all requirements of the constitutions and statutes.

 

The implied duty argument is vital for circumstances where questions about candidates remain, even up to Election Day.  She claims no such responsibility, yet the “national system” to which Secretary Bysiewicz refers to does not exist and/or has provided no remedy.  Despite popular misunderstanding, the FEC provides no verification whatsoever.  As the Chief of Elections, the Secretary of State is responsible for protecting Connecticut voters from fraud and unfair elections. Buck stops there.

 

Eligibility is a fundamental issue that strikes at the heart of fair elections.  Where the question of eligibility has become so obvious and clear, as in the case of Sen. Obama’s missing birth certificate, the Secretary of State must move to protect the voters, investigating the allegations of fraud or directing such agency as deemed proper such as the SEEC which would investigate and inform the Secretary of State of their findings.”

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Citizen Wells comment

“There is apparently more chicanery going on at the US Supreme Court. First, Leo Donofrio had an unjust encounter
with clerk Danny Bickell. Now, Cort Wrotnowski has filed an emergency stay application with the US Supreme
Court and he is receiving the same unjust treatment from clerk Danny Bickell.”
Leo Donofrio

 

“US Supreme Court stay clerk Danny Bickell is guilty of obstruction of justice for the second time. Yesterday, Cort Wrotnowski filed an emergency stay application in the case WROTNOWSKI V. BYSIEWICZ, CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF STATE, which is coming directly from a Connecticut Supreme Court order of Chief Justic Chase Rogers.

Mr. Wrotnowski was informed by Danny Bickell that Mr. Bickell denied Cort’s motion based on Rule 23.3, the same grounds Mr. Bickell had illegally improperly relied on to obstruct Donofrio v. Wells, the same case which is now going before the entire Supreme Court for Conference of Dec. 5th and to which Donofrio has pointed out Mr. Bickell was guilty of attemping to overturn Justice Powell’s holding in McCarthy v. Briscoe 429 U.S. 1317 n.1 (1976) and Justice O’Conner in Western Airlines, Inc. v. Teamsters, 480 U.S. 1301 (1987).”

“Donofrio (me) believes Mr. Wrotnowski’s case is at least as strong as his own, if not stronger. And Donofrio warned Wrotnowski that Bickell was going to try the same tactic again.”

“Courageously, Mr. Wrotnowski refused to back down and eventually Bickell said he would, reluctantly, docket the case.”

December 2, 2008

Leo Donofrio

“Cort Wrotnowski, (SCOTUS Docket No. 08A469), a day after facing the shock of his life when told by a SCOTUS clerk that his renewed application to Justice Scalia would be held back for 7 days due to anthrax screening, hand delivered 10 copies of his renewed application to the Security booth at SCOTUS this morning at 10:30 AM.  Cort was told by the Clerk’s office that the papers would “probably” be in the Clerk’s office by 2:00 PM.   Cort’s application, according to Supreme Court Rule 22.1, should be “transmitted promptly” to the Honorable Associate Justice Antonin Scalia.  Keep your eyes on that Docket to see if they will follow the Rules of Court.

59 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Connecticut, Cort Wrotnowski, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Superior Court, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Citizen Wells letter to Electors, Electoral College, Uphold US Constitution, December 15, 2008 Electors vote, Obama is not eligible, Demand proof, 2008 Election, Election laws, Political Party pledges, State laws unconstitutional

Posted on December 14, 2008 | 40 comments

“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 1778

To: 2008 Presidential Election Electoral College Electors

From: Citizen Wells

Electors,
You are being put into the uncomfortable position of having to
question your vote for president of the US. In the past, this
was a much simpler decision. Party politics has always been an
issue but in the past, after the general election, the rules
were fairly simple for you. You voted based on the party pledges
and state rules without giving it much thought. The duty to vote
in the manner as directed by the US Constitution has always been
there, but you never had to be concerned about violating it.

The 2008 Election year is unique in American History. Early in
2008 questions arose about the eligibility of John McCain and
Barack Obama to be president. John McCain put to rest any doubts
by presenting to Congress a vault copy of his birth certificate.
As the year progressed and more was learned about Obama’s history
and evasive attitude, more people began questioning Obama’s
eligibility. Several attempts were made on various websites to put
the issue to rest by presenting copies of what were alleged to be
COLB, Certificate of Live Birth. A COLB is a record of birth and
is not a legal verification of location of birth and other birth
facts.

On August 21, 2008, Philip J Berg filed a lawsuit in Philadelphia
Federal Court demanding that Barack Obama provide proof of eligibility.
Mr. Berg provided many details surrounding Obama’s past such as
Obama’s probable birth in Kenya, travel forbidden to American
citizens in Pakistan and Obama’s school records and other records’
that Obama has kept hidden from scrutiny. Many lies and deception
have been initiated by the Obama camp. One of the more interesting
ones is an AP report that tried to insinuate that Hawaiian Health
Department officials stated that Obama was born in Hawaii. They
did not state that.

Many other lawsuits have developed from the Berg lawsuit including
the Alan Keyes lawsuit in CA. Obama has spents hundreds of thousands
of dollars and employed multiple law firms to avoid proving his
eligibility. Lawsuits are still alive in the US Supreme Court and
many state courts. Lawsuits place the burden of proof on the
plaintiff and require very strict legal wording.

Why are you being put in the position of questioning your vote and
complying with the US Constitution? The Constitution gives the power
and control over elections to the states through the vote of the
Electoral College. State laws vary greatly but to various degrees
define how candidates get on the ballot and other rules controlling
the election process. Some states define the method of challenging
or ensuring that a candidate is qualified. Regardless, the states
do have the power and the duty to ensure that a presidential
candidate is qualified to take office.

Why are the states not requiring that a presidential candidate is
qualified? The short answer is that they are passing the buck. The
long answer is that tradition, politics and political parties are
driving the process when in fact political parties are given no
power or authority by the US Constitution. The typical answer
given by a secretary of state or other state election official is
that they get their cue from the political party as to who gets
put on the ballot and some even state that it is the responsibility
of the party to vet the candidate. While I see no problem getting
names for ballots from the political party, that does not remove
the Constitutional duty of the states. This is a blatant violation
of duty by state officers, election officials and judges and could
fall under “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

To make matters worse, the US Supreme Court, on multiple occasions, in
regard to several lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be
president, has not addressed three distinct constitutional issues
that need to either be ruled on or clarified:

  • Obama’s eligibility to be president and the relevance of natural
    born citizen.
  • Clarification of state powers and duties to ensure that Electoral
    College Electors have a qualified candidate on the ballot to vote for.
  • Applicability of oaths taken to uphold and defend the Constitution
    to the election process. Marbury V Madison is clear on oaths. Why are
    the states ignoring this?

No one wants to take responsibility. Why? Many of the reasons are
obvious. Party politics, fear of offending someone, fear of riots,
ignorance, tradition.

Electors. You are in a unique position. We have a system of checks and
balances in this country that has served us well over the centuries.
Our Founding Fathers had witnessed the monarchies and totalitarian
regimes prevalent in much of their world. They did not want that. That
is why we have executive, legislative and judicial branches and that
is also why we have an Electoral College system of voting for president.
The Electoral College was set up by the founding fathers to achieve two
primary goals.To prevent smaller states and lower population areas from
being dominated by a few larger states with higher population densities
and to prevent a tyrant or usurper of power from deceiving an uninformed
populace.

Consider the following quotes:
Alexander Hamilton echoed the thoughts of many of the founding
fathers when he wrote in the Federalist Papers: “afraid a tyrant could
manipulate public opinion and come to power.”
“The people are uninformed, and would be misled by a few designing men.”
Delegate Gerry, July 19, 1787.

Electors, you have a duty to uphold the US Constitution. As Harry Truman
said, “The buck stop here.” You can blindly follow party propaganda or
you can act as concerned Americans and do the right thing. What do other
concerned Americans expect from you? That you make certain that the
candidate that you vote for is qualified under the US Constitution,
nothing more, nothing less.

This is so simple a school child can understand it. Why would Barack
Obama spend so much money, time and resources to avoid proving his
eligibilty. The answer is obvious. Obama is not qualified. However,
all you have to do is demand that he provide legitimate, legal, proof
and you can rest easy knowing you have done your job, your duty to
this country and the US Constitution.

One person, one vote can make a difference:

1860 election: 4 electors in New Jersey, pledged for Stephen Douglas,
voted for Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln.

Those Electors helped save the Union and the world.

Electoral College Questions and Answers

40 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorney General, Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Declaration of Independence, Democratic Disaster, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Founding Fathers, Government, Illinois, impeachment, indictment, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Philip J Berg Injunction Application denied, Justice Souter denied, Pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, December 9, 2008

Posted on December 10, 2008 | 26 comments

Philip J Berg’s  Injunction Application was denied by Justice Souter on Tuesday, December 9, 2008. Mr. Berg’s petition for a Writ of Certiorari is still pending.

The Right Side of Life website has been doing a good job of keeping track of all the lawsuits. Thanks to them.

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/

No. 08-570  
Title:
Philip J. Berg, Petitioner
v.
Barack Obama, et al.
Docketed: October 31, 2008
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
  Case Nos.: (08-4340)
  Rule 11
~~~Date~~~  ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oct 30 2008 Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 1, 2008)
Oct 31 2008 Application (08A391) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Nov 3 2008 Supplemental brief of applicant Philip J. Berg filed.
Nov 3 2008 Application (08A391) denied by Justice Souter.
Nov 18 2008 Waiver of right of respondents Federal Election Commission, et al. to respond filed.
Dec 1 2008 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by respondent Bill Anderson.
Dec 8 2008 Application (08A505) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Dec 9 2008 Application (08A505) denied by Justice Souter.
 

 

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:    
Philip J. Berg 555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 (610) 825-3134
  Lafayette Hill, PA  19444-2531  
Party name: Philip J. Berg
Attorneys for Respondents:    
Gregory G. Garre Solicitor General (202) 514-2217
  United States Department of Justice  
  950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.  
  Washington, DC  20530-0001  
Party name: Federal Election Commission, et al.
     
Lawrence J. Joyce Lawrence J. Joyce LLC (520) 584-0236
  1517 N. Wilmot Rd., #215  
  Tucson, AZ  85712  
  barmemberlj@earthlink.net
Party name: Bill Anderson

26 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Cort Wrotnowski, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , ,

Lt Col Donald Sullivan, TRO, NC Electors, Temporary Restraining Order, Stop NC Electoral College vote, Judge Baddour, Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh NC, December 10, 2008

Posted on December 9, 2008 | 18 comments

Lt Col Donald Sullivan will appear in Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh NC, on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 with his TRO, Temporary Restraining Order, to attempt to stop the Electoral College vote in NC until Barack Obama’s eligibility can be confirmed. Lt Col Sullivan is scheduled to appear before Superior Court Judge Baddour at 2:15.

18 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Democrats, DNC, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Lt Col Donald Sullivan, Natural born citizen, NC, NC voters, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator Obama, Superior Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

James Schneller Petition, Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Writ of mandamus, Injunction, Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth, Demand proof from Senator Barack Obama, Natural born citizen, US Constitution, Prevent certification of the vote, Electors meeting, December 9, 2008

Posted on December 9, 2008 | 17 comments

I received the following comment on this blog from James Schneller:

“Submitted on 2008/12/08 at 11:45pm
I’ve filed a petition for review No, 199 MM 2008, to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, seeking a writ of mandamus and an immediate injunction ordering the Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth to demand proof from Senator Barack Obama of his sworn statement, filed with his application for placement on the ballot, that he is qualified as a natural born citizen under the United States Constitution.

The petition seeks urgent attention to the requested injunction and additionally requests an injunction preventing the certification of the vote and of the Pennsylvania electors ballot, by the Secretary, including any certification to Pennsylvania’s Governor, and postponing of the scheduled meeting of the electors, which by law usually occurs on the third Monday of December.

I seek in the request for injunction, a submitting of proof of birthplace and of any additional elements required to be a natural born citizen, by Senator Obama, prior to the certification of the electors’ vote by the State to the Governor, and prior to certification that would then occur to the Joint Session of Congress, which would convene for the purpose of formalizing the electoral vote in early January.

If the candidate has not shown his eligibility under the Constitution, the electors should not have their votes certified, their votes should not be tallied in the traditional meeting before the Governor, nor should the certified ballots be lodged with the President of the Senate, nor the joint session of Congress early in January.

It is astounding that no official has demanded proof of this gentleman’s eligibility under what is a most simple and basic requirement for the Presidency. A bare statement by the Hawaii Health Director that they have a valid birth certificate is completely insufficient, and the fact that Senator Obama apparently has placed a doctored “certificate of live birth” on the internet, and may have falsely sworn in his candidate affidavits in thirty or more states, should put every American on notice that the Presidency may be being sought invalidly.

Under my request, the Secretary of the Commonwealth should be ordered to quickly demand proof. If Mr. Obama’s birth certificate is as he says, he has 20 days to produce it, and the Pennsylvania officials will still have 10 days to transmit the ballot to Washington.”

17 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Birth Certificate, Board of Elections, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Cort Wrotnowski, Democrats, DNC, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, Pennsylvania voters, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

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

We The People Foundation, WeThePeopleFoundation.org, Press conference, Monday, December 8, 2008, National Press Club, Jeff Schreiber report, Robert Schulz, Philip J Berg, Orly Taitz, Reverend Manning, Chicago tribune, Curt Wrotnowski case December 12, 2008

Posted on December 9, 2008 | 3 comments

Robert Shulz of the We The People Foundation held a press conference on Monday, December 8, 2008, at the National Press Club to discuss the eligibility issues and concerns surrounding Barack Obama. Jeff Schreiber covered the event and has written an excellent report:

“A stone’s throw away from the White House, more than 50 members of the press and curious onlookers alike crowded the intimate Edward R. Murrow Room at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. this afternoon to hear arguments why Barack Obama is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president of the United States.

The press conference was sponsored by Robert Schulz and his We The People Foundation, both of which just this last week ran an open letter to the former Illinois senator in his hometown Chicago Tribune, appealing to Obama to present for review any and all documentation which will prove his qualification to serve as president pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Also attending the press conference: Philip Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney who, in August, filed the first lawsuit questioning Obama’s constitutional eligibility; Orly Taitz, a Chechnyan immigrant turned southern California dentist and lawyer who has filed a pair of suits in the Golden State, one of which was on behalf of Ambassador and former GOP presidential candidate Alan Keyes, who ran as the Independent Party’s candidate for president in this past election.; and Rev. James David Manning, chief pastor at the Harlem-based ATLAH World Missionary Church.”

“Schulz deemed the Court’s decision on Donofrio v. Wells “the latest injury,” cited a “conspiracy of silence” with regards to the individual merits of Donofrio’s case and others, and bundled it together with the adverse decision against self-proclaimed “Internet powerhouse” and “legendary muckraker” Andy Martin in Hawaii and the dismissal of Berg’s case at the district court level in Philadelphia. He also lamented a now widely publicized e-mail response on the eligibility-related issue from Florida Sen. Mel Martinez, who responded to such an inquiry by noting that voters are responsible for vetting candidates at the presidential level and more.

“Mr. Martinez is wrong,” Schulz said. “He would have us believe that our form of government is a democracy rather than a constitutional republic. It is not too great a burden to demand that one who seeks the office of the president simply produce documents proving his legal eligibility.”

Schulz stated that “as supreme law of the land, the Constitution is all that stands between freedom and tyranny.” He noted that “the Constitution is not a menu” and that we “do not get to pick and choose” which provisions and guidelines to follow, maintaining that the Natural Born Citizen clause was designed by our founders to “safeguard our nation from outside influence.””

“Philip Berg was next to speak, introduced by Schulz as a “lifelong Democrat” and 20-year member of the NAACP. Upon reaching the podium, Berg wasted no time in getting to the point.

“Barack Obama is really a phony, and this is the largest hoax perpetrated against the United States in 200 years,” Berg said. “Obama places our Constitution in a crisis situation, and will be able to be blackmailed by other world leaders who know he is not qualified.”

Berg then reminded those in attendance that his case is currently active and pending at the U.S. Supreme Court, contrary to what a Chicago Tribune article last week had asserted. He also noted that his case is distinguishable from Leo Donofrio’s, later expanding upon the statement and telling America’s Right that while Donofrio’s case was looking to the Court to define the concept of “natural born,” his case was merely before the court to ascertain standing, though he has filed for an injunction to stay the December 15 Electoral College vote pending disposition on his petition for writ of certiorari.”

““My case in district court was dismissed for one reason – standing,” Berg said. “According to the court, I don’t have standing, Bob doesn’t have standing, no one in this room has standing. We’re asking for one qualification out of three. We know he’s at least 35 years old. We’ll give him the 14 years in the country. We just want to know that he is natural born. It’s not that difficult.””

“Next up was Orly Taitz, the southern California dentist-turned-constitutional law attorney. A woman with a curious, unidentifiable, Arianna Huffington-like accent, Taitz explained that she was indeed Chechnyan-born and that, during this recent election cycle, “the media in the United States of America was worse than the media in communist Russia.””

“Taitz had several strong points and good moments in her lengthy presentation, including when she argued that startlingly little needs to be done to show eligibility for the ballot in her state, citing one such example where she showcased the lackluster approach of California Secretary of State Bowen in vetting and certifying mere electors by showing that one such elector, certified by Bowen, has been dead since 2001. Another good moment came when Taitz once again argued against potential foreign influence with regard to the presidency by reading from a letter written by the first Chief Justice of the United States, John Jay, to George Washington in 1787.

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.””

“Just when it looked as though the room would open up for questions, the Rev. James David Manning asked to say a few words. A very eloquent and decidedly patriotic man, he led with a prayer.

“I pray, Lord, that we can overcome the wickedness which has overtaken our politicians, the media, and even in our court systems at the highest level,” Rev. Manning said, “and that this long-legged mack-daddy will not be allowed to take the oath of office on the 20th of January.””

““We don’t know who this man is,” he said, cautioning his fellow African-Americans not to accept this fruit of a white woman as their redeemer. “He’s no Booker T. Washington, I’ll tell you that. He’s no Martin Luther King. But he does possess the potential to be the most prolific con-man in the history of this country. It is my prayer that January 20th will not happen, that Barack Hussein Obama will not be inaugurated. This man has come from the womb of a white woman.””

Read the rest of this great article here:

http://www.americasright.com/

Jeff Schreiber puts the MSM to shame with his coverage and article on the press conference and the Barack Obama eligibilty issue, the story of the century.

3 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Barack Obama, Barry Soetoro, Berg, Birth Certificate, Chicago Tribune, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, Civil Complaint, COLB, Congress, Cort Wrotnowski, Democrats, DNC, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, FEC, Federal Court, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, James Manning, Jeff Schreiber, John McCain, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Leo Donofrio, McCain Obama, National Press Club, Natural born citizen, New Jersey, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, press conference, Secretary of State, Senator McCain, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters, We the People Foundation

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