Category Archives: Courts

Blagojevich trial lawyers ask to play more than 100 undercover recordings, Senate seat controversy

Blagojevich trial lawyers ask to play more than 100 undercover recordings, Senate seat controversy

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

From the Chicago Tribune February 14, 2011.

“Lawyers for Rod Blagojevich asked a federal judge Monday to let them play more than 100 undercover recordings at the former governor’s retrial, maintaining they disprove the heart of the government’s charges that he was trying to sell a U.S. Senate seat.

Within a few hours, the prosecution fired back, calling the request a “redux” of arguments from the first trial and questioning Blagojevich’s intentions.

“It is unclear what purpose the defendant’s motion serves other than to potentially influence prospective jurors,” the government wrote.

Blagojevich’s legal team also accused the government in its filing of trying to sway public opinion, calling prosecution assertions at the time of his arrest that Blagojevich was selling the Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama a “sensationalized false narrative” that “tainted the jury pool.”
Jurors deadlocked on 23 of the 24 counts against Blagojevich in his first corruption trial last summer, finding him guilty on one count of lying to federal investigators. He faces a retrial on April 20 on the 23 counts on which the jury deadlocked.

The defense team contends the 115 undercover recordings would show jurors that Blagojevich was not trying to sell the Senate seat but rather was negotiating a political deal to name Attorney General Lisa Madigan to the spot.”

“In a separate filing Monday, Blagojevich also asked Zagel to order that Antoin Rezko and Stuart Levine, both convicted of wrongdoing in the Blagojevich probe, be made available for questioning by the former governor’s attorneys because both might be “crucial witnesses for the prosecution” at the retrial. Neither, however, testified at the first trial, and the government hasn’t revealed if they will be called at the retrial.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-blagojevich-defense-recordings20110214,0,6418023.story

I agree with the following statement:

“Blagojevich’s legal team also accused the government in its filing of trying to sway public opinion, calling prosecution assertions at the time of his arrest that Blagojevich was selling the Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama a “sensationalized false narrative” that “tainted the jury pool.””

The Citizen Wells blog has consistently stated that the alleged selling of the senate seat was a clever diversion from the many years of corruption that Blagojevich, Rezko, Levine and Obama were involved in.

Do you suppose that the defense team is ready to throw Obama under the bus?

“In a separate filing Monday, Blagojevich also asked Zagel to order that Antoin Rezko and Stuart Levine, both convicted of wrongdoing in the Blagojevich probe, be made available for questioning by the former governor’s attorneys because both might be “crucial witnesses for the prosecution” at the retrial.”

Kenneth J Connor v Mutual Bank lawsuit update, Tony and Rita Rezko loan, Obama land sale, Whistleblower case open

Kenneth J Connor v Mutual Bank lawsuit update, Tony and Rita Rezko loan, Obama land sale, Whistleblower case open

“Why did Mutual Bank fire whistleblower Kenneth J Connor after he challenged the appraisal on the land purchased by Rita Rezko, just prior to the land sale to Obama?”…Citizen Wells

I spoke to Kenneth J. Connor this afternoon to confirm that he is trying to keep his case alive of retaliatory discharge from Mutual Bank. That is all I can disclose.

From the Cook County records:

“Activity Date: 2/7/2011 Participant: CONNER KENNETH J
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FILED
   Attorney:  PRO SE
 

Activity Date: 2/7/2011 Participant: CONNER KENNETH J
MOTION TO REINSTATE CASE FILED
  Court Fee:  60.00
 Attorney:  PRO SE
 

Activity Date: 2/7/2011 Participant: CONNER KENNETH J
NOTICE OF MOTION FILED
   Attorney:  PRO SE
 

Activity Date: 2/7/2011 Participant: CONNER KENNETH J
MOTION SPINDLED
  Date:  3/10/2011
Court Time:  0900
 Attorney:  PRO SE”

In Cook County “spindle” means to file a motion.

Reprinted from Citizen Wells May 9, 2010.

“Here is a small but important exerpt from the Blagojevich defense motion to subpoena  Barack Obama for the Blagojevich trial, set to begin June 3, 2010.

“22. However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and administration, which the public official denies having had.”10

10 The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama. See, “Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake”, Dave McKinney, Chris Fusco, and Mark Brown, Chicago Sun Times, November 5, 2006. Senator Barack Obama was asked: “Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever discuss casino matters with you?” Senator Obama answered: “No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business interest. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony
Rezko were interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation.” Obama’s involvement with Tony Rezko and this legislation coincides with the three paragraph summary the government has provided to the defense referenced above.”

Read more:

http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/docs/obama-subpoena.html#document/p3/a11

The following is from a Chicago SunTimes article dated November 5, 2006. It contains the usual Obama lies and misrepresentations.

“Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake”

“U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko in a deal that enlarged the senator’s yard.
“I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it,” Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an exclusive and revealing question-and-answer exchange about the transaction.
In June 2005, Obama and Rezko purchased adjoining parcels in Kenwood. The state’s junior senator paid $1.65 million for a Georgian revival mansion, while Rezko paid $625,000 for the adjacent, undeveloped lot. Both closed on their properties on the same day.”

“The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves from him.
In the Sun-Times interview, Obama acknowledged approaching Rezko about the two properties being up for sale and that Rezko developed an immediate interest. Obama did not explain why he reached out to Rezko given the developer’s growing problems.
Last month, Rezko was indicted for his role in an alleged pay-to-play scheme designed to fatten Gov. Blagojevich’s political fund. Rezko also was accused of bilking a creditor.”

“”It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor,” the senator said.
The land deal came up in a court hearing Friday that delved into Rezko’s finances. Obama said he has not been approached by federal prosecutors about the transaction nor has plans to go to them about it.
Obama and Rezko have been friends since 1990, and Obama said the Wilmette businessman raised as much as $60,000 for him during his political career. After Rezko’s indictment, Obama donated $11,500 to charity–a total that represents what Rezko contributed to the senator’s federal campaign fund.
After the controversy surfaced on Wednesday, the Sun-Times presented Obama’s office with a lengthy set of questions about the land deal, Obama’s relationship with Rezko and the story’s impact on a potential 2008 bid for the White House.”

“Q: Senator, when did you first meet Tony Rezko? How did you become friends? How often would you meet with him, and when did you last speak with him?

A: I have probably had lunch with Rezko once or twice a year and our spouses may have gotten together on two to four occasions in the time that I have known him. I last spoke with Tony Rezko more than six months ago.”

“Q: Did you approach Rezko or his wife about the property, or did they approach you?
A: To the best of my recollection, I told him about the property, and he developed an interest, knowing both the location and, as I recall, the developer who had previously purchased it.”

“Q: How do you explain the fact your family purchased your home the same day as Rita Rezko bought the property adjacent to yours? Was this a coordinated purchase?

A: The sellers required the closing of both properties at the same time. As they were moving out of town, they wished to conclude the sale of both properties simultaneously. The lot was purchased first; with the purchase of the house on the adjacent lot, the closings could proceed and did, on the same day, pursuant to the condition set by the sellers.”

“Q: Why is it that you were able to buy your parcel for $300,000 less than the asking price, and Rita Rezko paid full price? Who negotiated this end of the deal? Did whoever negotiated it have any contact with Rita and Tony Rezko or their Realtor or lawyer?

A: Our agent negotiated only with the seller’s agent. As we understood it, the house had been listed for some time, for months, and our offer was one of two and, as we understood it, it was the best offer. The original listed price was too high for the market at the time, and we understood that the sellers, who were anxious to move, were prepared to sell the house for what they paid for it, which is what they did.
We were not involved in the Rezko negotiation of the price for the adjacent lot. It was our understanding that the owners had received, from another buyer, an offer for $625,000 and that therefore the Rezkos could not have offered or purchased that lot for less.”

“Q: Does it display a lack of judgment on your part to be engaging in real estate deals with Tony Rezko at a point his connections to state government had been reported to be under federal investigation?

A: I’ve always held myself to the highest ethical standards. During the ten years I have been in public office, I believe I have met those standards and I know that is what people expect of me. I have also understood the importance of appearances.
With respect to the purchase of my home, I am confident that everything was handled ethically and above board.
But I regret that while I tried to pay close attention to the specific requirements of ethical conduct, I misgauged the appearance presented by my purchase of the additional land from Mr. Rezko. It was simply not good enough that I paid above the appraised value for the strip of land that he sold me. It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor. For that reason, I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it.”

“Q: Why did you not publicly disclose the transaction after Rezko got indicted?

A: At the time, it didn’t strike me as relevant. I did however donate campaign contributions from Rezko to charity.”

“Q: Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever discuss casino matters with you?

A: No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business interests. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony Rezko were interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation. (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/srollcalls91/pdf/910SB1017_05251999_001000C.PDF)”

“Q: Did Rezko ever discuss with you his dealings with Stuart Levine, Christopher Kelly or William Cellini or the role he was playing in shaping Gov. Blagojevich’s administration?

A: No.”

“Q: Did Rezko have an appraisal performed for the 10-foot strip?

A: I had an appraisal conducted by Howard B. Richter & Associates on November 21, 2005.”

“Q: Was there a negotiation? Did he have an asking price, or did he just say, whatever you think is fair?

A: I proposed to pay on the basis of proportionality. Since the strip composed one-sixth of the entire lot, I would pay one-sixth of the purchase price of the lot. I offered this to Mr. Rezko and he accepted it.”

“Q: How many fundraisers has Mr. Rezko hosted for you? Were these all in his home? How much would you estimate he has raised for your campaigns?

A: He hosted one event at his home in 2003 for my U.S. Senate campaign. He participated as a member of a host committee for several other events. My best estimate was that he raised somewhere between $50,000 and $60,000.”

Read more:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article

Kenneth J Conner whistleblower lawsuit

Obama, Rezko real estate deal, rest of the story

Many have forgotten about the lawsuit initiated by Kenneth J Conner on October 16, 2008. I have not. Conner is the whistleblower who was fired from Mutual Bank for raising questions about the Rezko real estate transactions. His lawsuit is still alive. Mutual Bank has gone under but the FDIC is still listed as a defendant.

Kenneth J Conner worked for Mutual bank from August 3, 2000 until he was dismissed October 23, 2007. Conner is a graduate of Benedictine University with a Bachelor of Business Administration in Management degree with the honor of “Management Major of the Year” in May, 1999. Conner later earned a Master’s Degree in Finance from Benedictine University in May , 2005.

Here are some interesting exerpts.

“9.  In June, 2005, Mutual Bank President and CEO Amrish Mahajan and other Mutual Bank olfficers approved a loan to Rita Malki Rezko (Rita Rezko) which was guaranteed by Antonin Rezko so that Rita Rezko could purchase a 9,090 square foot vacant parcel of real estate at 5050 S. Greenwood Avenue, Chicago. As part of the Mutual Bank loan underwriting process, Mutual Bank obtained a real estate appraisal from Adams Valuation Corporation (Adams Appraisal) which purported to provide an opinion of value of the subject 5050 S. Greenwood real estate (the collateral for the Rezko loan) at $ 68.76 per square foot. A copy of the Adams Appraisal is attached as Exhibit C. In June, 2005, Rita Rezko closed on the purchase of the 5050 S. Greenwood property at a purchase price of $ 625,000.00 along with the loan from Mutual Bank in the amount of $ 500,000.00 with Mutual bank obtaining a first mortgage lien position on the Greenwood vacant parcel.”

“10.  On or about January 4, 2006, Rita Rezko entered into an agreement with Senator Barack and Michelle Obama (Obamas) to sell a ten-foot strip of the 5050 S. Greenwood property to the Obamas. A copy of the Obama/Rita Rezko contract is attached as Exhibit D. As a result of that transaction, the Rezkos requested that Mutual Bank release it’s first collateral position to the ten-foot strip parcel transferred to the Obamas. In that same general time frame, Richard Barth, Mutual Bank Senior VP of construction lending and James Murphy, Mutual Bank Senior VP Internal Auditor/Risk Manager, requested that Conner perform an appraisal review of the Adams Appraisal attached hereto as Exhibit C.”

“11.  In late 2005 or early 2006, Conner performed an appraisal review of the Adams Appraisal (Exhibit C) per the directive of Richard Barth and James Murphy. Conner prepared a written Appraisal Review report (ARR) opining that the Adams Appraisal overvalued the Greenwood lot by a minimum of $ 125,000.00 and that a reasonable and fair valuation for Mutual Banks’s underwriting purposes should be no greater than $ 500,000.00 for the entire 5050 S. Greenwood parcel as originally purchased by Rita Rezko. In that same general time frame an appraisal was performed for the 5050 S. Greenwood property by Howard B. Richter, MAI which valued the 5050 S. Greenwood property at $ 54.00 per square foot but then discounted the ten-foot strip being transferred by Rita Rezko to the Obamas by fifty percent, as the ten-foot strip was unbuildable standing alone…The valuation by the Richter Appraisal for the 5050 S. Greenwood lot was substantially to Conner’s ARR valuation.”

“12.  Conner notified Richard Barth and James Murphy orally of his ARR findings and Conner’s ARR was filed in the “Rezko 5050 Greenwood” loan file at Mutual Bank.”

“13.  In addition to Conner’s ARR stating that the Adams Appraisal overvalued the 5050 S. Greenwood property, Conner had reported on other occasions that Adams Valuation Corporation had overvalued real estate subject to Mutual Bank loan underwriting valuation.”

“14.  On or about October 19, 2006, Mutual Bank received a Grand Jury Subpoena (GJS) requiring Mutual Bank to produce the Rezko 5050 Greenwood loan file, as well as a Rita Rezko Riverside District Development LLC checking account and loan file. Electronic mail (email) communications about the subpoena were circulated to Mutual Bank officers and attorneys, including Amrish Mahajan, James Murphy and Conner. A copy of an October 19, 2006 email string pertaining to the Rezko GJS is attached as Exhibit F. On information and belief, Conner’s ARR was removed from the Rezko 5050 Greenwood loan file prior to the submission of that file pursuant to the GJS, and in it’s place Mutual bank submitted an appraisal checklist which was purportedly dated “06/15/05″ from Senior VP James P. Murphy (Murphy Checklist). A copy of the Murphy Checklist is attached as Exhibit G.”

“16.  In 2007, Conner observed that his ARR of the 5050 S. Greenwood property was not in the Rezko 5050 Greenwood loan file and in it’s place was the Murphy Checklist purportedly dated “06/15/2005.”…On June 18, 2007, Conner sent an email to James Murphy which provides, in part, “I spent time trying to track down work of mine that should be in a particular high profile loan file, though it is not–having been replaced by a checklist.””

“17.  In October, 2007, Conner had various communications with Mutual Bank’s Human Resources Department representative, Lana Schlabach. In an email communication of October 15, 2007, Conner directly referenced “Resentment over my mentioned discovery of the removal/replacement of an appraisal review that I conducted. That appraisal review contained substantial observations and suggestions. The transaction and parties involved were high profile in the media.I am under the impression that the FBI has since looked at the file.””

“18.  On October 23, 2007, eight days after Conner’s October 15, 2007 email to Schlabach attached as Exhibit J, Mutual Bank terminated Conner’s employment for pretextual reasons.”

Kenneth J Conner lawsuit:

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/mutualbanksuit.pdf

Lawsuit status:

https://w3.courtlink.lexisnexis.com/cookcounty/Finddock.asp?DocketKey=CAAI0L0ABBEHA0LD

I will not let the mainstream media ignore or downplay these stories.

I trust you will help in this endeavor.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/blagojevich-trial-obama-and-rezko-blagojevich-defense-subpoena-2006-chicago-suntimes-article-obama-lies-obama-rezko-ties-kenneth-j-conner-whistleblower-lawsuit/

Blagojevich trial juror names secret, Judge James Zagel, Questionnaires not released

Blagojevich trial juror names secret, Judge James Zagel, Questionnaires not released

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

From the Chicago Tribune February 8, 2011.

“The federal judge presiding over the retrial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich ruled today that he intends to keep the names of jurors secret until after the verdict and won’t publicly release the written questionnaires they fill out.

U.S. District Judge James Zagel said he intends to destroy the questionnaires to “help ensure full candor of responses.” He took the same action after the first trial last year.

The judge also said he would identify jurors by number during the trial and only release their names eight hours after the verdict is returned. He released the names moments after the verdict was announced last time.

Zagel wasn’t specific about why he made the change, writing, “Incidents occurring after juror names were released following the first trial counsels the wisdom of providing a short delay in releasing jurors’ names, even after the verdict is returned.””

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-judge-blagojevich-jurors-to-remain-secret-20110208,0,2705694.story

Blagojevich claims Emanuel John Harris conversation tape missing, Rod Blagojevich attorneys file pretrial motion

Blagojevich claims Emanuel John Harris conversation tape missing, Rod Blagojevich attorneys file pretrial motion

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

From the Chicago Tribune February 7, 2011.

“Attorneys for Rod Blagojevich filed a pretrial motion Tuesday seeking what they claimed was missing evidence in the impeached Illinois governor’s corruption trial, including records of a phone call between a Blagojevich aide and then White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

The motion claims the telephone conversation took place just a day before Blagojevich’s December 2008 arrest on charges that include allegations he sought to sell or trade the appointment to President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat for personal gain. The motion says details of that conversation could bolster a defense contention that Emanuel, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing, was willing to help with a political deal in which Blagojevich would have named Illinois’ attorney general to the seat.

But the call between Emanuel and then Blagojevich chief of staff John Harris is not among hundreds of transcripts of secret FBI wiretaps recorded before Blagojevich’s arrest. The defense motion points only to circumstantial evidence that it even happened, including a reference in a White House transition-team report from after the arrest that said Emanuel had “about four” conversations with Harris. The defense was given records of only three conversations, according to the motion.

“The fourth and final phone call is the call that is mysteriously missing,” it adds. “Piecing together multiple documents after the first trial, Blagojevich uncovered the fact that the December 8th phone call … took place.”

A message seeking comment left on a voicemail overnight at the U.S. attorney’s office wasn’t immediately returned.

Blagojevich faces 23 charges at his April retrial, after jurors at his first trial last year agreed only on one of 24 counts and convicted him of lying to the FBI. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys have been ordered to file all pretrial motions by next week.

The defense’s latest filing comes just two weeks before Chicago’s mayoral election. Emanuel has a considerable fundraising advantage and leads in polls in the race to replace retiring Mayor Richard Daley.

Emanuel has said little about the Blagojevich case publicly, often citing the ongoing legal proceedings for not commenting in detail. The White House report released in 2008 by the then president-elect’s office concluded neither Emanuel nor anyone else on Obama’s staff had had any “inappropriate discussions” with Blagojevich or his aides.

It found that Emanuel had had “one or two telephone calls” with Blagojevich and “about four” with Harris, who testified for the government at Blagojevich’s first trial.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-blagojevichtrial-,0,2339978.story

Here is a wiretap from several weeks before the alleged conversation from the Blagojevich trial.

Obama history best predictor, There are no surprises, Obama birth certificate, Muslim influences, Corruption ties, Radical associations

Obama history best predictor, There are no surprises, Obama birth certificate, Muslim influences, Corruption ties, Radical associations

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

“Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour; a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason. As a long and violent abuse of power, is generally the Means of calling the right of it in question”
“The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is capable of reflection. Without law, without government, without any other mode of power than what is founded on, and granted by, courtesy. Held together by an unexampled occurrence of sentiment, which is nevertheless subject to change, and which every secret enemy is endeavoring to dissolve. Our present condition is, Legislation without law; wisdom without a plan; a constitution without a name; and, what is strangely astonishing, perfect independence contending for dependence. The instance is without a precedent, the case never existed before, and who can tell what may be the event? The property of no man is secure in the present un-braced system of things. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion presents. Nothing is criminal; there is no such thing as treason, wherefore, every one thinks himself at liberty to act as he pleases.”…Thomas Paine, “Common Sense”

 Common Sense Too

Is anyone who has examined the history of Barack Obama surprised at the chain of events that have played out over the past years? No. Debates, discussions and analyses have continued on about the economy, jobs, foreign policy and even the religion of Obama, when all one has to do is look at Obama’s past. He has kept hidden much of his past but even that is a solid indicator of his intentions and why his past is secret.

Let’s examine one of the simple aspects of Obama, his religion. One cannot look into his heart directly, but regardless of one’s profession, one’s acts are the window to the soul. Obama’s past associations clearly reveal a strong Muslim influence as well as radical theologies such as those espoused by Jeremiah Wright. Ideas that certainly are not Christian and in many cases are anti semitic. So why would anyone be surprised about the turmoil in Egypt?

The economy. Why would anyone paying attention be surprised about the economy and jobless rate. Obama has been enmeshed in socialism and redistribution of wealth for many years. Obama and his liberal, socialist buddies have been spending like drunken sailors with no regard for the impact on hard working Americans. Obama’s involvement with and support from ACORN should have been warning enough.

Now to the core of the problem. It appears that many politicians do not want to touch the Obama eligibility issues. This is not a political issue, it is a constitutional issue. The impression is that the problem will go away with the next presidential cycle. That Obama will be removed then. They are wrong.

The same forces and thought processes that drove Obama to hide his past and associate with Anti American elements still guide him. Obama eligibility issues, his extreme efforts to hide his birth certificate and college records are symptomatic of deeper problems. His utter disregard for the US Constitution is the larger problem and is why Obama must resign or be arrested. It is also why Congress and the courts must take this out of the political realm and into the sanctum of the rule of law. There is no other duty and priority higher than this.

Congressman Paul Broun, Obama eligibility, US Constitution, Broun response, Broun Paul Boehner no more status quo

Congressman Paul Broun, Obama eligibility, US Constitution, Broun response, Broun Paul Boehner no more status quo

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

We have come to  expect anti American unconstitutional positions from the Democrats. The following actions and attitudes from Republicans are unacceptable.

When asked about challenging Obama’s eligibility during the certification of Electoral College votes in 2009.

“If I did that, I would be laughed out of Congress.”…Ron Paul, December 2008

The day of the reading of the US Constitution in the House of Representatives, Speaker Boehner allowed “citizen” to be used interchangeably with “natural born citizen.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner was interviewed by Brian Williams last friday after the reading of the US Constitution in the House Chambers and the shout of “Except Obama, except Obama” when the Natural Born Citizen clause was read. Williams continues the Orwellian tradition of the mainstream media of obfuscating the Obama eligibility issues by using citizen instead of Natural Born Citizen. Boehner, as Speaker of the House, should know better and should have corrected Williams. Otherwise, we have just another Pelosi look alike.

From The Post & Email February 2, 2011.

“I sent the following email to my U.S. congressman, Rep. Paul Broun:
Dear Rep. Broun,
I saw your interview following the SOTU with CBS.
I think it is imperative that just ONE elected Representative in D.C. stand up for the Constitution. I am PRAYING you are that hero. Barack claims that his father is Barack Sr., a British/Kenyan subject/citizen. It makes no difference where he was born, by our Constitution, he is not eligible as a dual citizen. He has admitted his dual citizenship on his own website, and in his own writings.”

“Rep. Broun’s response:
Thank you for recently contacting me with your kind remarks regarding the strong stances I have taken in Congress. Your words were very encouraging, and I am excited to hear that you are engaged in the political process.
In these tough times we must all work together to make America better for future generations. For my part, I will continue to fight for life, fiscal responsibility, and transparency in government. I hope that you will join this fight and encourage your friends and family to be as engaged as you are.”

Read more:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/02/constituent-to-u-s-congressman-be-a-hero/

The response from Congressman Paul Broun’s office appears to be a form letter, standard response. We need to contact Paul Broun and educate him. Once again, when you are discussing Obama’s eligibility issues with congressmen or those around you, keep it simple. While I agree that Obama is not a natural born citizen due to his father being British/Kenyan, it is subject to debate. Ask the non debatable question first.

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?

Next mention that the Governor of Hawaii, Neil Abercrombie, could find no birth certificate for Obama.

Then inform them that Tim Adams, who worked in a Hawaii elections office in 2008, has signed an affidavit stating that there was no birth certificate in Hawaii for Obama in 2008.

If they mention the COLB, inform them it is a document that refers to another document and is not proof of birth in Hawaii.

Keep it simple and non debatable.

FL judge, Health Care Bill Unconstitutional, Judge Roger Vinson, Requires Americans to obtain commercial insurance

FL judge, Health Care Bill Unconstitutional,  Judge Roger Vinson, Requires Americans to obtain commercial insurance

From the New York Times January 31, 2011.

“Like a Virginia judge in December, Judge Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., said he would allow the law to remain in effect while the Obama administration appeals his ruling, a process that could take two years. But unlike his Virginia counterpart, Judge Vinson ruled that the entire health care act should fall if the appellate courts join him in invalidating the insurance requirement.

“The Act, like a defectively designed watch, needs to be redesigned and reconstructed by the watchmaker,” Judge Vinson wrote.

In a 78-page opinion, Judge Vinson held that the insurance requirement exceeds the regulatory powers granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Judge Vinson wrote that the provision could not be rescued by an associated clause in Article I that gives Congress broad authority to make laws “necessary and proper” to carrying out its designated responsibilities.

“If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain,” Judge Vinson wrote.

In a silver lining for the Obama administration, the judge rejected a second claim that the new law violates state sovereignty by requiring states to pay for a fractional share of a Medicaid expansion that is scheduled for 2014.

Judge Vinson, the first judge to address that question, dismissed the contention that states were being illegally commandeered by the federal government. He said they always have the option, however impractical, to withdraw from Medicaid, a joint state and federal insurance program for those with low-incomes.

The judge’s ruling came in the most prominent of more than 20 legal challenges to some aspect of the sweeping health law, which was enacted last year by a Democratic Congress and signed by President Obama in March.

The plaintiffs include governors and attorneys general from 26 states, all but one Republican, as well as the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small companies. Officials from six states joined the lawsuit this month after shifts in party control brought by last November’s elections.

The ruling by Judge Vinson, a senior judge who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, solidified the divide in the health litigation among judges named by Republicans and those named by Democrats.

Last month, Judge Henry E. Hudson of Federal District Court in Richmond, Va., who was appointed by President George W. Bush, became the first to invalidate the insurance mandate. Two other federal judges named by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, have upheld the law.”

Read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/us/01ruling.html

Obama not president per Constitution, Constitution 101, Natural born citizen requirement trumps Electoral College

 Obama not president per Constitution, Constitution 101, Natural born citizen requirement trumps Electoral College

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

US President eligibility requirements 

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

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

Twelfth Amendment – Election of President

“then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.”

Twentieth Amendment

“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.”

It is clear from the language above, if you have reading comprehension skills of a fifth grader and an IQ greater than a squirrel, that one must be a natural born citizen to be president, irrespective of Electoral College votes, certification or swearing in ceremonies. It is sad that so many in Congress have these deficiencies.

Many of the states have statutes layered beneath the US Constitution clarifying duties and eligibility to run for office.

North Carolina

Elections and Election Laws.

§ 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election. If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:

Position

President 

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

§ 163-122.  Unaffiliated candidates nominated by petition.

 “(d)       When any person files a petition with a board of elections under this section, the board of elections shall, immediately upon receipt of the petition, inspect the registration records of the county and cancel the petition of any person who does not meet the constitutional or statutory qualifications for the office, including residency.”

§ 163-123.  Declaration of intent and petitions for write-in candidates in partisan elections.

“(f1)     When any person files a petition with a board of elections under this section, the board of elections shall, immediately upon receipt of the petition, inspect the registration records of the county and cancel the petition of any person who does not meet the constitutional or statutory qualifications for the office, including residency.”

§ 163-127.2.  When and how a challenge to a candidate may be made.

“(c)       If Defect Discovered After Deadline, Protest Available. – If a challenger discovers one or more grounds for challenging a candidate after the deadline in subsection (a) of this section, the grounds may be the basis for a protest under G.S. 163-182.9. (2006-155, s. 1.)”
§ 163-127.5.  Burden of proof.

(a)       The burden of proof shall be upon the candidate, who must show by a preponderance of the evidence of the record as a whole that he or she is qualified to be a candidate for the office.”

Article 5.

Precinct Election Officials.

§ 163-41.  Precinct chief judges and judges of election; appointment; terms of office; qualifications; vacancies; oaths of office.
“As soon as practicable, following their training as prescribed in G.S. 163-82.24, each chief judge and judge of election shall take and subscribe the following oath of office to be administered by an officer authorized to administer oaths and file it with the county board of elections:

“I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States; that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of North Carolina, and to the constitutional powers and authorities which are or may be established for the government thereof; that I will endeavor to support, maintain and defend the Constitution of said State not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States; that I will administer the duties of my office as chief judge of (judge of election in) ______precinct, __________County, without fear or favor; that I will not in any manner request or seek to persuade or induce any voter to vote for or against any particular candidate or proposition; and that I will not keep or make any memorandum of anything occurring within a voting booth, unless I am called upon to testify in a judicial proceeding for a violation of the election laws of this State; so help me, God.””

Kentucky

“In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and with sections 7-11 of Title III of the
United States Code”

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Manner of voting

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

US Constitution

Article. II.

Section. 1.
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

It is clear that NC and KY require that a presidential candidate be a natural born citizen in compliance with the US Constitution. Congratulations to Kentucky for their explicit language.

Constitution 101, State election laws, US Constitution rules, State election officials and electors legal duties

Constitution 101, State election laws, US Constitution rules, State election officials and electors legal duties

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

In men’s minds, as in nature, once a seed is planted, it many take many months to germinate, but the seed must be planted.

I was searching through Citizen Wells articles from 2008 on election laws and natural born citizen references when I came across this:

“Constitution 101 classes will begin soon.
State officers, election officials, judges and, of course,
US Supreme Court Justices will be invited. Stay tuned for a
class near you. I suppose Washington DC should be first.”

From Citizen Wells December 17, 2008.

The ultimate objective of a presidential election to inaugurate a
constitutionally qualified president that as closely as possible
reflects the will of the people.
The states have been given the power and the duty to control presidential
elections by the US Constitution.

The pervasive attitudes of the state officers and election officials is
that they, incorrectly, have no power to qualify presidential candidates
and/or they depend on political parties to vet the candidates.

The political parties have evolved and changed since the creation of the
US Consitution and are given no powers. However, members of the parties,
as US Citizens have an implied duty to uphold the Constitution and party
officers typically have taken oaths as elected officials to uphold the
US Constitution.

Clearly, the intent of the US Constitution and Federal Election Law is
for an eligible candidate to move through this election process to allow
for a constitutionally valid vote by Electors.

All officers and election officials, most judges and most Electoral
College Electors were informed prior to the general election and
particularly prior to the Electors meeting and voting, of compelling
evidence that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president. Despite
these warnings, Electors met and voted on the basis of party loyalty or
perceived directives from the states. State or party policies dictating
how an Elector votes violate the spirit and letter of constitutional
and federal law.

Even though the manner of Electoral College voting in clearly defined by
the US Constitution and Federal Election Law, some states have included
explicit references to law in their Certificates of Voters that are
signed by Electors and state officers. Below are certificates from 2004.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/2004_certificates/

Alabama

“pursuant to the Constitution and the laws of the United States
and this state, certify”

Alaska

“by authority of law vested in us”

Arizona

“by authority of law in us vested”

Arkansas

“as provided by law”

California

“pursuant to the Constitution and the laws of the United States
and the state of california, do hereby certify”

Connecticut

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States
and in the manner provided by the laws of the state of Connecticut”

Hawaii

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Idaho

“having met agreeably to the provisions of law”

Illinois

“as provided by law”

Indiana

“as required by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States”

Iowa

“in accordance with law”

Kansas

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Kentucky

“In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and with sections 7-11 of Title III of the
United States Code”

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Manner of voting

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

US Constitution

Article. II.

Section. 1.
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
Minnesota

“In testimony whereof, and as required by the Twelth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States we have hereunto set
our hands”

Montana

“agreeable to the provisions of law”

Nevada

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

New Jersey

“proceeded to perform the duties required of us by the Constitution
and laws of the United States.”

North Carolina

“by authority of law in us vested”

Pennsylvania

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Rhode Island

“in pursuance of law”

South Carolina

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Tennessee

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Utah

“in pursuance of the statutes of the United States and of the statutes
of the State of Utah”

Virginia

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Washington

“pursuant to the provisions of federal and state law”

Conclusion

  • The US Constitution is clear on presidential eligibility and how
    Electoral Colleges Electors are to vote.
  • Ignorance is no excuse. Everyone involved was forewarned. Voting
    party line over law will not be tolerated.
  • Electors and state officers have signed or will sign Certificates of Voters
    for the 2008 Election. As you can see from the above, they will
    certify that they are aware of the law and are abiding by the law.
  • Kentucky gets the award for the most constitutionally clear wording
    and should be applauded for doing so.
  • There are consequences for false attesting.
  • One of the consequences is that the votes of many Electors are now
    null and void.
  • Impeachment, recall, firing, criminal charges forthcoming?

Constitution 101 classes will begin soon.

State officers, election officials, judges and, of course,
US Supreme Court Justices will be invited. Stay tuned for a
class near you. I suppose Washington DC should be first.

Tony Rezko sentencing October 21, 2011, Blagojevich trial witness?, Rezko Blagojevich Obama board rigging

Tony Rezko sentencing October 21, 2011, Blagojevich trial witness?, Rezko Blagojevich Obama board rigging

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

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

From the Chicago Tribune January 28, 2011.

“A federal judge has set a new sentencing date for a convicted influence peddler and one-time fundraiser for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Judge Amy St. Eve told attorneys at a hearing Friday that she’ll sentence Tony Rezko on Oct. 21.

Rezko’s attorneys and prosecutors had asked the judge earlier to delay Rezko’s sentencing to allow for the possibility he could testify at two upcoming trials, including Blagojevich’s corruption retrial in April.

At Friday’s hearing, the defense also argued in favor of a new trial for Rezko based on a U.S. Supreme Court ruling scaling back so-called honest services laws.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/sns-ap-il–blagojevichtrial-rezko,0,1617012.story

“Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008, Rezko Obama ties deflected to Blagojevich”

Blagojevich throws Obama under bus, Blagojevich wiretap November 7, 2008