Georgia and Michigan received “F” in 2012 on anti corruption measures, GA SOS Brian Kemp, 650+ govt employees received gifts from vendors in 2007 – 2008
“we did have a problem with one of the vote scanners.”…Tom Rees, chairman of Floyd County’s Board of Elections
“We discovered that these systems are subject to different types of unauthorized manipulation and potential fraud,” “There is a reason that Texas rejected it,”...Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton
”They’ve got to be outcome determinative, but I will tell you, the Lt. Gov. [Geoff Duncan] in Georgia, the Secretary of State in Georgia [Brad Raffensperger] in Georgia, they’re in for quite a shock on Monday and Tuesday about how poorly they run and they ran – there’s going to be a proof – of how poorly run they ran the elections in one of their major counties,”…Attorney Jordan Sekulow
From Citizen Wells March 19, 2012.
“We already knew that Georgia is a corrupt state. We learned this during the recent handling of the Obama ballot challenges in GA by the behaviour of the Secretary of State, other election officials and the GA courts. We now have independent confirmation from a recent study of state ethics, open records and disclosure laws.
From State Integrity Investigation.
“The tales are sadly familiar to even the most casual observer of state politics.
In Georgia, more than 650 government employees accepted gifts from vendors doing business with the state in 2007 and 2008, clearly violating state ethics law. The last time the state issued a penalty on a vendor was 1999.”
“The stories go on and on. Open records laws with hundreds of exemptions. Crucial budgeting decisions made behind closed doors by a handful of power brokers. “Citizen” lawmakers voting on bills that would benefit them directly. Scores of legislators turning into lobbyists seemingly overnight. Disclosure laws without much disclosure. Ethics panels that haven’t met in years.
State officials make lofty promises when it comes to ethics in government. They tout the transparency of legislative processes, accessibility of records, and the openness of public meetings. But these efforts often fall short of providing any real transparency or legitimate hope of rooting out corruption.
That’s the depressing bottom line that emerges from the State Integrity Investigation, a first-of-its-kind, data-driven assessment of transparency, accountability and anti-corruption mechanisms in all 50 states. Not a single state — not one — earned an A grade from the months-long probe. Only five states earned a B grade: New Jersey, Connecticut, Washington, California, and Nebraska. Nineteen states got C’s and 18 received D’s. Eight states earned failing grades of 59 or below from the project, which is a collaboration of the Center for Public Integrity, Global Integrity, and Public Radio International.
The F’s went to Michigan, North Dakota, South Carolina, Maine, Virginia, Wyoming, South Dakota, and Georgia.
What’s behind the dismal grades? Across the board, state ethics, open records and disclosure laws lack one key feature: teeth.
“It’s a terrible problem,” said Tim Potts, executive director of the nonprofit advocacy group Democracy Rising PA, which works to inspire citizen trust in government. “A good law isn’t worth anything if it’s not enforced.””
“Using a combination of on-the-ground investigative reporting and original data collection and analysis, the State Integrity Index researched 330 “Integrity Indicators” across 14 categories of state government: public access to information, political financing, executive accountability, legislative accountability, judicial accountability, state budget processes, civil service management, procurement, internal auditing, lobbying disclosure, pension fund management, ethics enforcement, insurance commissions, and redistricting.
Indicators assess what laws, if any, are on the books (“in law” indicator) and whether the laws are effective in practice (“in practice” indicators). In many states, the disconnect between scores on a state’s law and scores in practice suggest a serious “enforcement gap.”
In other words, the laws are there, just not always followed.”
“While there are many examples that highlight a lack of resources, others assert that political factors may also be at play.
Georgia’s legislature slashed the ethics commission’s budget, eliminating all investigative positions and eventually forcing out its two top staffers. The former executive director claimed the funding cuts came with ulterior motives; at the time, the agency was pursuing an investigation against Governor Nathan Deal for improper use of campaign funds and exceeding campaign finance limits. Deal said the cuts were in line with what happened to other agencies. The state’s inspector general followed with an investigation, but found no evidence to support the claim of the commission’s former executive director.
Political loyalties can be a potential problem, especially since many ethics agencies are staffed by gubernatorial or legislative appointments.”
“For state judges, it’s a similar situation. Nearly all states have rules, codes, or regulations outlining recusal requirements, but again they leave it up to the judges to decide their own impartiality.
“There’s a longstanding principal that no judge should be the judge in his or her own case,” said Charlie Hall, director of communications for Justice at Stake, a national organization that promotes a fair and impartial court system. “There’s a strong sense by many that if one party asks a judge to step aside, there’s something not satisfying by the judge saying, ‘I think I can be impartial. I can make the decision.’”
Nine states don’t require judges to disclose outside assets, making it almost impossible to determine if a judge has a conflict at all. And in states where judges run for election, the potential for conflicts to arise is even greater.
“Special interests have discovered judicial elections and the money is pouring in,” Hall said.
Spending on judicial elections more than doubled in the past 20 years. From 2000 to 2009, special interests funneled about $206 million into court elections, up from about $83 million in the previous decade.””
Blagojevich commutation proposed Dec 2016, President Trump: release FBI wiretaps, Blagojevich prosecution protected Obama with closer Rezko corruption ties
Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells
“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich
“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011
Only 2 percent of the wiretaps of Rod Blagojevich were released.
The interview of Barack Obama was kept under seal.
Rod Blagojevich was the presumptive presidential candidate in early 2006. By the end of the year it was Obama.
The prosecution of Blagojevich was designed to protect Obama.
Obama had to win in 2008 and Hillary in 2016 for Obama to avoid prosecution.
This is a key reason they have been so desperate to defeat Trump.
From Citizen Wells December 28, 2016.
I sincerely hope that Rod Blagojevich does not die of another “mysterious death” (as so many involved with the Clintons and Obama have) before he can reveal the details of Obama’s involvement in Chicago and Illinois corruption.
There is much to tell.
We are left with these questions.
Will Obama grant Blagojevich the commutation he requested?
If not, will Trump grant the commutation with the stipulation that he rat on Obama?
If not, will Blagojevich squeal in prison?
From the AP December 25, 2016.
“One of the last chances for former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to win early release from federal prison rests on a pending decision by the man whose Senate seat Blagojevich was convicted of trying to sell – President Barack Obama.
Blagojevich, 60, is in the fourth year of a 14-year prison term. He recently submitted a request to have his sentence on wide-ranging corruption convictions commuted, the U.S. Department of Justice has confirmed.
Obama has rarely mentioned his fellow Chicago Democrat since Blagojevich’s December 2008 arrest, a month after Obama won the presidency, so it’s hard to gauge if he’d give Blagojevich’s request for a reduced sentence serious thought.
A look at the commutation process and factors that could influence a decision:
WHAT IT IS
A commutation is a reduction of a sentence, while pardons amount to forgiveness of a crime that also removes restrictions on rights to run for office and vote. In federal cases, only presidents have the power to reduce a sentence.
If Obama doesn’t get around to deciding on Blagojevich’s application before his last day in office, he would leave it for someone else with a tie to the ex-governor to decide: President-elect Donald Trump.
Blagojevich was on Trump’s “Celebrity Apprentice” TV show in 2010. While Trump eventually “fired” Blagojevich as a contestant, he praised Blagojevich for how he fought his criminal case, telling him, “You have a hell of a lot of guts.”
Among the factors Obama can consider is whether Blagojevich’s punishment was disproportionate to the crime. His 14-year prison term was the longest for an Illinois politician for corruption and his lawyers argue it was too severe.”
“One connection between the politicians – an uncomfortable one for Obama – is that he and Blagojevich once shared the same fundraiser, Tony Rezko. Rezko was convicted in June 2008 of fraud, money laundering and bribery.”
Do you believe that Obama was less guilty than Blagojevich?
Remember, only 2 percent of the wiretaps were released during the Blagojevich trials.
And they were damning for Obama.
From Citizen Wells August 2, 2015.
Blagojevich attorney Len Goodman is requesting that the full court review the appeal that was just ruled on by 3 judges.
How does this fit in with the deal that I am certain was struck with Obama et al?
To protect Obama and keep Blagojevich from talking.
I wrote this on July 19, 2011:
“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”
The prosecution and reporting of Rod Blagojevich has been so watered down that it barely resembles what actually happened.
Why?
To protect Obama.
For those of you blinded by the BS from the mainstream media or not familiar with this case, Blagojevich, not Obama was the presumptive presidential candidate in 2006. Within one year it was Obama.
The Blagojevich Administration came under investigation by late 2003 and Tony Rezko was at the center of much of the corruption.
Stuart Levine carried out the orders of Rezko and Obama was closely tied to both men.
Federal investigators soon knew of Obama’s ties to the corruption but for some reason focused more on Blagojevich and chose to wait until after the 2008 elections to arrest him.
Why?
“this guy is more Tony’d up than I am. …. they got the Chicago media to f…ing make me wear Rezko more. To f…ing dilute it from him.…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008
“BLAGOJEVICH: You know, Axelrod and Obama’s people, you know, clearly turned, you know, got the Chicago media to make Rezko all about me. And hardly about…
HARRIS: Yeah, in other words, they focus their,they focus their attention on you. They couldn’t make it go away so the bes-, next best strategy is deflect it.
BLAGOJEVICH: Right.
HARRIS: This is somewhere where it, it’ll satisfy the, the hunger of the beast, being the media.
BLAGOJEVICH: Right, right.
HARRIS: Yeah, it makes sense. It’s not a stretch. If I’m, if I’m his message advisor, media advisor or whatever, operative, yeah I’m gonna try to feed the beast by giving ‘em something else to eat on.”…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008
Here is some background on the complete story from Citizen Wells March 14, 2011.
“This is the first article in a series about corruption in the US Justice Department and specifically an operation I refer to as “Protecting Obama.” Many events smelled back in 2008, but with the passage of time, the stench is corroborated. Below is the Evidentiary Proffer, a summary and timeline of the bulk of evidence that reveals how Obama was protected in the investigation and prosecution of Tony Rezko, Rod Blagojevich, et al. The time is right to present my case. There are enough well documented events to make a strong case. As I have mentioned recently, I have contacted a prominent congressman about this issue and others and this is a way to get the facts in front of the congressman, his staff and the public. The Proffer will certainly be updated from time to time. I will next present an opening statement and then go on to present the case in more detail. However, anyone who has been paying careful attention or who reads this Proffer, will come to the obvious conclusion presented here of collusion involving the US Justice Department, Patrick Fitzgerald, Barack Obama, and probably Rod Blagojevich and Tony Rezko.
Before reading the Proffer, here is a recap of how important Rezko is to the prosecution of Blagojevich and ultimately indicting Obama.
It is understandable why the Blagojevich defense team does not want Rezko on the stand. Judge Zagel’s comment about Rezko being a bad witness reeks of conspiracy. Convicted felons of all categories are regularly used as witnesses. Stuart Levine, the key witness in the Rezko trial was not only enmeshed in corruption but was a long time drug user.
Here are the approximate number of times that “Rezko” is mentioned in US Justice Department documents.
Even if a strong argument is made against using Rezko as a witness, and good luck with that argument, Stuart Levine was used extensively as a witness in the Rezko trial, and his name was mentioned approx. 146 times in the Blagojevich Criminal Complaint. And remember, Blagojevich’s name was mentioned at least 30 times on one day of the Rezko trial.
U.S. Citizens
V.
U.S. Justice Department,
Barack Hussein Obama
Evidentiary Proffer supporting charge of Collusion in protecting Obama during the course of investigating and prosecuting Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich.
Jan. – Aug. 2003: Obama was Chairman of the IL Senate Health and Human Service Committee. Feb. 20, 2003: Senate Bill 1332 “Illinois Health Facilities Planning Act” filed. Reduced members of IL Health Planning and Facilities Board from 15 to 9.
(Rezko Trial March 13, 2008; 3:09 p.m.)
“Almanaseer was appointed to the planning board in 2003 on Rezko’s recommendation. Prosecutors contend he became part of a five-member voting bloc on the board that followed Rezko’s wishes. Almanaseer said board Chairman Thomas Beck tried to steer his voting.
“He said, ‘If you just don’t know which way to vote, vote the way Mr. Levine votes because that’s the way Tony would want the vote to go,” Almanaseer recalled, referring to Stuart Levine.”
Spring 2003 – Nov 2003: (Rezko trial March 11, 2008; 10:58 a.m.)
“Jennifer Thomas, a former aide to Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s patronage chief Joe Cini, continued on the stand Tuesday morning and gave a few more insights into those regular Monday morning meetings she and Cini held in 2003 with Antoin “Tony” Rezko at his office.”
“Thomas said Rezko floated the names of several people to sit on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, which the government claims Rezko corrupted with the help of board member Stuart Levine. And Thomas said Rezko at one point made it clear that he wanted to see Levine reappointed to the panel, which was being overhauled by the governor in 2003.” May 21, 2003: Senate Bill 1332 passed by House and Senate. June 27, 2003: Blagojevich made this the effective date of Senate Bill 1332. June 2003: (Rezko trial March 10, 2008; 4:16 p.m.)
“Ziegelmueller asked Hayden about a 2003 e-mail exchange with Lichtenstein, then the governor’s top lawyer, in which Wilhelm made recommendations for the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.
The name of Barack Obama, the Democratic front-runner for the presidential nomination, also appears in the e-mail as a member of a strategic team reviewing hospital board matters with the governor’s staff when he was a state senator. The hospital board was scheduled to be revamped in the summer of 2003.
Obama was then chairman of the Senate Committee on Health & Human Services.” June 30, 2003: Obama gets the following donations.
$5000 Ali Ata was appointed as Director at IFA
$6000 Alison Davis gets appointment on Investment Board
$15,000 Dr. Michael Malek gets appointment on Hospital Facility Board
$5000 Abdelhamid Chaib’s wife gets appointment on Employee Security Board
$10,000 Elie Maloof – Rezko used him as one of several strawmen to donate funds to certain politicians.
$1000 Phil Cacciatore (one of Auchi’s Riverside Park Investors) gets seat on Board
$1000 Velma Butler (one of Auchi’s Riverside Park Investors) was recommended for Board
$1000 Martello Pollack (Vegas Crystal Comm) received Iraqi Construction contracts
$1000 Jack Carriglio gets appointed to Board
$500 Anthony Abboud gets appointed to Board
$3000 Michael Winter, who helped Rezko in funneling kickbacks through investment firm
$1000 Talat Othman gets appointed to Board
$1000 David Gustman, $1000 from Gustman’s wife after he is appointed Board Chairman Late 2003: Earliest documented awareness by FBI and Patrick Fitzgerald of corruption in Blagojevich admin. Pamela Meyer Davis agreed to secretly record conversations involving state health planning board with an FBI wire. Oct. 29, 2003: Blagojevich interest in presidency (Blagojevich criminal complaint pg 14).
“During the conversation, Cari and ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed Cari’s fundraising background and work as a national fundraiser. ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed his interest in running for President of the United States.” Dec 17, 2003: Former Governor George Ryan indicted.
“Mr. Fitzgerald announced that he was prosecuting former Gov. George Ryan, a Republican, in a scandal that had been swirling around long before Mr. Fitzgerald got here and that many people thought would never touch the most powerful politicians in Illinois. But there Mr. Fitzgerald was, a week before Christmas, ticking off the details of a 91-page indictment against Mr. Ryan, seemingly from memory.
That, even Mr. Fitzgerald’s former opponents in the courtroom say, is classic Fitzgerald: dogged, dispassionate and endlessly prepared.” 2004 – 2005: (February 10, 2008 Sun-Times)
“In the media, Obama always made it sound like he rarely saw Rezko, saying they met for breakfast or lunch once or twice a year. However, the FBI mole John Thomas helped investigators “build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former business partner Daniel Mahru’s Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005,“
During his March 14, 2008 interview, the Times told Obama, Thomas is an FBI mole and he “recently told us that he saw you coming and going from Rezko’s office a lot.”
“And three other sources told us that you and Rezko spoke on the phone daily.”” March – May 2004: (Rezko trial exhibits)
FBI chart presented to the jury on April 28, 2008, shows 257 calls from Rezko’s phones to Blagojevich’s chief of staff, Lon Monk, between March 2004 and May 2004 alone.
“Stuart Levine, the prosecution’s star witness, said he and Obama were at a party Rezko threw at his Wilmette mansion on April 3, 2004, for Nadhmi Auchi, a controversial Iraqi-born billionaire who Rezko was trying to get to invest in a South Loop real-estate development.
Auchi, now a citizen of the United Kingdom, has faced criminal charges in Europe. He also figured in the revocation of Rezko’s bond early this year after attempting to wire him more than $3 million. Upon learning of that attempt, U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve declared Rezko a flight risk and ordered him held in a federal jail in the Loop.
The Rezko party in 2004 was designed to induce Auchi to pour money into the South Loop investment. Obama’s presence at the party was not previously known. At the time, Obama was fresh off a surprise win in the Illinois Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and was riding a crest of national publicity.” April 8 – May 21, 2004: (Rezko Trial March 12, 2008; 11:11 a.m.)
“FBI Special Agent Daniel Cain, the primary case agent on the investigation into Levine and Rezko, is on the stand now in testimony that is laying the foundation for entering the wiretaps into evidence.
Cain said the investigation, dubbed Operation Board Games by the federal agents, began in December 2003 and was prompted by information gleaned from an informant whom he did not identify. That witness, he said, took part in meetings with two other individuals who were in contact with Levine by phone at his home.
Cain said Levine had three phone lines in his North Shore home. Federal agents recorded conversations on those lines April 8-May 21, 2004. Those dates span the time when Levine, Rezko and others allegedly were working to rig the hospital board vote on a Mercy Health System hospital proposal for Crystal Lake and other kickback schemes prosecutors claim they were engaged in.” April 21, 2004: (Rezko Trial March 11, 2008; 5:27 p.m.)
“The former lawyer for a state board that regulates hospital expansions took the stand late in the afternoon and said she told Stuart Levine of her concern after an odd vote on the Mercy Hospital project that included Levine whispering to other board members before the project was approved.
His response was no less troubling, she said.
“He shrugged his shoulders and said, ‘Sometimes you have to be a good soldier,’” said Anne Murphy, the former lawyer for the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.
Murphy said Levine’s remark followed a vote that saw the plan for a new hospital in Crystal Lake squeak by with the minimum of five votes in favor on the nine-member board.
With eight members present at the April 2004 meeting, Murphy said the vote was stalled with three members voting “yes,” two voting “no” and two abstentions when Chairman Thomas Beck was called to give his vote.
Beck said, “Where’re we at?” Murphy testified. He then went over to whisper with Levine off the record, she said. When that conversation ended, Murphy said, Levine got up and whispered to Imad Almanaseer.
Beck then voted yes, Murphy testified, and Almanaseer changed his vote to “yes,” giving the plan the necessary votes to pass.
“There was an audible, collective gasp across the room,” Murphy recalled of the April 2004 meeting.
Prosecutors contend the five members who voted for the hospital were a Levine-led bloc that Rezko had placed on the board and controlled. The two were charged with arranging to accept a kickback from the builder who was going to build the Mercy project in Crystal Lake.
The entire board was new as of the summer of 2003, Murphy said. She said she had given the new members memos on ethics, including conflicts of interest.”
“Another government wiretap has been played with Antoin “Tony” Rezko’s voice on it, and this one could prove damaging to his defense. On the tape, recorded May 18, 2004, Rezko can be heard giving orders to political fixer Stuart Levine about how he wanted to manipulate the vote of one of Levine’s fellow members on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning board, Danalynn Rice.
June 7, 2004: Stuart Levine, member of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, abruptly resigns. This is the first indication that the Blagojevich administration is under federal criminal investigation.
July 2, 2004: Stuart Levine resigns from the state Teachers’ Retirement System board. July 27, 2004: Obama Democratic Convention Speech. May 9, 2005: Stuart Levine indicted on corruption charges. Federal subpoena issued to Tony Rezko. June 15, 2005: Obama purchases home next door to Rezko for $1.65 million, $300,000 less than the asking price. June 15, 2005: Rita Rezko, Tony’s wife purchased plot next door for $625,000 asking price. Sept. 15, 2005: Joseph Cari, former lawyer for the state’s teacher’s pension board pleads guilty to extortion. A high ranking public official is described in court documents only as “Public official A.” Oct. 25, 2005: The Chicago Tribune reports about a federal grand jury investigation into the alleged political hiring practices of the Blagojevich administration. Late 2005 early 2006: From the Kenneth J. Conner complaint against Mutual Bank filed Oct. 16, 2008. The lawsuit is still active.
“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″
“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.”
Conner later told World Net daily when he initially was fired, that the bank and the Rezkos were engaged in “fraud, bribes or kickbacks, use whatever term you want,” to benefit the Obamas.
Soon after the Blagojevich arrest, Conner was interviewed by investigators from Fitzgerald’s office. Jan. 2006: Rita Rezko sells the Obamas one-sixth of her lot for $104,500. Feb. 4, 2006: (Chicago Sun-Times)
“Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has always been rumored to be interested in higher office. A single entry in a campaign-finance report he filed this week could add fuel to the speculation.
Blagojevich paid $7,500 in December to one of the top Democratic political strategists in Iowa, where contacts are important for anyone with presidential aspirations.” Feb. 19, 2006: Blagojevich began his 2006 re-election to IL Governor. Aug. 5, 2006: The Chicago Tribune reports that Stuart Levine is cooperating with the federal investigation of state government. Aug. 11-20 2006: Illinois State Fair. “We’ve got a governor in Rod Blagojevich who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois,” Obama told the crowd. Oct. 11, 2006: Tony Rezko is indicted on federal charges he sought millions of dollars in kickbacks and campaign donations from firms seeking state business.
Oct. 22, 2006: Obama publicly states he is considering a run for the Presidency. Oct. 27, 2006: Stuart Levine pleads guilty in a scheme to squeeze millions of dollars from firms seeking state business. Court papers contain allegations that Rezko and Christopher Kelly were using their influence for corrupt purposes. Nov. 7, 2006 (Chicago SunTimes)
“The Rezko story broke last week, when Obama was wrapping up a national tour serving several purposes: promote his new book, The Audacity of Hope, raise money and stump for Democrats, and lay the groundwork for a possible 2008 White House bid.” Jan. 16, 2007: Obama announces his intention to run for president.
“I’ve navigated some fairly difficult territory in my political career and, you know, there are some folks in Springfield who are pretty wily.
And I’ve always been able to operate effectively, but also do so in a way that’s consistent with my values and ethics. I make no claims of perfection, but I think that generally my judgment and my assessments of people have been pretty good and that’s part of how I’ve stayed out of trouble in what can be a pretty hurly burly political environment. ….. I think that the way [voters should view the Rezko relationship] is that I made a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest or appearances of impropriety. But they should see somebody who was not engaged in any wrongdoing, who did not in any way betray the public trust, who has maintained consistently high ethical standards and who they can trust.” Feb 10, 2008: (Chicago Sun-Times)
“Sources said Thomas helped investigators build a record of repeat visits to the old offices of Rezko and former business partner Daniel Mahru’s Rezmar Corp., at 853 N. Elston, by Blagojevich and Obama during 2004 and 2005.” March 6, 2008: Rezko trial begins. April 22, 2008: Ali Ata pleads guilty to obstruction of justice and agrees to cooperate. May 2, 2008: Illinois Senate narrowly defeated a measure aimed at giving voters a chance to recall Gov. Rod Blagojevich. June 4, 2008: Rezko convicted on 16 of 24 counts.
Count 1 contains ties to Blagojevich and Obama.
The following conviction counts are related to Mercy Hospital and the rigging of the Planning Board.
1, 11, 12, 14, 15
A large portion of the testimony in the Rezko Trial was about the rigging of the Planning Board. Aug. 20, 2008: Rezko sentencing delayed. Oct. 9, 2008: Rezko sentencing delayed. Oct. 30, 2008: William Cellini indicted Nov. 4, 2008: Washington Times report.
“A former Illinois real estate specialist says FBI agents have questioned him about a Chicago property that had been bought by convicted felon Tony Rezko’s wife and later sold to the couple’s next-door neighbor, Sen. Barack Obama.
The real estate specialist, Kenneth J. Conner, said bank officials replaced an appraisal review he prepared on the property and FBI agents were investigating in late 2007 whether the Rezko-Obama deal was proper.
“Agents and I talked about payoff, bribe, kickback for a long time, though it took them only a short number of minutes of talking with me while looking at the appraisal to acknowledge what they already seemed to know: The Rezko lot was grossly overvalued,” Mr. Conner told The Washington Times Monday.
“Rezko paid the asking price on the same day Obama paid $300,000 less than the asking price to the same seller for his adjacent mansion,” he said. “This begs the question of payoff, bribe, kickback.””
Dec. 7, 2008: Criminal complaint of Blagojevich. Nine individuals is important. Obama helped passed a bill to reduce the number from 15 to 9.
“b. Corruption of the Planning Board”
“At the relevant time period, the Planning Board consisted of nine individuals.”
“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 31 times.
“Rezko” is mentioned 170 times.
“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 8 times. Dec. 9, 2008: Blagojevich arrested
“Fitzgerald said, “We make no allegations” that Obama was aware of any alleged scheming by Blagojevich.” Jan. 9, 2009: IL House votes 114 to 1 to impeach Blagojevich. Jan 29, 2009: IL Senate removes Blagojevich from office. Feb 12, 2009: “US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who brought criminal fraud charges against former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, will stay on with the Obama administration, reports Pete Williams at NBC.” APRIL 2, 2009: Press release, Superceding Indictment. There is no mention of nine board members.
“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 7 times
“Rezko” is mentioned 100 times.
http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2009/pr0402_01a.pdf July 30, 2009: Patrick Fitzgerald, the top prosecutor in Illinois’ Northern District, has been named interim chairman of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys (AGAC). Feb. 4, 2010: Second superceding indictment. There is no mention of nine board members.
“Planning Board” (IL Health Facilities Planning Board) is mentioned 7 times
“Rezko” is mentioned 87 times.
“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 1 time.
“During the relevant time period, the Planning Board consisted of nine individuals.”
“Rezko was able to obtain significant influence over the affairs of the Planning Board by arranging for Blagojevich to appoint five of Rezko’s associates and/or friends, including Levine, as members of the Planning Board in 2003.”
“Rezko” is mentioned 288 times.
“Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital mentioned 18 times. April 22, 2010: Motion filed to subpoena Obama and redacted parts revealed.
“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
Redacted:
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.”
June 29, 2010: Judge Zagel said there was a word to describe witnesses like Rezko who damage whatever side calls them to testify.
“generally explains why they’re not called.”
Aug. 17, 2010: Blagojevich convicted of 1 of 24 counts. Neither Rezko or Levine were called as witnesses. One juror held out from indicting on more counts. The trial was much shorter than predicted . Approx 2% of the wiretaps were presented. Jan. 6, 2011: Rezko sentencing delayed indefinitely. Jan. 28, 2011: Rezko sentencing set for October 21, 2011. Feb. 24, 2011: Counts 1,2,4 in the Blagojevich Indictment are dropped. This represents approx. half of the indictment and includes numerous corruption ties to Blagojevich and Obama.
The only reference left to “Hospital” in context of Mercy Hospital was in count one. March 9, 2011: Blagojevich files motion to be sentenced on one conviction charge.
More Broward County Florida election malfeasance, Brenda Snipes’ office improperly discarded thousands of ballots, Judge Raag Singhal ruled Broward Supervisor of Elections illegally destroyed ballots, 2012 nearly a thousand ballots not included in Florida’s final count found in warehouse
“High importance. I met with Jim and Mike in Denver. They are both old friends of the Clintons and have lots of experience. Mike hosted our Boulder Road Show event. They are reliving the 08 caucuses where they believe the Obama forces flooded the caucuses with ineligible voters. They want to organize lawyers for caucus protection, election protection and to raise hard $.”…Podesta Wikileaks email leak
“What is your threshold for acceptable voter fraud since 1 vote can win most elections?”…Citizen Wells
“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes”…Joseph Stalin
From the Miami Herald.
“Judge’s ruling that ballots were illegally destroyed continues Broward election woes
Florida’s Secretary of State plans to send an elections expert to the state’s second-largest county during the upcoming elections to “ensure that all laws are followed,” after a judge ruled that the Broward Supervisor of Elections illegally destroyed ballots cast in a 2016 congressional race.
Broward Circuit Judge Raag Singhal issued an order Friday determining that Supervisor Brenda Snipes’ office improperly discarded thousands of ballots cast two years ago in the Democratic primary race between Tim Canova and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. In a ruling first reported by Politico, Singhal sided with Canova, who filed a lawsuit last year after he said Snipes ignored and then illegally obstructed his request to copy and inspect ballots.
Snipes contends that her office kept scanned, electronic copies of the ballots and did nothing wrong. She plans to challenge the order. But heading into the mid-term elections, Singhal’s determination that Snipes broke state and federal law is sure to spark controversy around an office that oversees voting in Florida’s most reliably Democratic county.
“Given all the scrutiny going on about elections processes these days and elections concerns, one has to wonder why on the eve of having to produce these records they were destroyed,” Frank Rainer, an attorney for Canova, said in an interview.
Canova and Snipes have been wrangling over ballots for 18 months, dating back to a records request filed by a Canova representative shortly after he lost the primary election for Florida’s 23rd Congressional District to Wasserman Schultz by a 16-point margin in a race where nearly 200,000 votes were cast. The district dips a little into Dade County, but is mostly located in Broward.
Concerned about the integrity of the election, Canova wanted to inspect paper ballots and obtain copies. He sued in June 2017, arguing that Snipes was stonewalling him.
Canova’s first lawsuit was dismissed as Snipes fought back, calling his records requests unreasonable and arguing that Canova was trying to conduct his own manual recount of the election in ways that ran afoul of state law. But Canova amended his complaint, and in November Snipes’ office admitted in court that they’d destroyed paper ballots two months earlier.”
“Nearly a thousand ballots that were not included in Florida’s final count have been found in a warehouse in Broward County.
Tuesday morning and into the night, there was a buzz of activity at the Voting Equipment Center in Lauderhill, a week after the general election. There was a recount going on for two commission seats that were too close to call, one in Hallandale Beach and another in Dania Beach. Workers had to count those votes manually.
Also keeping elections officials busy is the fact that 963 filled ballots were found in a warehouse. The supervisor of elections, Dr. Brenda Snipes, said this happens all the time, especially when dealing with paper ballots. Her department is not the only one to have seen more ballots added to the final number after the election, and they have until Nov. 18 to certify all the votes.
Snipes noted that it is a routine thing to look for these kind of mishaps after election night and she is just glad that they are now being tallied into that final count.”
Senator Sherrod Brown finds certified copies of Obama birth certificate…oops, Same lies reported at Citizen Wells December 30, 2008, Democrat mantra end justifies the means
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
“Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya”...Barrister Michael Shrimpton
Finally, certified copies of Obama’s birth certificate.
Or not.
From BirtherReport March 16, 2015.
“U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown Says Obama Gave Several News Orgs Certified Copies Of Original Birth Certificate”
A constituent received a stunning reply from U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown claiming Obama provided several news organizations with certified copies of his purported original long-form birth certificate, even though the only “news reporter” ever to reportedly touch one of the two purported certified copies was NBC’s Savannah Guthrie.
The email exchange:
From: Sherrod Brown [mailto:Senator_Brown@brown.senate.gov]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 5:12 PM
To: ###########
Subject: Reply from Senator Sherrod Brown
Dear Mr. #######:
Thank you for getting in touch with me regarding President Obama.
President Obama has provided several news organizations with certified copies of his original long-form birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals born in Hawaii after its admission are legitimate natural-born United States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department has issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate.
The White House has posted the Certificate of Live Birth on its website. You can view a copy at:
These lies from Senator Brown are the same ones reported at Citizen Wells on December 30, 2008 in the Hall of Shame.
“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.”
Congressional oath of office
US Constitution
HALL OF SHAME
A letter received from Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:
“Thank you for contacting me regarding President-Elect Barack Obama.
President-Elect Obama has provided several news organizations with a
copy of his birth certificate, showing he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii
on August 4, 1961. Hawaii became a state in 1959, and all individuals
born in Hawaii after its admission are considered natural-born United
States citizens. In addition, the Hawaii State Health Department
recently issued a public statement verifying the authenticity of
President-Elect Obama’s birth certificate.
Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown”
Senator Sherrod Brown, as a US Senator, the public expects for you to be
well informed on important matters and a presidential election certainly
qualifies as important.
Every word of your paragraph was wrong!!
Obama has provided no one a copy of his birth certificate.
Mr. Brown, do you know what “natural born citizen” means in the
eligibility provision of the US Constitution?
Being born in Hawaii does not make one a natural born citizen of the US.
If it did, then British citizens vacationing in Hawaii and delivering
a child would enable that British child to be president.
The Hawaii Health Department Official stated that they had Obama’s
birth certificate. Read more below. You should have already learned this.
“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.”
H. Brooke Paige V Vermont, May 15, 2014, Obama natural born citizen challenge, US Supreme Court, Courts and states abrogated duties, Judge Moore Circuit court should have granted the petition for a writ of mandamus
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison
“Regardless of how this plays out, we have ensconced in writing, on the internet and available for other legal reference and quotation, a document with well
researched dissenting opinions by the AL Chief Justice Moore and Justice Parker regarding the duties and responsibilities of state election officials.
Perhaps just as important is the mention of documentation provided by the Arpaio Zullo investigation raising serious questions about Obama birth
certificates.”…Citizen Wells, March 23 2014
Thursday, May 15, 2014, the US Supreme Court will decide whether or not they will take on the appeal from the Vermont courts of H. Brooke Paige in Paige V Vermont. A challenge of Barack Obama’s natural born citizen status.
The SCOTUS should have clarified what a natural born citizen is in 2008 when Obama was first challenged.
Sadly they did not and since thrn have continued to abrogate their responsibilities.
The State filed a response waver March 26th, if the case passes muster in the conference, SCOTUS would request that the State file a response – in the absence of which the case would proceed on the merits outlined in my writ.
Another Vermont SCOTUS case just after mine – Daniel Brown v Vermont, State filed response waver on was received on April 4th with the case “distributed” on April 16th for the conference on May 2nd. https://certpool.com/dockets/13-1113, the conference schedule is found at: https://certpool.com/conferences/2014-05-02
I suspect that SCOTUS is awaiting “candidate Obama’s” response (required by April 9th) before scheduling the case for conference. All cases are considered in conference.
AL Chief Justice Roy Moore in the recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling stated:
“Although the plaintiffs’ request for relief is moot as to the legality, conduct, and results of the 2012 election, under the “capable of repetition, yet evading review” exception to mootness, the circuit court, in my view, should have granted the petition for a writ of mandamus to the extent of ordering
the Secretary of State to implement the natural-born-citizen requirement of the presidential-qualifications clause in future elections.
Furthermore, I believe the circuit court should have granted the petition for a writ of mandamus to order the Secretary of State to investigate the qualifications of those candidates who appeared on the 2012 general-election ballot for President of the United States, a duty that existed at the time this petition was filed and the object of the relief requested. Although the removal of a President-elect or a President who has taken the oath of office is within the breast of Congress, the determination of the eligibility of the 2012 presidential candidates before the casting of the electoral votes is a state function.
This matter is of great constitutional significance in regard to the highest office in our land. Should he who was elected to the presidency be determined to be ineligible, the remedy of impeachment is available through the United States Congress, and the plaintiffs in this case, McInnish and Goode, can pursue this remedy through their representatives in Congress.
For the above-stated reasons, I dissent from this Court’s decision to affirm the judgment of the circuit court dismissing this action on the motion of the Secretary of State.”
Rod Blagojevich prosecution and appeal reach critical mass in election cycles, Sentence overturned or shortened?, Obama pardon?, Obama being protected how long?, Will Blagojevich keep quiet?
“Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich, Governor of IL, prosecuted before Tony Rezko, a businessman?”…Citizen Wells
“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich
“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011
I told you this would happen.
Am I a psychic?
No.
2 + 2 = 4.
The Blagojevich Administration came under investigation by late 2003.
Rod Blagojevich should have been arrested at least by 2007 if Patrick Fitzgerald, et al were indeed concerned about the citizens of Illinois.
Instead they waited until after the 2008 election to protect Obama.
Obama et al were protected in the 2008 election cycle, 2010, 2012 and now we are well into the 2014 election cycle.
Why is this important?
Obama is under much scrutiny.
His eligibility and performance are being challenged.
If Obama loses control of both houses of congress, he is in trouble.
Blagojevich knows a lot about Obama and his ties to Rezko.
Obama is safe as long as Blagojevich is in prison and believes that his sentence will be overturned or pardoned.
If Blagojevich’s sentence is not overturned soon or greatly reduced, he will be forced to decide whether to talk or not.
Obama is the only person who could or would pardon Blagojevich.
Obama can only do this if he stays in office.
Rod Blagojevich has a lot to think about.
(To learn more about this, search on Blagojevich at this site)
Massive NC voter fraud discovered, Over 35 thousand voters same first and last name DOB registered in NC and another state voted in 2012, Senate Leader Phil Berger and rep Thom Tillis
“On Monday June 23rd, 2008 the SBI initiated an investigation into allegations that employees of the Alamance County Health Department specifically Dr.
Kathleen Shapley-Quinn and Nurse Karen Saxer were knowingly and willingly falsifying patient medical records.”
“At the request of some patients, Alamance County Health Department provided work notes and prescriptions in alias names. Providing these services would assist illegal aliens with maintaining assumed or stolen identities, which may be a violation of state, or federal law. (Identity Theft, Fraud, etc.)”
“Veronica Arias, of Texas, reported on May 2nd, 2008 to the ACSO that someone in Swepsonville, NC had stolen her identity and was using same to be employed.
Maria Sanchez was arrested on May 6, 2008 by investigators of the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office for stealing and using the identity of Veronica Arias.
Sanchez used the name, SSN, DOB, of Veronica Arias who is a living resident of Texas.”…Alamance County NC Sheriff 2008 report
“North Carolina is the latest state featured by Project Veritas in its series on how America’s electoral system is extremely vulnerable to voter fraud. During last week’s North Carolina primary, James O’Keefe and his colleagues demonstrated how easy it is to obtain ballots even if the person has publicly professed not to be a U.S. citizen.”
O’Keefe also tells WND about his group’s visit to the University of North Carolina, where a dean and a program director laugh off confessions of voter fraud and even seem to encourage it. Yet a day later, both officials tell conservatives that voter fraud never happens.”…WND May 15, 2012
“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″
From Phil Berger for Senate April 2, 2014.
“Tillis, Berger Issue Joint Statement On Newly Discovered, Alarming Evidence Of Voter Error And Fraud”
“Raleigh, N.C. – House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg) and Senate Leader Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) issued a joint statement Wednesday in response to more alarming evidence of voter error and fraud discovered by the North Carolina State Board of Elections.
Initial findings from the Board presented to the Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee today show:
765 voters with an exact match of first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in N.C. and the other state in the 2012 general election.
35,750 voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.
155,692 voters with the same first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state – and the latest date of registration or voter activity did not take place within N.C.
These findings only take into account data from the 28 states who participated in the 2014 Interstate Crosscheck, leaving out potential voter error and fraud in the 22 states that do not participate in the consortium.
Additionally, during an audit of death records from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Board discovered:
50,000 new death records that had not previously been provided to the State Board of Elections.
13,416 deceased voters on the voter rolls in October 2013.
81 deceased voters that had voter activity after they died.
The findings were made possible by a new election reform law passed by the General Assembly last year, which called on the Board to improve the accuracy of voter registration lists and combat potential fraud by cross checking information on voting records with those of other states.
“While we are alarmed to hear evidence of widespread voter error and fraud, we are encouraged to see the common-sense law passed to ensure voters are who they say they are is working,” said Tillis and Berger. “These findings should put to rest ill-informed claims that problems don’t exist and help restore the integrity of our elections process. We appreciate the State Board of Elections bringing this critical information to light.””
“How Obama stole the 2012 election was not a either or scenario. It wasn’t just voter fraud or absentee military ballots not counted or the Santa Claus appeal or the organizing strategy of the Obama Campaign or the massive record breaking contributions. It was a combination of those efforts.
I do not yet have a number for absentee military who were disenfranchised. I know for a fact, however, that they were not given a fair chance. I recently spoke to a family member who was in Iraq in 2008. He did not receive a ballot then.
Are you aware that there are over 800,000 undocumented aliens in Florida alone? In the period leading up to the 2008 election there was so much confusion on the part of social workers about illegal aliens and providing them with voter registration forms in Alamance County NC (just east of Greensboro), that the Sheriff’s Dept. documented the controversies in a paper. The Alamance Sheriff’s Dept. has subsequently been harassed by the US Justice Dept. for their efforts to uphold the law.
Obama and the Democrat party have done their best to permit illegal immigration and are now in the process of making them legal to broaden their voter base even more.
From The Examiner December 10, 2012.
“President Obama carried 70 percent of the Latino vote”
“Obama will introduce his own immigration reform proposal in January or February, and people familiar with the president’s plan say it will probably mirror a 2007 Democratic bill that would provide a path to citizenship for nearly all of the immigrants now in the country illegally, which some estimates put as high as 20 million people. That goes much further in dealing with illegal immigrants than Republicans have ever been willing to go, but Obama is betting that a newly chastened GOP will be more willing to negotiate.”
Forget the popular vote spread between Obama and Romney. There were literally just a handful of counties in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Virginia that decided the election based on the electoral college. The useless states of California and New York accounted for the popular vote spread.
WND has presented an excellent article on how Obama stole the 2012 election.
From WND December 10, 2012.
“DID OBAMA STEAL THE 2012 ELECTION?”
“Following Barack Obama’s re-election, accusations from some quarters have held that his campaign stole the election through vote fraud. Others claim no vote fraud occurred, and that the election victory resulted from the Obama campaign’s vastly superior get-out-the-vote effort. One RedState diarist has even gone so far as to announce that commenters complaining that the election was stolen will be banned from the site.
With all of the swirling allegations, where does the truth lie? While there have been many proven cases of vote fraud in previous elections, and many credible allegations of fraud in this election cycle, was the cumulative total of all fraud sufficient to throw the election for Obama? After all, Obama’s team ran an intensely focused, highly organized get-out-the-vote effort. Republican efforts were, by comparison, disorganized and nowhere near as comprehensive or sophisticated.
Still, members of the president’s team did everything possible to rig the game in their favor. They took liberties with the law Republicans would never dare attempt and obstructed voter-integrity efforts at every turn, while the vast political-media-entertainment-education-union-nonprofit complex went all in to promote Obama’s narrative.
Democrats and their media allies also engaged in what has fairly been described as a dishonest and “vicious” campaign to discredit the Republican nominee while steadfastly shielding the administration from its many scandals. Any of these could have sunk Obama’s reelection prospects had the media reported them with the enthusiasm they showed in attacking and spreading disinformation about Romney.
When it comes to outright vote fraud, however, let’s examine first those allegations with the greatest potential for skewing election results.
100 percent vote for Obama
In some inner city precincts, Obama garnered between 98 and 100 percent of the vote. This was most frequently noted about Philadelphia, Pa., and Cleveland, Ohio. Incredulous observers stated, “Third world dictators don’t even get 99 percent of the vote.” Rush Limbaugh quipped, “I mean, the last guy that got this percentage of the vote was Saddam Hussein, and the people that didn’t vote for him got shot.”
But these statements confuse turnout with votes. In communist countries like Saddam’s Iraq, every voter is indeed required to vote for the one choice on the ballot, and participation is close to 100 percent all the time. However, in U.S. elections, turnout has run at about 60 percent for the past three presidential races.”
“Does this mean that vote fraud didn’t occur in these locations? No, but if it did, it was likely not enough to throw the election. One issue that warrants a closer look, however, is absentee ballots. In Ohio, 29.5 percent of the vote came through absentee ballots in 2008 (2012 results are not finalized yet). In Cuyahoga County in 2012, absentee ballots made up 40.5 percent of the total.
According to the New York Times, use of absentee ballots nationwide has tripled since 1980 and now stands at about 20 percent of total ballots cast. The Times notes, “While fraud in voting by mail is far less common than innocent errors, it is vastly more prevalent than the in-person voting fraud that has attracted far more attention, election administrators say.”
Absentee ballots are particularly vulnerable to vote fraud. In one notorious recent case in upstate Troy, N.Y., eight local Democrat politicians were indicted and four have pleaded guilty to falsifying absentee ballots. This was a local election and these politicians won their seats before getting caught. Anthony DeFiglio, a Democratic committeeman who pleaded guilty, said that absentee ballot fraud was a “normal political tactic”:
[It is] an ongoing scheme and it occurs on both sides of the aisle. The people who are targeted live in low-income housing and there is a sense that they are a lot less likely to ask any questions… What appears as a huge conspiracy to nonpolitical persons is really a normal political tactic.
Bob Mirch, the former Republican legislator who first discovered this fraud, said, “It’s an insider game. It takes insiders to do it, and I think it takes insiders to catch those who try to steal the election. … It’s easy to do it and yes, it’s easy to not get caught …” Frank LaPosta, a former Troy, N.Y., city council president said he got run out of the Democratic Party for speaking out against the vote fraud.”
“Just the same, it is clear that Democrats are up to something at inner city polls. Their eye-popping – and illegal – stonewalling of poll watchers strongly suggests nefarious activity. The left’s nationwide campaign to discredit voter integrity efforts as “voter suppression” and their obstinate battle against voter ID laws only serve to reinforce this impression. Following are a few examples of realvoter suppression and threats to voter integrity that occurred in 2012:
75 GOP vote inspectors were ordered to leave Philadelphia poll locations by Democrat poll judges. One judge was caught on audio. A court order sent them back but who knows what went on while they were gone? These poll locations were all within the 59 precincts where Romney received no votes.
The Florida AFL-CIO threatened True the Vote and Tampa Fair Vote with legal action for submitting voter registration challenges.
Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings issued a highly publicized threat against True the Vote and Election Integrity Maryland just for checking voter rolls. EIM found 11,000 questionable registrations, including 1,566 dead voters. The Maryland Board of Elections took no action.
Think Progress falsely claimed True the Vote was “under investigation” by Rep. Cummings, when in fact he has no legal authority to do so.
Despite overwhelming nonpartisan public support for voter ID laws, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department and liberal jurists have delayed, emasculated or defeated ID laws in Texas, Wisconsin, South Carolina, Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Holder has vowed to fight voter ID laws as restricting voters’ rights.
The Obama administration “spiked investigations” of eight states that had major voter roll problems.
The Holder Justice Department conspired with Project Vote on National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) enforcement lawsuits, which force state and local agencies to become, essentially, low income voter registration drives.
In 2009 DOJ announced to its attorneys that it would not enforce voter roll maintenance laws because it wouldn’t increase voter turnout.
“
“Finally, whatever the actual level of voter fraud that occurred in the 2012 election, the potential for future fraud is truly staggering. Pew Research Center published a report revealing election rolls in a shambles nationwide. They found:
24 million invalid or inaccurate voter registrations
1.8 million deceased voters
2.75 million registered in multiple states.
As noted earlier, Cloward and Piven’s Motor Voter law is responsible for much of this mess.
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas found 30,000 dead voters still on the rolls in North Carolina, a state Obama won by only 14,000 votes in 2008.”
“llegal alien voting
Glenn Cook of the Las Vegas Review Journal reported in early November that illegal aliens were being pressured, even threatened, by Culinary Union Local 226, to register and vote. Cook related the story of two illegals who told him about it. In Florida, an NBC investigative report found that illegals were registered to vote and indeed have been voting.
This year, immigration officials uncovered a massive document fraud ring operating in Baltimore that has provided thousands of fraudulent driver’s licenses, green cards and Social Security cards to illegals for years. Such documents are apparently easy and inexpensive to obtain.
DHS believes about one-third of illegals in the U.S. are people who have simply overstayed their visas. Many of these people could have obtained driver’s licenses while still legal. Since licenses typically expire after a much longer period, it is reasonable to assume many of these people could be registered to vote.
Because of the National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter), anyone who obtains a new driver’s license is automatically registered to vote. Furthermore, the NVRA does not require voting officials to verify proof of citizenship when people register. In states where illegals can obtain driver’s licenses, including California, Washington, New Mexico and Utah, they are likely already registered to vote. How many illegals actually vote on a systematic basis is not known, but many do.
In fact, Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler found that about 5,000 Colorado illegals voted in the 2010 midterm elections and 12,000 were registered to vote. In 2012, he sent letters to 3,900 people identified as potentially illegal voters. Gessler’s office intends to conduct a thorough statewide analysis once all results are official.
These illegal voters should obviously not be ignored. They could spell the difference between victory and defeat in many cases.
One aspect of Colorado’s voting history merits especially close scrutiny. Colorado has an approximately equal number of registered Republicans (1,157,373) and Democrats (1,151,198). Historically, unaffiliated voters in Colorado have numbered roughly the same. Between 2008 and 2012, however, their numbers grew by a whopping 23 percent, some 248,000 people. Unaffiliated voters, now numbering 1.3 million, are the largest single voting bloc in Colorado. Who are these people?
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, between 2000 and 2010 Colorado’s population grew by 728,000. Fully 42 percent of these were Hispanic and almost all, 303,000, were of Mexican descent. A Gallup poll shows that Hispanics in general (52 percent), but immigrants especially (60 percent), tend to identify as independent. Yet most affiliate with Democrats (52 percent) versus Republicans (23 percent).
How many of these were illegal, and how many of them voted? A study on illegal immigrant demographics by the Center for Immigration Studies estimates Colorado’s illegal population at 167,000, so to pin Obama’s Colorado win on illegals alone would require almost all of these to have registered and voted.
According to the Colorado Secretary of State’s office, Coloradan voters must show a state-issued ID if they have one; if not, a utility bill or Social Security number will suffice. It is likely that some illegals voted and could have contributed to Obama’s victory, but it is unreasonable to assume a large scale illegal vote would have gone unnoticed. Gessler’s observation of a few thousand illegal voters is much more realistic.
Obama’s Colorado win was, however, secured with the unaffiliated vote, and many of these were Hispanic. According to Latino Decisions, an election eve poll claimed that 87 percent of Latinos in Colorado supported Obama over Romney. Nationwide, they found that the GOP was supported by only 25 percent of Hispanics. An October 2012 Pew Hispanic Center poll showed only 21 percent of Hispanics supporting Romney to 69 percent for Obama.
Despite Republican post-election hand-wringing, this is not likely to change much with any kind of concessions to the Hispanic community.
The reasons are straightforward and not dependent upon immigration reform. According to the CIS study, 57 percent of illegals in the U.S. live at or near poverty. Granted amnesty, would this group suddenly embrace the entitlement-reform-minded Republican Party en masse? Who would get credit for amnesty in their minds, Democrats, or the Republicans they dragged to the table? The very act of Republicans “conceding” to Democrats on amnesty and immigration “reform” declares Democrats the victors.
More relevant are the sentiments among legal immigrants and Hispanic U.S. citizens. According to CIS, well over 60 percent of legal immigrants from Mexico and Central American countries – i.e. the vast majority of Hispanic immigrants – live near or in poverty. Among U.S. born Hispanics, 50 percent of households with children are led by single mothers, 55 percent of households with children utilize welfare, and 45 percent of all Hispanic households pay no income tax.
They will probably not be voting Republican anytime soon.”
Obama resignation or arrest, Douglas Vogt McInnish V Chapman Paige V Vermont US Supreme Court cases, Arpaio Zullo investigation results, Obama not natural born citizen?, Treasonous activities by Obama et al
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison
It does indeed look like the chickens are coming home to roost.
High profile individuals such as Barrister Michael Shrimpton believe that Obama should resign.
Will Obama resign before he is arrested ?
There is too much evidence that Obama was not born in the US and zero evidence that proves he was.
Up to and beyond early 2008 there is numerous compelling circumstantial evidence that Obama was born in Kenya.
The stakes have gotten much higher.
It is no longer just a matter of Obama being removed from office.
Apparently treason and treasonous activities have been engaged in by the Obama camp.
From MMD Newswire March 28, 2014.
“Compelling Evidence of the Forgery of Obama’s Birth Certificate Lodged with the United States Supreme Court, Case No.: 13-1158”
“Douglas Vogt has lodged with the United States Supreme Court his compelling forensic evidence that the Birth Certificate of Barack Hussein Obama, II is indisputably a forgery.
That forensic evidence is contained in Vogt’s 95 page Public and 75 page Sealed Affidavits. Barack Hussein Obama, II – at his White House Press Conference on April 27, 2011 – released his Birth Certificate to prove that he was Constitutionally-eligible to be President. The lodging of the Affidavits accompanied Vogt’s filing of a Petition for Certiorari with the Supreme Court which has been assigned Case No: 13-1158. That Petition seeks review of the refusal of the Federal District Court to refer Vogt’s Affidavits to a federal Grand Jury as required by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(a).
Rule 6(a) states: “When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned.” Vogt’s Petition argues that there can be no higher “public interest” than the issue of whether Barack Hussein Obama, II, has foisted a forged Birth Certificate upon the Citizens of the United States. Accordingly, the Petition argues, the lower federal court has breached its Congressionally-imposed duty to “summon” a Grand Jury to hear Vogt’s well-founded, forensic proof of the forgery of Obama’s Birth Certificate.”
We expect McInnish V Chapman to be sent to the SCOTUS.
The opinions from the Alabama Supreme Court are significant for 2 important reasons.
Chief Justice Roy Moore in his extensive dissenting opinion made the strong case that the secretary of state, once confronted by a potential deficiency in a presidential candidate’s qualifications, has a duty to investigate.
Justice Parker, also dissenting, stated that there are reasons to suspect Obama’s eligibility.
“McInnish attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Obama that have been made
public.”
H. Brooke Paige has a case before the SCOTUS challenging Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen because Obama’s father was Kenyan and therefore British.
And of course we are awaiting the news conference from Mike Zullo regarding the Arpaio Zullo investigation into Obama’s records.
AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman, Justice Bolin concurrence opinion flawed, Status quo tradition and pass the buck, States control presidential election to electoral certification, Qualified candidates on ballot
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison
I still do not know how to take the concurrence opinion from Justice Bolin in the AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman decision.
It is still a bit surreal.
On the one hand, Justice Bolin agrees that the disired result is qualified candidates with any difficiencies discovered by the state. I.E. an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure. He also states that the Alabama legislature should pass laws to facilitate this.
On the other hand, he (in sync with most of the nation) passes the buck, abrogating the responsibility of the state of AL to place a qualified candidate on
the ballot. This is in direct contradiction to the US Constitution as well as federal and state election laws. This is well clarified by Chief Justice Moore.
Most law school graduates are intelligent and take a rigorous course of study.
Perhaps all do not take logic 101.
I will address the “High spots” of what Justice Bolin wrote and why I believe that he erred.
Justice Bolin:
“I respectfully disagree with Chief Justice Moore’s dissent to the extent that it concludes that the Secretary of State presently has an affirmative duty to
investigate the qualifications of a candidate for President of the United States of America before printing that candidate’s name on the general-election
ballot in this State. I fully agree with the desired result; however, I do not agree that Alabama presently has a defined means to obtain it.”
The following AL election statute seems clear to me.
“Section 17-13-6
Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.
The name of no candidate shall be printed upon any official ballot used at any primary election unless such person is legally qualified to hold the office
for which he or she is a candidate and unless he or she is eligible to vote in the primary election in which he or she seeks to be a candidate and possesses
the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his or her political party.”
Justice Bolin:
“The evidence suggests that the Secretary of State had expressed to the plaintiffs and their representatives well prior to the primary and as early as February 2, 2012, that she had no duty to investigate the eligibility qualifications 3 of a presidential candidate. Barack Obama was nominated as
his party’s presidential candidate at the Democratic National Convention on September 5, 2012. For this election, ballots were required to be printed and delivered to the absentee election manager of each county by at least September 27, 2012. See § 17-11-12, Ala. Code 1975. The plaintiffs did not
file their petition challenging Barack Obama’s ballot access until October 11, 2012, approximately eight months after being apprised of the Secretary of State’s position that she had no affirmative duty to investigate and two weeks after the ballots were to be printed and delivered to the various
counties. The failure by the plaintiffs to at least file their petition challenging ballot access during the intervening time between Barack Obama’s nomination as his party’s presidential candidate and the time in which the ballots were due to be printed and delivered to the various counties constitutes, I believe, “inexcusable delay” on the part of the plaintiffs. The prejudice that would have ensued from such a late challenge, if successful, would have been
twofold: first, assuming it could have been accomplished from a practical standpoint, the reprinting and distribution of general-election ballots would have come, at that late date, at great financial cost to the State; and second, and just as important, the reprinted ballots would differ from absentee
ballots already sent to the members of our military and other citizens overseas. This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”
Justice Bolin seems more concerned about a CYA for the Secretary of State than in upholding the constitution.
From the McInnish V Chapman Writ of Mandamus.
“13. On February 2,2072 Plaintiff MCINNISH, together with his attorney and others, visited the Office of the Secretaryo f State,a t which the Hon. Emily
Thompson,Deputy Secretaryo f State,speaking in the absence of and for the Secretary of State, s tated that her office would not investigate the legitimacy of
any candidate ,thus violating her duties under the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions.”
The AL Secretary of State’s office was forewarned.
If the AL Secretary of State had reacted in a responsible, constitutional way, minimally the Attorney General could have been consulted and simple steps
taken to remedy the situation. The plaintiffs were forced to file the Writ of Mandamus. The state of urgency was created by the state of AL. Justice Bolin
attempts to lay the blame on the plaintiffs.
None of the concerns Justice Bolin stated related to upholding the constitution.
“This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”
What about the thousands of disenfranchised voters casting votes for a disqualified candidate?
Justice Bolin:
“Moving beyond the merits of the matter before us, and
with due regard to the vital importance to the citizenry of
the State of Alabama that the names of only properly qualified
candidates appear on a presidential-election ballot for
election to the highest office in our country, I write
specially to note the absence of a statutory framework that
imposes an affirmative duty upon the Secretary of State to
investigate claims such as the one asserted here, as well as
a procedure to adjudicate those claims. The right of a lawful
and proper potential candidate for President to have ballot
access must be tempered and balanced against a clear process
for removal of an unqualified candidate. Nothing in this
process should be left to guesswork, or, with all proper
respect, to unwritten policies of the Secretary of State, and
certainly not without a disqualified candidate having a clear
avenue for judicial review consistent with the time
constraints involved and due-process considerations.”
Nothing in this process should be left to guesswork ???
That is exactly the situation we had in 2008 and 2012. The states abrogating their responsibilities with the last check of checks and balances being the
certification of electoral votes by congress. Congress failed in their duty despite being notified.
Talk about guesswork!
Justice Bolin:
“The general duties and scope of the Secretary of State’s
office are codified in § 36-14-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975.
Section 17-1-3, Ala. Code 1975, provides that the Secretary of
State is the chief elections official in the State and, as
such, shall provide uniform “guidance” for election
activities. It is, however, a nonjudicial office without
subpoena power or investigative authority or the personnel
necessary to undertake a duty to investigate a nonresident
candidate’s qualifications, even if such a duty could properly
be implied.”
What is his point? There were multiple avenues open to the Secretary of State. The AL Attorney General could have been queried and if necessary a
clarification from the courts. The Secretary of state “shall provide uniform ‘guidance'” and “Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.” Do your job
and let others do theirs. The common sense analogy is from the business world. Managers are responsible but delegate or refer tasks to the appropriate
personnel.
Justice Bolin:
“These sections, when read together, require only that the
Secretary of State certify and include on the general-election
ballot those presidential candidates who have been nominated
by their respective parties following that party’s national
convention and who are otherwise qualified to hold the office
of President. However, nothing in the express wording of
these statutory provisions imposes upon the Secretary of State
the duty to affirmatively investigate the qualifications of a
1120465
11
presidential candidate. Consistent with this conclusion is
Op. Att’y Gen. No. 1998-00200 (August 12, 1998), which states:
“The Secretary of State does not have an
obligation to evaluate all of the qualifications of
the nominees of the political parties and
independent candidates for state offices prior to
certifying such nominees and candidates to the
probate judges pursuant to [§ 17-9-3, Ala. Code
1975]. If the Secretary of State has knowledge
gained from an official source arising from the
performance of duties prescribed by law, that a
candidate has not met a certifying qualification,
the Secretary of State should not certify the
candidate.””
Bingo!
“If the Secretary of State has knowledge gained from an official source arising from the performance of duties prescribed by law, that a candidate has not
met a certifying qualification, the Secretary of State should not certify the candidate.”
He just made my point!
Justice Bolin:
“Rather, the Secretary of State contends that the task of ensuring a candidate’s qualifications is left to the leadership of that candidate’s respective political party, a less than ideal procedure for all challengers because of its partisan nature. See generally Knight v. Gray, 420 So. 2d 247
(Ala. 1982) (holding that the Democratic Party had the authority to hear pre-primary challenges to the political or legal qualifications of its candidates).”
Here is the common thread with most states. Tradition within and without state laws wields more power than it should. State officials are used to getting
their cues from political parties. This is written into state laws. However, political parties have no particular consititutional power or responsibility.
Justice Bolin:
“Courts in other states have tended to agree that the investigation of eligibility requirements of a particular candidate is best left to the candidate’s political party. In Keyes v. Bowen, 189 Cal. App. 4th 647, 117 Cal. Rptr. 3d 207 (2010), the plaintiffs brought an action against California’s
Secretary of State and others, alleging that there was reasonable doubt that President Obama was a natural-born citizen, as is required to become President of the United States (U.S. Const., Art. II, § 1) and that the Secretary of State had a ministerial duty to verify that President Obama met the constitutional qualifications for office before certifying him for inclusion on the ballot. The trial court entered a judgment against the plaintiffs, concluding that the
Secretary of State was required to see that state election laws were enforced, but that the plaintiffs had failed to identify a state election law imposing a duty upon the Secretary of State to demand documentary proof of birthplace from presidential candidates. Id. The plaintiffs appealed.”
He quotes a CA ruling (speaks for itself).
2 wrongs don’t make a right.
Finally lucidity and responsibility.
Justice Bolin:
“Looking forward, I would respectfully call upon the legislature to provide legislation that imposes this duty upon the Secretary of State and to give that office the authority and tools necessary to compel the compliance by a candidate, and that candidate’s party, upon penalty of disqualification.”
“However, it should not be necessary to rely on a post-election Congressional remedy if it can be proven before the election that the candidate is not qualified. The Secretary of State should have the written mandate to determine requisite qualifications, and a disqualified candidate should have a defined path of expedited judicial review.”
“There are obvious reasons why such post-election challenges would be undesirable. As Rick Hasen has argued in Beyond the Margin of Litigation, pre-election litigation is generally preferable to post-election litigation. It is generally better to resolve disputes before an election, allowing problems to be avoided in advance rather than putting courts in the difficult position of cleaning up the mess afterwards. This is particularly true in the context of a challenge to a presidential candidate’s qualifications. In the event that a candidate is deemed ineligible, the party could still put up a substitute.
“Of course, it is up to states–and, in particular, to state legislatures–to define the rights and remedies available in cases where a presidential candidate is alleged to be ineligible. There is certainly no constitutional requirement that the state provide either a pre-election remedy
(such as denial of ballot access) or a post-election remedy (like an order invalidating election results) for such disputes. But there remains no
constitutional bar to such state-law remedies. In fact, such remedies would seem to fall squarely within what Article II contemplates in leaving it to
state legislatures to define the manner by which presidential electors are appointed.”
AL Supreme Court decision McInnish V Chapman likely taken to US Supreme Court, Attorney Larry Klayman, Chief Justice Roy Moore, A few good judges, Presidential candidate eligibility state function
“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells
“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison
From WND March 23, 2014.
“That we have sadly become a nation of men and not of laws is best seen in the context of the legal challenges to the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to be president of the United States. Clearly, even if Obama were born in Hawaii and not Kenya to an anti-American, Muslim, anti-Semitic father – and his being born in the United States is doubtful given all that we know (see “Where’s the Real Birth Certificate?”) – he is not a natural born citizen – that is born to two citizen parents – as required by the U.S. Constitution.
Over the last five years, many court challenges have been filed concerning Obama’s eligibility. Indeed, I have filed three in Florida and one in Alabama. In every instance, and I am not just referencing the cases that I filed, these court challenges have been dismissed. (They are currently on appeal.) But what is more troubling than the dismissals is that the judges presiding over these cases have generally refused to even explain the reasons for their dismissals. Apparently, they are so afraid of taking on this issue that they don’t want to go on record for their actions. That is because these dismissals are not legally justified.
To challenge a black president’s qualifications is to be branded a racist. Obama and his minions know this well and have milked his race at every turn to guilt white America, including its judges, into acquiescing to his continued destructive leadership bent on turning the country into not only a socialist pro-Muslim state, but one which is second rate in the world.”
“Last Friday, one of the few great judges in this land, Chief Justice Roy Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court – the jurist who was first impeached for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courtroom and then overwhelmingly elected by the people of the state to be their chief justice – had the courage to write a compelling dissenting opinion validating our challenge to Obama’s eligibility to be president. While seven of his nine fellow justices took the easy way out perhaps to show that Alabama is no longer the state once governed by George Wallace and rejected my ballot challenge, Chief Justice Moore without political correctness and without the disingenuous and cowardly sensitivity to Obama’s race, told it like it is. He ruled that Alabama did have a legal duty to verify that candidates for the presidency are eligible to serve as natural born citizens if elected (see decision at FreedomWatch), Moore concluded:
“Furthermore, I believe the circuit court should have granted the petition for a writ of mandamus to order the Secretary of State to investigate the qualifications of those candidates who appeared on the 2012 general-election ballot for President of the United States, a duty that existed at the time this petition was filed and the object of the relief requested. Although the removal of a President-elect or a President who has taken the oath of office is within the breast of Congress, the determination of the eligibility of the 2012 presidential candidates before casting of its electoral votes is a state function.””
“Regardless of how this plays out, we have ensconced in writing, on the internet and available for other legal reference and quotation, a document with well
researched dissenting opinions by the AL Chief Justice Moore and Justice Parker regarding the duties and responsibilities of state election officials.
Perhaps just as important is the mention of documentation provided by the Arpaio Zullo investigation raising serious questions about Obama birth
certificates.”
Citizen WElls 