Category Archives: Eligibility

Natural born citizen controversy over, Constitution FEC ruling Senate Resolution 511 and founding fathers provide answer, Politico The Blaze Media and politicians clueless

Posted on March 16, 2013 | 96 comments

Natural born citizen controversy over, Constitution FEC ruling Senate Resolution 511 and founding fathers provide answer, Politico The Blaze Media and politicians clueless

“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

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

I have reported several Obama controversies from early in 2008. The Larry Sinclair Obama sex and drug encounter, Obama’s ties to Rezko and corruption in Chicago and Illinois and Obama’s eligibility deficiencies and efforts to hide his records.

I do not often report on the eligibility issue but I have kept the Hassan vs FEC rulings in the forefront for a reason. The FEC has helped to clear up some of the confusion regarding the definition of Natural Born Citizen. This also explains why Obama refused matching funds from the FEC in 2008. He was not eligible for matching funds or the presidency.

The Obots, imbeciles in the biased mainstream media and politicians were either confused, ignorant and/or biased in 2008 when Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen was questioned. Many of them used the terms citizen, naturalized citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably. If Obama had requested matching funds from the FEC, as he had promised to do, his eligibility would have been challenged, as was Abdul Hassan’s.

There is no more controversy.

The US Constitution is a good starting point. It states:

“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 . . . .”

This confirms that citizen is not equivalent to natural born citizen.

The FEC ruling against Abdul Hassan on September 2, 2011 states:

“No, as a naturalized American citizen, Mr. Hassan is not eligible to receive
presidential matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act (“Matching Payment Act”).

The United States Constitution provides that “[n]o 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 . . . .” U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 1, cl. 5.”

Click to access AO%202011-15.pdf

Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008, which Barack Obama signed, states:

“Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 193”

McCain had 2 US citizen parents. Lawyers and legislators must be specific in what they include and omit.

The founding fathers, some of whom were trained in the law, had a clear understanding of what a natural born citizen is and that is why they had to be grandfathered in.

Case closed!

We have come to expect biased reporting from Politico and of course The Blaze, owned by Glenn Beck, who is clueless regarding Obama’s eligibility, predictably mis reporting on the Natural Born Citizen clause.

From The Blaze January 8, 2013.

“POLITICO WONDERS: IS TX SEN. TED CRUZ A ‘NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’ ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR THE U.S. PRESIDENCY?”

“Only one week into his tenure as a Texas senator, Ted Cruz, 42, is already drawing presidential murmurs. While it’s certainly too early to tell what sort of leader Cruz will be, in practical terms, Politico raised a larger issue on Monday evening. Based on the fact that the politician was born to an American mother and a Cuban father in Canada, the outlet wondered if he is eligible to run for the American presidency.

The question at the center of the discussion is hypothetical at this juncture, as there’s no indication that the new senator is interested in the role. According to some, the fact that he was born outside of the U.S. could cause constitutional complications and uncertainties that would potentially cloud a candidacy. However, there is no precedent to examine that answers the viability question definitively. Politico explains:

While there’s no legal precedent for Cruz’s situation, most constitutional scholars surveyed by POLITICO believe the 42-year-old tea party sensation would be OK. But there’s just enough gray area to stoke controversy, as Cruz learned during his campaign for Senate last year.”

“Despite this analysis, it’s important to remember that Cruz is a newly-minted congressman. There’s no indication that he’s interested or seeking the presidency and such prospects, even if he does show an inclination, are years away. Still, on a grander scale, the discussion about natural born citizenship is pertinent — and one that seems continually unresolved.”

Read more:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/08/politico-wonders-is-tx-sen-ted-cruz-a-natural-born-citizen-eligible-to-run-for-the-u-s-presidency/

Huh???

What is going on at American Thinker? Too much Orwellian brainwashing?

Thanks to Obama Release Your Records for calling them out.

“Last Word: American Thinker Pushes Leftist Myth 14th Amendment Citizen Is Natural Born Citizen”

“Note to American Thinker’s Ken Blackwell, Bob Morrison, and J.R. Dunn.
If you don’t like Article II of the Constitution then seek to have it
amended. Crapping all over it and misleading your readers is
disgusting and shameful. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Bobby Jindal are
citizens of the United States but they are not “natural born Citizens”
of the United States. See here and here.

Either you three are the stupidest fools on the planet or you are
purposely misleading the readers of American Thinker. And judging by
the lashings you’re receiving in the comment threads they clearly are
not stupid. Again, if you don’t like the Article II requirement then
have it amended. Articles in question declaring several potential, and
ineligible, presidential candidates eligible, here and here.

You say:
“Consider this historical question: Could it have been the original
intent of the Founders to disqualify themselves from serving as
president? It was not until Martin Van Buren, eighth president, that
we elected a man who had been born an American citizen.”

I was going to point out the Grandfather Clause to you but your reader
Countryman did it for me:”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/03/american-thinker-pushes-leftist-myth.html

96 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, FEC, Founding Fathers, Government, Lawyers, media, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, US Senate, Washington DC, white house

Fairleigh Dickinson University Public Mind poll flawed, Bias uninformed sloppy methodologies?, Obama hiding records not just a theory, Unemployment rate question worded poorly

Posted on January 19, 2013 | 20 comments

Fairleigh Dickinson University Public Mind poll flawed, Bias uninformed sloppy methodologies?, Obama hiding records not just a theory, Unemployment rate question worded poorly

“Fairleigh Dickinson University (“University”) occupies a position of prominence, trust and responsibility within the state, the nation and the world. The University’s reputation, welfare, and ability to advance its mission rests upon the commitment of every member of the community to act with the highest level of integrity at all times while performing their official duties. Conduct which falls below this standard is inimical to the University and may result in a loss of confidence in the University and its mission by constituencies, stakeholders and publics.”…Fairleigh Dickinson University code of conduct and ethics

“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

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Fairleigh Dickinson University’s Public Mind recently released poll results that were reported by Politico. Politico’s biased reporting was addressed at Citizen Wells yesterday.

The Public Mind poll result reporting and some of the methodologies will be addressed below.

Fairleigh Dickinson University

CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICS

“Fairleigh Dickinson University (“University”) occupies a position of prominence, trust and responsibility within the state, the nation and the world. The University’s reputation, welfare, and ability to advance its mission rests upon the commitment of every member of the community to act with the highest level of integrity at all times while performing their official duties. Conduct which falls below this standard is inimical to the University and may result in a loss of confidence in the University and its mission by constituencies, stakeholders and publics.

This Code of Conduct sets forth standards which Members of Fairleigh Dickinson University, as defined in Article II, are required to observe when representing the University or otherwise performing their official duties.”

“This Code of Conduct is applicable to members of the board of trustees, faculty members, staff members, fellows, researchers, graduate assistants, teaching assistants and student employees (“Member of the University” or “Member”).”

Click to access codeofconductpdfversion.pdf

Let’s see how the University’s code of ethics meshes with the polling and poll reporting.

From the poll January 17, 2013.

“CONSPIRACY THEORIES PROSPER”

“Sixty-three percent of registered voters in the U.S. buy into at least one political conspiracy theory, according to results from a recent Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind Poll. The nationwide survey of registered voters asked Americans to evaluate four different political conspiracy theories: 56 percent of Democrats and 75 percent of Republicans say that at
least one is likely true. This includes 36 percent who think that President Obama is hiding information about his background and early life, 25 percent who think that the government knew about 9/11 in advance, and 19 percent who think the 2012 Presidential election was stolen. Generally, the more people know about current events, the less likely they are to believe in conspiracy theories – but not among Republicans, where more knowledge leads to greater belief
in political conspiracies.

The most popular of these conspiracy theories is the belief that President Obama is hiding important information about his background and early life, which would include what’s often referred to “birtherism.” Thirty-six percent of Americans think this is probably true, including 64 percent of Republicans and 14 percent of Democrats.

“This conspiracy theory is much more widely believed mostly because it’s been
discussed so often,” said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson University and an analyst for the poll. “People tend to believe that where there’s smoke, there’s fire – so the more smoke they see, the more likely they are to believe that something is going on.””

“In general, higher levels of actual knowledge about politics tends to reduce belief in conspiracy theories. In the poll, respondents were asked a series of four questions about current events, and respondents who were able to answer more questions correctly were less likely to endorse the conspiracy theories. Fifteen percent of people who got none of the questions right thought that three or four of the conspiracies were likely, compared to three percent of those who answered three or four correctly. Education also tended to reduce belief in the conspiracy theories.

However, the relationship between current events knowledge and belief in conspiracy theories is conditional on partisanship. Among Democrats, each question answered correctly reduces the likelihood of endorsing at least one of the conspiracy theories by seven points. Among independents, each additional question reduces it by two points. For Republicans, though, each additional question answered correctly tends to increase belief in at least one of the
theories by two points.

“There are several possible explanations for this,” said Cassino. “It could be that more conspiracy-minded Republicans seek out more information, or that the information some Republicans seek out just tends to reinforce these myths.””

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2013/outthere/

“The most popular of these conspiracy theories is the belief that President Obama is hiding important information about his background and early life”

This is no conspiracy theory. It is a well documented fact. Beginning in 2007 when Obama was interviewed while campaigning, Obama refused to supply records while he was in the IL Senate and consistently gave vague and evasive responses.

Beginning in 2008 and continuing to today, Obama has used a long list of private  attorneys such as Robert Bauer and numerous US Justice Dept. attorneys, at taxpayer expense, to avoid presenting legitimate birth, college, student loan and other records. For anyone not paying attention (living under a rock) during that period of time, Donald Trump, several months ago, offered Obama $ 5 million to release his college records. Obama refused to comply.

Conclusion: Obama hiding records?

Fact

Professor Dan Cassino stated:

“People tend to believe that where there’s smoke, there’s
fire – so the more smoke they see, the more likely they are to believe that something is going on.”

That is correct.

“Generally, the more people know about current events, the less likely they are to believe in conspiracy theories – but not among Republicans, where more knowledge leads to greater belief in political conspiracies.”

More knowledge by Republicans, and I would add, more respect for the US Constitution, makes them aware of Obama hiding his records.

“There are several possible explanations for this,” said Cassino. “It could be that more conspiracy-minded Republicans seek out more information, or that the information some Republicans seek out just tends to reinforce these myths.””

Bias apparent.

The questions asked were very poorly presented in the documentation. There are 2 questions that relate to unemployment:

“As far as you know, has unemployment increased, decreased, or stayed the same over the past twelve months?”

“Is unemployment higher, lower, or the same as it was when President Obama first took office in 2009?”

Instead of clarifying what they are referring to such as “stated unemployment rate” or “US Labor Dept. unemployment rate” they just state unemployment. The truly informed will pause, perhaps ask for clarification, and if none is given may answer it is difficult to ascertain. So many have dropped out of the labor force, i.e. the Labor Force Participation Rate has fallen so much that the number unemployed has stayed the same or possibly risen.

This poll and polling analysis is clearly biased and sloppy. Can these people be this uninformed or does political idealogy cloud their methodologies?

Peer review.

I am qualified.

20 Comments

Posted in Accountability, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Democrats, Eligibility, Liberalism, Lies, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, polls, republicans, The Case Against Barack Obama, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Judge Roy Moore sworn in,January 11, 2013, Ten Commandment judge returns, God and scripture references, No convincing evidence that Obama is a natural born citizen

Posted on January 13, 2013 | 54 comments

Judge Roy Moore sworn in,January 11, 2013, Ten Commandment judge returns, God and scripture references, No convincing evidence that Obama is a natural born citizen

“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

“Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty,” Moore said. “And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful.”

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.

“This is the strangest thing indeed. The president has never produced [evidence] in the face of substantial evidence he was not born in our country. People are accepting it blindly based on their feelings, not on the law,” he said.

“They can’t fool all of the people all of the time, and that’s what they’re trying to do,” he said.”…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 AL.com January 11, 2013.

“Ten Commandment judge returns: Roy Moore sworn in as Alabama’s chief justice”

“In a ceremony heavy on references to God and scripture, Roy Moore took the oath of office today as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court.

Moore was joined by many relatives and a number of classmates from the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, where he graduated in 1969.

An overflow crowd attended the investiture ceremony at the state judicial building to see Moore return to the office roughly nine years after he was removed for his refusal to follow a federal judge’s order to remove a Ten Commandments monument that Moore had placed in the state judicial building. Moore has said that order was wrong.

He did not mention the controversy during today’s speech. He did quote George Washington from an inaugural address on the subject of acknowledging God.

“It was right then to acknowledge God. And it will continue to be so,” Moore said.
He also said the foundation of the judicial system was laid in Deuteronomy 1:16-17.
“We’ve got to remember that most of what we do in court comes from some scripture or is backed by scripture,” Moore said.
More than 100 people watched the ceremony from an overflow area on closed-circuit television.

Tommy Bryan, a member of the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals since 2005, was sworn in as an associate Supreme Court justice.

Bryan was elected to fill the seat vacated by Justice Thomas Woodall, who retired.

Moore was sworn in Circuit Judge John Bentley from the state’s 25th Judicial Circuit, which includes Marion and Winston counties. Bentley attended West Point with Moore. Bentley introduced a number of other West Point graduates who came to Montgomery for Moore’s swearing in.

Justice Michael Bolin swore in Bryan, whom he called one of his best friends.
C.O. Grinstead, pastor of Trinity Baptist Church in Oxford, drove to Montgomery to see Moore sworn in. He said Moore was a long-time friend.

“I’m thankful he ran and that is not a derogatory statement against the previous chief justice,” Grinstead said. “I just think the name Roy Moore is a statement in itself against crime and something for great morality.””
http://blog.al.com/montgomery/2013/01/ten_commandment_judge_returns.html

From WND September 20, 2010.

“Battle-scarred judge says Lakin decision ignores Constitution”

” The military judge who curiously noted without explanation that uncovering evidence about President Obama’s birth records could prove “embarrassing” and denied an officer the right to obtain potentially exculpatory evidence in a court-martial simply has forgotten the Constitution, the supreme rule of the United States.

So says Judge Roy Moore, who battled the politically correct climate as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court a decade ago and ultimately was removed from office by a state panel that refused to review the constitutionality of a federal court order.

His comments came today in an interview with WND about Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who yesterday was denied permission by Army Col. Denise R. Lind to obtain evidence that could document Obama is not eligible to occupy the Oval Office.

Lakin refused to follow his latest deployment orders to go to Afghanistan, because he was unable through Army channels to document Obama’s eligibility, and the president himself has declined opportunities to do so.

Judge Moore, who now operates through the Foundation for Moral Law, has personal experience with challenging the powers that be to follow the Constitution. His dispute centered on a Ten Commandments display he put in a state building to recognize the God who inspired the Founders of America.

A federal judge opined that the monument shouldn’t be there and ordered its removal. Moore refused and ultimately was removed from office by a state commission that he says “blindly” followed the order without evaluating its legitimacy.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential-eligibility mystery!

With her decision, Lind mirrored a number of federal judges who have ruled on civil lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility. They have without exception denied the plaintiffs’ access to any requested documentation regarding the president’s eligibility.

Lind ruled that it was “not relevant” for the military to be considering such claims, that the laws allegedly violated by Lakin were legitimate on their face and that the chain of command led up to the Pentagon, and that should have been sufficient for Lakin.

Moore said the ruling is a symptom of a judiciary across the nation that now believes in following “blindly.”

“The highest law in this country is not the order of the Supreme Court of the U.S., not the order of the commander in chief, or any subordinate officer,” he said.

Instead, it is the Constitution, which in this particular case demands that the president be a “natural born citizen,” a requirement not imposed on other officers.

There have been dozens of lawsuits and challenges over the fact that Obama’s eligibility never has been documented. The “Certification of Live Birth” his campaign posted online is a document that Hawaii has made available to those not born in the state.

“Lt. Col. Lakin has every right to question the lawfulness of the orders of the commander in chief. He’s not only the commander in chief, he dictates the whole war effort, as shown by the recent firing of [Gen. Stanley McChrystal],” Moore said.

It doesn’t matter, he said, that orders come from a colonel, or a general or even the Pentagon.

“The same thing applies in the military as in the judicial system,” he explained. “The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it’s not the order of a higher officer, not the order of a judge.”

Lind found that since Congress allocates money for the war effort and the Pentagon was created, an order tracing back to the military hierarchy should have been sufficient for Lakin.

“That’s wrong,” Moore said. “They’re not the commander in chief.

“No order in the military can be issued without the authority that backs the order. The president didn’t give the order, but he is the authority that backs the order,” he said.

With the current protocol to simply follow orders, Moore warned, the U.S. will develop more incidents like that involving Lt. William Calley in Vietnam. The atrocities of My Lai were carried out under the guise of “following orders,” Moore noted.

Lakin “not only has a right to follow his personal convictions under the Constitution, he has a duty,” Moore said. “And if the authority running the efforts of the war is not a citizen in violation of the Constitution, the order is unlawful.”

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.

“This is the strangest thing indeed. The president has never produced [evidence] in the face of substantial evidence he was not born in our country. People are accepting it blindly based on their feelings, not on the law,” he said.

“They can’t fool all of the people all of the time, and that’s what they’re trying to do,” he said.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2010/09/199001/#lbsZ5CFlGZtGHvzd.99

54 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, Election Law, Eligibility, Judges, Justice, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution

Tagged , , , , ,

House Senate Obama judges et al require Constitution 101, Natural born citizen not equal to citizen, Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Posted on January 3, 2013 | 37 comments

House Senate Obama judges et al require Constitution 101, Natural born citizen not equal to citizen, Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin”…Samuel Adams, 1776

 

Obama, many senators, congressmen, judges and state officials have a poor understanding of and little respect for the US Constitution. Over the past 5 years we have watched and listened as the natural born citizen requirement has been butchered and ignored. Now we are confronted by the attempts by many to misinterpret, ignore or subjugate the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President”

Citizen is not equal to natural born citizen and therefore cannot be used interchangeably.

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Infringement: The encroachment, breach, or violation of a right, law, regulation, or contract.

Constitution 101 classes was first mentioned at Citizen Wells on December 17, 2008. This was prompted by the numerous absurd, erroneous, incompetent responses from senators and congressmen when Obama’s natural born citizen status was questioned.

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.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/2008-electoral-college-votes-certification-of-voters-state-laws-us-constitution-electors-signed-certification-certifications-invalid-obama-ineligible-violators-should-be-prosecuted-constitutio/

Nothing has changed!

John Boehner, soon after Constitution 101 classes were held for the new congress in 2011, misquoted the natural born citizen requirement in an interview.

From Citizen Wells February 13, 2011.

“John Boehner has failed Constitution 101. He is still using citizen interchangeably with natural born citizen.”

“I believe that the president is a citizen. I believe the president is a Christian. I’ll take him at his word,” said Boehner, appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/john-boehner-fails-constitution-101-meet-the-press-interview-boehner-natural-born-citizen-not-citizen-obama-eligibility/

Eric Cantor, considered as a replacement for Boehner as Speaker of the House, has made similar ignorant comments about Obama being a citizen instead of a natural born citizen.

We must keep pushing accountability.

At the end of the day, all that we have is the US Constitution and it’s provision for being armed,  to protect us from the tyranny of government.

37 Comments

Posted in Accountability, Barack Obama, Bill of Rights, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Civil rights, Congress, constitution, Constitution Hall of Shame, Election Law, Eligibility, Government, Judges, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Second Amendment, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, US House of Representatives, US Senate, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

John Kerry Obama Secretary of State nominee unfit for command, Rear Admiral Roy F Hoffman judgement truthfulness reliability loyalty and trust, Chicago Pay to play politics

Posted on December 29, 2012 | 83 comments

John Kerry Obama Secretary of State nominee unfit for command, Rear Admiral Roy F Hoffman judgement truthfulness reliability loyalty and trust, Chicago Pay to play politics

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”…REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

“In his 2004 DNC speech Obama stated John Kerry will be sworn in as president, and John Edwards will be sworn in as vice president. Thank God that did not happen. We must not let John Kerry be confirmed as Secretary of State.”…Citizen Wells

Chicago Pay to play politics

Why Obama owes John Kerry

From Chicago Magazine June 2007.

“The Speech

When Barack Obama launched into his keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, he was still an obscure state senator from Illinois. By the
time he finished 17 minutes later, he had captured the nation’s attention and opened the way for a run at the presidency. A behind-the-scenes look at the
politicking, plotting, and preparation that went into Obama’s breakthrough moment”
“A star is born: Obama soaks up the cheers moments after finishing his keynote address. “His public image changed because of that speech,” says Illinois
senator Dick Durbin.

On Saturday, June 26, 2004, Barack Obama sat in a recording studio in Chicago to give his party’s response to President Bush’s weekly radio address. The
speech offered the new Democratic Senate candidate from Illinois one of his first big moments on the national stage. In his remarks-written entirely by his
longtime media adviser, David Axelrod, and by his chief press aide, Robert Gibbs-Obama criticized Bush on a litany of economic issues, from rising health-
care costs and unfair tax policies to job outsourcing. The eloquent and well-argued talk hit all the right Democratic buttons. And the radio waves showcased
Obama’s trademark baritone-deep in pitch, authoritative and reassuring in tone.

But Obama thought the address came off flat. Something was missing. “It was good, but it was nothing awe inspiring,” recalls Gibbs. “It was kind of obvious
that he was recording the words of somebody else.”
So it was not exactly a surprise when, one week later-after John Kerry’s campaign manager, Mary Beth Cahill, called Obama and told him that he had been
picked to deliver the Democratic National Convention’s keynote address-Obama gave his aides a firm directive: he would write the speech himself. “One thing
that he was very clear about telling us,” says Gibbs, “-and I think it was largely out of that experience of the weekly radio address-was he wanted to write
this speech and write it in a way that was personal.””

“The keynote speech that Barack Obama delivered on Tuesday, July 27, 2004, galvanized the delegates who packed Boston’s FleetCenter and electrified a
nationwide television audience. The 2,297 words uttered over 17 minutes changed Obama’s profile overnight and made him a household name. Before the speech,
the idea of Obama running for president in 2008 would have been laughable; he was a lowly state senator from Chicago’s Hyde Park, and while he stood a good
chance at winning his U.S. Senate race, he would enter that powerful body ranked 99th out of 100 in seniority. After the speech, observers from across the
political world hailed the address as an instant classic, and Obama was drawing comparisons (deservedly or not) to Martin Luther King Jr. and John F.
Kennedy.

None of this happened by chance. Obama’s selection as keynote speaker was carefully plotted by all sides for maximum effect, and the speech itself was no
outpouring of inspiration scribbled on the back of an envelope. Obama labored over it for weeks, harvesting lines that he had already tested on Illinois
crowds. He is said to have been furious when one of his best remarks was cut by Kerry’s speechwriters. And even after all the preparation, the editing and
vetting by aides to Obama and Kerry, and the three run-throughs at the convention, the speech almost didn’t take flight-on the dais, Obama was slow to hit
his stride. But once he got going, the speech-and his career-took off: “Without that Boston speech, there’s a question whether Barack would be running [for
president] today,” says his fellow senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin. “His public image changed because of that speech.” Valerie Jarrett, a veteran Chicago
politico and one of Obama’s longtime friends, puts it more succinctly: “It changed his life.””

“Who the Heck Is This Guy?” Obama admitted in interviews at the time that he was “totally surprised” by the speaking invitation. (Through his spokesman, he
declined to be interviewed for this story.) As he put it in his book The Audacity of Hope: “The process by which I was selected as the keynote speaker
remains something of a mystery to me.”

A closer look, however, reveals less mystery and more politics.”

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/June-2007/The-Speech/

Why John Kerry must not be Secretary of State

Unfit for Command

From Citizen Wells August 13, 2008.

John Kerry, who has about the least amount of credibility of anyone who has ever run for office, has started a new website, TruthFightsBack.com. Here is the statement from the Kerry site:

“Please give to support truthfightsback.com!

This effort to beat back rightwing smears and have an election based on reality and truth is completely in your hands. From the reporting and debunking of smears to the spreading of the truth, we are depending on you. And to make it all work, we need your financial support, both to develop the website further and to put more resources behind spreading the truth.

This is a project of John Kerry’s Campaign For Our Country, so please contribute to Campaign For Our Country to support truthfightsback.com!”

Jerome Corsi, PHD, has written a new book, “The Obama Nation.” Mr. Corsi, who coauthored “Unfit for Command,” a book about the reputation of John Kerry and the many lies he told, has exposed Obama for the deceitful fraud he is as well as his ties to corruption and left wing extremists. Anyone who has questioned Obama has received personal attacks and Jerome Corsi is no exception.

I have a copy of “Unfit for Command” as well as “The Obama Nation.” On the introduction page of “Unfit for Command” is the following quote. It speaks volumes about John Kerry and his credibility:

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”

REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

Commander of the Swift Boats in Vietnam, 1968-1969

Call sign “Latch”

I and other concerned citizens are not going to let the Obama camp, in league with John Kerry, attack Jerome Corsi or anyone else for revealing the truth about Obama.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/08/13/truthfightsbackcom-john-kerry-obama-truth-fights-back-more-obama-lies-more-kerry-lies-citizen-wells-reveals-kerry-lies-bloggers-fight-back/

From Citizen Wells August 14, 2008.

“I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be commander in chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgement, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty, and trust–all absolute tenets of command.”

REAR ADMIRAL ROY F. HOFFMAN, USN (RETIRED)

Commander of the Swift Boats in Vietnam, 1968-1969

John Kerry meddling in foreign affairs (from “Unfit for Command):
“About one year earlier, two young Americans had also come to
Paris, presumably for their honeymoon: John Kerry, a young, clean
shaven Navy war veteran, accompanied by his new wife, the former
Julia Thorne, who could trace her lineage back to George Washington.
But honeymooning was not John Kerry’s only reason for traveling to
Paris. Kerry’s presidential campaign has now acknowledged that he
“talked privately with a leading Communist representative” there.

For decades, this meeting had been only a rumor. The rumor
stemmed from a comment Kerry made in the less publicized question
and answer segment of his April 22, 1971, testimony before the
Fulbright Committee: “I have been to Paris. I have talked with both
delegations at the peace talks, that is to say the Democratic Republic
of Vietnam and the Provisional Revolutionary Government.””

From the Petition to Impeach Senator Obama. Meddling in the affairs of Kenya and abuse of power:

Whereas: As a US Senator, Barack Obama violated the stated intention of
his 2006 Official Government Visa to Africa by publicly propagandizing
for his cousin, Railla Odinga against the US democratic ally of Kenya.
Whereas the stated “mission” of Senator Obama’s Official Visa, according
to the Kenya Office of Public Communications, was to “nurture relations
between the Continent and the United States” he, instead, made public
protest before Kenya citizens to rally against their leadership,
invoking a need for “Change!” and accusing this US allied nation of
“corruption.” In Official Protest of Mr. Obama’s passport abuse and
misconduct, Kenya’s government cited his “extremely disturbing
statements on issues which it is clear, he was very poorly informed, and
on which he chose to lecture the Government and the people of Kenya on
how to manage our country.” Whereas, furthermore, there is no public
record of any sanctions or reprimand by the US Congress of Senator
Obama’s passport violation or campaigning on foreign soil against a US
ally, history has since recorded the broadspread destruction of Kenya’s
economy and large scale loss of life as a result of the violence
instigated by Odinga’s ODM campaign there.”

View the complaint from the Kenyan Government here:

http://www.communication.go.ke/media.asp?id=284

Note that what was once considered to be a rumor about Kerry’s trip turned out to be true.

To John Kerry and the Truth Fights Back site.

The response from the Kenyan Government to Obama’s 2006 visit is not a rumor or a smear. It is what we commonly refer to as a fact.

John Kerry, do you have a response to these facts?

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/08/14/truth-fights-back-john-kerry-obama-communist-visits-aiding-and-abetting-the-enemy-abuse-of-power-logan-act/

83 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Chicago, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Commander in Chief, democratic convention, Democrats, DNC, Election 2008, Eligibility, Iraq War, John Kerry, Military officers, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Military, US Navy, Veterans, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Yes Florida there is a sanity clause, Judges may be removed from office by impeachment, Judicial qualifications commission, Judge Kevin Carroll removal, Leon County circuit court

Posted on December 23, 2012 | 81 comments

Yes Florida there is a sanity clause, Judges may be removed from office by impeachment, Judicial qualifications commission, Judge Kevin Carroll removal, Leon County circuit court

“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

“Why do state election officials continue to ignore the US Constitution, federal election code and their own state election statutes?”…Citizen Wells

“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

Judge Kevin Carroll, a Leon County Florida Circuit Court Judge, recently dismissed an Obama eligibility case. Judge Carroll made reference to a fictional ruling on Santa Clause in the movie “Miracle on 34th Street.”

I have a Sanity Clause ruling for Judge Carroll.

Removal from office.

In Florida there are 2 ways to remove a judge:

1. On the recommendation of the judicial qualifications commission, the supreme court may discipline, retire, or remove a judge.

2. Judges may be impeached by a two-thirds vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.

From WND December 22, 2012.

“ELIGIBILITY JUDGE QUOTES FAMOUS SANTA CASE
Cites paraphrased decision in ‘Miracle on 34th Street’ in Florida Democrat’s challenge”

“A real-life Florida judge has paraphrased a statement from the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper in “Miracle on 34th Street” to justify his sudden decision to dismiss a challenge under state law to Barack Obama’s eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

The ruling from Kevin Carroll of the Florida circuit court for Leon County dismissed the case brought on behalf of Democratic voter Michael C. Voeltz, who raised the issue of Obama’s qualifications under a state law that allows voters to challenge candidates’ eligibility.

Carroll, who had given the plaintiffs until Dec. 23 to respond to Obama’s motion to dismiss the case, changed his mind and abruptly Thursday ordered the case dismissed.

He explained that the fact the government says Obama is qualified to be president is more than enough for him.

“This court notes that President Obama lives in the White House. He flies on Air Force One. He has appeared before Congress, delivered State of the Union addresses and meets with congressional leaders on a regular basis. He has appointed countless ambassadors to represent the interests of the United States throughout the world,” Carroll wrote.

“As this matter has come before the court at this time of the year it seems only appropriate to paraphrase the ruling rendered by the fictional Judge Henry X. Harper from New York in open court in the classic holiday film ‘Miracle on 34th St.’ ‘Since the United States Government declares this man to be president, this court will not dispute it. Case dismissed.’”

It was the second time in eligibility cases that a judge appears to have abandoned legal fundamentals and simply ruled for Obama on no particular basis.

Several years ago it was Judge James Robertson in Washington who dismissed a case because, he wrote, “The issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year campaign for the presidency.”

Carroll’s ruling also did not address the fact that in the movie, the judge was determining that a resident of a nursing home hired to play Santa Claus at a Macy’s store was, in fact, Santa Claus. His ‘proof” was a pile of mail addressed to Santa Claus that the post office delivered to him, confirming his identity.

Attorney Larry Klayman, representing Voeltz in the case, immediately responded with a motion for rehearing, contending that the judge “prematurely and precipitously” dismissed the complaint without a hearing as outlined under state law.

“This act also flies in the face of this court’s own order of Dec. 13, 2012, which was law of the case,” noted Klayman, founder of FreedomWatchUSA.

“This court had a statutory duty under the Florida Election laws, the Florida and U.S. Constitutions, and 3 U.S.C. Section 5, to adjudicate defendant Obama’s eligibility and his alleged fraudulent acts expeditiously, timely, and before the electors met on Dec. 17, 2012, and before the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6, 2013, Klayman explained. “Thus, this court also violated these law is dismissing the complaint summarily.”

Klayman suggested to the court its order “at a minimum creates an appearance that it simply jettisoned this case not only on the extrajudicial and non-legal premise that President Obama was president during the prior four year term, and has already performed many ‘presidential’ acts but also because this court did not want to be ‘inconvenienced’ by holding an evidentiary hearing.”

Klayman also questioned Carroll’s “off-the-cuff” remarks about a friend being appointed to a federal post by Obama as inappropriate.

He said the remarks about fictional judge Henry X. Harper in “Miracle on 34th St.” also were “inappropriate” and showed “a mindset simply to rid the court of this case.”

“This court seems to want to sidestep having to reach these serious and important matters before it,” Klayman said.

Klayman is seeking a rehearing and an evidentiary hearing in the dispute. He’s also seeking a temporary restraining order to halt the delivery of the Florida electoral votes to Obama until the court case is resolved.

He has submitted evidence by way of a sworn statement from Investigator Mike Zullo of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse in Arizona that there probably were two crimes committed in the creation and display of Obama’s long-form birth certificate, which was released by the White House and posted online.

Zullo’s testimony is that forgery was used to create the document, and fraud was used in “presenting to the residents of Maricopa County and to the American public at large a forgery the White House represents as “proof positive” of President Obama’s” birth documentation.

Arpaio’s affidavit also was presented to the judge.

The sheriff said: “My investigators and I believe that President Obama’s long-form birth certificate is a computer-generated document, was manufactured electronically, and that it did not originate in a paper format, as claimed by the White House. … There is probable cause that the document is a forgery.”

Klayman has argued that Obama “has never established his eligibility for the presidency of the United States … the only evidence of defendant Obama’s alleged birth within the United States has come in the form of a belatedly filed electronic version of a claimed long-form birth certificate posted on the Internet.”

He told the judge that the evidence suggests, however, the document is fraudulent.

The case claims that should the judge not address the facts, the plaintiff “can never be made whole again.”

“If defendant Obama is found to be ineligible, which is likely to happen since there is no evidence … Obama was born in the United States to U.S. citizen parents, the plaintiff’s vote in the 2012 presidential election will be nullified.”

He suggested state law calls for an expedited hearing in such cases.

Carroll, however, said the state of Florida does not have jurisdiction to “determine the issue of qualification for the office of president of the United States, particularly at this late date in the process.”

His comments came after another challenge filed by Voeltz earlier this year was dismissed because the judge ruled it couldn’t be addressed until after the election.”

“Klayman said he also will be trying to go directly to the Florida Supreme Court if Carroll does not reconsider.

“It’s truly ‘remarkable’ and an affront to the rule of law and all our founding fathers and colonial America fought and risked and gave their lives for. This type of conduct by the establishment, which thinks it can do as it pleases without consequences, is why we have entered into a revolutionary state 236 years after we declared independence from the king. They will soon from We the People learn that there are consequences,” he said.

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/eligibility-judge-quotes-famous-santa-case/#HSid5ipo2b70BbeE.99

Judge Kevin Carroll is either biased, incompetent or insane or some combination and should be removed.

Florida’s Sanity Clause.

Florida House of Representatives.

“The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, members of the Cabinet, justices of the Supreme Court, and judges may be removed from office by impeachment. The House of Representatives has the sole power to impeach. It may do so by a two-thirds vote of the members voting. The Senate tries all impeachments, with the Chief Justice of the Florida Supreme Court presiding. A two-thirds vote of the Senate is required to convict. If convicted, the officer is removed from office.”

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/glossary/glossary.aspx?Filter=I

Florida 2011 Court Reform.

“What the Joint Resolution Does:

House Joint Resolution 7111 proposes a Constitutional Amendment to
address reforms to Florida’s court system. The Joint Resolution passed the
Florida House with a vote of 80-38 on May 3, 2011, and later passed the
Senate with a vote of 24-11 on May 5, 2011. Among other things, the Joint
Resolution:”

“As the body responsible for judicial impeachment proceedings,
grants the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, at his
or her request, access to the complaint files of the Judicial
Qualifications Commission at any time. The bill requires the
complaint files be kept confidential until the information is used in
the pursuit of impeachment.”

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Handlers/LeagisDocumentRetriever.ashx?Leaf=housecontent/opi/Lists/Announcements/Attachments/35/OPI%20Pulse%20-%20Court%20Reform%205-23-11.pdf&Area=House

Florida Code of Judicial Conduct.

“CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
For the State of Florida
Online Version

Reports of misconduct by judges must be made to the Judicial Qualifications Commission at (850) 488-1581.

Print the Entire Code of Judicial Conduct in PDF.

The opinions of the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee
are available on the Sixth Judicial Circuit Website.
Visit the web site to search the opinions.

Preamble

Definitions

Canon 1. A Judge Shall Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

Canon 2. A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all of the Judge’s Activities

Canon 3. A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently

Canon 4. A Judge Is Encouraged to Engage in Activities to Improve the Law, the Legal System, and the Administration of Justice

Canon 5. A Judge Shall Regulate Extrajudicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict With Judicial Duties

Canon 6. Fiscal Matters of a Judge Shall be Conducted in a Manner That Does Not Give the Appearance of Influence or Impropriety; etc.

Canon 7. A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Refrain From Inappropriate Political Activity”

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/ethics/index.shtml

Mission of the Florida Judicial Branch.

“The mission of the judicial branch is to protect rights and liberties, uphold and interpret the law, and provide for the peaceful resolution of disputes.

Vision of the Florida Judicial Branch
Justice in Florida will be accessible, fair, effective, responsive, and accountable.

To be accessible, the Florida justice system will be convenient, understandable, timely, and affordable to everyone.

To be fair, it will respect the dignity of every person, regardless of race, class, gender or other characteristic, apply the law appropriately to the circumstances of individual cases, and include judges and court staff that reflect the community’s diversity.

To be effective, it will uphold the law and apply rules and procedures consistently and in a timely manner, resolve cases with finality, and provide enforceable decisions.

To be responsive, it will anticipate and respond to the needs of all members of society, and provide a variety of dispute resolution methods.

To be accountable, the Florida justice system will use public resources efficiently, and in a way that the public can understand.”

http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/mi_vi/index.shtml

Procedures for filing a complaint.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/jqc.shtml

Judge Kevin Carroll Ruling.

Click to access 12CA3857.pdf

81 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Courts, Election, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electors, Eligibility, Florida, Judges, Justice, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Supreme Court, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Ellen L. Weintraub elected FEC Chair, Former Perkins Coie Counsel, Robert Bauer Obama 2007 matching funds advisory opinion, Obama controls FEC?

Posted on December 21, 2012 | 64 comments

Ellen L. Weintraub elected FEC Chair, Former Perkins Coie Counsel, Robert Bauer Obama 2007 matching funds advisory opinion, Obama controls FEC?

“What if the country held an election and there was no one to make sure that candidates played by the rules — no agency that could issue regulations, write
advisory opinions or bring enforcement actions against those breaking the law?”
“The six-person FEC — three members from each party — enforces the rules it writes about how Americans are permitted to participate in politics. You
thought the First Amendment said enough about that participation? Silly you.”
“Four Senate Democrats decided to block the Republican, Hans von Spakovsky.”
“The Post wants von Spakovsky confirmed only to keep the FEC functioning. He is being blocked because four senators have put “holds” on his nomination. One of those four who might be responsible for preventing the FEC from being able to disburse taxpayer funds to Democratic presidential candidates Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and John Edwards is . . . Barack Obama.”…George Will, Washington Post December 11, 2007

“Why did Obama employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to request an advisory opinion on FEC matching funds that he was not eligible for?”…Citizen Wells

“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

From the FEC December 20, 2012.

“FEC ELECTS WEINTRAUB AS CHAIR FOR 2013;
McGAHN TO SERVE AS VICE CHAIRMAN

WASHINGTON – At its open meeting today, the Federal Election Commission elected Ellen L. Weintraub as Chair and Donald F. McGahn II as Vice Chairman for 2013.

Commissioner Weintraub took office on December 9, 2002, after receiving a recess appointment. She was renominated and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on March 18, 2003. Commissioner Weintraub previously served as Chair in 2003. Commissioner McGahn was nominated and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on June 24, 2008. He was elected Chairman on July 10, 2008 and served in that capacity until December 31 of that year.

Prior to her appointment to the Commission, Commissioner Weintraub was Of Counsel to Perkins Coie LLP and a member of its Political Law Group. Commissioner Weintraub had previously practiced as a litigator with the New York firm of Cahill Gordon & Reindel.

Before joining Perkins Coie, Commissioner Weintraub was Counsel to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct for the U.S. House of Representatives (the House Ethics Committee). There, Commissioner Weintraub focused on implementing the Ethics Reform Act of 1989.  She was Editor in Chief of the House Ethics Manual and a principal contributor to the Senate Ethics Manual.

Commissioner Weintraub received her B.A., cum laude, from Yale College and her J.D. from Harvard Law School.

Commissioner McGahn took office on July 9, 2008. Prior to his appointment to the Commission, Commissioner McGahn served as head of McGahn & Associates PLLC, a Washington-based law practice specializing in election law. Commissioner McGahn also served as General Counsel to the National Republican Congressional Committee and as Counsel for the Illinois Republican Party.

Before joining the NRCC, Commissioner McGahn practiced law at Patton Boggs LLP in Washington, DC. Commissioner McGahn has been recognized for his significant pro bono work for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Prior to Patton Boggs LLP, Commissioner McGahn served as a judicial law clerk to the Honorable Charles R. Alexander of the Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania.

Commissioner McGahn attended the United States Naval Academy, the University of Notre Dame, Widener University School of Law and the Georgetown University Law Center.”

http://www.fec.gov/press/press2012/20121220newofficers.shtml

From Citizen Wells January 23, 2012.

WHY DID OBAMA REFUSE MATCHING FUNDS IN 2008?

PART 4

Obama, attorneys and Democrats control FEC

The devil himself could not have come up with a more devious plan.

Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, on February 1, 2007 requested an advisory opinion to keep Obama’s option for matching funds open. Bauer knew full well that Obama, not being a natural born citizen, was not eligible for matching funds. The FEC advisory opinion from March 1, 2007 responded in the affirmative.Ellen L. Weintraub, former staff member at Perkins Coie, was a Democrat appointee of the FEC at that time. She remained well beyond her scheduled tenure with the help of Barack Obama.
Obama, Robert Bauer, Democrats interaction with FEC timeline.
February 1,2007

Advisory Opinion Request: General Election Public Funding

From Obama attorney Robert Bauer to FEC

“This request for an Advisory Opinion is filed on behalf of Senator Barack Obama and the committee, the Obama Exploratory Committee, that he established to fund his exploration of a Presidential candidacy. The question on which he seeks the Commission’s guidance is whether, if Senator Obama becomes a candidate, he may provisionally raise funds for the general election but retain the option, upon nomination, of returning these contributions and accepting the public funds for which he would be eligible as the Democratic Party’s nominee.”

“cc: Chairman Robert Lenhard
Vice Chair David Mason
Commissioner Michael Toner
Commissioner Hans von Spakovsky
Commissioner Steven Walther
Commissioner Ellen Weintraub“

Note, in the above advisory opinion request, Robert Bauer was a Perkins Coie attorney and Ellen Weintraub was a former Perkins Coie staff member.
March 1, 2007

FEC advisory opinion

From Robert D. Lenhard to Robert Bauer

“The Commission concludes that Senator Obama may solicit and receive private contributions for the 2008 presidential general election without losing his
eligibility to receive public funding if he receives his party’s nomination for President, if he (1) deposits and maintains all private contributions
designated for the general election in a separate account, (2) refrains from using these contributions for any purpose, and (3) refunds the private
contributions in full if he ultimately decides to receive public funds.”
December 11, 2007

George Will in the Washington Post writes.

“Paralyze The FEC? Splendid.”

“What if the country held an election and there was no one to make sure that candidates played by the rules — no agency that could issue regulations, write
advisory opinions or bring enforcement actions against those breaking the law?”

“The six-person FEC — three members from each party — enforces the rules it writes about how Americans are permitted to participate in politics. You
thought the First Amendment said enough about that participation? Silly you.

The FEC’s policing powers may soon be splendidly paralyzed.

Three current FEC members, two Democrats and one Republican, are recess appointees whose terms will end in a few days when this session of Congress ends –
unless they are confirmed to full six-year terms.

Four Senate Democrats decided to block the Republican, Hans von Spakovsky. Republicans have responded: “All three or none.” If this standoff persists until
Congress adjourns, the three recess appointments will expire and the FEC will have just two members — a Republican vacancy has existed since April. If so,
the commission will be prohibited from official actions, including the disbursement of funds for presidential candidates seeking taxpayer financing.”

The Post wants von Spakovsky confirmed only to keep the FEC functioning. He is being blocked because four senators have put “holds” on his nomination. One of those four who might be responsible for preventing the FEC from being able to disburse taxpayer funds to Democratic presidential candidates Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and John Edwards is . . . Barack Obama.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001559.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
June 19, 2008.

“Obama to Break Promise, Opt Out of Public Financing for General Election”

“In a web video to supporters — “the people who built this movement from the bottom up” — Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, announced this morning that he will not enter into the public financing system, despite a previous pledge to do so.”

“In November 2007, Obama answered “Yes” to Common Cause when asked “If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?”
Obama wrote:

“In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party
candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/06/obama-to-break/

June 24, 2008

Senate confirms FEC Nominees.

From the Wall Street Journal.

“The Senate confirmed five new members to the Federal Election Commission, ending a bitter political battle that had hobbled the elections watchdog for
months.

But the Senate action came with a final twist: Republicans accused Democrats of delaying the confirmation vote one day to allow the Democratic National
Committee to file a lawsuit against the presidential campaign of Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

The six-member elections agency had been without a quorum since December as Democrats objected to Republican nominee Hans Von Spakovsky for what they said was his partisan handling of voting-rights matters in his former job as a Department of Justice attorney. The dispute prevented the two parties from reaching an agreement to vote on any of the nominees.”

“Other commissioners confirmed Tuesday included Democrats Steve Walther and Cynthia Bauerly. The new Republican commissioners are Mr. Petersen, Don McGahn and Caroline Hunter. They join sitting commissioner Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat. The commission needs at least four members to take official action on election complaints, new campaign-financing rules and requests from campaigns for legal guidance.”

http://www.democracy21.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC=%7BAC81D4FF-0476-4E28-B9B1-7619D271A334%7D&DE=%7B620D20F2-742F-4979-B8D6-6597558A6716%7D

From Fox News.

“Since the beginning of the year, the commission has only had two members: Republican Chairman David Mason and Democrat Ellen Weintraub.”

August 18, 2008

From Citizen Wells FEC FOIA request.

The individual, redacted, is requesting an advisory opinion from the FEC on Obama’s eligibility to be president. An email was sent with the request. The
email provides information on why Obama is not eligible. It begins with

“It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president, after all, for the following reason:”

It ends with

“Interesting! Now what? Who dropped the ball or are we all being duped? Who do you know whom you can forward this to who might be able to help
answer this question?”
August 21, 2008

Philip J Berg files lawsuit in Philadelphia Federal Court

Defendants: Obama, DNC, FEC

Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and therefore ineligible to be President.
August 22, 2008

From Citizen Wells FEC FOIA request.

An email from David Kolker, FEC counsel, to Rebekah Harvey is certainly interesting. Rebekah Harvey was the assistant to Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub . Prior to being appointed to the FEC, Weintraub was on the staff of Perkins Coie LLP and a member of it’s Political Law Group.

“Victory in Berg v. Obama”

August 27, 2008

Complaint served on the U.S. Attorney for DNC and FEC

August 27, 2008

From Citizen Wells FEC FOIA request.

FEC response to advisory opinion dated August 18, 2008.

“The Act authorizes the Commission to issue an advisory opinion in response to a complete written request from any person about a specific transaction or
activity that the requesting person plans to undertake or is presently undertaking.”

“your inquiry does not qualify as an advisory opinion request.”
November 11, 2008

“Obama to Most Likely Avoid FEC Audit”

“The Federal Election Commission is unlikely to conduct a potentially embarrassing audit of how Barack Obama raised and spent his presidential campaign’s record-shattering windfall, despite allegations of questionable donations and accounting that had the McCain campaign crying foul.

Adding insult to injury for Republicans: The FEC is obligated to complete a rigorous audit of McCain’s campaign coffers, which will take months, if not
years, and cost McCain millions of dollars to defend.

Obama is expected to escape that level of scrutiny mostly because he declined an $84 million public grant for his campaign that automatically triggers an
audit and because the sheer volume of cash he raised and spent minimizes the significance of his errors. Another factor: The FEC, which would have to vote to
launch an audit, is prone to deadlocking on issues that inordinately impact one party or the other – like approving a messy and high-profile probe of a
sitting president.

So, by declining public funding, Obama decreased the odds of an audit. And the FEC may not investigate due to political party affiliations of the FEC
commission members.”

http://obamashrugged.com/?p=267

May 1, 2009

“At midnight Thursday, the terms of Federal Election Commissioner Donald F. McGahn II (a Republican) and FEC Chairman Steven T. Walther (a Democrat) expired. Combined with Democrat Ellen L. Weintraub’s seat — she remains on the commission even though her term expired two years ago — President Obama has the opportunity to make his first three appointments to the six-member commission. Though FEC terms are set for six years, members are free to stay on until replacements are selected by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.”

“Josh Zaharoff, deputy program director for Common Cause, argues that, short of complete overhaul, such a proposal would be the best way to ensure real
enforcement of election laws. The long-standing existing practice “ensures that the commissioners are likely to be loyal to their political party rather than
to election laws and the American people as a whole.”

After seven months without a quorum, the restocked FEC has drawn significant criticism from campaign-finance-reform advocates for its lack of serious,
independent enforcement. There have been a series of 3-3 deadlocks on key issues, resulting in a significant increase in the percentage of dismissed cases.”

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2009/05/01/2875/president-obama%E2%80%99s-opportunity-mold-fec
April 4, 2011

“More FEC Terms Expire, But Replacements Unlikely”

“The terms of Chairwoman Cynthia Bauerly (D) and Commissioner Matthew Petersen (R) expire at the end of April. The terms of Donald McGahn (R) and Steven Walther (D) expired almost two years ago.

The longest-serving commissioner is Ellen Weintraub (D), whose term expired almost four years ago. The only commissioner who will be serving an unexpired term at the end of the month is Republican Caroline C. Hunter, whom Bush nominated in 2008, for a term that expires in April 2013.

Further complicating the confirmation process is a large list of pending issues before the FEC that will affect Obama’s own re-election campaign.
One of the biggest issues is how the FEC will write new rules in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, which would set boundaries for how
hundreds of millions of dollars can be spent by third parties in the presidential election and Congressional campaigns. The issue was so important to Obama
that he admonished the Supreme Court a few days after its decision in the case during his 2010 State of the Union address.”

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/56_105/-204592-1.html?zkMobileView=true
April 16, 2011

“FEC Launches Audit Of Obama’s 2008 Campaign”

“The FEC’s decision to audit the campaign is not surprising, given that it was the largest federal campaign in history, raising more than $750 million in
receipts. If Obama’s campaign were not audited, it would have been the first presidential nominee’s campaign to escape such scrutiny since the public
financing system was created in 1976.

The potential for the FEC’s audit became increasingly more likely as the FEC questioned some of Obama campaign filings. In all, the FEC wrote 26 letters to
Obama for America warning the campaign that if it did not adequately respond to the agency’s questions that it “could result in an audit or enforcement
action.””

“As of the end of March, Obama for America had spent nearly $3 million on legal fees since the 2008 election. In all, the president’s campaign spent three
times more on lawyers after Election Day than in the two years preceding it.

The lion’s share of Obama’s legal spending went to Perkins Coie, a well-known Democratic legal and accounting firm. Perkins Coie is representing the Obama
campaign in all major legal matters, including seven of the FEC’s known investigations involving the White House bid. In each of these cases, the FEC voted to dismiss the case or found “no reason to believe” that the Obama for America or related committees had violated any laws.

Perkins Coie may be also representing Obama for America in the FEC’s spending investigation of a Republican National Committee complaint. A few weeks before the election, the RNC alleged that Obama’s campaign accepted donations from foreign nationals, received contributions that had exceed limits and submitted fictitious donor names to the agency. The status of this investigation is unknown, though the FEC confirmed it received the complaint.”

http://www.rollcall.com/news/FEC-Launches-Obama-Campaign-Audie-205014-1.html
Jan 12, 2012

“Election Watchdogs Assail Obama on FEC Appointments”

“The groups are demanding that Obama shake up the board of commissioners at the Federal Election Commission, the only agency able to enforce campaign laws.
They say political divisions among the agency’s panel of six leaders have rendered it toothless.

“The bottom line is nothing can happen to change the commission unless the White House names new commissioners, and they are refusing to do so,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a nonpartisan advocacy group. “The result is going to be an election with no enforcement.””

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/election-watchdogs-assail-obama-on-fec-appointments/

Why would Obama, as we know him, replace the FEC board. Since early 2007, Obama has been shielded by Robert Bauer and Ellen Weintraub. That’s right, as you read above, Weintraub is still on the FEC board, four years after her term expired. And don’t forget, after Obama secured the White House, he hired Robert Bauer as general counsel. Bauer has since returned to Perkins Coie to continue helping Obama keep his records hidden.

This is a clear conflict of interest!!!

And what about attorney ethics?

As stated above, Robert Bauer knew about Obama’s natural born citizen deficiency in February of 2007 and yet he filed a request for an advisory opinion on Obama’s behalf regarding Federal Matching Funds. This is fraud!

From Citizen Wells June 2, 2011.

“From the American Bar Association.

“A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent””

“Model Rules of Professional Conduct
Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession
Rule 8.4 Misconduct”

“It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;

(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;

(e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional
Conduct or other law; or

(f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/robert-bauer-leaving-white-house-counsel-position-perkins-coie-attorney-helped-obama-hide-records-bauer-assists-obama-2012-campaign/

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-4-obama-attorneys-democrats-control-fec/

64 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Election, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, FEC, Government, Law firms, Lawyers, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Alabama Obama eligibility challenge, AL election statutes Section 17-13-6, Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots, Democrat party certified Obama, Judge Roy Moore

Posted on December 12, 2012 | 46 comments

Alabama Obama eligibility challenge, AL election statutes Section 17-13-6, Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots, Democrat party certified Obama,  Judge Roy Moore

“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

“Why do state election officials continue to ignore the US Constitution, federal election code and their own state election statutes?”…Citizen Wells

“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 Obama Ballot Challenge October 30, 2012.

“Two Motions were filed on October 18, 2012 with the first being Alabama’s Democratic Party Motion to Intervene (MTI). Make special note of Item 5 in the Motion—The Alabama Secretary of State does not object to this motion to intervene. (See link to Motion to Intervene below)

The Alabama Democratic Committee MTI argues their nominee, Mr. Obama, is “eligible, qualified and entitled” to gain access to the taxpayer supported Alabama ballot and that Alabama’s Secretary of State “does not have a duty to independently investigate the qualifications of candidates nominated by the political parties.” Their motion wouldn’t be complete without the usual “pontification on high” that their candidate’s questionable natural born citizenship status is based on “discredited conspiracy theories and outlandish claims of fraudulent and forged birth certificates.”

Attorney General Strange filed the second motion which was a Motion to Dismiss (MTD). Strange offers the following arguments:

The Secretary of State has no legal duty to investigate the qualifications of a candidate;
In regard to candidates for President, the authority to adjudge qualifications rests with Congress;
Plaintiffs have failed to join necessary parties; and
Plaintiffs’ claim is filed too late.
According to Strange the Secretary of State aka the Chief Election Officer for the state of Alabama holds no responsibility whatsoever to ensure any and/or all presidential candidates working to gain access to Alabama’s electorate meet the necessary constitutional qualifications to be on their state ballot. (See link to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss below)

Plaintiffs’ responded to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on October 24, 2012 by reiterating their Motion for Summary Judgment filed on or about October 15, 2012 “in which Plaintiffs submitted sworn affidavits that set forth evidence demonstrating that Barack H. Obama is not eligible to serve as President of the United States.” These sworn affidavits are from Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, Maricopa County, Arizona and Lead Investigator Mike Zullo, Maricopa County’s Cold Case Posse unit (see link Response to Motion to Dismiss below).

Plaintiff argues that it is clearly the legal duty of Alabama’s Chief Election Officer to “verify the eligibility of those seeking office” and when eligibility of a candidate comes into question it is their responsibility to verify and remove said party from the ballot if necessary. A recent Opinion by Alabama’s Attorney General cited by the plaintiff states –

“The Secretary of state does not have an obligation to evaluate all of the Qualifications of the nominees of political parties and independent candidates for state offices prior to certifying such nominees and candidates to the probate judges pursuant to sections1 7-7-l and l7-16-40 of the Code of Alabama. 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 [such as a candidate’s failure to file a public statement of Economic Interest], the Secretary of State should not certify the candidate.”

Clearly the sworn affidavits from Arpaio and Zullo serve as an “official source” placing into doubt at least the certifying qualifications necessary for Mr. Obama to gain access to the Alabama general election ballot. As for the remaining presidential candidates, no such “official source” has presented itself challenging their certifying qualifications.

The Plaintiff’s conclude “It is time — finally — to ensure that the person we are entrusting the highest and most powerful office of our country is eligible to serve for that office. The issue of eligibility has become a political hot potato, in effect a sticky matter for judges and courts around the nation. But the rule of law must eventually govern, without regard to politics, and cannot and should not be sidestepped through legally convenient and politically correct court rulings which ignore the plain language of the U.S. Constitution.””

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/alabamas-goode-mcinnish-v-chapman-ballot-challenge-case-update

From Judge Roy Moore.

“Judge Roy Moore will be having his Investiture (swearing in ceremony) at the Judicial Building in Montgomery on January 11 at 1:30 PM. If you would like to come I need you to give me your name and address so I can send you the ticket and info. Feel free to message me….Thanks!”

https://www.facebook.com/JudgeRoyMoore

Will newly elected AL Chief Justice Roy Moore review this case?

Let’s review Alabama election statutes.

From above:

“According to Strange the Secretary of State aka the Chief Election Officer for the state of Alabama holds no responsibility whatsoever to ensure any and/or all presidential candidates working to gain access to Alabama’s electorate meet the necessary constitutional qualifications to be on their state ballot.”

“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.”

Legally qualified means as defined by the US Constitution, US election code and Alabama election statutes.

The Alabama Democrat Party made this certification on January 18, 2012.

“CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 17-13-5, Code of Alabama, 1975, I hereby certify that the persons whose names appear below and on the following schedules filed qualifications with me for the March 13, 2012 Democratic Primary Election as candidates for the offices indicated.
President of the United States
Barack Obama

This certification is subject to such disqualifications or corrective action as hereafter may appropriately be made.
Given under my hand and the seal ofthe State Democratic Executive Committee of Alabam

a, this the 18th day of January, 2012.

H. Mark Kennedy Chairman”

http://www.sos.state.al.us/downloads/election/2012/primary/Primary_Candidate_Certification-Democratic_Party-2012-01-18.pdf

ALprimaryCert2012

What part of “qualified” from the statutes or “This certification is subject to such disqualifications or corrective action” do they not understand.

46 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Civil rights, constitution, Courts, Democrats, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Eligibility, Judges, Judicial misconduct, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Motion, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, Secretary of State, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Judge Roy Moore swearing in ceremony Judicial Building Montgomery Alabama January 11, 2013, AL Supreme Court Chief Justice Moore to hear Obama eligibility challenge?, Secretary of State Beth Chapman

Posted on December 11, 2012 | 30 comments

Judge Roy Moore swearing in ceremony Judicial Building Montgomery Alabama January 11, 2013, AL Supreme Court Chief Justice Moore to hear Obama eligibility challenge?, Secretary of State Beth Chapman

“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

“Barack Obama, show me the college loans.”…Citizen Wells

“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

Will the newly elected Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore review the recently dismissed Obama eligibility challenge filed against AL Secretary of State Beth Chapman?

From Judge Roy Moore.

“Judge Roy Moore will be having his Investiture (swearing in ceremony) at the Judicial Building in Montgomery on January 11 at 1:30 PM. If you would like to come I need you to give me your name and address so I can send you the ticket and info. Feel free to message me….Thanks!”

“Just found out that in the race for Chief Justice the largest vote spread ever to win was Judge Moore in 2000 with 152,000 votes and the second largest was Tuesday when Judge Moore won by 80,000 votes! “Moore’s victory was part of a Republican sweep of statewide offices in Alabama on Tueday. It was the 1st time since the post-Civil War Reconstruction even in the late 19th century that Democrats were shut out of office on the state level”. (Reuters)”

http://www.facebook.com/JudgeRoyMoore

From WND December 9, 2012.

“A longstanding eligibility case challenging Barack Obama’s presence in the White House soon could be headed to the state Supreme Court in Alabama, where one justice already in a court filing has questioned the authenticity of Obama’s documentation, and the incoming chief justice is a dyed-in-the-wool Constitution supporter with little tolerance for those who want to bypass the document.

The move is pending in an eligibility challenge brought by Hugh McInnish and others against the Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman.

The case most recently was turned down by a state district judge, Eugene Reese, who got his opinion into the mix by determining that the case was “ordered, adjudged and decreed” to be dismissed.

The case calls for a determination that Chapman “has a duty to verify the eligibility of those seeking office.”

In a recent brief in the case, attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and now of the Klayman Law Firm in Washington, noted that while the state is arguing it should not be tasked with making sure candidates are eligible, the submission by the state itself suggests otherwise.

“[An attorney general’s opinion] is not case precedent binding on this court … Nevertheless, it constitutes an admission by Alabama’s chief law enforcement officer on behalf of the state that if the Secretary of State has knowledge gained from an official source about a candidate’s eligibility then she ‘should not’ certify the candidate.”

The issue is the conflict over the requirements of the U.S. Constitution, which demands, “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…”

While Obama’s campaign first released a representation of a short-form birth document from Hawaii, and the White House later officially posted online a representation of a long-form certificate, the authenticity of both of those documents has been questioned.

A special Cold Case Posse assembled by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio concluded that the long-form document was a fabricated image built on a computer.

At last word, it was investigating the possibility of forgery and fraud charges.

“Plaintiffs have shown, backed by sworn affidavits from an ‘official source,’ Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio and his investigator, Mike Zullo, that Barack H. Obama is not a natural born citizen eligible to be president. … There is credible evidence that Mr. Obama was not born within the United States and that his birth certificate or other identifying documents are fraudulent,” Klayman argued.

For one thing, a publisher promoting Obama as an author for years promoted in a biography of Obama that he was a native Kenyan.

“The secretary of state, having the power to certify candidates, can surely de-certify – in effect disqualify – them if they are found to be ineligible. Mr. Obama proceeded at his own risk. He defrauded the people of the state of Alabama as well as the other voters in this country, and incredibly has served an entire presidential term without once having to prove that he was indeed a natural born citizen, despite all the evidence to the contrary,” the plaintiffs argued.

The brief said even though the dispute is a “hot potato,” “the rule of law must eventually govern, without regard to politics, and cannot and should not be sidestepped through legally convenience and politically correct court rulings which ignore the plain language of the U.S. Constitution.”

But many court cases have made such arguments, and have prompted dismissals by “hot potato”-wary judges.

This one, should it appear before the state Supreme Court as Klayman plans, would be before a panel where one judge at an earlier step in the case already has raised doubts about Obama’s authenticity.

It was when the majority of the high court denied a petition filed by McInnish seeking to require an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate before the sitting president would be allowed on the state’s ballot this year, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/2nd-bite-to-challenge-obamas-eligibility/#RO5MOEVeWM15k3XV.99

 

Thanks to commenter observer

30 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Eligibility, Judges, Lawyers, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, white house

Tagged , , ,

Donald Trump Obama $ 5 million offer press release, November 1, 2012

Posted on November 1, 2012 | 25 comments

Donald Trump Obama $ 5 million offer press release, November 1, 2012

“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

The Donald Trump offer to Barack Obama of $ 5 million for the charity of Obama’s choice has expired. Obama continues to keep his college, passport and other records hidden.

Here is the Donald Trump press release November 1, 2012.

 

25 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Columbia University, Donald trump, Election 2012, Eligibility, Harvard, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,