Category Archives: Hollister lawsuit

Supreme Court rejects Hollister appeal, Obama eligibility, Obama not natural born citizen

Supreme Court rejects Hollister appeal, Obama eligibility, Obama not natural born citizen

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

***  Update Below ***

From CNN March 7, 2011.

“The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from a so-called “birther” advocate to examine whether President Barack Obama was actually born in the United States.

By questioning whether Obama was born in the country, birthers continue to question whether he meets the constitutional standard of eligibility for the presidency. Several birther petitions have been rejected by the courts.”

This was an amazingingly objective report from CNN.

*** Update March 7, 2011 3:15 PM ET ***

At the time of posting this article, at approx. 11:15 AM today, the entire article was presented above. The link now yields the following:

“The Supreme Court has again rejected an appeal from a “birther” proponent questioning the citizenship of President Barack Obama.

The justices Monday turned aside without comment a request for a rehearing of various claims, after dismissing the original appeal in late January.

The long-shot petition by Gregory Hollister had called on Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to withdraw from considering the constitutional claims, contending a conflict of interest by the president’s two high court appointees.

Lower federal claims had dismissed Hollister’s claims.

The justices had also dismissed earlier, unrelated lawsuits from individuals questioning Obama’s citizenship. State birth certificate records show he was born August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His mother is a native of Kansas; his father was born in Kenya.

Among the claims of various “birther” movement organizers are that the president was born in Kenya or Indonesia; that his birth certificate is a forgery; and that he had dual American-British citizenship at birth because of his father’s Kenyan heritage and therefore is not a “natural born” citizen, as is required to be eligible for president under the U.S. Constitution.

That clause 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; 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.”

The grass-roots legal issue has gained little legal or political footing, but continues to persist in the courts.

The Obama administration did not file, and the high court did not demand, a formal government response to this latest legal claim from Hollister, who said in his appeal he is a retired U.S. Air Force colonel.

The high court will often insist the Justice Department weigh in with its views on a particular constitutional issue, or when a top government official or agency is being sued, a strong sign the justices would be seriously considering accepting the appeal.

Obama and his staff produced copies of his birth certificate when he was running for president in 2008, and have previously dismissed questions over his citizenship.

The respondent in the case was labeled as “Barry Soetoro,” the name Hollister said Obama used when he was a child living in Indonesia with his family. The case is Hollister v. Soetoro (10-678).

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll in July found that 71% of Americans believed Obama definitely or probably was born in the United States, while 27% said he definitely or probably was not. The sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The largest support for the idea he was definitely or probably not born in the United States was among Republicans, at 41%, compared with Independents, at 29%, and Democrats, at 15%. The sampling error for that breakdown was plus or minus 5.5 percentage points.”

Robert Bauer et al illegally scheme with Obama, Attorney ethics, Rules of Professional Conduct, Criminal or fraudulent conduct

 Robert Bauer et al illegally scheme with Obama, Attorney ethics, Rules of Professional Conduct, Criminal or fraudulent conduct

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

“Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.”… US Code, TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384

Robert Bauer, husband of Anita ( Mao Tse-Tung is my hero) Dunn, is at it again. He is aiding Obama in his continued efforts to keep his birth certificate and other records hidden. At this point, it must be assumed that Bauer’s primary motivation is to avoid jail time for himself.

 From the Birther Report December 30, 2010.

“This is an update to the Colonel Gregory Hollister v. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, et al, lawsuit that was in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court of the United States website now shows the Petition for Writ of Certiorari was Distributed for Conference of January 14, 2011. The two previous filings by Col. Hollister in the Appeals court embedded below. That makes three eligibility cases against Obama before the Supreme Court in 2010, more details on the other cases here and here.

Click on the screen shot below and check out the law firm that is still defending Barry Soetoro AKA Barack Hussein Obama Soebarkah.

Cycle of Discernment at Free Republic laid out the expensive details;

(Robert Bauer-married to former Obama WH Communications Director Anita Dunn, who professed that Mao Tse-Tung was a personal hero–was appointed last year as White Counsel by Obama and had been the lead atty representing Obama in blocking release of any Obama documents).”

Read more:

You remember Robert Bauer.

From Citizen Wells September 24, 2008.

“44. Mr. Berg then alleges that Barack Obama,
the Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve
as President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges
(contrary to fact) that Senator Obama is not a natural-born citizen.”
“Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
607 Fourteenth Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003”

From Citizen Wells September 28, 2010.

“Robert F. Bauer was a partner in Perkins Coie before becoming White House Counsel in 2009. Bauer also began defending Barack Obama in eligibility lawsuits in 2008. Perkins Coie has represented Obama for America for over 2 years. Bauer is married to Anita (“I look to Chairman Mao”) Dunn.

Here is the payment total to Perkins Coie from Obama for America for the second quarter 2010.”

Many people are aware of the concept of attorney client previlege. Most people are not aware of the following.

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.”

I stated in 2008 that Obama had to win the popular vote and scheme his way into the White House to avoid prosecution. Likewise, it is apparent that Robert Bauer is fighting to avoid prosecution of himself.

Hollister v Soetoro update, December 6, 2010, Colonel Gregory Hollister lawsuit, Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Hollister v Soetoro update, December 6, 2010, Colonel Gregory Hollister lawsuit, Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Despite the Orwellian lies being told in the mainstream media by the likes of Anderson Cooper, not only have there been more than a couple of lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility, the second one in a few weeks is on the US Supreme Court docket and it was also filed by a military officer.

Citizen Wells November 8, 2010.

“For Immediate Release – 8 Nov 2010

Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al Petition for Writ of Certiorari Distributed for Conference by the Justices on 23 Nov 2010

Contact Attorney Mario Apuzzo for more details and comment at:
Mario Apuzzo, Esq., Jamesburg, New Jersey
Tel: 732-521-1900, Fax: 732-521-3906
CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Pennsylvania USA
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner et al v Obama et al

Read more:

Gregory S. Hollister, Colonel, USAF, Retired, has a Petition for Writ of Certiorari on the docket of the US Supreme Court.

“Ladies and Gentlemen,
My lawsuit against Obama has reached the US Supreme Court (copy of Docket attached).  Our legal team has done everything gratis to this point – however, there are certain costs we cannot avoid in moving forward to get a final ruling.
Having said that, I am including a link to a website I am still refining requesting donations to help defray costs for the effort.  We have held off on doing this for two years but it is time for me to solicit help. 
Therefore, please review the US Supreme Court docket and the website at the link and provide comments, suggestions and any donations you can afford.  Please feel free to forward to any and all you think may be interested as well.
We have been trying to get a website up for our non-profit but not there yet so I have done this through our for profit corporation.  Therefore, I will donate a majority of what is contributed to our non-profit and pay tax on the remainder as “income” so you are fully aware of what we are doing.
The website link is
Sincere thanks and best regards
Greg Hollister

Gregory S. Hollister, Colonel, USAF, Retired
President, Hollister Enterprises LLC

No. 10-678  
Gregory S. Hollister, Petitioner
Barry Soetoro, et al.
Docketed: November 23, 2010
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
  Case Nos.: (09-5080)
  Decision Date: March 22, 2010
  Rehearing Denied: August 23, 2010
~~~Date~~~  ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nov 22 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 23, 2010)
Nov 22 2010 Appendix of Gregory S. Hollister filed. (Volumes I, II, III)

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~    ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:    
John David Hemenway 4816 Rodman Street, NW (202) 244-4819
  Washington, DC  20016
Party name: Gregory S. Hollister
Attorneys for Respondents:    
Neal Kumar Katyal Acting Solicitor General (202) 514-2217
  United States Department of Justice  
  950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.  
  Washington, DC  20530-0001  
Party name: Barry Soetoro, et al.

Hollister v. Soetoro aka Barack Obama update and history, Judge James Robertson biased or incompetent, Bias or conspiracy?

Hollister v. Soetoro aka Barack Obama update and history, Judge James Robertson biased or incompetent, Bias or conspiracy?

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

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial
department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to
particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that
rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must
decide on the operation of each.”

“If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the
constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature;
the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the
case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all
cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention
of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the
constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising
under the constitution should be decided without examining the
instrument under which it arises?  This is too extravagant to
be maintained.”

“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

Is Judge James Robertson biased, incompetent or part of a conspiracy?

Citizen Wells December 30, 2008.

“Berg today, with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire, filed another lawsuit in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia on behalf of Retired Colonel Hollister against Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama demanding to know Obama’s real name and if he is constitutionally qualified to be President. Plaintiff, Gregory S. Hollister, is a resident of Colorado Springs, Colorado and Hollister has “standing” and needs a decision so he knows whether or not to follow any Order of Soetoro a/k/a Obama.”

Read more:

Citizen Wells February 5, 2009.

“The following Order from DC District Court Judge James Robertson was issued for Hollister v. Soetoro yesterday:

Plaintiff’s motion to file interpleader and deposit funds with the court [#2] is frivolous and is denied. His motion to shorten time for defendants to respond to his complaint [#3] is moot and is denied. The motions of his counsel [#4, #5] for the admission pro hac vice of Philip J. Berg and Lawrence J. Joyce are in abeyance until the Court has had the opportunity, in open court, to examine their credentials, their competence, their good faith, and the factual and legal bases of the complaint they have signed.
United States District Judge”

Read more:

Citizen Wells March 6, 2009.

“The following is from a Memorandum issued by
United States District Judge James Robertson
on March 5, 2009. The Memorandum is a response
to the Hollister vs Soetoro lawsuit.”

“This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve
mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is
foolish or that America has too many lawyers with not enough to
do. Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the
blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The right thing to do
is to bring it to an early end.”
“The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force
colonel who continues to owe fealty to his Commander-in-Chief
(because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is
tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey
orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven — to the
colonel’s satisfaction — that Mr. Obama is a native-born
American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be
President. 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, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a

Read more:

The following statement by Judge Robertson should be sufficient to have him impeached:

“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, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a

Obama’s citizenship may be an issue, but it is not the critical issue, which is his natural born citizen status and eligibility for the presidency per the US Constitution. Judge Robertson’s reference to the vetting of Obama on social media sites stands on it’s own for a high level of stupidity. The quote from Marbury v Madison above is the final arbiter of Judge Robertson’s guilt.

From World Net Daily November 26, 2010.

“Supremes challenged to put Constitution above Twitter”

“The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the Constitution will trump Twitter on issues of national importance, including the eligibility of a president, which could determine the very future of the American form of government.

The request is being made in a petition for writ of certiori, or a request for the Supreme Court to review the decision of a lower appellate court, in a case brought on behalf of Col. Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force officer.

He is among the many who have brought court challenges to Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office based on doubts about whether Obama qualifies for the position under the U.S. Constitution’s demand that presidents be a “natural born citizen,” a qualification not imposed on other many other federal officers.

The pleadings submitted to the court, compiled by longtime attorney John D. Hemenway, cite the incredible importance of the claims that Obama, in fact, failed to qualify for the office.”

“The questions suggested by the petition are weighty:

  • “Did the district court examine the complaint, as required by the decisions of this and every other federal court, to see if it alleged facts to support its claims?”
  • “By refusing to consider the issue of defendant Obama not being a ‘natural born citizen’ as set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, did the district court violate its obligations to consider the issues raised by the complaint?”
  • “In … relying on extrajudicial criteria such as an assertion that ‘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’ combined with an attack on petitioner … did the district court not engage in such obvious political bias and upon extrajudicial factors as to render its opinion void?”
  • “Did the … bias engaged in lead to a decision which ignored the law as set out above and as a result place the respondent-defendant Obama above that law and the rule of law in this country generally and threaten the constitutional basis and very existence of our rule of law?”
  • “Did the courts below not completely ignore the decisions of this court and the clear language of Rule 15 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning amendments so as to compound its biased elevation of the defendant Obama above the rule of constitutional law?”

Read more:

Thanks to commenter GORDO.

Hollister v Soetoro aka Barack Obama, Update, June 3, 2010, Motion for recusal of Judge Robertson, Attorney John D. Hemenway motion

Hollister v Soetoro aka Barack Obama, Update, June 3, 2010, Motion for recusal

From Attorney John D. Hemenway.

“On behalf of Colonel Gregory Hollister, et al, Attorney John D. Hemenway filed a “Motion for Recusal” in the Colonel Gregory Hollister, et al, v. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama, et al, lawsuit now pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The Judge in question is Judge Robertson who ruled the issue of “the President’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and was otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry…,” among numerous other bias statements. Atty Hemenway cites numerous cases including a SCOTUS case regarding bias and the recusal of Judges. The Motion for Recusal embedded below the snippet speaks for itself and is well worth the time to read.

This is the same Judge that ruled that Jihadists at Gitmo are entitled to the same benefits as our Troops.

Page 18: It is evident that from the outset to the end of his second opinion the lower court judge was operating with a strong bias, much of it derived from extrajudicial sources. We have previously mentioned that the late Norbert Wiener, in his seminal work “Cybernetics” in the 1950’s said presciently that what most people did not realize was that the information revolution that was then coming and which is now upon us would mean not just the decentralization of information but the decentralization of decision making itself. We now see that with the rise of the blogosphere and the springing up of countless independent websites not part of the centralized command media that arose in the initial days of nationalized broadcasting in the 1930’s and 1940’s and 1950’s. We see today meetings in which ordinary citizens know more about what is in the details of a bill than their Member of Congress or Senator does. The dissemination is instantaneous and the rise in independent decision-making about officeholders and their doings is overwhelming. One result is a never before seen, at least since the founding days themselves, interest in the Constitution and adherence to it as a basic principle of our Rule of Law.

This inevitably has an effect upon the insistence upon an objective appearance of an absence of bias which 28 U.S.C. 455 in its present form commands. In this case the court below has become widely known in the country and will go down in history as the “blogging and twittering” judge, one for whom a sort of affirmative action progressivism is more important than protecting and preserving the Constitution sufficiently to actually analyze the issues it presents. However, in the present structure of communications, Orwellian “memory holes” become very difficult to operate despite earnest efforts.

The defendant Soetoro has in a never before seen maneuver, used a State of the Union address to try and openly intimidate the Supreme Court into not carefully adhering to the Constitution, like a Cook County politico with the courts there. He has announced at a prayer breakfast that it is not “allowed” to know about his birth documentation. Mr. Justice Thomas has observed that the issues here are being avoided. So the message has been received. Politically orchestrated “unthinkability” of course, is no substitute for the application of the Rule of Law. It presents at the very least the spectacle of decisions being made on the basis of political bias. History will not be escaped. It will reveal whether this audacious and knowing attempt to get around the Constitution and one of its most specific requirements will succeed through a tactic of seeking to intimidate and control the courts to prevent them from applying a constitutional rule of law or whether its judges will take their oath to preserve and protect the Constitution as seriously as those who have sworn the oath to preserve and protect in the military such as Colonel Hollister do. In a very real sense it is our system of a constitutional rule of law that is on trial here, and that is under attack. Those who will not defend and protect as they have sworn to do should recuse themselves.

Their decision, in adopting the opinion below, should they chose to do so, without analyzing the actual issues, is a political one echoing the bias we have set out. As such it presents at least the appearance that violates 28 U.S.C. § 455 and they are, therefore, bound to recuse themselves.

Respectfully submitted,
Counsel for Appellants”

Obama eligibility lawsuits, Update May 22, 2010, Obama attorneys, Perkins Coie, $ 261206 paid to law firm April quarter 2010, Obama hiding birth certificate and college records

Obama eligibility lawsuits, Update May 22, 2010, Obama attorneys, Perkins Coie

You have witnessed the veiled attempts from the mainstream media to cover for Obama. You have heard the irrational responses from rabid Obama supporters, heavy kool aid drinkers. And still, with the help of law firms like Perkins Coie and taxpayer funded government attorneys, Obama continues to hide his birth certificate and college records.

Perkins Coie has been busy.

How much has the Obama camp spent on private and government attorneys? Who knows. Who cares. The important fact is that he is hiding something. Something big.

 Obama for America, in the quarter ending April 2010, disbursed  $ 261,206.69 to Perkins Coie, a  law firm that has represented Obama in multiple eligibility lawsuits.

Read more

Yes, the main article is posted at the site. This is a new format and in the very early stages of development. This blog will continue on as the blog for Citizen Wells. The dot com will be a news site. This will be a long and probably slow process. Commenting will be selectively allowed on the dot com.

I continue to monitor efforts by the Obama camp that include Google and others to hide articles that reveal the truth about Obama. For years I have been in contact with other site owners and writers who are all concerned Americans. The internet continues to be attacked, Blagojevich and Obama potential witnesses continue to drop like flies. We will not be intimidated. We (that’s you and I) will continue to endeavor to get the real news out. We will do whatever it takes.

God bless.


Philip J Berg, Update, September 18, 2009, Interview, MommaE blog radio, Status of 3 cases, Berg lawsuits, Obama not eligible, Obama not natural born citizen

Philip J Berg, who filed the first lawsuit in August 2008, claiming that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president, will be interviewed on MommaE blog radio tonight, September 18, 2009 at 8:30 PM ET. Philip Berg will provide updates on his 3 cases. Attorney Berg also warned in 2008 that if we did not resolve this eligibilty issue before the general election, that we would have a constitutional crisis. That is exactly what has happened.

I just want to let you know that tonight’s guest will be Attorney Phil Berg.  Phil will be giving us updates on the status of his 3 cases that are alive and well, plus telling us the true information about a Subpoena that surfaced a few days ago with his name on it.. It should be a hot, rocking and interesting show!
I look forward to seeing you all there!  Link, time and call in number for the show is below.
Call In # 347-237-4870
5:30 PM Pacific Time
6:30 PM Mountain Time
7:30 PM Central Time
8:30 PM Eastern Time
I hope to see you all.  Please join us in the Chat room!