Category Archives: Kenya

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

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 14 comments

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

 

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Obama is not eligible

What Hawaii Health Official really said

From the Alan Keyes lawsuit

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

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

mdmikulski

14 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Senator Mike Crapo, Idaho, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged, ID senator

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 15 comments

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

 

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

A letter received from Senator Mike Crapo of Idaho
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for contacting me regarding citizenship and other
eligibility requirements for public office. I appreciate hearing
your thoughts and welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you know, some have raised questions about the eligibility
of President-elect Barack Obama (D-Illinois) and Senator John
McCain (R-Arizona) for the office of President of the United
States. Having confidence in the electoral process and our public
officials is critical to maintaining public confidence in our
democracy. As such, the voters must be confident in the integrity
of the electoral process and our electoral institutions.

The Constitution and federal law require that, among other things,
only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to
parents who were both American citizens) may be President of the
United States. In President-elect Obama’s case, some individuals
have filed lawsuits in state and federal courts alleging that he
has not proven that he is an American citizen, but each of those
lawsuits have been dismissed. Furthermore, both the Director of
Hawaii’s Department of Health and the state’s Registrar of Vital
Statistics recently confirmed that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu,
Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and, as such, meets the constitutional
citizenship requirements for the presidency. If contrary
documentation is produced and verified, this matter will necessarily
be resolved by the judicial branch of our government under the
Constitution.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me
in the future on this or other matters of interest to you. For more
information about the issues before the U.S. Senate as well as news
releases, photos, and other items of interest, please visit my Senate
website, http://crapo.senate.gov.

Sincerely,”
Senator Mike Crapo states the following:

“The Constitution and federal law require that, among other things,
only native-born U.S. citizens (or those born abroad, but only to
parents who were both American citizens) may be President of the
United States.”

Mr. Crapo is close but not exact. The Constitution says “Natural
Born.” Having parents that are US citizens is required no matter
where the presidential candidate is born.

Mr. Crapo apparently is not well informed regarding the many lawsuits
that challenge Obama’s eligibility.

Mr. Crapo goes on to make one of the more popular ill informed
statements:

“Furthermore, both the Director of Hawaii’s Department of Health
and the state’s Registrar of Vital Statistics recently confirmed
that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961 and,
as such, meets the constitutional citizenship requirements for
the presidency.”

That statement is wrong on two counts.
1. The Hawaii Health Department Official did not state that Obama was
born in Hawaii.

2. Being born in Hawaii would not meet the constitutional requirement
for natural born citizen.

Mr. Crapo then states.

“If contrary documentation is produced and verified, this matter will
necessarily be resolved by the judicial branch of our government
under the Constitution.”

Contrary documentation exists. Obama’s father being a citizen of
Kenya under British rule disqualifies Obama as being a natural born
citizen. What is equally disturbing about the statement is that it
is another example of buck passing that has endlessly been going on
during the 2008 election. It is important for Mr. Crapo and all
congressmen to remember that Congress as well as the judicial system
is part of the checks and balances that we rely on.

Senator Crapo, You are ill informed on several important aspects of
the 2008 election and Barack Obama’s eligibility. If you have any
questions or comments please respond. A non answer will be the same as
an answer.

Why Obama is not eligible

What Hawaii Health Official really said

idcrapo

15 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , , ,

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

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 22 comments

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

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

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

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

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

Article II of the Constitution provides that “no Person except a
natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time
of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office
of President.” The Constitution, however, does not specify how that
qualification for office is to be enforced. As you may know, a voter
recently raised this issue before a federal court in Pennsylvania. On
October 24, 2008, the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania released an order in the case of Berg v.Obama.
In that case, the plaintiff, Phillip Berg, raised the same issue that
your letter raises regarding proof of the President-Elect’s birthplace.
Through his lawsuit, Mr. Berg sought to compel President-Elect Obama to
produce a certified copy of his birth certificate.

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

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

Mel Martinez

Senator Mel Martinez states the following:

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

Mr. Martinez is correct in that statement.

However, Mr. Martinez goes on to say:

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

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

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

Mr. Martinez then states:

“And, he has now been duly elected”

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

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

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

Why Obama is not eligible

flmartinez

22 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Senator Roger F Wicker, Mississippi, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 25 comments

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

US Constitution

Hall of Shame

 

A letter received from Senator Roger F Wicker regarding
Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for contacting me regarding questions surrounding President
-Elect Obama’s citizenship. I am glad to have the benefit of your views
on this issue. The U.S.Constitution requires the President to be a
natural-born citizen. In August, a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court
in Philadelphia alleged that President-Elect Obama was born in Kenya, not

Hawaii. The lawyer who filed this action has also filed suits alleging
President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney knew about the September 11
terrorist attacks. He also has called for Supreme Court Justices Clarence
Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and former Justice Sandra Day O’Conner to disbar
themselves for their decision in the 2001 Bush v. Gore. In October, a
federal judge dismissed the Obama suit, and on Dec 8, 2008 , the Supreme
Court declined to hear the emergency appeal without opinion. Several
similar cases have been filed in various courts across the country and are
going through the judicial process. It appears unlikely that Senate
Democratic leaders will bring up legislation related to this issue

in the 111th Congress. I hope this information is helpful. Please do not
hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance. With best wishes I am
Sincerely yours,

Roger F. Wicker”

Senator Roger F Wicker states the following:

“The U.S.Constitution requires the President to be a natural-born citizen.”

Apparently Mr. Wicker does not understand what this means.
Secondly, for whatever reason, he then tries to impune the character of
Mr. Berg instead of addressing the real issue, Obama’s eligibility.
He apparently has only a vague idea of the active court cases and the
reasons for some dismissals. Lastly, he refers to potential legislation
that is irrelevant to vetting Obama.
It is important for Mr. Wicker and all congressmen to remember that
Congress as well as the judicial system is part of the checks and
balances that we rely on.

Senator Wicker, if you have any questions about the US Constitution or
Barack Obama’s eligibility, I will be glad to answer them. If you have
any questions or comments, please respond.

Why Obama is not eligible

mswicker

25 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , ,

US Constitution Hall of Shame, 2008 Election, US Congress, Senators, Representatives, Constitutional crisis, Electoral College votes, Connecticut, Secretary of State, CT Supreme Court Justice, Attorney General, Susan Bysiewicz, Chase T. Rogers, Richard Blumenthal

Posted on December 29, 2008 | 7 comments

This is the kickoff article on a series called “Constitution Hall of Shame.”
It is clear that we already have a constitutional crisis in the country before
Barack Obama theoretically gets inaugurated. The US Constitution has been
ignored, misunderstood and trampled on during the 2008 election year. We not
only have a candidate, Obama, that is clearly ineligible, but probably is not
a US citizen, i.e, illegal alien. Barack Obama, who has sworn to uphold the
Constitution, has thumbed his nose at the rule of law and American public.
So, to add to the normal political bias and posturing and tradition based
election processes, we now have a total disregard for the US Constitution.

The US Congress will meet soon to count and authenticate the Electoral
College vote.

“January 8, 2009

Counting Electoral Votes in Congress
Public Law 110-430 changed the date of the electoral vote in Congress in 2009
from January 6 to January 8. This date change is effective only for the 2008
presidential election. The Congress meets in joint session to count the
electoral votes (Congress may pass a law to change the date). The President
of the Senate is the presiding officer. If a Senator and a House member jointly
submit an objection, each House would retire to its chamber to consider it.
The President and Vice President must achieve a majority of electoral votes
(270) to be elected. In the absence of a majority, the House selects the
President, and the Senate selects the Vice President. If a State submits
conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting
concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes
of the electors certified by the Governor of the State would be counted in
Congress.” Read more

Since the Electoral College vote can be challenged in Congress, we will focus
on senators and representatives that have made comments that clearly indicate
that they do not take their oath of office seriously. We will give them a
chance to respond and atone for their dereliction of duty. This will also
serve as a forum to educate and hold accountable their colleagues.

The first member of the Constitution Hall of Shame is not a congressman. It
is the state of Connecticut and includes the Secretary of State, Susan
Bysiewicz, State Supreme Court Justice Chase T. Rogers and State Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal. Here is the damning paragraph in a
letter received from Susan Bysiewicz:

“On November 3, 2008 Connecticut State Supreme Court Chief Justice
Chase T. Rogers dismissed the case after hearing testimony from my
attorneys and State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal and the
Greenwich resident who filed the action.  The plaintiff, Cort Wrotnowski,
alleged that I should not have placed Senator Obama’s name on the ballot.
The court was satisfied that officials in Hawaii have stated
that there is no doubt that the Democratic presidential candidate
was born there and that the state’s health department possesses
Senator Obama’s original birth certificate.  This is now a matter
of public record.”


Why Obama is not eligible

What Hawaii Health Official really said

From the Alan Keyes lawsuit

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

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

So, Susan Bysiewicz, Chase T. Rogers, Richard Blumenthal,
what is your excuse?

Ignorance
Apathy
Party politics
Fear

Please respond with your reasons for your behaviour.

An apology to the American public is in order.

ct3

A new page at the top of the Citizen Wells blog will be devoted to the
Constitution Hall of Shame.

7 Comments

Posted in Alan Keyes, Announcements, Attorney General, Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, COLB, Connecticut, Constitution Hall of Shame, Cort Wrotnowski, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Government, Hawaii, impeachment, indictment, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Keyes lawsuit, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Secretary of State, Senator Obama, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

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

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

Posted on December 18, 2008 | 33 comments

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 7

One or more of the following events should happen:

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

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

Barack Obama

Prove you are eligible

or

Step down

 

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

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

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

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

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

What Acorn and Community Organizers are really about

Think Obama has been looking out for you?

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

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

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

 

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

Prove you are eligible to be president or step down.

 

33 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

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

Posted on December 16, 2008 | 17 comments

“Ignorance is not bliss.”

“Knowledge is Power.”

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

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

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

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

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

California Certificate of Voters is questionable

Do we have any takers?

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

Recall initiatives, impeachment, removal from office?

2004 MN Certificate of Vote

mncertofvote

17 Comments

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

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

2008 Election Certificate of Vote, Electoral College Electors, California example, Secretary of State, US Constitution, Governor, Alan Keyes, Lawsuit, Obama not eligible, Citizen Wells, Democratic Disaster, December 16, 2008

Posted on December 16, 2008 | 43 comments

“Ignorance is not bliss.”

“Knowledge is Power.”

The Citizen Wells blog and many other citizens have been busy for months
informing state officers, election officials, Electoral College Electors
and judges of eligibility issues surrounding Barack Obama and reminding
those people of their duty under the US Constitution, federal and state
laws. Despite these warnings and reminders, the states have plodded along
based on tradition, ignorance and party politics. Numerous lawsuits in
state and federal courts as well as the US Supreme court should have served
as a huge warning that something was wrong. We need someone like Harry
Truman to remind everyone that “The buck stops here.”

The Electoral College met yesterday and the next step in the process is for
state officials to prepare a certificate of vote and send it to the US Senate
and other locations described below. This is a very important document and in
highest sense of the word a legal document. The format of the document is
left up to the states. Remember, all of those people involved in the election
process are sworn to uphold the US Constitution. However, some of the states
have wording in their documents as a reminder of the obligation to uphold
the various laws.

We will focus on California for multiple reasons.

The following is taken from the 2004 certificate of vote:

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

From the dictionary:

pursuant to

in conformance to or agreement with; “pursuant to our agreement”; “pursuant to the dictates of one’s conscience”  

Now consider the following:

Electoral College Questions and Answers

Citizen Wells letter to Electoral College Electors

The Alan Keyes lawsuit is still alive questioning the eligibility
of Barack Obama.

The CA Secretary of State was contacted by the Citizen Wells blog,
the Democratic Disaster organization and numerous other entities.

It is clear to even a casual observer that Barack Obama is not
eligible to be president and that Electors in CA and throughout
the nation, despite compelling evidence that Obama is not eligible,
plodded along and engaged in the worst kind of party politics, and
violated the US Constitution.

2004 CA Certificate of Vote

cacertofvote2004

Electoral College Vote and subsequent procedures:

4.   Hold the Meeting of Electors
On the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (December 15, 2008), the electors meet in their respective States. Federal law does not permit the States to choose an alternate date for the meeting of electors – it must be held on December 15, 2008. The State legislature may designate where in the State the meeting will take place, usually in the State capital. At this meeting, the electors cast their votes for President and Vice President.

If any electors are unable to carry out their duties on the day of the Electoral College meeting, the laws of each State would govern the method for filling vacancies. Any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of electors must be decided under State law at least six days prior to the meeting of the electors.

See Title 3, Section 6 of the U.S. Code
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law requiring electors to vote in accordance with the popular vote in their States. Some States have such requirements.

5.   Prepare the Certificate of Vote
Federal law does not govern the general appearance of the Certificate of Vote. The format is determined under the law or custom of the submitting State. The electors must execute six Certificates of Vote. Federal law requires that the Certificates be prepared and authenticated in the following manner:
The Certificates of Vote must contain two distinct lists, one for President and one for Vice President.
The Certificates must list all persons who received electoral votes for President and the number of electors who voted for each person.
The Certificates must list all persons who received votes for Vice President and the number of electors who voted for each person.
The Certificates do not contain the names of persons who did not receive electoral votes.
Each of the six Certificates of Vote must be signed by all of the electors.

One of the six Certificates of Ascertainment provided to the electors by the Governor must be attached to each of the six Certificates of Vote.

Finally, each of the six pairs of Certificates must be sealed and certified by the electors as containing the list of electoral votes of that State for President and Vice President.
6.   Distribute the Paired Certificates of Vote and Certificates of Ascertainment
The six pairs of Certificates must be sent to the designated Federal and State officials as follows:
One is sent by registered mail to:
The Honorable Richard B. Cheney
President of the United States Senate
The Capitol
Washington, DC 20510

Two are sent by registered mail to:
Allen Weinstein
Archivist of the United States
National Archives and Records Administration
c/o Office of the Federal Register (NF)
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001

Two are sent to:

The Secretary of State of each State.

One of these is held subject to the order of the President of the United States Senate or the Archivist of the United States in case the electoral votes fail to reach the Senate or the Archivist.
The other one is to be preserved by the Secretary of State for public inspection for one year.
One is sent to:

The Chief Judge of the Federal District Court located where the electors meet.

It is held subject to the order of the President of the United States Senate or the Archivist of the United States in case the electoral votes fail to reach the Senate or the Archivist.
The statutory deadline for the designated Federal and State officials to receive the electoral votes is December 24, 2008. Because of the very short time between the meetings of the electors in the States on December 15 and the December 24 statutory deadline, followed closely by the counting of electoral votes in Congress on January 6, 2009, it is imperative that the Certificates be mailed as soon as possible.

We strongly recommend that the sealed pairs of Certificates be taken to the Post Office on December 15, or no later than the morning of December 16, to minimize delays that could occur during the holiday mail season. Some States may find it useful to alert their local Postmaster to the extraordinarily important nature of the mailing. When the paired Certificates of Vote and Certificates of Ascertainment have been delivered to the designated Federal and State officials, the States’ Electoral College duties are complete.

Prior to the election this year, the Legal Staff of the Office of the Federal Register will telephone Secretaries of State and other election officials to establish contact with the States and assure the smooth operation of the Electoral College process.

Read more here:

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/state_responsibilities.html#vote

 

43 Comments

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

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

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

Posted on December 15, 2008 | 59 comments

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

 

08A469

 

 

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

 

 

The application for stay and/or injunction addressed

 

 

to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.

 

 

 

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

Electoral College Questions and Answers

Citizen Wells letter to Electoral College Electors

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

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

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

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

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

Here is the heart of the complaint

“HOLDING BY THE PLAINTIFF

 

Holding Regarding the Role of the State Supreme Court
 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Holding regarding Responsibility of the Secretary of State in National Elections
 

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

 

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

 

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

 

From:  Connecticut General Statutes

 

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

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

 

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

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

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Citizen Wells comment

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

 

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

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

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

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

December 2, 2008

Leo Donofrio

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

59 Comments

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

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Patrick Fitzgerald, Indict Obama, Blagojevich arrest indicts Obama, December 12, 2008, Barack Obama rigged IL Health Facilities Planning Board, Citizen Wells contacted Fitzgerald and US Justice Department, Obama arrest?

Posted on December 12, 2008 | 31 comments

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 3

One or more of the following events should happen:

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

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

 

Yesterday, Thursday, December 11, 2008 the Citizen Wells blog posted
an article that ended with:

“Since Barack Obama is attempting to sneak through the election
process with a great many legal questions clouding his past and
since the American public needs and depends on the Judicial Branch
of government to protect it from criminals and imposters, I
Citizen Wells, on behalf of the American public, ask that Mr.
Patrick Fitzgerald or any authorized employee of the US Justice
Department, present Mr. Barack H. Obama with an indictment and/or
Criminal Complaint at the earliest possible moment, with time being
of the essence. The Electoral College meets next week and it is
imperative that we do all that is in our power to prevent a
constitutional crisis in this country.”

Barack Obama’s role in rigging the IL Health Facilities Planning Board
by reducing the number of members from 15 to 9 and therefore allowing
Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine and Rod Blagojevich to control the board with
only 5 members, is examined in detail. The indictments and criminal
complaints of Rezko, Levine, Blagojevich and Weinstein reveal their
involvement in board corruption. Obama should be indicted as well.

Citizen Wells plea to Patrick Fitzgerald and US Justice Dept.

Today, Friday, December 12, 2008, Patrick Fitzgerald’s office at
the US Justice Department was notified by telephone call and fax
of the Citizen Wells article and request to indict and/or arrest
Barack H Obama. In addition to Patrick Fitzgerald, the following
USDOJ employees were listed to be copied on the fax:

Reid Schar
Carrie Hamilton
Chris Niewoehner

31 Comments

Posted in Announcements, Attorney General, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Blagojevich, Chicago, Chicago machine, Chief Justice, Citizens for the truth about Obama, COLB, Congress, Crime, Criminal Complaint, Democrats, DNC, Dr. Robert Weinstein, Election, Election 2008, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Electoral College, Electors, Emil Jones, Government, Hawaii, Illinois, Impeach Senator Obama, impeachment, indictment, Indonesia, Judges, Justice, Kenya, Logan Act, McCain Obama, Natural born citizen, News, Obama impeachment, Obama indictment, Obama Nation, Obama records, Patrick Fitzgerald, PHILIP J. BERG, Politics, Rezko, Secretary of State, Selective Service, Senator Obama, Stuart Levine, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, U.S. Supreme Court, United States, US Constitution, Voter fraud, voters

Tagged , , , , , , ,