Category Archives: Keyes lawsuit

Barnett Keyes et al v Obama, Obama attorneys response, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Citizen Wells open thread, October 15, 2010

Barnett Keyes et al v Obama, Obama attorneys response, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

“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

What does the above statement mean? Those in denial about Obama, his character and his past tend to dismiss such statements as fiction. I assure you that it is based on solid facts, court records. Here is one of many examples.

From the Obama attorneys response to the appeal in the Barnett/Keyes lawsuit appeal in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“PAMELA BARNETT, Captain, et al., )
Plaintiffs/Appellants,

v.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, et al.,

Defendants/Appellees.”

“APPELLEES’ ANSWERING BRIEF
APPEAL FROM THE
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SANTA ANA
SA CV 09-00082 DOC
ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.
United States Attorney
LEON W. WEIDMAN
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
ROGER E. WEST
Assistant United States Attorney
First Assistant Chief, Civil Division
DAVID A. DeJUTE
Assistant United States Attorney
Room 7516 Federal Building
300 North Los Angeles Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-2461/2574
Facsimile: (213) 894-7819
Attorneys for Defendants/Appellees”

Yes, that’s right, three taxpayer funded government attorneys representing Obama, helping him to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and proof that he is eligible to be president.

Instead of presenting simple proof of eligibility, as John McCain and others have done, Obama has continued for over 2 years to avoid presenting proof.

Here is just a snippet of the legalese, the horsecrap, what I believe is an illegal manuever by government attorneys to aid and abet Obama in violating the law of the  land.
“Regarding the military plaintiffs, any injury which they may be suffering has
never been identified with any precision at all. Certainly, military personnel may
face risk of injury in the course of their duties, but the military plaintiffs have
pointed to no such concrete risks that they themselves presently face. Even if the Court could find standing on the basis of such injuries, however, it is even more highly speculative that any such injury would be redressed by a change in the identity of the Commander-in-Chief. The military plaintiffs, therefore, cannot meet the redressability prong on this basis.”

“Moreover, the military plaintiffs also lack standing because members of the
military cannot challenge the orders of a superior in a judicial forum. See, e.g.
Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296, 300, 304, 103 S.Ct 2362, 76 L.Ed.2d 586
(1984) (holding that “[c]ivilian courts must, at the very least, hesitate long before entertaining a suit which asks the court to tamper with the established relationship between enlisted military personnel and their superior officers” because “that relationship is at the heart of a necessarily unique structure of the military establishment” and noting that the “disruption of ‘[t]he peculiar and special relationship of the soldier to his superiors’ that might result if the soldier were allowed to hale his superiors into court.” (quotation omitted); United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669, 682-83, 107 S.Ct 3054, 97 L.Ed.2d 550 (1987) (holding that members of the military cannot raise Constitutional claims against military officials for injuries incident to service because “congressionally uninvited intrusion into military affairs by the judiciary is inappropriate”).”

“It is well settled that when the United States Constitution makes a “textually
demonstrable constitutional commitment” of an issue to another branch of
government, other than the judiciary, that issue presents a non-justiciable political question.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39302812/Barnett-Keyes-et-al-v-Obama-et-al-9th-Circuit-Court-of-Appeals-Appellees-Obama-Answering-Brief-10-13-10

Citizen Wells ending comment.

Aside from the fact that the attorneys helping Obama are engaging in an illegal activity, knowing full well that he has no proof of eligibility:
Congress does indeed have the right and responsibility to insure that the president is eligble. That, however, does not preclude other branches from performing their critical functions of checks and balances and highest responsibility to uphold and defend the US Constitution. Nor does any power provided by the Constitution preclude or preempt a citizen, having taken an oath to defend the Constitution or not, from adhering to the rule of law, the supreme law of the land and performing their civic duty.

Wiley S Drake, et al Alan Keyes v Obama appeal update, September 7, 2010, Obama motion to extend time to answer brief

Wiley S Drake, et al Alan Keyes v Obama appeal update, September 7, 2010, Obama motion to extend time to answer brief

From BirtherReport.com September 7, 2010.

“Just more proof that Obama & Gang are working hard to dismiss/quash Obama eligibility lawsuits. Well, in this case, filing an extension to drag it out a bit longer. Mr. Usurper, would it not be easier to just release the records these lawsuits seek? Not long ago you stated this; “The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.” …I agree 100%!!!

Text of the motion; APPELLEES’ MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANSWERING BRIEF

Appellee President Barack Obama and all other Appellees, through their counsel of record, the United States Attorney for the Central District of California, hereby respectfully move this Court for an order extending the time for thirty (30) days from the current due date of September 13, 2010, to and including October 13, 2010, for the Appellees to file their Answering Brief in this appeal. Undersigned counsel will be unable timely to complete the Answering Brief by its current due date of September 13, 2010. The reasons for the requested extension are set forth in the attached Declaration of Assistant United States Attorney David A. DeJute. This is the Appellees’ first request for an extension of time.

This motion is made pursuant to Rules 26(b) and 27 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rule 31-2.2(b) of the Rules of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and is based upon the files and records in this case and on the attached declaration of Assistant United States Attorney David A. DeJute. This request is unopposed by Appellants Wiley S. Drake, et al. but is opposed (without explanation or reason) by Appellants Pamela Barnett, Captain, et al. – DATED: September 3, 2010

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/09/obama-et-al-file-motion-for-extension.html

Obama trial, May 19, 2010, Obama indictment, Pastor James Manning, Columbia University indictment, Days 1 to 4 recaps

Obama trial, May 19, 2010, Obama indictment, Pastor James Manning

Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

Pastor James Manning of Atlah Ministries in Harlem is conducting a trial Of Barack Obama and Columbia University. Manning maintains that Obama never physically attended Columbia and that his degree was bought. Here are recaps of the proceedings of day 1 through 4 provided by the Conservative Monster website.

Day 1

“The indictment was handed down via a grand jury and the subpoenas were refused by Columbia University and the Obama administration according to the testimony. 
Indictment alleges:
 
 

 

1. Columbia Univ. and Obama conspired to defraud and commit wire fraud and mail fraud

2. Columbia Univ. knowingly concealed the fact that Obama is NOT a natural born citizen

3. Columbia Univ. aided in obstructing justice

4. Obama fraudulently obtained office of the POTUS gaining access to sensitive materials, posing a danger to national security.

5. The prosecution dropped the charges of treason and espionage to avoid complications with a death sentence.     


Pastor Manning Quotes:
 
 
 

 

1. Obama is a criminal and we will prove that in this court room

2. Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton and John McCain helped Obama win the election. Manning stated that a witness will testify that John McCain “took a dive” in the 2008 election.

3. The courts have failed and they are complicit, along with the media to cover up Obama’s alleged ineligibility.

4. Manning quoted a speech that he made at a Tea Party in June/July 2009 where he stated “We need to pursue Obama on his ineligibility, non natural born status rather than his policies, because health care will pass no matter how much you try to protest it.  

5. God told me that “Our shoes are our weapons”. Meaning that we need to march and protest to show them that we will not be silenced. “

Read more:
http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/05/14/day-one-of-the-obama-columbia-university-trial.aspx

Day 2

 

“Dr Ron Polland Video – Fraud in the USA

 
Manning then played a video of Dr Ron Polland for the court where he showed in depth how the media targeted John McCain’s possible ineligibility issues due to the fact that he was born in Panama. In many instances, the video showed how the media was biased against McCain and for Obama.

It was also interesting to see that the attacks against anyone that questioned Obama’s ineligibility were brutal, but no attacks or name calling was used against anyone that questioned McCain’s possible ineligibility. The video also claimed that Factcheck.org was allegedly the instigator that started the name calling and this is unusual since they are supposed to be non-biased.

Manning then submitted into evidence a notarized letter from Dr Polland stating that his videos were true and that he owned them. ”

“The FIRST WITNESS

Linda Bentley, the 1st witness is sworn in. Bentley is an investigative reporter from Arizona and she was a very impressing and convincing witness with her testimony on Obama’s selective service card. Bentely, also a former private investigator went into great detail how Steve Hoffman (an immigration agent) obtained Obama’s selective service records. Hoffman filed a request for Obama’s selective service records after he saw an interview with George Stephanopolous back in September 2008.

Obama stated during the interview that “he filed for selective service after he graduated from high school”. Bentley then noted that Obama graduated in 1979 and at that time there was no requirement to file a selective service card since President Ford ended that requirement back in 1975.

Bentley then stated that Hoffman noted that the filing date on Obama’s selective service card was just 6 weeks prior to when he obtained the requested information. The date filing date on the card was just two days after the Stephanopolous interview. There were many dates mentioned, but this is what your reporter is stating that he heard.

There was also an issue with the stamp on the document since there was only a two digit number year (80), rather than a four digit number (1980). Bentley questioned whether the number was made two digits to give the appearance that it was filed in 80, rather than 08 (1980 rather than 2008). ”

Read more:

http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/05/15/day-two–the-obama-columbia-university-trial-with-pastor-manning.aspx

Day 3

“In this interview Dr. Drew stated:

1. Dr Drew was the founder of the Marxist Organization at Occidental College.
2. Obama was a radical Marxist revolutionary that constantly preached about redistribution of wealth and transformation of the political system.
3. Obama had no black friends, they were only white and foreigners (Middle Eastern)
4. Obama wanted to overthrow the wealthy

5. Obama had no girlfriends and that he was not a hard working student that hit the books hard. He liked to party more than study.

6. Islam and Marxism fit together perfectly and that is why leftists and the Muslim students mixed very well.

7. Obama was always dressed very nice, had designer clothes and drove in a BMW. Obama’s friend Mohammed Chandoo from Pakistan seemed to be rolling in cash and Obama was not struggling at all. They spent their money on partying, pot and hotel rooms. ”    

Read more:

http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/05/16/recap-of-day-3-of-the-obama-columbia-university-trial-with-pastor-manning.aspx

Day 4


“Witnesses Sabbath La Fleur and her sister Precious La Fleur
Both testified that they checked the Columbia University archives and yearbooks dating from 1980-1985 and they could find no evidence or photos of any Barack Obama or Barry Soetoro. They also testified that they could not find any Phil Bonner either. Obama stated in his book that Bonner was a friend of his that attened Columbia University with him, after a transfer from Occidental college.
 
 

 

1. The professor that Obama named in his book also could not be found in the archives accorded to their testimony.
2. Nothing related to Obama’s name could be found in the Political Science dept.
3. Teachers spoke of Obama in his elementary school, his High School, Occidental College and Harvard as well, but no professors have ever mentioned him from Columbia University.
4. Obama stated that he used to hide in the Butler Library, but the witness stated that Library is a major meeting place and it is always very crowded. There is no way to hide there without meeting someone. Yet, nobody ever saw Barry in the Butler Library.  

5. There was also a theory that Obama attended the Latrice Mumumba school in Moscow during that time he claimed he was in Columbia, but this has never been proven. This school was created by the Russians to teach radical Marxism to students to help spread communism throughout the world.

6. No photos of Obama taken at his Columbia graduation ”

 

 

Read more:

http://theconservativemonster.com/2010/05/17/recap-of-day-four–the-obama-columbia-university-trial-with-pastor-manning.aspx

 

Thanks to Steve Cooper and the Conservative Monster

Glenn Beck, Citizen Wells red phone challenge, Obama college records, Obama attorneys, Occidental records, Columbia records, Harvard records, Beck insults Americans Military officers US Constitution, Glenn Beck call me on the phone

Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

 

Glenn Beck, et al, the above question is simple to answer, simple enough for a fifth grader. Lou Dobbs, while still at CNN, asked another simple question. Why doesn’t Obama just provide a legitimate birth certificate. However, Glenn Beck, the eligibility issues surrounding Obama appear to be too complex (or controversial) for you. You know, messy stuff like natural born citizen and the US Constitution. So I have decided to just focus on something real simple for you, something you can get your head around. Obama’s college records. That’s not too complex or controversial is it?

Glenn, perhaps even you at one time or another had to prove you attended a school.

Glenn Beck, you inspired me with the red phone you set up to receive calls from the Obama Administration. So I have dedicated a phone to receive calls from you. If anything I write or put in a video is incorrect, please call me anytime and let me know. The follow video, let’s call it a trailer for upcoming shows, presents some information regarding efforts to obtain Obama’s college records. I will be curious to know if you consider the three men referred to in the video as right wing idiots.  One of them is a retired military officer. You have insulted plenty of them in the past, so why not. Heck, you will probably call me an idiot. However, I must warn you, I fight back. I will not back down.

“Unlike Lou Dobbs, who on CNN of all places, asked the basic journalistic question,
why doesn’t Obama present a legitimate birth certificate, Glenn Beck, on his radio
and Fox TV show has insulted millions of concerned Americans. Many of these Americans
are current and retired military and quite a few high ranking officers. Beck often talks
out of one side of his mouth about upholding the US Constitution, while at the same time
insulting Americans exercising their First Amendment rights.

Three concerned Americans, Philip J Berg, a lifelong Democrat, former ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes
and Charles F Kerchner, USNR Commander, all requested Obama’s college records using legal
channels and were opposed by Obama attorneys.

Glenn Beck, if you have any questions or corrections to make about this video, you can call
me on the dedicated phone (Mickey Mouse red phone holding the cell phone).”

Here are some images of the documents from the video

Philip J Berg

Alan Keyes

Charles Kerchner

Obama campaign payments to law firm, Perkins Coie

Taitz v Obama, Update, January 28, 2010, US District Court, Washington DC, Summons issued, CASE #: 1:10-cv-00151-RCL

Just in from Charles Kerchner of another case, Kerchner v Obama & Congress.

U.S. District Court
District of Columbia (Washington, DC)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:10-cv-00151-RCL

TAITZ v. OBAMA
Assigned to: Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth
 Case: 1:09-mc-00346-RCL

Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Date Filed: 01/27/2010
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

 
Plaintiff 
ORLY TAITZ represented byORLY TAITZ
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway
Suite 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
(949) 683 – 5411
Fax: (949) 766 – 7603
PRO SE
V.
Defendant
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
 
Date Filed#Docket Text
01/27/20101  COMPLAINT against BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4616027174) filed by ORLY TAITZ. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(rdj) (Entered: 01/28/2010)
01/27/2010  SUMMONS (3) Issued as to BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (rdj) (Entered: 01/28/2010)

 
1:10-cv-00151-RCL TAITZ v. OBAMA
Royce C. Lamberth, presiding
Date filed: 01/27/2010
Date of last filing: 01/27/2010
 
Case Summary
Office: Washington, DC     Filed: 01/27/2010
Jury Demand: None     Demand:
Nature of Suit: 890     Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question
Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant     Disposition:
County: 88888Terminated:
Origin: 1    Reopened:

Lead Case: None
Related Case: 1:09-mc-00346-RCLOther Court Case: None
Def Custody Status:
Flags: PROSE-NP, TYPE-F

 
Plaintiff: ORLY TAITZ
Defendant: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

Pastor James Manning, Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement, Bold and Fresh, Glenn Beck Bill O’ Reilly show, Westbury NY, Saudis bought Fox, US Constitution, News blackout

We have known for over a year that Bill O’Reilly has ignored and insulted the Obama eligibility movement. Recently Glenn Beck insulted average Americans who question Obama’s eligibility and adher to the US Constitution.

From the Conservative Monster, January 23, 2010.

“Pastor Manning – Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement”

“Tonight was the “Bold and Fresh” Glenn Beck/Bill O’ Reilly show in Westbury, NY. Thousands of their loyal fans showed up and they were greeted by an enthusiastic crowd from Pastor Manning’s church as they entered the parking lot. The Fox fans were met with leaflets and church songs, it was quite a site to see. There were about 50-60 people, but their spirit was strong.

There should have been 5,000 people protesting tonight, but too many people are brainwashed by Fox News and the Tea Party movement that the Obama eligibility issue is a non-issue. I have heard so many excuses and I am not buying any of them. This issue is bigger than Watergate and that is why there is a news blackout on the entire issue on all networks.

I almost did not make this protest due to sheer exhaustion, but I knew that I had no choice to make it to Westbury, NY. Why? Because the people need to be informed of this ‘news’ that is being blacked out by all networks and print in the media. If I did not report about this protest, it would have gone unreported. I was the ONLY journalist there covering this protest.

I want everyone to know that I do like Fox and Beck, but not as much as I used to like them. Beck’s Jan. 4th attack on the American people (many of them his fans) that dared to ask Obama for evidence that he is a natural born citizen was not only betrayal, it was suspicious. 

Many of the Fox fans did not even know why we were out there protesting. One of them shouted “Communism does not work.” I approached him and I told him “We are here because Beck and O’ Reilly are part of a news blackout on the Obama eligibility issue and we want that blackout lifted.” I explained other details briefly and in under 30 seconds the gentleman said “Wow, that is interesting indeed.””

“Glenn Beck, Bill O’ Reilly, countless others in the media and both political party’s need to be held accountable if any violence breaks out when Obama is removed from office. I allege that THEY knowingly covered up this issue prior to the election to protect Obama and they betrayed this nation in the process.
FYI – Fox news was attacking Congressman Deal today on the show Cashin’ in. He is the only one in congress with the guts to send Obama a letter asking that he release his birth and school records to the public.”

Read more:

http://theconservativemonster.com/

Pastor Manning – Beck and O’ Reilly are trying to Sabotage the Obama Eligibility movement

Does this explain why Fox ignores or insults those questioning Obama’s eligibility?

Dr Orly Taitz, Update, January 11, 2010, Captain Pamela Barnett et al V Barack Hussein Obama lawsuit, Not been heard on the merits, No discovery has been granted, Quo Warranto

Just in a few minutes ago from Dr. Orly Taitz, attorney in Captain Pamela Barnett, et al V Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle L.R. Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense, Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and    President of the Senate.

Dr. Orly Taitz, Attorney-at-Law
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-3078 
California State Bar No.: 223433
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
 
Captain Pamela Barnett, et al.,                           §
                        Plaintiffs,                                     §
                                                                            §
              v.                                                           §        Civil Action:
                                                                            §
Barack Hussein Obama,                                     §        SACV09-00082-DOC-AN
Michelle L.R. Obama,                                        §         REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO
Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State,      §        MOTION TO TRANSFER;
Robert M. Gates, Secretary of Defense,             §        MOTION FOR LEAVE OF  
Joseph R. Biden, Vice-President and                  §        COURT TO FILE QUO
President of the Senate,                                      §        WARRANTO
Defendants.                                                         §
 
Here come the plaintiffs in this case (aside from Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson represented by Gary Kreep ) and concur with the brilliant suggestion by the Department of Justice and move the court to grant the Leave of Court to file Quo Warranto challenging constitutionality of position of Mr. Barack Hussein Obama as the president of the United States under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution of the United States for following reasons.
 
(1.) The case at hand has not been heard on the merits, no discovery has been granted and the court simply granted the defendants’ pretrial motion to dismiss for want of Jurisdiction, when the defendants argued that the proper jurisdiction is Washington DC. In their opposition the defendants do not deny making such an argument.
(2.) The defendants twist the truth in their opposition claiming that the court didn’t find the jurisdiction in the District of Columbia. On page 26 of the order 89 the court states: “[T]he writ of quo warranto must be brought within the District of Columbia because President  Obama holds office within that district. The quo warranto provision codified in the District of Columbia Code provides, “A Quo warranto may be issued from the United States District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States, civil and military”. D.C. Code §§16-35-1-3503. The court h! as denied the plaintiffs request to apply the District of Columbia quo warranto statute pursuant to California choice of law provisions. The court went even further by stating that “[W]hile the Court can apply the law of the other jurisdiction where appropriate, it is precluded from robbing the D.C. court of jurisdiction as to any quo warranto writ against President Obama because the D.C. Code grants exclusive jurisdiction to the District of Columbia. Plaintiff’s quo warranto demand is hereby dismissed for improper venue”.  The court dismissed plaintiffs quo warranto due to improper venue, not on the merits of the case. At this time the plaintiffs have 3 options:  A. App! ealing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, as the DC statute quoted by the court itself does not state that the venue is exclusive and other district courts cannot apply this statute anywhere else in this country from Anchorage, Alaska to Tucson, Arizona, however an appeal might take a year and a half to get to trial, which means a year and a half of further usurpation of US presidency. B. The plaintiffs can file a new case in DC, however judging by stonewalling techniques of the Department of Justice, there will be another year of pretrial motions, which means another year of usurpation of US presidency. C. Motion for leave of court to file quo warranto to be granted by this court or to be transferred by this court directly to the Chief Judge of the US District of  Columbia Royce Lamberth who currently has under submission a related case and to include by reference all the pleadings in the current case of B! arnett et al v Obama et al. This will serve the interest of justice, it will clear the jurisdiction hurdle and will give both parties an opportunity to proceed with discovery and trial on the merits of the case. As this court very eloquently stated during the July 13 hearing, that the case should not be decided on technicality but on the merits. It is important for the country and the military.
 
     The plaintiffs have filed both with the Attorney General Eric Holder and the US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor and his successor Channing Phillips a request for Quo Warranto in March and April of 2009 respectively. Undersigned has already provided the Court with copies of the Certified Mail receipts, showing that those were received.  Hundreds of concerned citizens have called the Department of justice demanding a response to Quo Warranto submission. No response was received for ten months. Letters, e-mails, faxes went unanswered. Employees of the justice department were slamming phones in the face of the citizens calling and urging a response, even when those calls came from high ranking officers of US military. The undersigned does not know what was the reason for this t! otal dereliction of duties by Attorney General Holder and DC US attorneys Taylor and Phillips: was it A Laziness? B Lack of guts and spine? C Corruption? Regardless of the reason department of Justice cannot use their own inaction as justification in denying the plaintiffs ex-relators status in filing Quo Warranto. They cannot eat the cake and have it whole. This game of hide and seek by the Attorney General Holder and US attorneys played with the plaintiffs and their counselor is infantile at best and treasonous at worst, as National Security is on the line. Recent near tragedy of NorthWest 253, slaughter of CIA agents and tragedy at Fort Hood are only a few reminders of how dangerous it is to have a Big Question Mark with numerous stolen and fraudulent social security numbers sitting in the position of the President and Commander in Chief.       
 
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the undersigned counsel respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant Leave of Court to file Quo Warranto as ex-relators in the name of the United States of America against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States and to transfer this leave of court or transfer the request for leave of court with the rest of the file as an attachment to the US District court for the District of Columbia to be assigned to Honorable Judge Royce Lamberth, chief judge for the US District Court of the District of Columbia, who currently presides over a related case.
Writ of Quo Warranto
 
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
 
I.   What is Respondent Obama’s standard and burden of proof of his birthplace under Quo Warranto and ethical duties? – Considering Obama’s first cousin Raela Odinga, Prime Minister of Kenya, sealed alleged records of Obama’s birth in Mombasa; while the State of Hawaii holds Obama’s “original” sealed birth records, allows registration of births out of State, allows registration based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence and seals original birth records.
 
II. Does the State of Hawaii’s withholding Respondent’s Obama’s original birth records by privacy laws breach the U.S. Const. by obstructing constitutional rights duties of the People to vote, and State and Federal election officers to challenge, validate & evaluate qualifications of presidential candidates based on legally acceptable and not fraudulent records and the President Elect., per U.S. Const. art. II § 1, art. VI, & amend. XX § 3?
 
III.          Does the restrictive qualification for President of “natural born citizen” over “citizen” include allegiance to the U.S.A. from birth without any foreign allegiance, as required of the Commander in Chief in time of war to preserve the Republic, including birth within the jurisdiction of the U.S.A. to parents who both had U.S. citizenship at that birth, and having retained that undivided loyalty?
 
IV.          Does birth to or adoption by a non-citizen father or mother incur foreign allegiance sufficient to negate being a “natural born citizen” and disqualify a candidate from becoming President?
 
V.           Having attained one’s majority, do actions showing divided loyalty with continued allegiance to the foreign nationality of one’s minority evidence foreign allegiance sufficient to disqualify one from being a “natural born citizen” with undivided loyalty to the U.S.A., such as campaigning for a candidate in a foreign election, or traveling on a foreign passport?
 
VI.          Does a presidential candidate or President Elect by default fail to qualify under U.S. Const., art. II § 2 and amend. XX, § 3, if they neglect their burden to provide State or Federal election officers prima facie evidence of each of their identity, age, residence, and natural born citizenship, sufficient to meet respective State or Federal statutory standards?
 
VII.        Do candidates for office disqualify themselves if they seek office under a birth name differing from a name given by adoption, or vice versa, when they neglect to provide election officers prima facie evidence of legal changes to their name, or if they neglect to legally change their name?
 
VIII.       Does a President elect fail to qualify through breach of ethical disclosure duties, and obstruction of election officers’ constitutional duties to challenge, validate and evaluate qualifications for President, by withholding or sealing records evidencing identity, age, residency, or allegiance, or by claiming privacy and opposing in court efforts by Electors, election officers, or the People to obtain and evaluate such records?
 
IX.          Does misprision by Federal election officers cause a President Elect to fail to qualify, if they neglect or refuse to challenge, validate, or evaluate qualifications of Electors or a President Elect, being bound by oath to support the Constitution and laws, after citizens provided information challenging those qualifications via petitions for redress of grievance, or by law suits?
 
X.           To uphold its supremacy and inviolability, and to preserve the Republic, does the U.S. Constitution grant standing to Citizens to bring suit or quo warranto over negligence, obstruction, misprision, or breach of constitutional duties, and protect the People’s rights?
 
Here come the plaintiffs/ ex-relators in the name of the United States of America praying this Honorable Court issue Quo Warranto writ against Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States and Commander in Chief.
 
Ex Relators are seeking Quo Warranto under District of Columbia Codes §§16-3501-16-3503 which provides for the “Writ of Quo Warranto to be issued in the name of the United States of America  against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military”.  The ex-relators assert that respondent Obama  has indeed usurped the franchise of the President of the United States and the Commander in Chief of the United States Military forces due to his ineligibility and non-compliance with the provision of the Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United  States that provides that the President of the United States has to be a Natural Born Citizen for the following reasons:
 
The legal reference and legal definitions used by the framers of the Constitution was the legal treatise “The Law of Nations” by Emer De Vattel as quoted and referenced in the Article 1, Section 8. The Law of Nations defines “…Natural Born Citizens, are those in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the conditions of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.” Book 1, Chapter 19, §212. In his book Dreams From my Father   as well as on his web site Fight the Smears respondent Obama admitted to the fact that his father was never a US citizen, but rather a British citizen from a British colony of Kenya and based on British Nationality act respondent Obama was a British citizen at birth and a K! enyan citizen from age 2 on December 12, 1961 when Kenya became an independent nation. As such, for the reason of his allegiance to foreign nations from birth respondent Obama never qualified as a Natural Born citizen. 
 
In spite of some 100 legal actions filed and 12 Citizen Grand Jury presentments and indictments Respondent Obama due to his ineligibility  never consented to unseal any prima facie documents and vital records that would confirm his legitimacy for presidency.
 
          The state of Hawaii statute 338-5 allows one to get a birth certificate based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborative evidence from any hospital. Respondent Obama refused to unseal a birthing file (labor and delivery file) evidencing his birth from the Kapiolani Hospital where he recently decided, that he was born. Similarly, respondent Obama refused to consent to unseal his original birth certificate from the Health Department in the state of Hawaii. The original birth certificate is supposed to provide the name of th! e hospital, name of the attending physician and signatures of individuals in attendance during birth. As such there is no verifiable and legally acceptable evidence of his birth in the state of Hawaii.
Circa 1995 Respondent Obama has made an admission in his book Dreams from My Father that he has a copy of the original birth certificate, when describing a certain article about his father he write “…I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms…” In spite of the fact that respondent Obama has a copy of his original birth certificate, he released for public consumption only a COLB, an abbreviated certification of life birth which was issued in 2007 and does not provide any verifying information, such as name of the hospital and name of the attending physician and signatures, which infers that he knows that he is not eligible and actively trying to obfuscate the records in order to usurp US presidency. An affidavit from one of the most prominent forensic document experts, Sandra Ramsey Lines, previously submitted to this court, states t! hat authenticity of COLB and inference of the US birth cannot be ascertained based on COLB alone without examining the original birth certificate in Hawaii, that respondent Obama refuses to unseal and present in court and to the public at large.
 
As respondents schools records from Indonesia, previously submitted, show him the citizen of Indonesia under the name of Barry Soetoro, and there is no evidence of legal name change upon his repatriation from Indonesia, there is a high likelihood of the scenario whereby the respondent was sworn in as a president not only illegitimately due to his allegiance to three foreign nations, but also under a name that was not  his legal name at the time of inauguration and swearing in as the president. 
 
Affidavits from licensed private investigators Neil Sankey and Susan Daniels, previously submitted to this court, show that according to national databases respondent Obama has used as many as 39 different social security numbers, none of which were issued in Hawaii, which in itself is an evidence of foreign birth. Most egregious is the fact that the respondent has used for most of his life in Somerville Massachusetts, Chicago, Illinois and currently in the White House SSN XXX-XX-4425, which was issued in the state of Connecticut between 1976-1979 and assigned to ! an individual born in 1890, who would have been 120 years old, if he would be alive today. Respondent never resided in the state of Connecticut and he is clearly not 120 years old. There is such a high probability of criminal acts of identity theft and social security fraud committed by the respondent that the undersigned requests this Honorable court to use its inherent powers to order Sua Sponte an evidentiary hearing on this particular issue for possible criminal prosecution of identity theft and social security fraud, as the respondent has submitted himself to the jurisdiction of this Honorable court and can be brought to a separate evidentiary hearing to ascertain if fraud was perpetrated upon the court by assertion of false identity, even if the underlying case is not heard or closed for one reason or another.  The undersigned requests to bar the US attorney’s office from representing the respondent in such hearing based on US Code 44 Section 22 and due to obvious inherent conflict of interest.
 
Wherefore the plaintiffs ex-relators in the name of the United States of America are requesting this Honorable Court to issue a writ of Quo Warranto against a respondent Barack Hussein Obama and order an evidentiary hearing whether fraud upon the court was committed and whether criminal charges should be brought  against the respondent for fraud, identity theft and social security fraud.
 
 
s/ DR ORLY TAITZ ESQ
:__________________________________
. Orly Taitz, Esq. (California Bar 223433)
 for the Plaintiffs
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688
Tel.:  949-683-5411; Fax: 949-766-7603
E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com
 
 
 
 
PROOF OF SERVICE
 
     I, the undersigned Orly Taitz,  hereby declare under penalty of perjury that on this, 01.06.2010, I provided electronic copies of the Plaintiffs’ above-and-foregoing Notice of Filing to all of the following non-party attorneys whose names were affixed to the “STATEMENT OF INTEREST” who have appeared in this case in accordance with the local rules of the Central District of California, to wit:
ROGER E. WEST roger.west4@usdoj.gov (designated as lead counsel for President Barack Hussein Obama on August 7, 2009)
 
DAVID A. DeJUTTE
FACSIMILE (213) 894-7819
 AND EXECUTED ON THIS 01.06.2010
 
/s/Orly Taitz
 
Dr. Orly Taitz Esq
29839 Santa Margarita PKWY
Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Obama not president, Obama not natural born citizen, Internet billboard, Kenyan born, Obama sr Kenyan and British citizen, Sarah Obama, African news, Obama not eligible, US Constitution

Article II, Sec. 1, cl. 5 of 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. . .”

From the 20th Amendment to the US Constitution.
“or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify,
then the Vice President elect shall act as President until
a President shall have qualified;”

According to the US Constitution, the supreme law of the
land, Barack Obama is not President of the United States.
No Chief Justice administering the oath of office,
No  oath sworn by a “president elect” makes one president.
There are 3 mandatory requirements to achieve a legal inauguration.

  • A qualified president elect.
  • Sufficient votes by the Electoral College.
  • Certification and count of Electoral College votes by
    Congress

I am sick and tired of good, hard working Americans being insulted, being ignored, being attacked for questioning the eligibility of Barack Obama. People that are supposed to look after our best interest and the best interest of this country, are taking their cues from political agendas, lazily accepting status quo or being bought. This includes the Mainstream Media, State Election officials, US Congressmen, judges of all ranks and certainly the Obama camp of left wing socialists. Even the best of those in the media, such as Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck have either stayed away from this constitutional crisis issue or joined in belittling “birthers.”

Many of us are guessing why those on Fox are not covering this issue. The consensus, I believe, is that Fox Management has said no to covering this issue. Even if the people doing research for Fox were restrained or bought off, O’Reilly, Hannity and Beck are not stupid enough to not get it.

So, therefore, The Citizen Wells blog is going to do two things.

1. Each day, a fact sheet, truths and facts that are self evident about Obama’s eligibility including interviews with Sarah Obama, Barack’s Kenyan grandmother, facts about Obama’s birth and reports from media in the US and Africa. This will serve as an Internet Billboard and will be posted everyday until either someone in the MSM accurately reports on this or action is taken by a judge or elected official.

2. I am issuing a challange to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and others in the media to step up and do their jobs. I will answer any questions they may have, debate them and I challenge them to dispute the facts.

To my knowledge, the only person in the MSM who has covered Obama’s eligibilty issue to any extent is Lou Dobbs and he did this on CNN of all places. Mr. Dobbs consistently stated his no brainer question again recently on the O’Reilly show on Fox. Lou Dobbs on CNN earlier referred to the COLB presented by the Obama camp as a piece of paper referring to another piece of paper. He then simply stated why doesn’t Obama present an authentic birth certificate. We applaud you Mr. Dobbs. This is such a common sense basic question to ask yet few in the media have asked it.

The eligibilty issues surrounding Barack Obama have been extensively covered on this blog and many other sites. To not cover this on the mainstream media is certainly unprofessional, un American and I believe criminal.

I am challenging those in the media to do their jobs, to serve their customers, their fellow Americans and cover this crisis. You are being out scooped and many of you are going down the tubes fast. That is no surprise. I am also challenging those on Fox, the only TV network to seriously question Obama and his agenda. O’Reilly, Hannity and Beck, if you do not cover this story, it will eventually rise to the surface and you will be lumped together with the masses of biased, leftist, talking heads that pretend to do journalism and reporting.

I am personally challenging you. Anyone have the guts and integrity to take me and the American people on?

Wells

Bill O’Reilly, Dr Orly Taitz lawsuit, O’Reilly uninformed, Fox, O’Reilly Factor, Obama not natural born citizen, Alan Keyes, Major Stefan Cook, YouTube video, So simple even O’Reilly can understand

Bill O’Reilly’s

cowardly treatment of Orly Taitz

and the American Public

Part II

Last Night on the O’Reilly factor on Fox, Bill O’Reilly and two fawning females belittled Dr. Orly Taitz and millions of Americans who support the US Constitution and want proof that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen. Commenter Jacqlyn Smith of this blog has presented a video that explains Obama’s eligibility issues in a manner that even Bill O’Reilly can understand.
From the Youtube video:
“Life and Liberty PAC presents the Proof Positive Series with Molotov Mitchell. In this fifth episode, Molotov takes a closer look at the people Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman call “kooks” and “cowards”, Dr. Alan Keyes and Maj. Stefan Cook.”
“Proof Positive: Just Some Guy”

Bill O’Reilly, Orly Taitz, Fox, Obama, Judge Land, Case Frivolous, Taitz fined $ 20,000, Lis Wiel, Kimberly Guilfoil, O’Reilly Factor, NO spin?, O’Reilly shooting messenger, O’Reilly coward, Obama not natural born citizen, Citizen Wells challenge

“Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”…Proverbs 16:18

 “There is an epidemic of shooting the messenger in this country.”…Citizen Wells

Bill O’Reilly, who has a sinecure, maligned Orly Taitz and anyone questioning the eligibility of Barack Obama last night, October 27, 2009, on his Fox TV show.

O’Reilly is well known for being a pompous ass.

Last night, Bill O’Reilly was a coward.

Neither O’Reilly or his female fawners, who agreed the case was frivolous and that Orly Taitz deserved what she got, have done sufficient research to make an intelligent, informed comment on the subject.
I criticize Bill O’Reilly for pontificating on a subject that he knows little about.

I also criticize O’Reilly for shooting the messenger.

Orly Taitz, Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, concerned active and retired military, myself, commenters on this blog and millions of concerned Americans are not the guilty party in this matter. Barack Obama is guilty.

Barack Obama

  • His father was Kenyan and a British Citizen.
  • Obama has not provided a long form birth certificate.
  • Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of someone’s money to fight proving eligibility.
  • Obama has consistently lied to the American people.
  • Obama is entangled in Chicago and IL corruption and should be indicted.
  • Obama’s further control of federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald should alarm everyone.

So, Bill O’Reilly, quit shooting the messenger and do your damn job. After all, the Obama administration continues to shoot Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

 
O’Reilly, you coward, try picking on me. I am a natural born citizen of the US, close to your age, male, with a strong business background. I have thoroughly researched Obama’s background and eligibility issues and written about it. I am not receiving a large salary for doing this. I simply care about this country.

I hereby challenge Bill O’Reilly to a battle of facts.

I will, of course, be attacking an unarmed opponent.

Bill O’Reilly, please explain why concerned Americans should not boycott your show.

 

And now for the response from Captain Pamela Barnett, a lead plaintiff in one of Taitz’ cases:


“(Oct. 28, 2009) —  She was a captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to Military Intelligence; but now retired she’s fighting a war on two fronts.

Captain Pamela Barnett is lead plaintiff in a case that could lead to the removal and life-time imprisonment of Barack Hussein Obama on charges of high-crimes, election fraud, campaign fraud, and a laundry list of campaign financing violations.

But Captain Barnett is not shirking her duty to defend her fellow Plaintiffs in the case: no, she is rebutting the lies and falsehoods promoted by the widely followed, but often errant and politically correct, Bill O’Reilly of Fox News.”

“From Captain Pamela Barnett to Bill O’Reilly – October 28, 2009

I challenge you Mr. O’Reilly to interview me..

I am Captain Pamela Barnett U.S. Army Retired of Barnett v. Barack Obama.

I am sick and tired of you defaming our lawsuit and our attorney against the Resident in the Whitehouse Obama. 48 plaintiffs mostly military retired have brought this lawsuit to force the production of Obama’s vital records to determine if he is in fact a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN which is one of the requirements to be a legal POTUS and NOT an illegal USURPER. There is also a huge amount of information regarding fraud that Obama committed before being illegally sworn in as POTUS.

IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE TRUTH AT ALL.. YOU WILL CALL ME…

FROM WHAT I CAN SEE OF YOUR SHOW, THE TRUTH DOES NOT SEEM TO MATTER TO YOU OR THE REST OF THE SHILLS AT FOX. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE ONLY A COMMENTATOR, BUT AT LEAST GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT BEFORE HURTING OUR CASE AND PROPAGATING LIES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Sincerely,

CPT Pamela Barnett, U.S.Army Retired”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/28/captain-pamela-barnett-issues-challenge-to-bill-oreilly/

Some of the initial comments on the Citizen Wells blog after O’Reilly’s remarks:
“How are these people like Lis, Bill, and Kimberly, on Fox, going to explain themselves to the public after Kerchner gets Obama thrown to the curb.
After hearing those idiots say Obama is legitimate I hope Obama is removed from office just so I can see the expressions on their faces, it will be priceless.”

bob strauss

“OWrongly just made me throw up a little in my mouth. How ignorant can he be? And that blond dimwit. It’s been repeatedly proved Obotomy was born in Hawaii? Looked into by Congress? WHAT???? And then they don’t even know what Natural Born even means? I don’t know why anyone watches that show.”

Paulajal

“O’Reilly sucks!”

zachjonesishome

“O’reilly sucks and double sucks!!
I stopped watching long time ago when he talked down to his audience and being an ex-teacher, as my daddy would say, ‘that don’t set right with me’.”

JJ

“O’Reilly has gotten way to big for his britches. That “nose up in the air” arrogance sickens me and reminds me of someone else we all know.”

Teedee

“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.”

bob strauss

“Yepppers,…. I have been losing my respect for o’reilly,……. this really nailed it shut. I have sent him emails telling him to find out the truth,…. but, it seems that he wants to remain ignorant on the facts of obamas birth. I will email him again and tell him he needs to change the name of his show. NO – SPIN…… what a joke.”

joyceaz

“Watched O’Reilly’s comments on Orly, I have been studying on this ever since. The comments were not fair or balanced. NOW Orly or one of her reps. should contact the No Spine Zone and have the opportunity to defend herself with the truth! The Big Leprachan is a know it all”

carmen

“joyceaz, Bill needs to change the name of his show to “The Spin Zone”.”

bob strauss

“After the 3 against 1 on O’Reilly I believe she should be on this week!”

carmen

“OK – O’Reilly was the show that started my turn from uninformed democrat to a strong conservative and for about the last year – I can hardly stand him. Now – he is dead to me. YKWIM

Thanks Venice and SueK for the welcome.”

DenisetheMenace

“Did anyone really expect anything different from O’Reilly?”

SueK

“Observer, Bill Oreally, Lis Wiel, and Kimberly Guilfoil, all agreed the case was frivolous, she brought the same case to the same court twice, and she got what she deserved. That is about what it boiled down to.

Thanks Bob. So it came down to an “O’Bloviate” segment only. Figures. He loves macho soundbites – but he’s definitely been looking old lately plus losing the hair more and more. They should give Beck his slot and put Lou Dobbs in Beck’s. None of them want to commit to the eligibility question though because they just don’t know Constitutional law or care and want to wait ’til the patriots get all bloodied up – then report it later and take the credit.”

Observer

“They have something on O’Reilly. There are too many reaasons why Obama’s COLB is suspect for him not to elaborate at all. They have something on him.”

Paxson

Additional comments from American citizens who are far more informed than O’Reilly:

“Obama law tab up to $1.7 million

‘Grassroots army’ contributions used to crush eligibility lawsuits?

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114202
Danny

“He’s full of it because those records were sealed shortly after Barky went to visit the dying Gramma Dunham. Does he really want us to believe that the State of Hawaii gave HIM the birth certificate?

He thinks we’re stupid; he has another thing coming.

Ratings or blackmail…take your pick. I’ll bet you a donut that he won’t consent to having Orly on to rebut his garbage.

Smug bastid.”
SueK

“His eyes go cross eyed when he even has the balls to bring this up. He says that he vetted it, but won’t publicly go into how he vetted it. He said that the state of Hawaii gave him a copy of the birth certificate (not certification). He said that he could find out the name of the hospital that President Obama was born in “tomorrow” (if he so chose). He’s a frigging liar. You can see it all over his face and he is being “black mailed” or his hands are tied to elaborate. Any normal person looking at this issue can see that something is up. Camille Paglia, noted LIBERAL, even accepts this fact. They can only keep their thumb in the whole of the dam for so much longer. They think we are stupid, and in the long run (whether during Obama’s term, or afterwards) the truth will be known. All of their careers will be over at that point.”
Paxson

“I am suspect about O’really picking Orly for a segment. At the very least I thought it would have simply been a gratuitous move.

No doubt it was meant to discredit her and the “movement.”

This on the heels of Judge Carter’s recent new hire. I can’t help but question if it’s not part of a bigger plan being implemented incrementally.”
JustMe
“I think O’Reilly is a jerk and I don’t like to watch him. He obviously is uninformed of what a NBC is and he thinks he knows it all. They like to discredit those who are trying to find out the truth because he thinks he knows the truth and says BO was born in HI so that makes him NBC. I don’t like O’Reilly. He is a fake conservative. He does not care about the country or the constitution, but he discredits those who do. He is lousy. I also think that Lou Dobbs should switch places with him.”

speedy

“BOYCOTT O’REILLY and let people know”
carmen

“O YOUR A PINHEAD!!!NEVER WILL WATCH HIM AGAIN!!!!”
GBAmerica