Category Archives: McCain Obama

Senator Herb Kohl, Wisconsin, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged, WI senator

“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 Herb Kohl of Wisconsin
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from
you and welcome this opportunity to respond.

As you may know, Hawaii became a state on August 21st,
1959. President-elect Barack Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961,
making him a United States citizen at birth under the first section
of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. President-elect
Obama’s birth certificate has been made public, and is widely
available online. This document has been authenticated by a
variety of sources, including the Hawaii Department of Health and
the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Additionally, on December 5, 2008, the United States
Supreme Court considered Donofrio v. Wells, a case questioning
President-elect Obama’s citizenship, in conference. The Justices
voted not to hear this case, making it the second case related to
President-elect Obama’s citizenship that the Supreme Court
refused to hear. The first, Berg v. Obama, was rejected at
conference on November 3, 2008.

I hope this information proves useful to you. If I can be of
assistance to you in any other matters, please do not hesitate to
contact me.

Sincerely,

Herb Kohl
U.S. Senator”
It appears that Senator Herb Kohl is following the sheep herd.
He states:

“President-elect Obama’s birth certificate has been made public,
and is widely available online.”

That is false. What has been touted as a COLB, a certificate of
live birth has been posted on websites. Read below to understand
what this is. To make matters worse, the COLB posted on the
internet is suspect and another expert has questioned it in
the Keyes V. Lingle lawsuit. Unlike John McCain, who presented
a vault copy of his real birth certificate to Congress, Obama
has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and employed numerous
attorneys to avoid presenting legal, official proof.

Mr. Kohl then states:

“This document has been authenticated by a
variety of sources, including the Hawaii Department of Health and
the Annenberg Public Policy Center.”

No one has authenticated a birth certificate for Obama because
no one has seen it. The Hawaii Department of Health stated that
they had the original birth certificate, not that Obama was born
in Hawaii. The Annenberg Public Policy Center was the recipient
of Grants when Obama worked with Bill Ayers.

Mr. Kohl then states:

“The Justices voted not to hear this case, making it the second
case related to President-elect Obama’s citizenship that the
Supreme Court refused to hear.”

What is Mr. Kohl’s point? The US Supreme Court accepts a small
percentage of cases. The US Supreme Court did not state that
the case had no merit. Fundamentally, as my mom always said,
“two wrongs don’t make a right.” It is important for Mr. Kohl
and all congressmen to remember that Congress as well as the
judicial system is part of the checks and balances that we rely on.

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.”

These men fought to save our country.
Don’t let them down. Defend the US Constitution.

wikohl

Keyes V. Lingle, Hawaii, Sandra Ramsey Lines analysis, forensic document examiner, Obama COLB, Ron Polarik, Daily Kos, Obama Campaign, Factcheck.org COLB not reliable

The Right Side of Life website has an update on the Keyes V.
Lingle case in Hawaii. However, the bigger story revealed is
the documentation provided by forensic document examiner
Sandra Ramsey Lines. Ms. Lines corroborates the analysis
done by Ron Polarik of the so called Obama COLB.

“2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet
from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name
because of a number of death threats he has received. After my
review and based on my years of experience, I can state with
certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various
groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign,
“Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr.
Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm.
Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or
alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image
offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of
the authentic document.

3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect  of
the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the
Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow
anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the
Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?”
It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore,
there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.

4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original
of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined
to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness.
In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for
President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all.”

Read more here:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=2299

Senator Carl Levin, Michigan, US Constitution Hall of Shame, Obama not eligible, US Congress, Electoral College Votes, Obama’s eligibility must be challenged, MI senator

“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 Carl Levin of Michigan
regarding Barack Obama’s eligibility issues:

“From: senator_levin@levin.senate.gov senator_levin@levin.senate.gov
Subject: Re: Your Concerns
To: xxxxxxxxx.com
Date: Friday, December 5, 2008, 12:53 PM

Dear xxxxxxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the false rumors surrounding
President-elect Obama’s citizenship status. I appreciate you
sharing your thoughts with me.

As you may know, Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution
states 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.”
President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii as documented by his
official birth certificate. He is, therefore, a natural born citizen
of the United States. Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

Carl Levin”
Is Carl Levin related to Barbara Mikulski? There are three
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. “President-elect Obama was born in Hawaii as documented by
his official birth certificate.”
No one has seen a copy of his birth certificate!!!
Obama has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and used
numerous attorneys to avoid producing his real birth certificate.

3. “He is, therefore, a natural born citizen of the United States.”
Being born in Hawaii does not make Obama a natural born citizen.
Here we have another reason why the approval rating of Congress is
approaching single digits and why so little good comes from it.
Senator Levin, 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.

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.”

milevin

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

“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

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

“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

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

“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

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

“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

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

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.

Nayak seeks immunity, Blagojevich arrest, Patrick Fitzgerald investigation, December 22, 2008, Raghuveer P. Nayak, Oak Brook businessman, Medical businesses, Political fundraiser, Individual D,Wiretaps, U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Obama’s senate seat, Obama ties, Chicago Tribune

The Chicago Tribune has an article today, Monday,
December 22, 2008, that reveals that Raghuveer P. Nayak,
the unnamed “Individual D” referred to in the Rod
Blagojevich criminal complaint, is seeking immunity.

“Fundraiser seeks immunity in Blagojevich probe
Blagojevich allegedly pressured ‘Individual D’ for cash to pick Jackson
By David Kidwell and John Chase | Tribune reporters
December 22, 2008”

 
“A key figure in Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s alleged scheme to sell a U.S. Senate seat has sought immunity from federal authorities in return for his cooperation in their ongoing probe, the Tribune has learned.
Raghuveer P. Nayak, an Oak Brook businessman and political fundraiser, is the unnamed “Individual D” who prosecutors say was being squeezed by the governor for campaign cash in return for appointing U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. to the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama, sources said.
Investigators appeared at Nayak’s Oak Brook home the morning the FBI arrested Blagojevich, the sources said. Nayak was among a number of people connected to the case who were contacted by federal agents that day.
Nayak has not been accused of wrongdoing and declined to comment. It is unclear what information he can provide to authorities, who said they had more work to do after moving quickly to interrupt the governor’s alleged scheme.”
“Nayak’s businesses have faced multiple audits by state and federal authorities since he first opened his Chicago drug stores in the early 1980s, according to interviews and records. In addition, his name came up repeatedly in one of the largest health-care fraud investigations in Illinois history.
Nayak was never charged in that case, or any other.
The multi-year federal probe resulted in the shuttering of two South Side hospitals—Doctors Hospital and Edgewater Medical Center—and the convictions of seven doctors and administrators. Nayak, who then owned a lab testing company called NR Laboratories as well as an outpatient surgery center, was among numerous individuals who came under scrutiny.”

 

“In 1987, Nayak was suspended for 60 days from the state’s public aid program after auditors concluded nearly 22 percent of billings at one of his pharmacies were fraudulent. In 1989, state auditors reported concerns that Nayak was giving free airline tickets to doctors who sent business to NR labs, which he has since sold. And in 2001, Nayak returned $20,000 in a federal Medicaid fraud lawsuit in Indiana.”

Read more here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-blagojevich-nayakdec22,0,7892226.story
Nayak has longtime ties to Obama and Obama associates.
The Citizen Wells blog will provide “the rest of the “story’
soon in a continuing series on Obama’s ties to crime and
corruption in Chicago and IL.

Another tie to Obama to talk?
 

Obama indictment, Obama must be arrested, Patrick Fitzgerald, Blagojevich arrest, December 20, 2008, Obama Rezko Levine Weinstein Blagojevich, Pay to play, Chicago corruption, US Dept of Justice, IL corruption, Chicago Tribune, Charlotte Observer

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 11

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.

The truth about the Rod Blagojevich arrest and criminal
complaint and what it means for Barack Obama.

If you are getting your news from your local newspaper or
MSM media on TV, you probably believe that Blagojevich’s
arrest was mainly about his trying to make money off of
selling Obama’s senate seat and that Obama is innocent of
any wrongdoing. That is what the MSM and the Obama camp
want you to believe. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First of all, Obama was caught lying when he stated that he
had no contact with Blagojevich. That part is clear. Now for
the important part of this article. Patrick Fitzgerald was
not ready to indict Blagojevich, but when he discovered that
Blagojevich  was trying to sell the senate seat and the Chicago
Tribune prematurely leaked the story, he hurriedly created a
criminal complaint. The investigation of Blagojevich had been
going on for many months and the sentencing of Tony Rezko
was delayed several times to allow him to talk more.

According to FBI special agent Rob Grant:

“But we do know that something big is going on. “There is a lot
of investigation that still needs to be done,”

“There are critical interviews that we have to do and
cooperation we need to get from different people.”

Obama camp coverup of Obama lies

Exerpts from the Rod Blagojevich criminal complaint

“Count One
From in or about 2002 to the present, in Cook County, in the Northern District of Illinois, defendants did,
conspire with each other and with others to devise and participate in a scheme to defraud the State of Illinois and
the people of the State of Illinois of the honest services of ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, in
furtherance of which the mails and interstate wire communications would be used, in violation of Title 18, United
States Code, Sections 1341,1343, and 1346; all in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section 1349.”
“12. Because this affidavit is submitted for the limited purpose of securing a
criminal complaint and corresponding arrest warrants, I have not included each and every
fact known to me concerning this investigation.”
“a. Defendant ROD BLAGOJEVICH and at times defendant JOHN
HARRIS, together with others, obtained and attempted to obtain financial benefits for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH, members of the Blagojevich family, and third parties including Friends of
Blagojevich, in exchange for appointments to state boards and commissions, state
employment, state contracts, and access to state funds;”
“15. The remainder of this affidavit first sets out certain information obtained prior
to the initiation of the court-authorized interceptions, relating to allegations that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH solicited and obtained campaign contributions in exchange for official
actions as Governor.”

 

III. FACTS ESTABLISHING PROBABLE CAUSE
A. Evidence Concerning the Solicitation and Receipt of Campaign
Contributions in Return for Official Acts by ROD BLAGOJEVICH Prior
to October 2008
1. Information Provided by Ali Ata
Connections to Ali Ata
“16. As described in more detail in the following paragraphs, Ali Ata testified under
oath in the spring of 2008 that Ata discussed with ROD BLAGOJEVICH a potential
appointment to a high-level position with the State of Illinois while a $25,000 donation check
to Friends of Blagojevich from Ata was sitting on a table in front of ROD BLAGOJEVICH.
Ata further testified that later, after Ata made another substantial contribution to Friends of
Blagojevich, ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Ata that he was aware of the donation, that he
understood that Ata would be joining his administration, and that Ata better get a job “where
[Ata] can make some money.””

 

“17. Ata is a businessman who, in May 2008, as part of a cooperation agreement
with the government, pled guilty to making false statements to the FBI and to tax fraud.2
Pursuant to his cooperation agreement, the government has interviewed Ata extensively
regarding a number of topics, including his knowledge of and involvement in fundraising for
ROD BLAGOJEVICH. In addition, Ata testified under oath at the criminal trial of Antoin
Rezko (the “Rezko Trial”) in May 2008.3 Portions of Ata’s testimony are directly relevant
to the current investigation. In summary, and in relevant part, Ata testified as follows during
the Rezko Trial:”

 

“21. Later that year, Rezko approached Ata for additional monetary support for
ROD BLAGOJEVICH. Ata agreed to contribute $25,000 in additional monies to the
campaign of ROD BLAGOJEVICH. Ata, subsequently and by prior arrangement with
Rezko, brought a check in this amount to Rezko’s offices on Elston Avenue in Chicago.
After he arrived at Rezko’s offices, Ata was greeted by Rezko to whom he handed the check
in an envelope. Rezko, carrying the check, ushered Ata into a conference room where he met
with Rezko and ROD BLAGOJEVICH. Rezko placed the envelope containing Ata’s
$25,000 check to ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s campaign on the conference room table between
himself and ROD BLAGOJEVICH and stated to ROD BLAGOJEVICH that Ata had been
a good supporter and a team player and that Ata would be willing to join ROD
BLAGOJEVICH’s administration. ROD BLAGOJEVICH expressed his pleasure and
acknowledged that Ata had been a good supporter and good friend. ROD BLAGOJEVICH,
in Ata’s presence, asked Rezko if he (Rezko) had talked to Ata about positions in the
administration, and Rezko responded that he had.”

Connections to Joseph Cari
“26. Cari was a significant fundraiser for Democratic causes and was previously the
national finance chair for Vice President Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign. During his
testimony, Cari described meetings that he had with ROD BLAGOJEVICH, Chris Kelly,
Rezko, and Stuart Levine7. In particular, on approximately October 29, 2003, Cari, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH, Kelly, Levine and others rode on an airplane arranged by Levine to a
fundraiser in New York being hosted by Cari on behalf of ROD BLAGOJEVICH. During
the plane ride, Cari had a conversation with ROD BLAGOJEVICH. During the
conversation, Cari and ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed Cari’s fundraising background and
work as a national fundraiser. ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed his interest in running for
President of the United States. During the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed
Cari that it was easier for governors to solicit campaign contributions because governors had
the ability to “award contracts” and give legal work, consulting work, and investment
banking work to campaign contributors. ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed Cari that Rezko
and Kelly were his point people in raising campaign contributions. Later in the conversation,
ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Cari that there were State of Illinois contracts and other State of
Illinois work that could be given to contributors who helped ROD BLAGOJEVICH, Rezko,
and Kelly. Cari testified that ROD BLAGOJEVICH ended the conversation with Cari by
informing Cari that Rezko and Kelly would follow up with Cari in relation to the discussion
that had just occurred.”

 

“28. Cari also testified about a conversation he had with Rezko at Rezko’s office.
Levine was also present for the conversation. According to Cari, Rezko informed Cari that
Rezko had a close relationship with the Blagojevich administration and Rezko had a role in
picking consultants and law firms and other entities to get State of Illinois business. Rezko
informed Cari that Rezko called ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s chief of staff, Lon Monk, and
Monk would help implement Rezko’s choices for certain State of Illinois work. Rezko
informed Cari that, in exchange for raising money for ROD BLAGOJEVICH, the
Blagojevich administration would be financially helpful to Cari’s business interests.”

Connections to Stuart Levine

 

“31. In approximately December 2003, the FBI began an investigation of allegations
that at least one member of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board (the “Planning
Board”), Stuart Levine, was soliciting bribes in exchange for board action. At the time,
Levine was a businessman who served on two state boards: the board of trustees of TRS, and
the Planning Board. As part of the investigation, the government sought and obtained court
authorization to record phone calls on multiple phones used by Levine.”
“32. On May 4, 2005, Levine was indicted in United States v. Levine, et al. 05 CR
408 (Grady, J.) on 28 counts of mail and wire fraud, extortion, bribery, and money
laundering. On August 3, 2005, Levine was indicted in United States v. Levine, et al., 05 CR
691 (St. Eve., J.) on 13 counts of mail and wire fraud, bribery, and attempted extortion. On
October 27, 2006, Levine pleaded guilty to Counts One and Twenty-Three of a superseding
indictment in Case No. 05 CR 691. As part of Levine’s plea agreement, the government
moved, on November 15, 2006, to dismiss the pending superseding indictment and
indictment against Levine in Case No. 05 CR 408.”
“33. Pursuant to his cooperation agreement, the government has interviewed Levine
extensively regarding a number of topics, including his knowledge of and involvement in the
corruption of Illinois state government and fundraising for ROD BLAGOJEVICH. In
addition, Levine testified under oath at the Rezko Trial.8 Portions of Levine’s testimony at
the Rezko trial are directly relevant to the current investigation. The remainder of this
section sets forth, in summary, and in relevant part, Levine’s testimony at the Rezko Trial,
except as noted where information is specifically identified as having been obtained from
other sources:”

Levine’s Plane Ride with Blagojevich

“34. According to Levine, in approximately late October 2003, after Levine was
reappointed to the Planning Board, he shared a private plane ride from New York to Chicago
with ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Kelly. Levine, ROD BLAGOJEVICH, and Kelly were the
only passengers on the flight. According to Levine, at the beginning of the flight, Levine
thanked ROD BLAGOJEVICH for reappointing him to the Planning Board. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH responded that Levine should only talk with “Tony” [Rezko] or [Kelly]
about the Planning Board, “but you stick with us and you will do very well for yourself.”
ROD BLAGOJEVICH said this in front of Kelly. According to Levine, Levine understood
from ROD BLAGOJEVICH’s manner of speaking and words that ROD BLAGOJEVICH
did not want Levine to talk to ROD BLAGOJEVICH directly about anything to do with the
boards, but that Levine should talk to Rezko or Kelly. Levine also understood that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH meant that Levine could make a lot of money working with ROD
BLAGOJEVICH’s administration. According to Levine, ROD BLAGOJEVICH did not
seem to expect a response from Levine, and Kelly then shifted the conversation to something
else.”

Corruption of the Planning Board

(This is the subject of the Citizen Wells plea to Fitzgerald
to indict Obama)

“35. As described more fully in the following paragraphs, Mercy Hospital, which
sought permission from the Planning Board to build a hospital in Illinois, received that
permission through Rezko’s exercise of his influence at the Planning Board after Rezko was
promised that Mercy Hospital would make a substantial campaign contribution to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH. Rezko later told a member of the Planning Board that Mercy Hospital
received the permit because ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted the organization to receive the
permit.”

“36. Levine’s criminal activities included his abuse of his position on the Planning
Board to enrich both himself and Friends of Blagojevich. The Planning Board was a
commission of the State of Illinois, established by statute, whose members were appointed
by the Governor of the State of Illinois. At the relevant time period, the Planning Board
consisted of nine individuals. State law required an entity seeking to build a hospital,
medical office building, or other medical facility in Illinois to obtain a permit, known as a
“Certificate of Need” (“CON”), from the Planning Board prior to beginning construction.”

“37. Levine, as well as Planning Board members Thomas Beck and Imad
Almanaseer, testified under oath at the Rezko Trial.9 Beck testified that he asked Rezko to
reappoint him to the Planning Board and that Beck thereafter followed Rezko’s directions
regarding which CON applications Rezko wanted approved. Beck testified that it was his
job to communicate Rezko’s interest in particular CONs to other members of the Planning
Board, including Almanaseer, who were loyal to Rezko. Beck testified that he understood
that Rezko spoke for the Blagojevich administration when Rezko spoke to Beck about
particular CONs. Almanaseer testified that Beck instructed him that Rezko wanted
Almanaseer to vote a particular way and that Almanaseer should follow Levine’s lead in
voting on CONs. Almanaseer testified that before certain Planning Board meetings, he
received notecards from Beck indicating how to vote on certain CON applications. Beck
testified he provided these notecards to Almanaseer and certain other members of the
Planning Board to communicate Rezko’s directions about certain CON applications.”

 

“38. During his testimony, Levine described a plan to manipulate the Planning
Board to enrich himself and Friends of Blagojevich. The plan centered on an entity
commonly known as Mercy Hospital (“Mercy”) that was attempting to obtain a CON to build
a new hospital in Illinois. Levine knew the contractor hired to help build the hospital. In
approximately November 2003, on behalf of the contractor, Levine checked with Rezko to
determine whether Rezko wanted Mercy to obtain its CON. Rezko informed Levine that
Mercy was not going to receive its CON. According to Levine, he asked Rezko whether it
would matter to Rezko if Mercy’s construction contractor paid a bribe to Rezko and Levine
and, in addition, made a contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH. Levine testified that Rezko
indicated that such an arrangement would change his view on the Mercy CON.”
“39. Levine’s testimony regarding Rezko’s actions to change the Planning Board
decision concerning Mercy’s application for a CON based on contributions for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH is confirmed by attorney Steven Loren. Loren testified at Rezko’s criminal
trial and, before that, in the grand jury.11 According to Loren, in approximately December
2003, Levine informed Loren that Rezko was against the Mercy CON. According to Loren,
Levine relayed to Loren a conversation between Rezko and Levine during which Levine
asked Rezko whether a political contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH would make a
difference for Mercy’s CON, and Rezko responded to Levine that such a contribution might
make a difference.”
“40. Thereafter, and confirmed by the testimony of Levine, Beck, and Almanaseer,
as well as recorded conversations, Rezko switched his directions to Beck and informed Beck
that Mercy was to receive its CON. According to Almanaseer, although he previously had
been told by Beck that Rezko did not want Mercy to receive its CON, he was later told that
there had been a change and that Rezko now wanted Mercy to receive its CON.”
“41. Mercy received its CON as a result of a controversial and irregular vote at a
public Planning Board meeting.12 The vote brought significant publicity to the Planning
Board and ultimately led to the disbanding of the Planning Board. Almanaseer testified
under oath in the grand jury that not long after the Planning Board vote on Mercy’s CON he
saw Rezko at a fundraiser. According to Almanaseer, he was still embarrassed about what
had occurred at the Planning Board vote on Mercy’s CON and Rezko’s role in the vote.
Almanaseer testified that he asked Rezko why Rezko had switched the vote on the Mercy
CON. According to Almanaseer, Rezko stated: “The Governor wanted it to pass.”
Almanaseer understood the reference to “Governor” to be a reference to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH.”

Dr. Robert Weinstein connections

“54. Numerous conversations related to the extortion were captured on the courtauthorized
wiretaps on Levine’s phones. In particular, on a recorded May 1, 2004
conversation, Levine spoke with Dr. Robert Weinstein, a co-schemer in Levine’s criminal
activities. During the call, Levine told Weinstein about his more recent meeting with Rezko
and Kelly.”

Conclusion

There is much more evidence of corruption in the complaint and
ties to Obama. The exerpts provided above reveal clear ties to
Obama and in particular his involvement in rigging the IL
Health Board.

Request to Fitzgerald to indict Obama for rigging Health Board

Citizen Wells article in April 2008 ties Obama to Rezko, Blagojevich

Citizen Wells series on why Obama should be indicted

The Chicago Tribune, in an article dated December 18, 2008
states that the following ties to Blagojevich could help to
impeach him:

“Longtime Blagojevich friend Ali Ata, in a plea bargain on charges of lying to the FBI, said that he handed $25,000 to a Blagojevich fundraiser and that the governor immediately brought up the subject of getting Ata a state job.

In another guilty plea, Joseph Cari said Blagojevich tried to enlist him as a fundraiser with the possibility of getting state contracts and legal work.”

Reasons given for Blagojevich impeachment also apply to Obama

The investigation of Rod Blagojevich has been going on for
many months. Neither Blagojevich or Obama was charged with
wrongdoing during the Rezko Trial. I have watched the methodical
well orchestrated efforts of Patrick Fitzgerald all year and it
is now obvious that Obama is next.
Remember, the Obama Camp wants you to believe that the
Blagojevich arrest was just about selling the senate seat. Obama
et al are about lies, deception and diversions. This would give
him a chance to throw another associate under the bus

Obama must be indicted

Patrick Fitzgerald rushed the criminal complaint to prevent
Blagojevich from appointing a replacement for Obama’s Senate
seat. This was prompted by the Chicago Tribune breaking the
story.

Since Fitzgerald was obligated to arrest Blagojevich early
to avoid a travesty of justice, by the same token,
a greater sense of urgency involves allowing a non eligible
candidate, Obama, with ties to corruption that equal and in
some cases exceed those of Rod Blagojevich take office.
Because of this sense of urgency and potential constitutional
crisis, Citizen Wells is urging you to contact the Dept. of
Justice and voice your concerns. Also, share this article
with as many people and websites as possible. The election
officials and courts are ignoring this crisis. Perhaps
Patrick Fitzgerald or the Dept. of Jusctice (part of the
checks and balances syetem) will save this country from
a disaster.

Hold MSM accountable
 
This article will also serve as a starting point to hold the
MSM accountable and I have decided to start with two
prominent newspapers, The Chicago Tribune and Charlotte Observer.

I am asking that the Chicago Tribune and Charlotte Observer
apologize for unprofessional, irresponsible and biased reporting.

The Charlotte Observer, in a disservice to it’s readers
and what could be considered part of a conspiracy to perpetrate
fraud, presented only articles that were favorable to
Obama and did not present articles regarding Obama’s
eligibility issues and corruption ties. Not only did the
Observer not cover Obama, they endorsed him.

The chicago Tribune presented transcripts of the Rezko trial
and even some articles critical of Obama and his ties to
corruption. However, the Tribune, despite exposing some of
Obama’s corruption ties, still endorsed him. Also, the
Tribune broke the story on Blagojevich which led to his
premature arrest. What were the reasons for the Tribune
doing this? To protect the paper or citizens from
Blagojecvich or to prevent the Obama camp from being
implicated in more corruption ties?

Readership is down for most newspapers across the country.
Younger people are not embracing outdated news delivery
and older people are fed up with biased reporting.

Attention Tribune, Observer and newspapers throughout
the country.

Apologize to your readers, the American public and
change your methodology fast or you are history.

Coming soon.

We plan to hold congressmen accountable.