Category Archives: NC primary

NC voter fraud, 145 voters may be ineligible, 10k names tagged by DMV as legally present, 600 or more could be ineligible, Tip of voter fraud prosecuted

NC voter fraud, 145 voters may be ineligible, 10k names tagged by DMV as legally present, 600 or more could be ineligible, Tip of voter fraud prosecuted

“On Monday June 23rd, 2008 the SBI initiated an investigation into allegations that employees of the Alamance County Health Department specifically Dr.
Kathleen Shapley-Quinn and Nurse Karen Saxer were knowingly and willingly falsifying patient medical records.”
“At the request of some patients, Alamance County Health Department provided work notes and prescriptions in alias names. Providing these services would assist illegal aliens with maintaining assumed or stolen identities, which may be a violation of state, or federal law. (Identity Theft, Fraud, etc.)”
“Veronica Arias, of Texas, reported on May 2nd, 2008 to the ACSO that someone in Swepsonville, NC had stolen her identity and was using same to be employed.
Maria Sanchez was arrested on May 6, 2008 by investigators of the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office for stealing and using the identity of Veronica Arias.
Sanchez used the name, SSN, DOB, of Veronica Arias who is a living resident of Texas.”…Alamance County NC Sheriff 2008 report

“North Carolina is the latest state featured by Project Veritas in its series on how America’s electoral system is extremely vulnerable to voter fraud. During last week’s North Carolina primary, James O’Keefe and his colleagues demonstrated how easy it is to obtain ballots even if the person has publicly professed not to be a U.S. citizen.”
O’Keefe also tells WND about his group’s visit to the University of North Carolina, where a dean and a program director laugh off confessions of voter fraud and even seem to encourage it. Yet a day later, both officials tell conservatives that voter fraud never happens.”…WND May 15, 2012

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Now that the longtime Democrat presence in NC government has been eradicated and a new NC voter ID law has been passed, perhaps we can come closer to insuring that our elections are fair.

From the Winston Salem Journal October 23, 2014.

“The State Board of Elections will not be able to verify before the early-voting period begins today whether all of the nearly 10,000 names that it has flagged as belonging to possible ineligible voters are in fact ineligible, according to interviews with elections and transportation officials.

Elections officials estimate that most are likely eligible to vote, but the uncertainty has led some state lawmakers to question why the verification process is happening now.

The Winston-Salem Journal reported Wednesday that, according to the SBOE, a specific search of those 10,000 names on the state’s voter rolls turned up 145 that belong to immigrants in the U.S. under the federal program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which provides qualified applicants with a two-year reprieve from deportation.

The number has been pared down to 119 after more research, said Josh Lawson, a spokesman for the SBOE.”

“The SBOE is in the process of sending letters to the 119 DACA license holders seeking proof of citizenship, said SBOE spokesman Josh Lawson. Separately, Lawson said that the SBOE is also working to verify all of the nearly 10,000 names. The Journal has asked to receive that information when it becomes available.

The DMV sends data to the SBOE on a regular basis, Charbonneau said.

That data includes license holders who are tagged as “legally present,” which includes anyone who was not a U.S. citizen when he or she got a license.

The DMV has been “assisting” the SBOE on verifying the names at this time — as the early-voting period begins — because the SBOE requested the assistance on Monday, according to Charbonneau.

Apart from the DACA license holders, the names on the list of nearly 10,000 belong to license holders who were not U.S. citizens when they got a license. They may have been green-card holders, foreign workers or foreign students, for example. Most have become U.S. citizens since getting a license, according to an estimate by elections officials based on a sample of the overall list.

Earlier this month, State Board of Elections officials sampled about 1,600 of the 10,000 names, Lawson said. They cross-checked the names against a U.S. Department of Homeland Security database, known as SAVE, and found that 94 percent of those 1,600 are in fact U.S. citizens, Lawson said.”

Read more:

http://www.journalnow.com/news/elections/local/early-voting-starts-today-eligibility-for-not-verified/article_ceeb3ca4-5a60-11e4-8cfa-001a4bcf6878.html

From the Raleigh News and Observer June 28, 2014.
“When Chuck Stuber shows up, politicians are in trouble.

He’s the FBI agent who put handcuffs on former House Speaker Jim Black and former U.S. Rep. Frank Ballance Jr.

He’s the one who booked a top aide to former Gov. Mike Easley and then played a major role in Easley’s felony conviction.”
“Last week, Stuber started work as an investigator at the state Board of Elections, where he will focus on rooting out fraud and campaign violations. He is expected to take up several pending inquiries – into questions of voter fraud, about possible campaign violations by state lawmakers, and an ongoing probe of a major campaign donor in the last statewide election cycle.”

Read more:

http://www.newsobserver.com/welcome_page/?shf=/2014/06/28/3969919_meet-former-fbi-agent-chuck-stuber.html%3fsp=/99/100/&ihp=1

From Citizen Wells April 3, 2014.

“Raleigh, N.C. – House Speaker Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg) and Senate Leader Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) issued a joint statement Wednesday in response to more alarming evidence of voter error and fraud discovered by the North Carolina State Board of Elections.

Initial findings from the Board presented to the Joint Legislative Elections Oversight Committee today show:

  • 765 voters with an exact match of first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in N.C. and the other state in the 2012 general election.
  • 35,750 voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.
  • 155,692 voters with the same first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state – and the latest date of registration or voter activity did not take place within N.C.

These findings only take into account data from the 28 states who participated in the 2014 Interstate Crosscheck, leaving out potential voter error and fraud in the 22 states that do not participate in the consortium.

Additionally, during an audit of death records from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Board discovered:

  • 50,000 new death records that had not previously been provided to the State Board of Elections.
  • 13,416 deceased voters on the voter rolls in October 2013.
  • 81 deceased voters that had voter activity after they died.

The findings were made possible by a new election reform law passed by the General Assembly last year, which called on the Board to improve the accuracy of voter registration lists and combat potential fraud by cross checking information on voting records with those of other states.

“While we are alarmed to hear evidence of widespread voter error and fraud, we are encouraged to see the common-sense law passed to ensure voters are who they say they are is working,” said Tillis and Berger. “These findings should put to rest ill-informed claims that problems don’t exist and help restore the integrity of our elections process. We appreciate the State Board of Elections bringing this critical information to light.””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/04/03/massive-nc-voter-fraud-discovered-over-35-thousand-voters-same-first-and-last-name-dob-registered-in-nc-and-another-state-voted-in-2012-senate-leader-phil-berger-and-rep-thom-tillis/

 

 

 

Greensboro Guilford County votes default to Obama, Romney vote override, Voting machine calibration problem?, Board of Elections Director George Gilbert recurring problem

Greensboro Guilford County votes default to Obama, Romney vote override, Voting machine calibration problem?, Board of Elections Director George Gilbert recurring problem

“Isn’t it necessary to eliminate these parties, and isn’t it time to put an end to their useless activity?”…Joseph Goebbels, July 31, 1932 Reichstag elections

“The past is whatever the records and the memories agree upon.
And since the party is in full control of all records, and in
equally full control of the minds of it’s members, it follows
that the past is whatever the party chooses to make it. Six
means eighteen, two plus two equals five, war is peace,
freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.”…George Orwell, “1984”

From My Fox 8 October 23, 2012.

“Guilford Co. voters say ballot cast for Romney came up Obama on machine”

“GREENSBORO, N.C. –The Presidential election is just around the corner and voting issues have already become a problem in Guilford County.
On Monday, several voters complained that their electronic ballot machine cast the wrong vote. All the complaints were made by people who voted at the Bur-Mil Park polling location.

One of the voters, Sher Coromalis, says she cast her ballot for Governor Mitt Romney, but every time she entered her vote it defaulted to President Obama.
“I was so upset that this could happen,” said Coromalis.

Guilford County Board of Elections Director George Gilbert says the problem arises every election. It can be resolved after the machine is re-calibrated by poll workers.

“It’s not a conspiracy it’s just a machine that needs to be corrected,” Gilbert said.

After the third try, Coromalis says she was able to get her vote counted for Gov. Romney but was still annoyed.
“I should have just mailed it in,” Coromalis said.

Elections officials say the machines have been fixed as of Tuesday, and no problems have been reported since.

Early Voting ends November 3.”

Watch report here.

http://myfox8.com/2012/10/23/guilford-county-voters-say-they-voted-for-the-wrong-candidate/

If this has happened to you or if you have had another problem voting in NC, leave a comment here.

Thanks to commenter Philo-Publius.

NC voter fraud investigations, Project Veritas, James O’Keefe, UNC officials, 2008 evidence, Wake County residents charged, Governor Perdue veto of ID bill

NC voter fraud investigations, Project Veritas, James O’Keefe, UNC officials, 2008 evidence, Wake County residents charged, Governor Perdue veto of ID bill

“Why would anyone eligible to vote complain about providing a photo ID?”…Citizen Wells

“The end justifies the means, the template of the left.”…Citizen Wells

“We control life, Winston, at all its levels. You are imagining that there is something called human nature which will be outraged by what we do and will turn against us. But we create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.”…George Orwell, “1984″

Voter fraud in NC is being investigated again and for good reason.

Governor Beverly Perdue vetoed the NC voter ID bill passed by the legislature.

From WRAL News June 23, 2011.

“Gov. Bev Perdue has vetoed a controversial proposal to require voters to show photo ID at the polls.

Her statement:

“The right to choose our leaders is among the most precious freedoms we have – both as Americans and North Carolinians. North Carolinians who are eligible to vote have a constitutionally guaranteed right to cast their ballots, and no one should put up obstacles to citizens exercising that right.””

http://www.wral.com/news/state/nccapitol/blogpost/9772426/

The voter ID bill was passed by constitutionally elected legislators who represent the majority of North Carolinians. Governor Perdue overrode the will of the people. She refers to the “constitutionally guaranteed right to cast their ballots” for “North Carolinians who are eligible to vote.” What about the rights of North Carolinians to not have their votes diluted by ineligible voters?

From Citizen Wells April 5, 2011.

“Students from area universities have been working behind the scenes to protest the proposed voter ID bill that is currently in the House. They held a forum Monday morning to discuss the bill and followed it with a press conference to voice their concerns.

“This bill makes it more difficult for me to exercise my vote and my voice,” said UNCG junior Caleb Patterson. “The voter ID bill would add one more obstacle to vote, which will discourage students from voting.”

“On Monday June 23rd, 2008 the SBI initiated an
investigation into allegations that employees of the
Alamance County Health Department specifically Dr.
Kathleen Shapley-Quinn and Nurse Karen Saxer were
knowingly and willingly falsifying patient medical
records.”
“At the request of some patients, Alamance
County Health Department provided work
notes and prescriptions in alias names.

Providing these services would assist illegal
aliens with maintaining assumed or stolen
identities, which may be a violation of state, or
federal law. (Identity Theft, Fraud, etc.)”

“Veronica Arias, of Texas, reported on May 2nd, 2008 to
the ACSO that someone in Swepsonville, NC had
stolen her identity and was using same to be employed.

Maria Sanchez was arrested on May 6, 2008 by
investigators of the Alamance County Sheriff’s Office
for stealing and using the identity of Veronica Arias.

Sanchez used the name, SSN, DOB, of Veronica Arias
who is a living resident of Texas.”
“Obama’s campaign wants to tell the world they registered 800,000 blacks out of a million voter base, so that before in the election only 200,000 blacks voted in North Carolina.
That is impossible.”

“U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

Staff Report
U.S. House of Representatives
111th Congress
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
July 23, 2009
“A. Voter Registration Fraud
One-third of the 1.3 million voter registration cards turned in by ACORN in 2008 were invalid.3 ACORN has been investigated for voter registration fraud in Nevada, Connecticut, Missouri, Ohio and North Carolina.”

“Yet another state investigates the union-backed voter fraud group for Barack

A Durham (NC) official is asking state elections administrators to check approximately 80 voter registration forms for possible fraud.

Mike Ashe, Durham County’s elections director, said the forms were among about 4,000 submitted to his office over the past four to six weeks by a national left-wing group called Acorn, for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

“They will be turned over to the State Board of Elections for investigation and prosecution,” Ashe said of the questionable documents.

Most of the forms at issue bear one of six names. Ashe was not sure whether the people named existed or not.

Many of the papers are incomplete, which Ashe said is a nuisance, not a crime. But the group contains very different versions of what are purportedly the same person’s signatures.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/tag/obama-camp-nc-voter-fraud-initiative/

From Citizen Wells August 16, 2011

“Authorities have charged four Wake County residents with voter fraud in connection with the last presidential election.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/08/16/nc-voter-fraud-2008-election-voting-twice-for-obama-four-wake-county-residents-charged-raleigh-nc/

From WND May 15, 2012.

“VOTER FRAUD? YOU AIN’T SEEN NOTHIN’ YET!”

“Filmmaker James O’Keefe exposes ‘total liars’ in undercover video”

“North Carolina is the latest state featured by Project Veritas in its series on how America’s electoral system is extremely vulnerable to voter fraud. During last week’s North Carolina primary, James O’Keefe and his colleagues demonstrated how easy it is to obtain ballots even if the person has publicly professed not to be a U.S. citizen.

Poll workers insist that the ridiculously dressed activists do not need to show identification or a passport. The video further shows an election official telling Project Veritas that it’s “up to the public” to expose voter fraud.

O’Keefe also tells WND about his group’s visit to the University of North Carolina, where a dean and a program director laugh off confessions of voter fraud and even seem to encourage it. Yet a day later, both officials tell conservatives that voter fraud never happens.

“We’re trying to highlight the hypocrisy of these individuals and their inablility to do the right thing,” O’Keefe told WND.

And Project Veritas catches up with an election official who says he can no longer agree to uphold the state constitution in his oath since voters passed the amendment establishing only traditional marriage as the definition of marriage in the state.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/james-okeefe-strikes-again-at-polls/

Jim Pendergraph runoff election July 17, 2012, Pendergraph endorsed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio questioned Obama eligibility, Charlotte Observer attacked

Jim Pendergraph runoff election July 17, 2012, Pendergraph endorsed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio questioned Obama eligibility, Charlotte Observer attacked

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

“Pendergraph’s long experience as a public servant, especially his 12 years as Mecklenburg County sheriff, would be an asset. He understands the value of service to constituents and responding quickly and efficiently to their cares and concerns.”…Charlotte Observer

Jim Pendergraph, who entered the race for NC 9th Congressional District Republican Congressman late (Feb. 2012), will be in a runoff election with the other top vote getter Robert Pittenger on July 17, 2012. This despite the efforts of the Charlotte Observer to discredit him after endorsing him.

From the Charlotte Observer May 9, 2012.

“District 9: Runoff looms for Pittenger, Pendergraph

Pittenger, Pendergraph lead in chase for Myrick’s seat”

“Republicans Robert Pittenger and Jim Pendergraph, whose feuding dominated the crowded primary in the 9th Congressional District, are poised to take it into a July 17 runoff.

Buoyed by strong showings in the Charlotte suburbs, Pittenger led the 10-man field with about 33 percent of the vote. Pendergraph had about 25 percent.

While each fell short of the 40 percent needed to win outright, both lapped the 10-man field. Edwin Peacock, a former Charlotte city council member, ran third with about 12 percent. State Rep. Ric Killian had about 10 percent. No one else had more than 7 percent.

The eventual winner will be the favorite in November against Democrat Jennifer Roberts and Libertarian Curtis Campbell in the heavily Republican district that includes most of Mecklenburg County and parts of Iredell and Union.

The candidates are running for the seat being vacated by Republican U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick of Charlotte. It’s open for the first time in 18 years, and only the fifth time in six decades.

“I think we brought a clear, conservative message to the voters,” Pittenger said Tuesday night. “They know that I will stand for those values in the future. … This has been a grass-roots effort with lots of involvement. It hasn’t just been Pittenger.”

Comparing spending

But only two House candidates in the country spent more of their own money. Outpacing his rivals, the Charlotte real estate investor and former state senator gave his campaign $1.1 million.

Pendergraph, a Mecklenburg County commissioner and former sheriff, has run as Myrick’s hand-picked successor. He was the target of a barrage of ads by Pittenger.

“He spent a million and a half dollars, and I’m nipping at his heels,” Pendergraph said Tuesday night. “If I had spent (that) I’d be really disappointed if I don’t blow out all the candidates. … Everything he has said, he either has stretched the truth or out-and-out lied.”

Pendergraph, under attack from Pittenger and a super PAC that supports him, struggled to compete financially.

Through mid-April, he’d raised $173,000, less than three rivals. Last week he loaned his campaign $20,000, saying, “The well’s near dry.”

Pittenger defended his ads, which have flooded mailboxes as well as airwaves.

“Of course Mr. Pendergraph has pandered and flip-flopped,” he said. “We’ll show the distinctions between the two of us.”

Pittenger, a social as well as fiscal conservative, won support from voters like Carter Brydon, a south Charlotte Republican. He said he liked Pittenger’s “big-time Christian values.””

“Last week Pendergraph stirred controversy when he said he had “reason to be suspicious” of President Barack Obama’s claim that he was born in the U.S. and thereby eligible for the presidency. His remarks on the “birther” issue prompted the Observer to retract its endorsement for the first time.

It also appeared to cost him some votes.

“I was going to go with Pendergraph (until) the birther stuff,” said Richard Ellis, a south Charlotte Republican. “That’s kind of silly. I think it’s an issue that’s been put to rest.””

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/05/08/3227717/district-9-us-house-runoff-looms.html

Mr. Ellis, you have been lied to by the mainstream media.

Jim Pendergraph, I applaud you.

When in the Charlotte area in recent years, I heard nothing but good things about Jim Pendergraph. Obviously the Charlotte Observer had the same opinion before Pendergraph questioned the messiah, Obama (see quote above).

“But we give our nod to Mecklenburg County commissioner Jim Pendergraph. We believe he has broad appeal and understands the district’s needs best. He speaks with a strong conservative voice but seems pragmatic in how he would represent the district – focusing on constituent needs and getting things done.”

Read the history of Jim Pendergraph being endorsed by the Charlotte Observer and then attacked by them.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/charlotte-observer-obama-media-arm-media-bias-example-times-of-1984-praises-jim-pendergraph-one-minute-then-attacks-him-orwellian-two-minute-hate/

Why any concerned American should question Obama.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/05/07/charlotte-observer-obama-facts-obama-hides-birth-certificate-college-and-other-records-taxpayer-dollars-aid-in-obama-deception-sheriffs-arpaio-and-pendergraph-question-obama/

NC marriage amendment passes, Mitt Romney wins NC Republican primary, Obama has a NC problem

NC marriage amendment passes, Mitt Romney wins NC Republican primary, Obama has a NC problem

NC marriage amendment passes.

Mitt Romney wins NC Republican primary.

Obama has a NC problem and it is getting bigger.

Jim Pendergraph, who was endorsed by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who questioned Obama’s birthplace and had his endorsement by the Charlotte Observer rescinded, is in a close battle with Robert Pittenger in the Republican 9th district US Congress race.

NC elections 2012, Ballot challenges, North Carolina election law, SBOE, State Board of Elections, Laws bias or corruption, Part 1

NC elections 2012, Ballot challenges, North Carolina election law, SBOE, State Board of Elections, Laws bias or corruption, Part 1

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

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

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

NC elections 2012

North Carolina election law

Laws, bias, corruption

Part 1

I begin Part 1 of this series on NC Elections 2012, NC election law at a historic moment. As I sit here in NC writing this, Judge Michael Malihi may still
be pondering his decision for a ruling on the Obama ballot challenges in Georgia. His ruling is expected soon and the GA Secretary of State, Brian P. Kemp,
has stated he will abide by the judge’s decision. Regardless, this is significant for 2 main reasons. First, it the the first time I am aware of that a judge
is ruling on Obama’s eligibility based on merits and not some other issue like standing. Second, regardless of the ruling, there are stated avenues of appeal
in the GA Statutes.

Another historic aspect of NC elections and election law in 2012 is the Democrat National convention being held in Charlotte, NC this year. Obama won NC by a
very narrow margin in 2008. So small that had the outcome made a difference in the election, I would have been more involved in disputing it. Nevertheless,
individuals were indicted in 2011 in the Raleigh area for flagrant voter fraud in 2008. There was much controversy in Alamance County and other areas about
illegal aliens beeing allowed to register to vote. There is no reason to believe this has diminished.

In 2008, I read the election statutes of approximately one half of the states, emailed nearly all Secretary of States or other appropriate departments and
contacted several offices by phone. My intent was to inform them of deficiencies in the eligibility of Barack Obama and to get clarification of their
statutes. I also insured that they were forewarned so as not to have ignorance as an excuse later.

I am now focusing my energy on NC statutes and performance of duties. Sadly, in my home state, the aura of corruption in high and lower places must be
addressed. This has become a multi part series for several reasons. One is the sheer volume of items to be addressed. Another is going through protocols,
channels in an orderly fashion. However, I did not want to let much time elapse before informing you of the methodology and progress.

In 2008 I and others contacted the NC Secretary of State as well as SBOE, State Board of Elections. I must admit that my expections were low and the state
met them. However as I stated above, they were warned and consequently will be held accountable. It is no wonder that since then, former Governor Mike
Easley has been indicted and convicted of other infractions. Current Governor Beverly Perdue just announced that she will not run again. It is no wonder she
is backing off. Her administration has been plagued with scandal, some of which is tied to the NC State Board of Elections.

I will be addressing 2 main areas of concern as I attempt to get clarification of our statutes. One is the powers and duties of the board, not as tradition
dictates but as the US Constitution and State Law demands. The other is the level of corruption and bias within the board and other departments.

What will rule the priorities of NC Government this year? Will it be the US Constitution, State Laws and the rule of law

or

will it be the Democrat Party and the desire to look good hosting the Democrat Convention.

Our state motto is:

“Esse quam videri”

To be rather than to seem.

I guess we will find out.

From John Hammer of the Rhino Times February 2, 2012.

“North Carolina Gov. Beverly “Dumpling” Perdue announced last week that to benefit the school children of North Carolina she was not going to run for reelection. One might assume that Perdue thinks the school children of North Carolina will be better off without Perdue in the governor’s mansion. I agree with her, but for some reason I don’t think that is what she meant.

She tried to say in her terse announcement that by being a lame duck governor she would be better able to fight for school children. It makes no sense. There is a reason why they call someone in office who is not running for reelection a lame duck and that is because they don’t have much power. They cannot threaten to make opponents’ lives miserable for the next four years or threaten to veto legislation coming up in the next session. They can beg and plead, but a governor can do that whether they are running or not.

There are only two reasons that come to mind that would explain why a sitting governor who has repeatedly said she was going to run for reelection would, two weeks before filing opens, announce she isn’t going to run. One is health. I have it on good authority that the governor is not stepping down because of any health issues.

The other is because she has learned that she is about to be indicted. Her mentor, former Gov. Mike Easley, was indicted after leaving office and was convicted of a felony.

Several of Perdue’s 2008 campaign staff have been indicted: Her finance chairman, Peter Reichard, who is the former president of the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, was convicted of one felony in connection with the 2008 Perdue campaign. Two other people associated with the Perdue campaign were also indicted.

It is certainly possible that Perdue agreed not to run for reelection as part of a deal. Perhaps the US attorney agreed not to indict her until after she served her term if she agreed not to run for reelection

Of course it could be that Perdue realized there was no way she was going to beat Pat McCrory again and decided not to prolong the agony. However, that seems highly unlikely. Candidates almost always think they are going to win. They may say that they know they don’t have a chance but in their hearts they have this belief that somehow at the end of the night they will be declared the winner. I have interviewed candidates on the eve of the election who finished with less than 20 percent of the vote but they could explain in detail why despite the odds they were going to win.

Perdue beat McCrory once, even though the polls had said early on that McCrory was ahead.

One theory is that the National Democratic Party asked Perdue to step aside because she couldn’t win, and not having a strong candidate would hurt President Barack Hussein Obama’s chances of winning North Carolina. Right now it looks like Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton is going to be the Democratic candidate, and although he holds statewide office the vast majority of the people in the state have no idea who he is.

It just doesn’t seem possible that the National Democratic Party is so out of touch that it believes Dalton would help Obama more than Perdue. Of course, someone should tell the Obama campaign that they are not going to win North Carolina. Four years ago the Republicans ran an extremely poor candidate and the Democrats had an extremely charismatic one. Plus four years ago Obama was making history by becoming the first black person elected president of the United States. He can’t do that again.

Four years ago no one could blame Obama for the economy. Today people do blame Obama for the economy and it appears that his solutions have not worked, although he is going to campaign like they have.

It doesn’t look like Obama has much chance in North Carolina, but then again the Republicans could nominate a candidate who will give the race to Obama.”

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-Columns-c-2012-02-01-210912.112113-Under-the-Hammer.html

 

Tenth Amendment, Standing, Supreme Court ruling, Obama eligibility cases, No Supreme Court ruling on Obama eligibility

Tenth Amendment, Standing, Supreme Court ruling, Obama eligibility cases, No Supreme Court ruling on Obama eligibility

“Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”… Chief Justice Marshall opinion, Marbury versus Madison

“If Philip J. Berg as an American citizen, a respected Democratic operative and former attorney general of Pennsylvania doesn’t have the “standing” to bring this type of lawsuit against Obama, then who in America does have standing?”…Ellis Washington, professor of law

 From Citizen Wells Tuesday, June 21, 2011.

“The SCOTUS, Supreme Court of the United States, provided a decision in Bond v. United States on June 16, 2011. The ruling addressed standing and the Tenth Amendment.”

“Before accessing the impact of the ruling, especially regarding eligibility cases, the Citizen Wells blog will revisit some articles from 2008. It was apparent to us and many legal scholars that any citizen had standing to question the eligibility of Barack Obama, especially when many states indicated they had no authority or responsibility to do so. Per the Tenth Amendment, that gave the power to citizens.

It is also important to remember that the US Supreme Court did not render a decision on any eligibility case. It was lower courts that deemed that the plaintiffs had no standing.”

Read more

There are probably multiple reasons why the US Supreme Court chose to not take on any of the Obama eligibility cases. Clearly one of them is the fact that there are provisions in place to safeguard elections. One of them, grossly ignored, is the right of citizens to uphold the Constitution via Tenth Amendment Rights.

From Citizen Wells November 17, 2008.

NC State Officers and Election

Officials are in Violation of the Law
             2008 Presidential Election

Eligibility for presidency

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.”

How President is elected

UNITED STATES ELECTION LAW

“The following provisions of law governing Presidential Elections are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended):

§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.”

The states are responsible for the primaries, general election and events leading up to the Electoral College vote

US Constitution
Article II
Section 1

“Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.”

NC Officials responsible for upholding the US Constitution and Federal and State Election Laws

Governor Mike Easley has overall responsibilities as well as Electoral College certification.

Attorney General Roy Cooper is charged with compliance with all Federal and State laws.

Secretary Elaine Marshall is responsible for the NC Election process.

NC Board of Elections is responsible for the NC Election process.

NC Electoral College Electors are responsible for complying with Federal and State laws.

NC Judges ruling on election matters are bound to uphold the US Constitution and Federal and State laws.

Laws that apply to NC State Officials

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1. Presidential eligibility.

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1. States are responsible for Presidential Elections up to Electoral College vote.

Federal Election Law dictates that Electors must vote in a “manner directed by the Constitution.”

Article VI of the US Constitution states:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislators, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by
Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution;”

NC Statute § 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election.

“If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:
Position

President 

Vacancy is to be filled by appointment of national executive
committee of political party in which vacancy occurs”

NC Statute § 163‑19.  State Board of Elections; appointment; term of office; vacancies; oath of office.

“At the first meeting held after new appointments are made, the members of the State Board of Elections shall take the following oath:

I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States; that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of North Carolina, and to the constitutional powers and authorities which are or may be established for the government thereof; that I will endeavor to support, maintain and defend the Constitution of said State, and that I will well and truly execute the duties of the office of member of the State Board of Elections according to the best of my knowledge and ability, according to law, so help me, God.”
NC Statute § 163‑23.  Powers of chairman in execution of Board duties.

“In the performance of the duties enumerated in this Chapter, the chairman of the State Board of Elections shall have power to administer oaths, issue subpoenas, summon witnesses, and compel the production of papers, books, records and other evidence. Upon the written request or requests of two or more members of the State Board of Elections, he shall issue subpoenas for designated witnesses or identified papers, books, records and other evidence. In the absence of the chairman or upon his refusal to act, any two members of the State Board of Elections may issue subpoenas, summon witnesses, and compel the production of papers, books, records and other evidence. In the absence of the chairman or upon his refusal to act, any member of the Board may administer oaths. (1901, c. 89, s. 7; Rev., s. 4302; C.S., s. 5923; 1933, c. 165, s. 1; 1945, c. 982; 1967, c. 775, s. 1; 1973, c. 793, s. 4.)”

The following facts and conclusions are self evident:

  • The State of NC, State Officials and Election Officials are responsible for the Presidential Election in NC up to and including the vote by the Electoral College Electors of NC.
  • The Electoral College Electors of NC are bound by the US Constitution and Federal and State Election law to vote for an eligible presidential candidate.
  • The Governor’s office, the Secretary of State’s office, the NC State Board of Elections and the Electoral College of NC has been notified in public and private of major issues surrounding the eligibility of Barack Obama.
  • The office of the Secretary of State and Board of Elections was notified multiple times, prior to the general election, of the Philip J Berg lawsuit and facts regarding Barack Obama’s ineligibility. The notification was via telephone conversation and emails as well as notification on the internet. The Board of Elections stated they had been aware of these issues for several months.
  • There are pending lawsuits in NC courts, other state courts, as well as US Supreme Court, challenging the eligibilty of Barack Obama.
  • Barack Obama has refused to supply legal proof of eligibility.
  • Pending or dismissed lawsuits have no bearing on the obligation of NC officials to uphold the rule of law.
  • Failure of NC officials to uphold the law and their election duties may result in the disenfranchisement of millions of voters.
  • The state of NC has complete control of the presidential election process in NC up to and including the Electoral College vote.
  • Placing a candidate on the ballot at the direction of a major political party does not relieve NC election officials of their duty to ensure eligibility of candidates.
  • The state of NC in NC Statute § 163-114 provides for replacing a candidate that “for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified”.
  • The Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution gives power to the people not reserved for the federal government or the states.
  • The laws on the books not only allow, but require that NC officers and Elections Officials demand proof from any presidential candidate of eligibility.

If the officers and Election Officials do not perform their legal obligation to demand proof of eligibility from Barack Obama or any other presidential candidate, they will be subject to one or more of the following:

  • Prosecution
  • Lawsuit
  • Impeachment
  • Recall
  • Expulsion
  • Dismissal

Citizen Wells will be providing this information to the officers and Election officials of NC. If a satisfactory answer is not received soon, petitions will be initiated to remove non compliant officials from office. Judges are not immune.

What is the alternative?

The answer is in the Declaration of Independence.

Read more

Lt Col Donald Sullivan V NC Board of Elections, Elaine Marshall, NC Secretary of State, Update, December 7, 2009, Obama eligibility, Obama Kenyan born

 Here is the latest update December 7, 2009, from Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, plaintiff in a lawsuit against North Carolina Board of Elections, and Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State For North Carolina. Following the update is a copy of the lawsuit.

“Sullivan v. Secretary of State for North Carolina, 08CVS1076
RE:  Obama Eligibility
 
12-4-09:  Hearing on Plaintiff’s motion to amend, alter or vacate Judge Cobb’s order of October 10, 2008, dismissing subject lawsuit with prejudice.
 
Judge Cobb called the case for hearing at 11:00 AM.  Present were myself and Brandon Truman, Special Deputy Attorney General, for the Defendant.  I made my statement in support of my motion to delete the words “with prejudice” from the order dismissing the case.  I wanted this done because my filing of the second complaint against Obama’s eligibility included as defendants both the secretary of state and the board of elections.  The “with prejudice” made any future complaint against the secretary of state filed by me, including mine, moot “res judicata”. 
 
I argued that the case had been dismissed, not on its merits, but on procedural arguments from the State.  I argued that the order had been drafted by the State’s attorney at the request of the judge, and that the term “with prejudice” had not been the subject of any discussion during the hearing on the complaint.  Further, the Rule governing dismissals makes it clear that dismissals for procedure in first complaints typically are considered to be without prejudice unless otherwise noted.  Such a dismissal on a second complaint in the same matter is typically “with prejudice”.  This was my first case in the series.  I had no way of knowing whether or not the attorney put those words into the order or if the judge had done that himself; since I was not given the privilege of reviewing the proposed order prior to its being given to the judge.  I also made a “point of order” on the court’s not being properly set, since, upon information and belief, the State’s attorney did not have a proper oath of office.  I did this without argument, just for the record.
 
The State’s attorney responded that he did not recollect adding that language to his order, but he might have.  He just couldn’t be sure.  He argued that the case was not only dismissed on procedural errors, but also due to the fact that the Secretary of State has no statutory duty to do that which I requested the court to order her to do.  He also introduced the dismissal order from my second Obama case showing its mootness since Obama had already been inaugurated.  I objected to that order as being irrelevant to the instant case, but the judge allowed it. 
 
I responded that I agreed there was no statutory duty of the Secretary to do as I requested, but that there was a higher, constitutional authority to do so. 
 
Judge Cobb denied the motion, telling me in no uncertain terms that it was he who put the words “with prejudice” into the order.  I had told the State’s attorney I would not appeal this ruling prior to the hearing.  I will put all my effort into Obama II.  The denial in this case means the second case will lose the Secretary of State as a defendant, leaving only the Board of Elections to carry the ball.  Again, the only argument in that case is the constitutional duty also.  I have a hearing being scheduled for later this month or early in January to hear a similar motion to amend, alter or vacate the dismissal order from last March, 2009.  It will be heard by Judge Osmond Smith III out of Caswell County.”

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
COUNTY OF WAKE File # 08CV21393
Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, )

Plaintiff ) NOTICE AND DEMAND ) TO AMEND FINAL

v. ) JUDGMENT ORDER

) (CLASS ACTION)

North Carolina Board of Elections, and )

Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State )

For North Carolina, )

Defendants )

________________________________________________________________________

 
NOTICE AND DEMAND
 
 

 

Now come I, Lt. Colonel Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, on behalf of myself and all others similarly situated, pursuant to Rule 59(a)(7), (8) and (e) and Rule 60 (b)(2), et seq., to notice and demand this court vacate, amend or alter its final order “signed” March 16, 2009, but dated October 2, 2009, and received by me on October 6, 2009, dismissing this action. This demand is based upon the newly discovered evidence infra, and upon the sworn duty of this court to “support and maintain the Constitution and laws of the United States” (Art. VI, Section 7, NC Const.).

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
 
 
 

 

On November 7, 2008, and on behalf of all those similarly situated, I filed a class action complaint in this instant matter with the Pender County Clerk of Court demanding injunctive relief in the matter of the citizenship of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., his eligibility to have been a candidate on the North Carolina ballot for the office of President of the United States of America, and his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States of America. Defendants moved for a change of venue to Wake County; Motion was granted December 1, 2008. I filed in this action a Notice and Demand for a TRO on November 26, 2008, to prevent the NC Board of Elections from certifying the vote for the offices of President and Vice-President of the United States until the defendants had certified the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of President of the United States under Article II, Section 1. The Honorable R. Allen Baddour, Jr., presiding Superior Court Judge, denied said motion for TRO on December 15, 2008. On December 19, 2008, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss my complaint in its entirety pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to mootness, res judicata, and lack of standing; and pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. I filed by mail a Motion to Amend my Notice and Demand for Injunctive Relief on December 19, 2008, seeking to add as defendants the Governor and the General Assembly, delete Para. 8.7, and delete the attachment of the claims for relief to the timing of the inauguration of the President, since the unreasonable and calculated court delays in this matter had rendered that element moot (A demand for injunctive relief being an extraordinary remedy which is normally heard immediately rather than being handled routinely as in the instant matter). On January 19, 2009, I filed a Notice and Demand for Class Certification seeking to represent all voters of North Carolina. Hearing was held on March 16, 2009, on the defendantÕs Motion to Dismiss and my Motion to Amend. On September 16, 2009, the attorney for the defendant e-mailed for my review a copy of the proposed order dismissing my case and denying my Demand. On September 21, 2009, I submitted my Objections to the Proposed Order by return e-mail. The subject order dismissing this action was issued by the Honorable W. Osmond Smith, Jr., on October 2, 2009, and dated March 16, 2009, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The final order contained no changes from that originally proposed.

PRESENTATION OF NEW EVIDENCE
 
 
 

 

The following is a statement of newly discovered evidence which was not available to me prior to the hearing on the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and which was unknown and unavailable to me at that time:

1. A syndicated report by the Associated Press, published Sunday, June 27, 2004, by the Kenyan Standard Times and available in their electronic edition for that date at http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/ap-declares-obama-kenyan-born/ . The article, though well concealed by Google, may also be found posted at http://web.archive.org/web/20040627142700/eastandard.net/headlines/news26060403.htm  The AP reporter stated the following:

“Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat…” (Emphasis added).

One would expect that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004 that he was born in Kenya. This article was not refuted by the Obama camp. Further, during that same campaign in 2004, Mr. Obama, for the record and in response to Mr. Alan Keyes’ statement that Obama was not a Ònatural born citizenÓ, stated in quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”.

2. On September 4, 2009, an Affidavit was filed as evidence in a federal case with the United States District Court in Santa Ana, California, by Mr. Lucas Smith. In this affidavit, he certified the legitimacy of a certified copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., which he had personally obtained from Kenyan records. A copy of this birth certificate was filed concurrently with the affidavit, including a baby footprint, for the man who is currently referred to as President Barack Hussein Obama. The document is a legal affidavit that declares Lucas Smith to be of sound mind and judgment. Lucas Smith could go to jail if he lied on this affidavit.

3. On November 24, 2008, the following excerpts from an article by Chelsea Schilling appeared in the World Net Daily:

“A radio interview with Kenyan Ambassador Peter N.R.O. Ogego has been widely publicized since the ambassador called President-elect Barack Obama’s Kenyan birthplace a ‘well-known’ attraction – but the embassy is now telling WND the hosts misunderstood his comments.

“On Nov. 6, only two days after the election, Detroit radio talk-show hosts Mike Clark, Trudi Daniels and Marc Fellhauer on WRIF’s ‘Mike In The Morning’ called the Embassy of Kenya in Washington, D.C., to speak with Ambassador Ogego.

“The radio hosts were surprised when their light-hearted interview with Ogego reignited suspicions that Obama may have been born in Kenya.

“An assistant to the ambassador, referring to herself only as ‘Trudy,’ confirmed today that Ogego had indeed participated in the radio interview. But she said the show made leading statements and took the following comments out of context:

‘Clark: “We want to congratulate you on Barack Obama, our new president, and you must be very proud.”
‘Ogego: “We are. We are. We are also proud of the U.S. for having made history as well.”
‘Fellhauer: “One more quick question, President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”
‘Ogego: “It’s already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive.”

‘Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”

‘Ogego: “It would depend on the government. It’s already well known.'”

…”‘If you listen to the call in its entirety, you will find it was very obvious we were all talking about President-elect Barack Obama and not his father,’ Clark said.”

4. Here’s what it says at Obama’s web portal, Fight The Smears:

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United KingdomÕs dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.”
(Emphasis and italics added.)Obama is telling us himself that his status was “governed” by a foreign jurisdiction.  This is no theory.  This is a fact. Like it or not, rich or poor, great or strong, Democrat or Republican, Obama was born under the jurisdiction of Great Britain via Kenya.  There is nothing conspiratorial about saying that.  Obama has it posted on his own web site. So, even if we accept that Mr Obama was born in Hawaii of a black Kenyan father and a 17-year-old white American mother, his citizenship is and constitutional eligibility for the presidency is still in question, since he is either a Brtish or Kenyan by birth, not an American. His American citizenship has never been confirmed or reinstated.
 
 

 

5. A letter dated 2 Februrary, 2009, from Michael Angelus to US Senator Maria Cantwell (D., VA) submitted four attachments including the following:

A. The actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795;

B. The actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790;

C. The actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789;

D. The actual text in a January 26, 2009 letter issued by United States Senator, Mark R. Warner.

Mr. Angelus also went on to include, Òand we also witness the apparent denial in the current United States Congress to address the phrase “natural born citizen.”

The purpose of the letter is to define what the Congress has concluded “natural born citizenship” to mean. Mr. Obama fails each of these tests for being natural born as required by Article 2, Section 1.

6. Upon information and belief, as one of his first acts as the newly installed “President”, Mr. Obama issued an executive order which sealed his personal papers, documents, records, transcripts, etc. from public scrutiny.

CONCLUSION
Therefore, because of the sworn duty of this court “to support and maintain the Constitution and laws of the United States”, and pursuant to the provisions of Rule 59 and Rule 60, supra, this court has the subject matter jurisdiction and the authority to grant the relief I am requesting based upon the new evidence herein provided, to vacate or alter the order of the court dismissing my complaint for injunctive relief and force the State of North Carolina, in the form of its elected and appointed officials, to properly and adequately protect the combined citizens of this State from an unconstitutionally elected chief executive of the United States; or, in the alternative, to confirm that Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., is indeed eligible to hold that office. Each of these elected and appointed officials, including this Honorable Court, has taken a solemn oath to do no less.
 
 

 

Any act repugnant to the Constitution is void ab initio. It carries no authority and creates no law. We learn this the first week of law school. Ignorance of the law, therefore, does not apply in this matter. I demand this court do its duty to the People, to this country and to themselves and confirm the constitutionality of the Obama “Presidency”. We have seen already the unintended consequences of enthroning an apparent imposter. There will be more unless we all do our duty. Honor requires no less.

Respectfully submitted this the Twenty-Ninth Day of October, 2009.

____________________________________ Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, sui juris Lt. Col., USAFR(R) PO Box 3061 Wilmington, NC 28406 910-617-2559

 
 
 
 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do certify I have this Tewenty-Ninth Day of October, 2009, served a copy of the foregoing “Notice and Demand Amend Final Judgment Order” by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mails, certified with return receipt requested, or hand-delivered, and addressed as follows:
For Defendant Board of Elections:
State of North Carolina Department of Justice

ATTN: Susan K. Nichols, Special Attorney General

PO Box 629

Raleigh, NC 27602-0629

For Defendant Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State:

Brandon L. Truman

Assistant Attorney General

PO Box 629

Raleigh, NC 27626-0629

A copy is also being filed with the Clerk of Court for Wake County.

BY: ________________________________

Donald Sullivan, Lt Col, USAFR (Ret)

Plaintiff, Sui JurisPO Box 3061

Wilmington, NC 28406

  

Obama not eligible, NC lawsuit, Donald Sullivan, Lt Col, Elaine Marshall, NC Secretary of State, North Carolina Board of Elections, NC Electoral College, November 7, 2008, Class Action Lawsuit, Support and defend Constitution

Here is the lawsuit filed on November 7, 2008, by Lt Col. Donald Sullivan against Elaine Marshall, the NC Secretary of State, and the NC Board of Elections:

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

COUNTY OF PENDER File # 08CV_____________

 

 

Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, )

Plaintiff ) NOTICE AND DEMAND ) FOR

v. ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

) (CLASS ACTION)

North Carolina Board of Elections, and )

Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State )

For North Carolina, )

Defendants )

________________________________________________________________________

 

 

Now comes Lt. Colonel Donald Sullivan, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, to notice and demand this court provide injunctive relief in the matter of the citizenship of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., his eligibility to have been a candidate on the North Carolina ballot for the office of President of the United States of America and his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States of America. 

1. PARTIES

1.1.

 

I, Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, am an adult individual with an address of PO Box 3061, Wilmington, NC, and Citizen of the State of North Carolina and of the United States of America.

1.2 Defendant, North Carolina Board of Elections, is an appointed agency of the State of North Carolina General Assembly, with oversight authority in matters pertaining to State elections and election irregularities including, but not limited to, candidate/electee eligibility, with offices at 506 Harrington Street, Raleigh, NC, 27611, and with a mailing address of PO Box 27255, Raleigh, NC, 27611-7255. Upon information and belief, the Process Agent for said entity is Director Gary O. Bartlett of the same address.

1.2. Defendant, Elaine F. Marshall, a/k/a Elaine Marshall is an adult individual with an office address of Old Revenue Building, 2 S. Salisbury Street, PO Box 29622, Raleigh, NC, 27626-062, and the elected North Carolina State Secretary of State. Upon information and belief, the Process Agent for said individual and entity is Ann Wall at PO Box 29622, Raleigh, NC, 27626.

2.     JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2.1.

 

As we do not have a federal ballot, per se, as there is no federally guaranteed right to vote and there is no popular federal election held, North Carolina State, through the office of the North Carolina Board of Elections, creates its own ballot, supervises the same, and allows its citizens to vote in a popular election to choose electors to represent our choice for the Office of President to the Congress under the 12

th Amendment. This case arises under Article VI, of the North Carolina State Constitution and North Carolina General Statute 163, et. seq., and the laws and Constitution of the United States, and presents a state question within this Court’s jurisdiction.

3. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLASS ACTION STATUS

 

 

3. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF CLASS ACTION STATUS

 

I bring this action on my motion for class certification on behalf of my self and all others similarly situated pursuant to Rule 23 of the N.C.R. of Civ. P. and state as follows:
Pursuant to said Rule 23, I request a determination that all voters be certified as a single class based upon the following grounds:

3.1. I bring this action now maintained by the named plaintiff as a class action on behalf of myself and all persons similarly situated, comprising the class.
3.2. I am informed and believe that there are approximately over 4,000,000 members of the class so that joinder of all members is impracticable.

3.3. My claims are typical of the claims of all members of the class above.

3.4. I will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the class above, to the best of my ability.

3.5. There are common questions of law and fact affecting the rights of each member of the class, as against the named defendants.

3.6. The common questions of law and fact predominate over any questions affecting individual members only, and a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversies between the class described above and the named defendants.

For the reasons stated infra, I respectfully request this court to grant my request for class certification.  As discussed above, all requirements of NC Civil Rule 23 have been satisfied, and the goal of judicial economy will be well served by resolving these claims contained infra in a single action. [English v Holden Beach Realty, 41 NC App 1, 254 SE 2d 217 (1979) and Crow v. Citicorp Acceptance, 319 NC 274, 354 SE 2d 459 (1987)]

4.

 

     MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S DEMAND FOR AN ORDER FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

4.1.

 

I

, Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, hereby offer this memorandum in support of my motion for injunctive relief and to demand performance of constitutional duties related to the offices of the North Carolina Board of Elections and the North Carolina State Secretary of State, Elaine F. Marshall, a/k/a Elaine Marshall, [hereinafter Defendants”]. Upon information and belief, all my allegations and aversions herein are true and verifiable.

4.2.

 

My complaint challenges Mr. Barack Hussein Obama’s, eligibility to run for, or hold, the Office of President of the United States and demands that the Offices of the Board of Elections and the Secretary of State make such determination by acquisition of original documentation or by receipt of verifiable information from other government entities so charged with overseeing the election process, such as the Federal Elections Commission.

4.3.

 

I argue that when a challenge is received by the North Carolina State Board of Elections to the qualification for office of an individual appearing on the North Carolina State Ballot, that the entire burden of proof falls on the candidate for Office to present such information and documentation to the North Carolina State Board of Elections as would be normal and customary to establish one

s minimum qualifications for office.

4.4.

 

I further argue that the Office of the Board of Elections has the Constitutional and Statutory authority to make such determinations as part of certifying and executing fair and open elections.

4.5.

 

I further argue that it is sufficient to show only reasonable cause for complaint to the Board of Elections for that Board to require documentation of the respective individual relevant to determination of minimum qualification; that, lacking explicit statute defining the requisite documentation, the Board of Elections has the intrinsic authority to set those reasonable standards that would establish certain confidence in the people in the electoral process.

4.6.

 

Plaintiff seeks focused and expedited review, to protect the veracity of the electoral process, maintain the people’s confidence in the government and to support defend the Constitutions of North Carolina and of the United States of America. 

5. DEMAND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF – PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

5.1.

 

Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution, states in particular part, “No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

5.2.

 

Mr. Barack H. Obama was a candidate for United States Office of President on the 2008 North Carolina ballot. However, to have been a candidate, Mr. Obama must have met those qualifications specified for the United States Office of the President, which include, but are not limited to, being a “natural born” citizen. Upon information and belief, Mr. Obama has failed to demonstrate that he is a “natural born” citizen. There are other legal challenges before the Federal Courts regarding aspects of lost or dual citizenship. Those challenges further demonstrate my argument that reasonable doubt exists as to the veracity of the electoral process that would allow such fundamental questions to exist at this late hour preceding the election.

5.3.

 

The North Carolina State office of the Board of Elections is responsible for the veracity of the North Carolina State election process, for verifying ahead of time the qualification of the voters, the ballots themselves, the candidates and the final counting and certification of results. That office is intended to be non-biased and to provide the critical sense of fairness and correctness necessary for the people to have faith in the fundamental underpinnings of the democratic basis for our republic.

5.4.

 

There is a reasonable and common expectation by the people that to qualify for the ballot the individuals so listed meet the minimum qualifications as outlined in our Constitutions, and that proof of those minimum qualifications has been received by the officials executing the election process. Heretofore, upon information and belief, only a signed statement from Mr. Obama attesting to meeting those qualifications was requested and received by the office of the Board of Elections, with no verification demanded. This practice, it should be noted, represents a much lower standard than that demanded of one when requesting even a driver’s license. Since the office of the Board of Elections has at its core the mission of certifying and establishing the veracity of the election process, this demand seeks a directive to the North Carolina State Office of the Board of Elections to receive appropriate verifiable documentation and certify any individual’s qualification for Office whose basic credentials for that Office have been challenged by this formal demand to the Office of the Board of Elections from a citizen of North Carolina State.

5.5.

 

In the case of individuals seeking the Office of President of the United States, the US constitution prescribes a system of electors where citizens of the respective state have a state controlled election with electors representing the interest of the named individual on the state ballot being elected to represent the interests of the respective state at the electoral college. Thus, we do not have a federal ballot controlled by the federal government. We have a North Carolina State ballot where we choose electors who in turn represent the named individual on the ballot. That is one more reason that the North Carolina Board of Elections has purview over the certification of not just the counts of the ballots so cast, but also the veracity of the contents of the ballot.

5.6.

 

This statement of failure to carry out a key task in our election system could be satisfied should verification of Mr. Obamas qualifications be received from original or certified documents from primary sources or from a verifiable report generated from government agencies such as the Federal Elections Commission. It is the North Carolina Board of Elections duty, through the State Secretary of State

s authority, to demand or request such information from foreign governments and to certify the veracity of documents or reports so received.

5.7.

 

To avert likely civil unrest and a constitutional crisis which would certainly accrue after the inauguration through laborious legal challenges and impeachment processes, this demand seeks to resolve such complaints prior to the inauguration. It was incumbent on the candidates to present such documentation, but to date Mr. Obama has failed to do so.

5.8.

 

This demand seeks specifically to verify through the office of the North Carolina Board of Elections, assisted by the Secretary of State, that Mr. Obama is a “natural born” citizen.

5.9.

 

Up to now, Mr. Obama, or the governments in question, has not allowed independent or official access to his birth records and supporting hospital records. Mr. Obama’s citizenship status has and is being challenged in the federal courts, which challenges will cast doubt on the veracity of the electoral system regardless of outcome if not resolved prior to the inauguration. Upon information and belief, the North Carolina Board of Elections is specifically charged with certifying and guaranteeing the veracity of official documents and overseeing the elections such that the people’s confidence in the fundamental aspect of our representative Republic is maintained. Upon information and belief, to date the Board of Elections has not carried out that fundamental duty regarding the eligibility of Mr. Obama.

5.10.

 

 The Federal Elections Commission FEC is generally tasked with providing oversight and verifications of federal candidates. Upon information and belief, to date the FEC has not produced either certification or verifiable documentation regarding Mr. Obama

s basic qualifications for office. Lacking that certification from the FEC, this demand requires that the Defendants formally request Hawaii State Health Department officials produce forthwith a certified copy of his “Vault” [original long version] Birth Certificate.

5.11. This demand requires that the Defendants formally request primary backup materials if they exist of hospital records that would lend veracity to a Hawaii live birth declaration. A court order of discovery is demanded to assist that investigation directed to the respective hospital, if so identified on a live birth certificate.

5.12.

 

 

Should Mr. Obama be discovered, whether by virtue of malfeasance, negligence or ignorance on his part not to have a valid certified US birth certificate; or, by such examination of original records, be found ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and thereby his election be declared void by the appropriate authorities acting under the law, I as well as other Americans will suffer irreparable harm including but not limited to:

5.12.1. Functional, or actual, disenfranchisement of large numbers of citizens, being members of the Democratic Party, who would have been deprived of the ability to choose a qualified nominee of their liking;

5.12.2.

 

Irreparable

harm to the structure and integrity of the Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee. In turn, this too would lead to disenfranchisement.

5.12.3. As Mr. Obama has now secured the election, should he later be discovered ineligible, the resulting constitutional and national security crisis that would ensue would generate a severe and genuine likelihood of civil disturbance by virtue of reaction to said disenfranchisement and upset with global ramifications.

5.13.

 

   It was well expected that, after all the public concern that has been raised over the preceding months, Mr. Obama would have released for public or official scrutiny the relevant documentation to back up his claim of qualification as a “natural born citizen”. His reaction to public concern and his recent actions in Federal District Court on 9/24/2008 demonstrate that Mr. Obama has no intentions of releasing said documentation for review or cannot because they do not exist. The late hour of this request was dictated by the delaying tactics of Mr. Obama, and the non-responsiveness to citizens’ repeated requests to the Obama campaign for proof of eligibility.

 

6.     FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS THAT DEMOSTRATE THE NEED TO PROVE MR. OBAMA’S MINIMUM CONSTITUTIONAL QUALIFICATION.

6.1.

 

These allegations and statements are not intended to be proof of the status of Mr. Obama’s citizenship or lack thereof. That will be determined in the venue of the US District court on action by the Federal Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The listing of the allegations detailed below are included to demonstrate the reasonable assertion of the need for the Defendants to reestablish public confidence in the veracity of the electoral process and the obvious need for pre-certification as to a candidate’s meeting the minimum constitutional requirements.

6.2.

 

Pursuant to the U.S. Constitution, in order to run for office of the President of the United States, one must be a “natural born citizen” and may not hold dual citizenship or multiple citizenships with foreign countries. (U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1)

6.3.

 

There are questions as to where Mr. Obama was actually born, whether in the United States or abroad, and if his birth was subsequently registered in Hawaii. There are further questions regarding Mr. Obama’s United States citizenship, if he ever held such, being expatriated, and his failure to regain his citizenship by taking the oath of allegiance once he turned eighteen (18) years of age. There are additional questions regarding Mr. Obama’s multi-citizenships with foreign countries, which he may still maintain. To date, Mr. Obama has refused to prove he is qualified under the U.S. Constitution and eligible to run for the office of President of the United States despite requests and recent opportunities to do so in Federal Court.

6.4.

 

The “certificate” that Mr. Obama has posted on his official WEB site is a “Certification of Live Birth,” and not a “Birth Certificate” from Hawaii. There is no indication on even this certificate as to specifically where the birth took place.

6.5.

 

Researchers have claimed to have been unable to locate any birthing records in island hospitals for Mr. Barack Obama’s mother. Mr. Obama has offered none for review.

6.6.

 

Three forensic document experts have published extensive reports claiming that there is evidence of tampering on even the Obama WEB site displayed certificate.

6.7.

 

Numerous Freedom of Information Act Requests have been sent to Officials in Hawaii with no response from the public officials, nor has Mr. Obama granted access for release of the information, lending to the concern over the veracity of the attestation of eligibility on Mr. Obama’s application for candidacy for the office of President of the United States.

6.8.

 

The facts are undisputed by Mr. Obama that his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was a U.S. citizen; however, his father, Barack Obama, Sr., was a citizen of Kenya. Mr. Obama’s parents, according to divorce records, were married on or about February 2, 1961.

6.9.

 

Mr. Obama claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961; however, he has never given the name of the hospital in which he was born; whereas there are reports that Mr. Obama’s grandmother on his father’s side, his half brother and his half sister claim Mr. Barack H. Obama was born in Kenya. Reports further reflect that Mr. Obama’s mother went to Kenya during her pregnancy. Wayne Madsen, Journalist with Online Journal as a contributing writer published an article on June 9, 2008, stating that a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya, and located a Certificate Registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr., at a Kenya Maternity Hospital, to his father, a Kenyan citizen, and his mother, a U.S. citizen. There are claims of records of a “registry of birth” for Mr. Obama, on or about August 8, 1961, in the public records office in Hawaii; but these have not been released for scrutiny. It is alleged in the Federal trial and is a matter of much general speculation that Mr. Obama’s mother was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of pregnancy, which apparently was a normal restriction to avoid births during a flight. It is likely that Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) gave birth to Mr. Obama in Kenya, after which she flew to Hawaii and registered Mr. Obama’s birth. In apparent confirmation that Mr. Obama was born in Kenya, an ABC newsman, reporting from Nairobi, Kenya, the morning after the elections, stated that the Kenyan people were celebrating the victory of their own native son

in the race for the presidency in the United States. Mobs of Kenyans were shown in the streets of Nairobi proudly waving their American flags and chanting words of support for their brother, Mr. Obama.

6.10.

 

Regarding the alleged birth of Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., in Honolulu, Hawaii, it is variously circulated that Mr. Obama’s birth is reported as occurring at two (2) separate hospitals, Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital. Mr. Obama has provided no proof of birth from either of these or any other US based facility. He has made no effort to address these public concerns.

6.11. Upon information and belief, there are no published or known hospital birthing records for Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama), Obama’s mother. There are only claims of records of a “registry of birth” for Mr. Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii.

6.12.

 

  

There is even a Canadian Birth Certificate posted on the Internet in the name of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.; however, the date of birth shows to be August 23, 1961.

6.13.

 

  

At the time of Mr. Obama’s birth in 1961, Kenya was a British Colony. Subsequently, under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Mr. Barack H. Obama, Jr., became a Kenyan citizen on December 12, 1963. There are no indications or reports that Mr. Obama ever renounced that dual citizenship conferred either by nature of birth or by virtue of his father’s Kenyan citizenship. On Mr. Obama’s Senate web site, Mr. Obama acknowledges his father holds Kenyan nationality but avoids addressing that he (Mr. Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.) also held/holds Kenyan nationality.

6.14.

 

    

If in fact Mr. Obama was born in Kenya, the laws on the books in the United States at the time of his birth stated that if a child is born abroad and one parent is a U.S. Citizen, which would have been his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, Mr. Obama’s mother would have had to live ten (10) years in the United States, five (5) of which were after the age of fourteen (14). At the time of Mr. Obama’s birth, his mother was only eighteen (18) years of age and, therefore, did not meet the residency requirements under the law to give her son (Obama) U.S. Citizenship much less the status of “natural born”. Thus, the laws in effect at the time of Mr. Obama’s birth prevented U.S. Citizenship at birth of children born abroad to a U.S. Citizen parent and a non-citizen parent, if the citizen parent was under the age of nineteen (19) at the time of the birth of the child. Mr. Obama’s mother did not qualify under the law on the books to register Mr. Obama as a “natural born” citizen. Section 301(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27,1952,66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S.C. §1401(b), Matter of S-F-and G-, 2 I & N Dec. 182 (B.I.A.) approved (Att’y Gen. 1944). Thus, Mr. Obama could have only been Naturalized, and a Naturalized citizen is not qualified or eligible to run for Office of the President. (U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5)

6.15.

 

  

Furthermore, if Mr. Obama had been born in Kenya, his birth father, Barack Obama, Sr., was a citizen of Kenya; therefore, Mr. Obama would have automatically become a citizen of Kenya.

5.16.

 

   

The Nationality Act of 1940 provided for the loss of citizenship when the person became naturalized upon the naturalization of his or her parent having custody of such person. Arguably, Mr. Obama’s mother expatriated her U.S. Citizenship when she married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia and relocated herself and her son (Obama) to Indonesia.

6.17.

 

   Mr.

Obama was enrolled by his parents in a public school, Fransiskus Assisi School in Jakarta, Indonesia. Copies of the school registration are available which clearly state Mr. Obama’s name as Barry Soetoro and list his citizenship as Indonesian. Mr. Obama’s father is listed as Lolo Soetoro; his date of birth and place of birth are listed as August 4, 1961, in Honolulu; and Mr. Obama’s Religion is listed as Islam. This document was verified by the television show Inside Edition, whose reporter, Matt Meagher, took the actual footage of the school record.

6.18. In or about 1971, Mr. Obama’s mother sent him back to Hawaii. He was ten (10) years of age upon his return to Hawaii.

6.19.

 

    

Sometime after the return of Mr. Obama to Hawaii, His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham returned to Hawaii and divorced her husband, Lolo Soetoro. At the time of the divorce, Mr. Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, could have regained her U.S. citizenship. In order to regain her citizenship, she would have had to take the oath of allegiance required for such recognition. Said oath of allegiance may be taken abroad before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or in the United States before the Attorney General, a judge or clerk of a court. Such Oath of Allegiance would have been entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General. Upon demand, a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath administered, under the seal of the embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General can be delivered. The certified copy would be evidence of the facts stated therein before any court of record or judicial tribunal and in any department or agency of the Government of the United States. (8U.S.C.§1435)

6.20. Upon information and belief, M

 

r.

Obama’s mother failed to take the oath in order to regain her U.S. Citizenship. Therefore, Mr. Obama would not have been able to regain his U.S. Citizenship until he turned eighteen (18) years of age, and then only after he took the Oath of Allegiance before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or in the U.S. before the Attorney General, the judge or clerk of court. Since the Oath of Allegiance would have been entered in the records of the appropriate embassy, legation, consulate, court or the Attorney General, then Mr. Obama should be able to produce in court a certified copy of the proceedings, including a copy of the oath administered. Upon information and belief, no such copy has been to date produced for public examination.

6.21.

 

   After many attempts of the public to obtain Mr. Obama’s Certificate of Birth, a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was placed on Mr. Obama’s campaign website. However, as posted all over the internet, three (3) independent Document Forensic Experts performed extensive forensic testing on the Certificate of Live Birth as posted on Mr. Obama’s campaign website. The Forensic Expert findings were that the posted Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was a forgery. It was further discovered that the posted COLB had evidence of having been created from an altered/forged COLB issued to Maya Kasandra Soetoro, born in 1970. Maya Kasandra Soetoro is Mr. Obama’s half sister who was born in Indonesia and her birth later registered in Hawaii. The altered and allegedly forged COLB is still on Mr. Obama’s website located at http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert. Thus, if these allegations prove to be true, Mr. Obama may not only not be born in the United States, he may also very well be an illegal alien.

6.22.    Even if Mr. Obama had and subsequently maintained his United States Citizenship, which citizenship he has failed before District Court to demonstrate, he may still carry citizenships in Kenya and/or Indonesia. These facts call into question what the constitution attempted to address regarding potentially divided loyalties with foreign countries. Thus, Mr. Obama carries multiple citizenships and would be ineligible to run for President of the United States. (United States Constitution, Article II, Section 1)

7.     Failure to grant injunctive relief will realize these detriments:

7.1.

 

Failing to officially and publicly vet the status of the citizenship claims of Mr. Obama will cast a pall of doubt on the election process and taint the election results themselves.

7.2.

 

Failure to grant injunctive relief would allow a potentially corrupted, fraudulent nomination and election process to continue and an ineligible individual to assume

(Assume – To adopt in order to deceive) the office of President of the United States.

7.3.

 

Failure to grant injunctive relief demanding the Defendants certify the minimum qualifications of challenged Mr. Obama not only allows, but promotes an overwhelming degree of disrespect and creates such a lack of confidence in voters of the primary and electoral process itself that it would cement a prevailing belief that no potential candidate has to obey the laws of this country, respect our election process, follow the Constitution, or even suffer any consequence for lying and defrauding voters to get onto the ballot when they have no chance of serving if they fraudulently manage to get elected.

7.4.

 

As stated above, I as well as all American citizens will suffer irreparable harm if injunctive relief is not granted. I do not have any other way of redress regarding these very significant and important issues and have made the general counsel for the Board of Elections and the Office of the Attorney General aware of my concerns that Mr. Obama may very well be an illegal alien. In this regard, I filed an affidavit on Friday, October, 31, 2008, with the Wilmington Office of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement which provided Agent-In-Charge Al Fitchett, or his successor, with the information contained herein in hopes he would use his extensive authority and resources to resolve this matter. (Exhibit A)

7.5. Despite many complaints, the FEC may have failed me and the entire class of American and North Carolinian citizens by their failure to date to perform due diligence and inquire into Mr. Obama’s eligibility to run for Office of the President. Lacking such certification, it is incumbent on the Defendants to certify or decertify as to Mr. Obama’s eligibility for the office of President of the United States based on the availability of clear documentation demonstrating that minimum qualifications for the respective office have been met by Mr. Obama.

8.    

 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court:

8.1. Certify this action as a class action under Rule 23 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.

 

 

8.2.

Grant injunctive relief demanding that Defendants immediately acquire primary documents or certified copies from primary sources such as Health Department and hospital records or verifiable reports regarding same from the FEC.

8.3.

 

Direct that Defendants immediately demand such verifiable report from the FEC or demand a certified copy of Mr. Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth and subpoena as needed for the release of hospital records, if so claimed, on said Live Birth Certificate to further prove he was born in Hawaii as Mr. Obama claims.

8.4.

 

Direct that Defendants certify or decertify the challenged Mr. Obama prior to the inauguration based on the availability of clear documentation.

8.5.

 

Order the Defendants to demand immediately a certified copy of Mr. Obama’s Oath of Allegiance proving he regained his United States Citizenship if, in fact, he is found not to have been born in the United States.

8.6.

 

If Defendants are unable to document a certified record of Mr. Obama’s oath of allegiance and birth and hospital records, the Defendant Board of Elections must immediately decertify Mr. Obama as a valid North Carolina electee for the office of President of the United States Office under the United States Constitution, Article II, Section I.

8.7 If Defendants are unable to document a certified record of Mr. Obama’s oath of allegiance and birth and hospital records, the Defendant Secretary of State must immediately demand Mr. Obama be stripped of his

 

electee

status, and decertified as such, nationwide, including, but not limited to, removing his status as the Senator from Illinois.

8.8.

 

Award me such costs and fees applicable by law; and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

 

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted this the 7th day of November, 2008. 

________________________________________ Donald Sullivan, in pro per and sui juris Lt. Col, USAFR(R) Plaintiff PO Box 3061 Wilmington, NC 28406

 

VERIFICATION

 

 

I, Donald Sullivan, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this action and verify that the statements made in the foregoing Notice and Demand for Injunctive Relief (Class Action) are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to the penalties of law relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.

_____________________________________ Donald Sullivan, Plaintiff, in pro per and sui juris PO Box 3061 Wilmington, NC 28406 

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 

 

 

 

I do certify I have this 7th Day of November, 2008, served a copy of the foregoing “Notice and Demand for Injunctive Relief (Class Action)” by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mails, certified with return receipt requested, or hand-delivered, and addressed as follows:

 

For Attorney General for the State of North Carolina:

Office of the Attorney General of North Carolina

ATTN: Mr. Roy A. Cooper, III, Attorney General

114 E. Edenton Street

PO Box 629

Raleigh, NC 27626-0629

For Defendant Board of Elections:

North Carolina Board of Elections

ATTN: Mr. Gary O. Bartlett, Director and Process Agent

POB 27255

Raleigh, NC 27611

For Defendant Elaine F. Marshall, Secretary of State:

Office of North Carolina Secretary of State

ATTN: Ms. Ann Wall, Process Agent

PO Box 29622

Raleigh, NC 27626

A copy is also being filed with the Clerk of Court for Pender County.

 

 

BY: ___________________________

Donald Sullivan, Lt Col, USAFR (Ret)

Plaintiff, In Pro per and Sui JurisPO Box 3061

Wilmington, NC 28406

NC Election 2008, Barack Obama ineligible, Legal Notice, NC Governor, NC Attorney General, NC Secretary of State, NC Board of Elections, NC Electoral College Electors, Barack Obama must be removed from Ballot, October 30, 2008

Legal Notice

To:

The State of North Carolina

The Governor of North Carolina

The Attorney General of North Carolina

The Secretary of State of North Carolina

The NC Board of Elections

The Electoral College Electors of North Carolina

Whereas: Barack Obama was placed on the ballot in NC in the primary and
General Election.

Whereas: The NC Board of Elections placed Barack Obama on the ballot
solely on the basis of the direction of the DNC, Democratic National
Committee.

Whereas: The NC Board of Elections has not requested proof of eligibilty
for Barack Obama to be president from Barack Obama or the DNC despite
strong evidence that Barack Obama is not eligible.

Whereas: The NC Board of Elections has been aware of the lawsuit and
associated evidence of Philip J Berg for several months.

Whereas: Citizen Wells contacted the NC Board of Elections by email
and telephone conversation on or about 10/06/08 and provided
information that Barack Obama is ineligible.

Whereas: Citizen Wells contacted the office of the Secretary of State
of NC by email and telephone conversation on or about 10/27/08 and provided information that Barack Obama is ineligible.

Whereas: Most, if not all, NC Officers and Election officials have sworn
an oath to uphold the US Constitution.

Whereas: The US Constitution clearly defines the requirements to be
president of the US.

Whereas: The following NC statute provides for replacing a presidential
candidate if “for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified“.
Chapter 163.

Elections and Election Laws.

§ 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election. If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:

Position

President 

Vacancy is to be filled by appointment of
national executive committee of
political party in which vacancy occurs”
Whereas: Barack Obama is ineligble to be President of the United States
and the NC State Board of Elections and the NC Secretary of State have
been notified by email and telephone.

Citizen Wells, a citizen of the State of North Carolina, demands that
the NC State Board of Elections obtain proof of eligibility from
Barack Obama or the Democrat Party in the form of a vault copy of
a birth certificate or pledge of allegiance to the US, and in the absence
of proof, remove Barack Obama from the ballot and request that the DNC
provide a replacement candidate per NC Law.

Citizen Wells further requests that the citizens of NC contact the NC
Board of elections and demand that they uphold the US Constitution and
NC Law.

Furthermore, all NC officials and election officials will be held
accountable if a non eligible presidential candidate is allowed to remain
on the ballot. The severity of the consequences will increase if the
ineligible candidate receives votes in the general election and Electoral
College. Many voters have been disenfranchised by Barack Obama being on
the ballot in the primary election. The further disenfranchisement of
voters, and the potential constitutional crisis must be taken seriously.
Citizen Wells              October 30, 2008

Attachments:
Email sent to NC Board of Elections:

Hi.
What I am about to share is serious and not a joke.
I am going to post this on my blog.
You may or may not be aware of the lawsuit filed by Philip J Berg
in federal court on August 21, 2008. Mr. Berg states that Obama
is not qualified to be president. I helped break this story and I am
in contact with Mr. Berg. He is trying to avoid a constitutional
crisis.
 
Here is a subchapter from the NC statues:
 
(Changes effective January 1, 2007)
§ 163-114. Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring
after nomination and before election.
If any person nominated as a candidate of a political
party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary
or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary)
Current through September 7, 2008
Page 118 of 429
dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or
disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election,
the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the
following instructions:
Position
President vacancy is to be filled by
Vice President appointment of national
executive committee of
political party in which
vacancy occurs

I am a NC voter.

Citizen Wells
Email sent to NC Secretary of State:

This email is a followup to a phone coversation with the Secretary
of State’s office.

The following article was posted on my blog. My viewership is in
the hundreds of thousands. A response is most welcome.
Citizen Wells
https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/

 

“Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise
that it will last; but nothing in this world is certain but death and
taxes.”

Benjamin Franklin

“A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high
duties of a good (officer), but it is not the highest. The laws of
necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger,
are of higher obligation.”

Thomas Jefferson

“The ballot is stronger than the bullet.”

Abraham Lincoln

Up to this point, the political parties and the individual states have been in control of the election process. The state boards of elections, in conjunction  with the major political parties have controlled which candidates will be on the ballots. However, the US Constitution still rules and just beneath that the Federal election laws rule. The states have control over their respective elections and electors, but are still governed by federal law.

Several weeks ago, Citizen Wells contacted the NC State Board of Elections.
After a brief phone call dominated by the Board of Elections staff member,
Citizen Wells was told that they had been aware of the Philip J Berg
lawsuit for several months and that they took their cue from the
Democratic Party regarding Obama’s eligibility. Once again, the US
Constitution rules and we will hold the NC State Board of Elections
accountable.

Once the individual state electors meet on December 15, 2008, the Federal
Government takes control of the process. Lawsuits in courts require
the burden of proof on the part of the plaintiff. This burden is not necessary
for those charged with upholding and defending the Constitution.
Consider the following:

Both John McCain and Barack Obama are US Senators. When they took office they spoke the following pledge:

“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.”

UNITED STATES ELECTION LAW

“The following provisions of law governing Presidential Elections are contained in Chapter 1 of Title 3, United States Code (62 Stat. 672, as amended):”

“§ 8.   The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.”

Pennsylvania Law

Ҥ 3192. Meeting of electors; duties.
The electors chosen, as aforesaid, shall assemble at the seat of government of this Commonwealth, at 12 o’clock noon of the day which is, or may be, directed by the Congress of the United States, and shall then and there perform the duties enjoined upon them by the Constitution and laws of the United States.”

NC Law

“At the first meeting held after new appointments are made, the members of the State Board of Elections shall take the following oath:

“I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States; that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the State of North Carolina, and to the constitutional powers and authorities which are or may be established for the government thereof; that I will endeavor to support, maintain and defend the Constitution of said State, and that I will well and truly execute the duties of the office of member of the State Board of Elections according to the best of my knowledge and ability, according to law, so help me, God.””
“§ 163-114.  Filling vacancies among party nominees occurring after nomination and before election.

If any person nominated as a candidate of a political party for one of the offices listed below (either in a primary or convention or by virtue of having no opposition in a primary) dies, resigns, or for any reason becomes ineligible or disqualified before the date of the ensuing general election, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment according to the following instructions:
Position

President

Vacancy is to be filled by appointment of national executive
committee of political party in which vacancy occurs”

This is not a situation where Obama is on trial and the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.

The government of the US has not filed a lawsuit with the burden of proof placed on the plaintiff.

Barack Obama is running for the office of president of the US, This is no different than applying for any other job involving competition.
As in any other situation involving a job application, the burden of
proof regarding qualification to hold office, falls on Obama. The
rules are spelled out in the US Constitution. The preponderance of
evidence reveals that Obama was born in Kenya, became an Indonesian
citizen and is in fact an illegal alien. Those who choose to ignore
these facts and allow Obama to proceed are violating the law and
will be held accountable.

Regardless of how the Philip J Berg lawsuit plays out, the US Constitution
must be upheld. Many people involved in the election process are
charged with upholding the US Constitution and will be held accountable.
This article will be emailed to the Secretary of State in each state
after a phone call to explain that the citizens are watching them. The
individual electors will also be held accountable. The Citizen Wells
blog will also create an accountability page for each state and will
provide feedback on how each state cooperates with the letter and spirit
of the Constitution.

I urge all of you to contact your Secretary of State and Board of Elections
in your state. Let them know you do not want an illegal alien on the
ballot or voted for by state electors. While you are at it, let them
know that voter fraud will not be tolerated. Let us know about the level
of concern and cooperation in your state.

The Philip J Berg lawsuit Timeline can be accessed at the top of this blog.