Category Archives: NC

NC Grand Jury indictment of Obama, Walter Fitzpatrick complaint, American Grand Jury, Obama not eligible, Obama British citizen, Obama has committed treason

 I received the following email this morning:

“On May 9, 2009, the American Grand Jury met and, after reviewing the evidence presented, indicted Barak Obama, aka Barry Soetoro for fraud and treason.  Wednesday, May 13, 2009, the indictment was filed with the Clerk of Court, Catawba County, NC (file #09R81) and a copy of the indictment was sent by Certified Mail to District Attorney James C. Gaither (NC District 25B), for further action according to his Oath of Office.” 

Here is the indictment:

Presentments:  American Grand Jury
  •  
    •  
              MAY 9th, 2009

On April 29, 2009 the American Grand Jury convened and conducted a hearing with regard to CRIMINAL activity, complaints and allegations presented before said Grand Jury;

Such charges and presentments of criminal activity were handed down against the person(s) known as Barack Obama, aka: Barack Obama, Jr., aka: Barack Hussein Obama, aka: Barry Soetoro; aka: Barry Obama; aka: Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States (hereinafter known as Obama);

Said Grand Jury was duly organized and empowered under the laws of the Constitution of United States of America as follows:

Scope and Authority of the Grand Jury

The Constitution of the United States, Amendment 1 and Amendment 5, known as portions of the Bill of Rights states:

Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 5: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,

Said Grand Jury was convened under the power and authority vested with the people as guaranteed under the Constitution, Amendment 5, Bill of Rights.

The convened Grand Jury was “national” in nature, represented by people of the United States, said people being citizens as were sworn under Oath as to Eligibility for and Service in behalf of the Grand Jury:

Each Jury member was eligible as follows:

      1) A citizen of the United States;

      2) A citizen of eighteen (18) years or older;

      3) A resident of a State chartered within the United States of America

    4) Were in possession of his/her natural faculties, of ordinary intelligence, of sound judgment and of fair character;

      5) Possessed a sufficient knowledge of the English language;

      6) Were not serving as a trial juror in any court;

    7) Had not been convicted of a malfeasance in office, a felony, or other high crime; 
    8.  Were not serving as an elected public officer.  
     
     
     
     

Each Jury member did SWEAR or AFFIRM as follows:

“That I (jury member) shall diligently inquire, and true presentment make, of all such matters as may be given me before the jury, or shall come to my knowledge, touching such service. I shall present no person through prejudice or ill will, nor leave any un-presented through fear or favor, but in all my presentments shall endeavor to present the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth (affirmed) or so help me God (sworn).”

Said affirmation or sworn oath was duly subscribed by appearance of each jury member before a notary public whereby each jury member affirmed or swore the Oath of Office for service to the Grand Jury; furthermore each jury member verbally repeated the “oath” and acknowledged their eligibility in front of said notary by signing their name in execution. Said notary acknowledged that said jury member executed the “Eligibility and Oath of Office” document for the purposes therein contained by placing their notary hand and seal upon the document.

Each original jury member’s “Oath of Office and Eligibility” document was sealed and recorded in a central location for purposes of empowering the Grand Jury.

A jury foreman (moderator) and alternate jury foreman were appointed to conduct the Grand Jury hearing.

Said Grand Jury hearing was conducted in secrecy. All evidence was sealed and protected. All witnesses were sworn under oath. All presentments (charges) were voted upon. Said Grand Jury was comprised of 34 regular Grand Jury members, 1 Jury Foreman and 1 Alternate Jury Foreman  

Criminal complaints were placed before the Grand Jury 

    COUNT ONE:
    That Obama is NOT eligible under the laws of the Constitution of the United States as provided for in Article II, Section 1.

    Page –2- 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    Said Article II, Section 1 states:
    “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
    Wherefore, Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” for the following reasons:
    1) Obama was NOT born of mother and father who were BOTH US Citizens.

    “These facts are not in dispute: Under the British Nationality Act 1948, Obama’s father was a British citizen/subject when he was born in the English colony of Kenya. Obama’s father continued to be such and not a U.S. citizen when Obama was born in 1961. Under the same BNA 1948, at birth, regardless of where he was born, Obama also became a British citizen/subject by descent from his British father.

    As applicable only to a Presidential Article II ‘natural born Citizen’:

    …the individual must be born in the United States to a mother and father who are themselves United States citizens (by birth or naturalization). This is to assure that a would-be, all powerful President and Commander in Chief of the Military has sole allegiance and loyalty to the United States from the time of birth.

    It is public knowledge that Obama has admitted in his writings and otherwise that when he was born, his father was a British citizen/subject and not a United States citizen and that at that time he himself also became such. In fact, his father was not even a permanent resident of the United States, but rather only a student who would probably have been here only on a temporary student visa. Hence, not only was Obama’s father not a United States citizen but Obama himself was born a British subject/citizen. Hence, clearly, Obama is not and cannot be an Article II ‘natural born Citizen.’ The operative facts are not in dispute.”

    Page –3-

     
     
     
     
     
     

    Mario Apuzzo, Esq. 
    Licensed Attorney 
    Jamesburg NJ 08831

    2) Obama was a British citizen ‘at birth.’

    “Since Barack Obama’s father was a citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Obama’s birth, then Obama was a British citizen ‘at birth.’ ”

    “The Framers of the Constitution, at the time of their birth,” Donofrio writes, “were also British citizens, and that’s why the Framers declared that, while they were citizens of the United States, they themselves were not ‘natural born citizens.”

    “Therefore,” Donofrio summarizes, “even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on U.S. soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be president.”

    Leo Donofrio, Esq. 
    Licensed Attorney 
    State of New Jersey

    COUNT TWO:
    The charge of “Treason” against Obama is before the people of the United States of America. That such complaint is CRIMINAL, of high crimes, and extremely damaging against the people.
    Said complaint was formally brought by a Military Officer (retired) of the United States of America. All United States Military Officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and such complaint is valid, explicit and proper; when an Officer is aware of such malfeasance of Treason by an offender it is that Officer’s SWORN duty to come forward and present such accusation and complaint;
    The Military Officer who filed the complaint is Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, III, retired, United States Navy and a graduate of the United States Naval Academy;

    Page –4- 
     
     
     

    Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick on March 17, 2009 did hereby make such criminal accusation and complaint against Obama and presented said complaint before the U.S Attorney Russell Dedrick, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Schmutzer, Eastern District, Tennessee;
    An original photocopy of said complaint was submitted to the Grand Jury as evidence for immediate investigation;
    Said original photocopy of the complete criminal complaint is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and made a part hereof;
    Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick was sworn under oath before the Grand Jury to testify as to the true nature and details regarding said criminal complaint filed against Obama;
    Said criminal complaint by Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick and his “accusation of Treason” is quoted in the excerpt below:

“Now you [Obama] have broken in and entered the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, dissembling, and deceit. Posing as an impostor president and commander in chief you have stripped civilian command and control over the military establishment. Known military criminal actors-command racketeers-are now free in the exercise of military government intent upon destruction of America’s constitutional government.

We come now to this reckoning. I accuse you and your military-political criminal assistants of TREASON. I name you and your military criminal associates as traitors. Your criminal ascension manifests a clear and present danger. You fundamentally changed our form of government. The Constitution no longer works.

Confident holding your silent agreement and admission, I identify you as a foreign born domestic enemy.

My sworn duty Mr. Obama is to stand against what you stand for. You are not my president. You are not my commander in chief.”

Scope of Investigations and Deliberations of the Grand Jury hearing

Page –5- 
 
 
 
 
 

Wherefore on April 29, 2009 at approximately 7:00 pm Central Standard Time,

the American Grand Jury met in closed session comprising an attendance of 34 jury members, including a Jury Foreman (as moderator) and an Alternate Jury Foreman.  The Jury Foreman and Alternate Foreman did not vote.  The final vote included 32 jury members.

Said hearing lasted for approximately 3 hours. Such meeting was conducted online in a private website for the express purpose of conducting said Grand Jury assembly and hearing. Such hearing was secure and unencumbered by outside intervention or public intrusion.

Each Jury member had full access to the evidence, written and visible (in the form of scanned and photographed documents embedded in said private website). Each Jury member was given a full week (in advance) in private session (using the facilities of the private website) to study the evidence, present questions and form an opinion as to the validity and truthfulness of said evidence.

The final Grand Jury hearing of April 29, 2009 was scheduled in secrecy and privacy following said week of evidence review.

All counts (as listed above) were voted upon by the 32 jury members.

All communications (email, chat messages, jury foreman messages, surveys, reports, testimony) were conducted in written English. All said communications were securely saved in a database server on the private website. All recorded communications have been placed in a secure evidence file and saved for any proper authority to review.

The final vote was unanimous.  All 32 members voted “Yea” to hand down the presentments against Obama.

The Grand Jury concluded the hearing after handing down the final vote and affirming said counts and presentments.  
 
 
 
 
 

Page –6- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The Presentments and such Remedies as prayed for by the Grand Jury

Now therefore:

The Grand Jury hereby prays the Court take said presentments and formally charge AND prosecute Obama under Count One:  fraud against the people of the United States of America by reason of:

    That Obama is NOT eligible under the laws of the Constitution of the United States as provided for in Article II, Section 1.  

Furthermore, the Grand Jury hereby prays the Court will formally charge AND prosecute Obama with “treason” as attested to in Count Two:

    That the charge of “Treason” against Obama is before the people of the United States of America. That such complaint is CRIMINAL, of high crimes, and extremely damaging against the people.

Given on this day and year of April 29, 2009 by unanimous vote of the Jury Members of said American Grand Jury; 

Said presentments are hereby attested to and verified by my hand on this day and year as first above mentioned: 
 

  •  
    •  
              Your browser may not support display of this image.      _______________________________________
  •  
    •  
        Robert John Campbell, Jury Foreman

Page –7-

 
 
 
Your browser may not support display of this image.

_________________

Identification of Jury Foreman

  •  

            Name:  Robert John Campbell

  •  

            Status:  United States Citizen

  •  
    •  

        Address: P.O. Box 1513, Nogales, AZ 85628 

  •  
            Signature:Your browser may not support display of this image. 

      Passport number is concealed for privacy.  This information is available to the proper authorities, if required.  Thanks, Robert Campbell 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Rhino Times, Greensboro, NC, John Hammer, Real news, truth about Obama and government

We were in Greensboro, NC over the weekend and as usual picked up a copy of the Rhino Times, one of the few newsprint outlets in NC that tell it like it is. Unlike other papers in large cities of North Carolina such as the Charlotte Observer, they did not drink the kool aid and attempted to expose the truth about the real Barack Obama. Editor in chief, John Hammer, is in the forefront of exposing Obama with his column “Under The Hammer.”

Here is a segment from “Under The Hammer” dated April 30, 2009:

“Under the Hammer  

 

 

   
 
     

April 30, 2009It appears we have elected a man president whose main claim to fame is that he reads well from a teleprompter. Whatever is there he reads with a predictable pacing that people seem to like. When it said “privacy” on the screen instead of “piracy,” he read privacy even though it made no sense.

When the teleprompter can’t keep up he motions for it to move faster and apologizes to the audience. Wouldn’t it be nice if he had some idea what he was saying and could give a five-minute speech without having to read the exact words off a screen?

I guess we are getting what we deserve. For years the media has allowed people who sit in front of cameras and read from teleprompters to call themselves journalists or reporters. Many are not. They don’t write the stories, they just read them, like Ted Baxter on The Mary Tyler Moore Show or Ron Burgundy in Anchorman. These caricatures are all too real. But nobody wants to admit that the people reading the news on television are often just pretty faces who read well. We pretend that they actually go out, get the information and write the stories even though we know it isn’t true.

When Dan Rather got caught with a false story about former President George W. Bush, he of course blamed it on his producer – the person who actually researched and wrote the story – while at the same time not admitting that he didn’t write his own news.

So for years we have had people pretending to be reporters and the nation has gone along with the farce. Now we have a man pretending to be president. He has the same skill set as the network newsreaders: He reads well from a teleprompter. We know that he will read whatever is there because we do not have a problem with “privacy” on the high seas. The scary part is that Obama doesn’t flinch or get a puzzled expression on his face when the teleprompter is wrong; he just continues to read whatever is put before him on the teleprompter.

We know that he will stop reading when the teleprompter can’t keep up because he doesn’t ad lib. He stops and tells the technician to get it fixed.

When he was in France, Obama said that he didn’t know what the word for “wheeling and dealing” was in Austrian. It is a true statement because Austrian is not a language any more than American is a language. The people in Austria mostly speak German. Americans mostly speak English.

Imagine if former President George W. Bush had made that statement. In fact, former Vice President Dan Quayle said something similar about knowing Latin when he was going to Latin America. The press made great fun of him over and over again, but it is a statement that makes sense. If you know Latin you can understand some Spanish, as well as other romance languages.

The press made Quayle out to be an idiot for making a perfectly reasonable statement. Obama made a statement about a language that does not exist, and that is not even mentioned in the mainstream media.

To find out about Obama’s mistakes you are better off reading British newspapers than American newspapers, or you can watch Fox News.”

Read more:

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-i-2009-04-30-194804.112113_Under_the_Hammer.html

 

Tea Party April 15, 2009, NC taxpayer tea parties, Protest Reckless Federal Spending, Trillions of Dollars of Debt and Proposed Tax Hikes, North Carolina locations, cities

From Americans For Prosperity:

http://capwiz.com/americansforprosperity/utr/1/FNFYKGXWLK/BSKXKGYGDY/3189919426


Join Taxpayer Tea Party Protests Across North Carolina
Reckless Federal Spending, Trillions of Dollars of Debt and Proposed Tax Hikes Spark a Growing List of Tea Party Protests All Across North Carolina

Excitement is building as we get closer and closer to Tax Day on Wednesday, April 15 and not because we are anxious to file our taxes. There are literally dozens of tea party protests across the state on this date. And they don’t stop there! On the list below, you will see that the tea parties will continue after April 15, too.

Average citizens are bringing their friends, neighbors, children, and handmade signs conveying the message that, like the patriots of old, they don’t want high taxes, oppressive government or trampled freedoms. Chanting “Don’t Tread on Me” and “We, the People”, citizens hope their elected officials hear their voices.

We have been to three tremendous tea parties so far. See the photos and video coverage from Raleigh’s kickoff tea party at the Capitol on March 21, and enjoy this photo of an April 7 Wilmington tea party where hundreds of people exercised their right to assemble and protest on the Cape Fear River.

Please attend one or more of these events and help us spread the word. Our economic freedom is under attack and we must fight back. All of the events below are free and open to the public.

Events taking place on Wednesday, April 15, 2009 unless otherwise noted.

Asheville
4:30 pm
Sidewalk in front of Asheville City Hall and Buncombe County Courthouse
Non-partisan Movement to Repeal the Pork!
Email: erikafranzi@mac.com

Boone
4:00-6:00 pm
Hardees’ parking lot across from the Holmes Convocation Center
Email: info@afpnc.org

Charlotte
2:00pm – 4:00 pm
City Hall Lawn
600 E. Trade Street
Charlotte , NC
E-mail: charlottetaxdayteaparty@gmail.com
Register online here.

Currituck
11:30am – 1:00pm
Currituck Judicial Center,
2801 Caratoke Hwy.,
Currituck, NC.
Register Here

Davidson
5:30-7:30 pm
North Harbor Club, exit 30 on I-77
Email: info@afpnc.org

Eden
5:30 pm
Boat Landing
Email: info@afpnc.org

Edenton
5:00 pm
Edenton Courthouse Green ( Chowan County)

Note: The Edenton Tea Party was one of the earliest organized women’s political actions in United States history. On October 25, 1774, Mrs. Penelope Barker organized, at the home of Mrs. Elizabeth King, fifty-one women in Edenton, North Carolina. Together they formed an alliance wholeheartedly supporting the American cause against “taxation without representation.”

This event will include Revolutionary war re-enactors to celebrate the famous Edenton Tea Party. This is a once in a lifetime event to celebrate our past and protect us from a future of debt and high taxes.

Please register today here.

Read more about the history of the Edenton tea party here.

Elizabeth City
5:30pm – 7:30pm
Sidewalk in front of Pasquotank County Courthouse, 206 E. Main Street
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Fayetteville
12:00 pm
Liberty Point Resolves Marker, Corner of Bow and Person Streets
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Franklin
12:00pm – 1:00pm
Town Gazebo in Downtown Franklin
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Goldsboro
12:00 noon
City Hall in Goldsboro
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Greensboro
12:00-1:00 pm
Tea Party will be held at the Governmental Plaza in downtown Greensboro, near the Courthouse
Register Here.
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Greenville
3:00 pm
Town Commons
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Henderson
5-8:00 pm
City Hall on Rose Ave.
Need info: Tim McAlister 252.213.3701 moonlighter07@nc.rr.com

Hillsborough
5:30-6:30 pm
Historic Orange County Courthouse at 104 E. King Stree
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Kill Devil Hills
10:00 am
Wright Brothers Monument (Milepost 7.5 on US Highway 158)
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Lincolnton
11:00 am – 1:00 pm
Lincoln County Court House
Email: info@afpnc.org

Louisburg
6:30-8:30 pm
Franklin County Courthouse, Main Street
Email: info@afpnc.org

Mooresville
4:30-7:00
Post Office on Williamson Road
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Morehead City
4-6pm
Parkway Shopping Center located on Hwy 70. 4841 Arendell Street.
Register Here

Morganton
12-1:00 pm
Old Courthouse Square
Need info: info@afpnc.org

New Bern
6-8 PM
Begins at County Commissioner Building and then moves to Union Point Park
Register Here

Newton
12:00 noon
Newton Courthouse100 A South West Blvd.
Government Center on 321
http://www.meetup.com/Hickory-NC-Glenn-Beck-Meetup-Group/

Raleigh
Note: Two Raleigh Tea Parties on this date—different times and locations—attend both!
4:30-6:00 pm
Federal Courthouse. New Bern Avenue across from the Post Office. New Bern Ave. and Person St.
6:30pm – 8:30 pm
NC State Capitol at One East Edenton Street (east side-Wilmington Street side)
Register online here.

Roanoke Rapids
5:00-8:00 pm
Colliers Harley Davidson
Email: info@afpnc.org

Rockingham
4:00-9:00 pm
Post office in Rockingham, 119 W. Washington St.
Email: info@afpnc.org

Rutherfordton
5:00pm – 6:00pm
Rutherfordton County Courthouse Lawn, 229 N. Main Street
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Smithfield – [CANCELED]
2-4:00 pm
Smithfield Post Office, 201 N. 3rd Street, Smithfield 27577
Need info: idspeck@yahoo.com

Southern Pines
4:00-7:00
Post Office on Broad Street
Need Info: info@afpnc.org

Statesville
12-5:00 pm
In front of Civic Center, corner of Center St. and Front St.
Need info: info@afpnc.org
http://therealnewsradio.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13…

Stella (Carteret County)
6:30pm
Boondocks beside the Stella bridge,
Need info: info@afpnc.org

Sylva (county seat for Jackson County)
12:00-7:00 pm
Downtown Sylva
Email: info@afpnc.org

Wilmington
5pm to 7pm
Corner of Oleander and College Road
Register Here

Winston-Salem
12 to 2pm
Winston Park on N. Marshall St in downtown Winston Salem.
Register Here

Waynesville
1:00-6:00 pm
Haywood County Courthouse
Email: info@afpnc.org

Date: Thursday, April 16

Washington
5:30-6:30 pm
Beaufort County Courthouse
Email: info@afpnc.org

Date: Friday, April 17

Asheboro
Randolph County Tea Party
12-1PM
Randolph County Republican Headquarters at 122 Sunset Ave. Asheboro, 27203 NC
Register Now

Date: Saturday, April 18

Jacksonville
5:30pm
Marina Cafe & Marina, 110 S Marine Blvd, Jacksonville, NC 28540
Register Here

 

Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is the nation’s premier grassroots organization committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits.

For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org

 
 

Lt Col Donald Sullivan, update March 30, 2009, Sullivan’s son’s arrest, Burgaw, NC, Miranda rights, Obama thugs, Lt Col Sullivan lawsuits, NC state trooper, Son arrested for not answering questions

We have illegal aliens getting benefits an illegal president but
the son of a Lt Col, Donald Sullivan, gets arrested for not
answering questions. Here is an update from Lt Col Donald Sullivan
on the arrest of his son.

“Events of March 24, 2009 – My son’s Arrest for not being from NC; and the beat goes on, only it’s getting more personal.

Short Version:  On March 24, 2009, my son was stopped at a checkpoint; arrested for not answering questions; and jailed under $50,000.00 bond for committing no crime.

Long Version:  Just when I thought it could get no more ridiculous, Tuesday came.  It was the 24th of March, 2009, and I was in Burgaw, NC, the county seat, at the courthouse to serve the DA timely with my record on appeal for the right to bear arms trial of November, 2008.  As I walked into the courthouse from the bright North Carolina sunshine, I saw a familiar face just coming down the stairway from the courtrooms upstairs.  Not only did the face look familiar, it was my son; and he was in handcuffs!  I casually walked up to him and the State policeman who had him in tow and said, “Well, I see they finally broke your cherry, Myson.”  He smiled, and said, “Looks that way, Dad.”

I turned to the officer, introduced myself, and asked him why my son was being charged.  He told me straight up, “He wouldn’t answer my questions.”  “That’s the way I taught him”, I said.  “He doesn’t have to answer your questions.”  I turned to my son and asked him what was going on, not thinking the trooper would let him answer; but he did.  He said he was on his way to my house along NC Highway 210 when he ran up on a police checkpoint. When I interrupted and asked why he didn’t just turn around and go the other way, he said there was no need, since he was not breaking any laws.  Besides, he said he was towing my trailer and turning around on a two-lane road would have been difficult. 

He continued with his story saying the trooper had asked him for his license and registration, which he tendered.  Both are from Michigan, since my son is still a resident of Michigan, but the trooper asked him what his local address was.  (The trooper was aware of my son’s trial a few months ago when the charge was dismissed against him for no NC license for lack of evidence and jurisdiction.  I know for a fact my son has no NC address.)  He responded with, “You have my license.  I’m not going to answer any of your questions.”  The trooper asked him if he had insurance, and my son responded, “I told you I am not going to answer any of your questions.”  The trooper told him he would go to jail if he didn’t answer.  My son persisted, so the trooper ordered him to pull his pick-up off to the side of the road and get out of it.  He complied, and the trooper read him his Miranda rights, the first of which is, “You have the right to remain silent.”  The trooper then told him he would be arrested unless he answered the questions about his local address and his proof of insurance.  My son maintained that he didn’t have to answer any questions, so he was handcuffed and brought to the courthouse for his “probable cause” hearing.  This is where I came in.

I asked the trooper how he could arrest my son for not answering his questions when he had a right not to answer.  He responded that there is a law in NC which requires everyone to give their address when asked by a law enforcement officer or the courts.  When I asked how that could be with our right to remain silent and not incriminate ourselves, and he said he was just doing his job.  How I hate that response.  One day 9it will be the death sentence of anyone who uses it.  I told the officer I had some quick errands to run in the courthouse, but that I would join them upstairs where the magistrate was holding small claims court.  After depositing my record on appeal with the DA, I went upstairs to the courtroom. 

Once inside, I saw that the trooper was about to finish briefing the magistrate on the charges:  No NC operator’s license; no proof of insurance; expired MI registration; no trailer license plate; and refusal to answer questions divulge his local address.  The magistrate called my son forward and asked him for his address.  He told her he was not answering any of his questions, that he had a right to remain silent.  She then asked if he could be in court on the 20th of May, to which he responded, “Yes, Ma’am.”  She then put him under FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS SECURED BOND ($50,000.00), BECAUSE HE REFUSED TO ANSWER HER QUESTIONS!  When he told her he was not a flight risk, nor was he a threat to anyone, and should be released on his own recognizance by law, she responded, “You won’t answer my questions or those of the trooper.  Your license says you are from out of state.  You could be an ‘axe-murderer’ for all we know, so the bond stays.”  I then interrupted and asked, “How much was that bond?!”  She said “$50,000.00.”  I then asked her if she would accept cash or a check.  She said, “Certified check or cash.”  I told her I would be back in an hour with the money.  My son went to jail, and I went to get the cash. 

Needless to say, I was very upset, but controlled.  This whole charade was obviously due to the amount of harassment my many legal filings have caused the local law enforcement agencies and the courts along with the several criminal proceedings and appeals I have active at the present.  There was no need whatsoever to arrest my son for alleged statutory violations which do not have jurisdiction over an out-of-state individual, and the $50,000.00 bond was an aberration not seen before in Pender County!

When I returned to the jail with the cash, the magistrate was busy in her office.  I struck up a conversation with some other unfortunates who were waiting in the lobby for their friends and loved ones and told them I was there to pick up my son who had been arrested for “Not answering their questions” and held under $50,000.00 bond.  They were astounded, of course, since no one had ever been heard of such; and it was completely illogical.  I told them it was vindictive and retaliatory, that “they” were using my son to get at me, and I was not going to stand for it.  I said things like, “They’ve made it personal now by going after my children, and they’ve crossed the line!”  These things I said loud enough for the magistrate to hear.  Then, I walked over to her open door and asked if she was ready for me to bail out my son; that I had $60,000.00 cash just in case she upped the ante.  She replied in the affirmative and said, “All he had to do was to answer my questions, and he wouldn’t be here.  And it was not vindictive.  I didn’t know he was your son and had ties to the county.  If I had, I could have reconsidered the bond.”  I told her it was not too late to reconsider, especially since he had a right to remain silent in the first place, and it was a violation of his constitutional rights to deny him his liberty for exercising his rights.   She replied that she had reconsidered, that the bond was reduced to $2,000.00 unsecured.  I told her that was not good enough, that he had objected to any bond due to his not being a flight risk or a threat to anyone’s life, liberty or property.  She said she had to leave the bond in place, since that was the guideline she was given “in school”.  (I assumed she was referring to the same “school” my jailer had mentioned when she told me my “stay would be prolonged” if I didn’t submit to being photographed last month.)  She tapped on the window at the back of her office and told the jailers to “Bring Mr. Sullivan out.  He doesn’t need handcuffs.)  So, they brought my son out; he collected his things and filled out the necessary paperwork; and we left to recover his truck.  I told her it was a good thing she had “reconsidered”, or my son would have filed a civil suit against her.  As it was, he would only file against the trooper, but she might be a co-defendant.

When we got to his truck about 90 minutes later, the State trooper who had arrested him was there waiting in his car, right by my son’s truck.  I got out of my car, with my S&W 9mm strapped on my hip as always, and walked up to his car and tapped on is window.  He rolled the window down, and I asked him if he was waiting to arrest us again when we moved the car.  He replied that he was just stopped doing some paperwork.  I then asked if he would arrest my son when he drove off in the car, or did we have to trailer it home, which I was prepared to do.  He told me he couldn’t drive off if he had no insurance.  I told him my son had insurance, but he just hadn’t felt the need to answer the trooper’s questions.  When he said the truck couldn’t move on its own without proof of insurance, I asked my son to show the officer his proof of insurance, which he readily did.  This set the officer back a bit, and he asked, “Why didn’t you show me this before?”  My son responded, “Because, it’s like I told you, ‘I don’t have to answer your questions if the answer might tend to incriminate me”, so I don’t answer any questions.”

We then proceeded to have a very nice and informative chat with the officer for over an hour, during which time I said nothing to compromise my son’s case, but I did take the opportunity to educate the trooper a little bit.  He admitted he was not so sure things were always as they appear, or as the government tells them, and that he regularly listened to local conservative radio hosts and to Neil Bortz.  As we parted, I informed the trooper that he had violated my son’s rights, and that my son would file a civil suit against him as soon as the charges were dismissed.  He said, “Do what you have to do”, to which I responded, “It’s the only way you and your buddies are going to learn to leave us alone.”  Oh, and as to my sidearm, the trooper asked me just before we parted what kind of weapon it was.  I told him, “S&W 9mm”.

DS
3-29-09″

Lt Col Sullivan, sir, if you need any assistance say the
word, and thousands will come to your aid.

Sullivan v. NC Secretary of State and Board of Elections, Update March 20, 2009, Lt Col Donald Sullivan, Obama not eligible, NC lawsuit, Judge W. Osmond Smith, III, Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh, NC, US Constitution, First Lieutenant Scott Easterling, US Military

I just received this update from Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan:

“Personal Transcript of Hearing:  Sullivan v. NC Secretary of State and Board of Elections; Case #08-CVS-021393

SUBJECT: Obama Eligibility

On March 16, 2009, the calendar was called by Judge W. Osmond Smith, III, presiding, in Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh, NC.  My case was #23 on the calendar and required the hearing of three separate “motions”:  My demand for class action certification; my demand for leave to amend; and the State’s motion to dismiss.  When he got to #23, the judge said he would pass over this item until he had completed calling the calendar.  (Odd, this.  It was apparent there had been discussion of my case prior to the hearing.  I am not at all sure these discussions did not include the defendant State.) Upon completion of calling the calendar, and after dividing the calendar between himself and another superior court judge, A. Leon Stanback, Jr., Judge Smith called the first case without mentioning mine again.  I stood and called his attention to his oversight, and he apologized.  The case was then scheduled for hearing last.  

When my case was called (actually next to last as it worked out), the judge asked the parties how long the arguments would take.  I answered it would depend upon which of the three “motions” he decided to hear first.  After a brief discussion, the judge chose to hear my demand to amend first.  It being my action with the burden of proof on my shoulders, I began my arguments in support of my demand with a statement of the justification for my amendment to the original pleadings. The original filing was a demand for injunctive relief which the court had decided to consider only a “routine” case.  The case was filed on November 7th, 2008, and in anticipation of an expedited ruling to take place prior to the inauguration on January 20th, 2009.  By considering the case “routine”, the court had condemned the action to becoming moot upon the completion of the inauguration.  Thus, it was necessary to amend the complaint to prevent the necessity of filing a completely new action.  It was only due to the scheduling by the court that the case had taken three months to be heard.  I also was demanding I be allowed to add the Governor and the State of NC as defendants, since the necessary actions required in my demand for injunctive relief were interstate actions and would necessitate the Governor be a party.

I then presented that it was the sworn duty of the court to support the Constitution of the United States in accordance with the court’s ( and all others involved in this action) Article VI, Section 7, (NC Constitution) oath, in accordance with Article VI, Section 2, (US Constitution), and in accordance with Article 1, Section 5, of the NC Constitution.  I admitted there was no statutory requirement for the State to do as I had demanded, but that the obligation and responsibility was a constitutional one, this being both an equity court and a constitutional court.  I listed the evidentiary facts which appeared to assert the ineligibility of Barack Obama to hold the office of President in contravention to Article IV, Section 2, Clause 5, of the US Constitution including, but not limited to, his failure to reveal his original birth certificate from Hawaii; his apparent use of an Indonesian passport in 1981, his multiple citizenships by birth and residence, none of which he has renounced; his failure to release his collegiate records which allegedly show he attended as a foreign student under an FS-1 foreign student visa; statements by the ambassador to the US from Kenya and his paternal grandmother which attest to his being born in Mombasa, Kenya; his having given false information on his application for an Illinois license to practice law in 1989, in that he averred he had no other names than Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., when, in fact, he has used at least four other names over his lifetime; and the apparent falsity of his selective service registration.  I also showed the court the current issue of “Globe” magazine I had purchased that morning on the way to the courthouse, which highlighted on its cover, and in the article inside, the peril faced by the US military in its confusion over whether to execute the orders of a “President” who may in fact not be qualified.  The cover pictured 43-year-old First Lieutenant Scott Easterling, in uniform and in Iraq, one of many US soldiers who are questioning the authority of Obama’s presidency.  I explained that, should Obama survive the first four years of his presidency and decide to run again (a likelihood for which I admitted having very little hope), the issue of his eligibility would most certainly come up again; and, in the event he was proven ineligible, every action, appointment, order and law he had committed to during his first four years would be invalidated.   I tried to impress upon the court that this constitutional crisis could be averted by nipping the “rumors”, if in fact that is what we are dealing with here, of Obama’s ineligibility in the bud by allowing my amendment so that the complaint could continue.

Having exhausted my arguments to the court, I turned it over to the defense, which merely argued that the case against the Secretary of State was res judicata (judged previously), having been heard in my prior filing against her and dismissed; that my arguments were moot, since the inauguration had passed, and there was no claim upon which relief could be granted by the court; and that I lacked standing before the court to pursue this case.  Their arguments were brief, and the judge listened.  When the two attorneys for the State sat down, the judge denied my motion to amend.

We then proceeded directly to the State’s motion to dismiss.  They presented the same arguments in brief that had already been presented in the first hearing on the demand to amend, except they added that the ruling should be “with prejudice”.  Part of my defense against the motion to dismiss had already been presented as to the res judicata claim in the form of my prior complaint had been dismissed “without prejudice”, such that I could file the same complaint again. They also argued the issues of standing, mootness and jurisdiction.  When it was my turn, I repeated most of my arguments as well in the rebuttal, adding that mootness was not a valid defense because the offense of Obama’s illegitimacy was a continuing offense against the Constitution, not degraded nor invalidated merely on the grounds that he was now inaugurated falsely as President.  My argument against “standing” was my filing as a “class action”, and the argument against jurisdiction was, of course, the constitutional obligations of the court.  As to res judicata,
I explained to the judge that a ruling “without prejudice” did not deny leave to refile the case at a later date.

The judge didn’t buy any of it and allowed the motion to dismiss, along with the prayer for finding “with prejudice”, due to “mootness” (the inauguration issue); “failure to state a claim against which relief could be granted” (the “No State statute requires it” issue, which denies any constitutional duty or obligation); and “res judicata”.  Conspicuously absent from this list was the issue of “standing” which has killed all the other suits around the country, of which I am aware.  This last supports my theory that I had resolved the “standing” issue by filing a class action suit”, for which I offered myself as the representative of the registered voter “class” of North Carolina. I advised the court that I intended to appeal, but would appeal in writing within the allotted 30 days after the order is signed. 

I have no intention of appealing this ruling.  I will file a new case and improve on that one as I did from the first one filed in October to the second one filed in November.  It is ironic that, had the judge allowed my demand to amend the names of the Governor and the State of NC to the defendant list, I would be precluded from filing a new case against them as it would be “res judicata”. 

It is important that we continue to push this issue of legitimacy in government, if only because we are currently involved in two foreign armed conflicts with more on the horizon, and the economy is on the edge of collapse.  Our military cannot continue to question the orders of the Commander-in-Chief because of the confusion of his nationality, and the “Stimulus Plan” is not going to help the economy.  As Sun Tsu told us, we must know the enemy and ourselves, or we can never be victorious in battle.  In the case of the United States government, the enemy is a mystery who changes with the tide; and, with Obama in the White House, even we ourselves are an unknown quantity.  We cannot win if we continue on this course.
END
March 20, 2009
DS”

Charlotte Observer, March 13, 2009, Vivek Kundra, Obama article, Obama technology aide, Obama campaign, FBI raid, Obama Chief Technology Officer Vivek Kundra, Yusuf Acar and Sushil Bansal arrested by FBI

The Charlotte Observer once again proves it’s bias and
irresponsible reporting by hiding negative news about
Barack Obama and providing the most positive spin about
a damaging news story. This comes as no surprise. The
Observer endorsed Obama early in the election year and
provided no coverage of the many corruption ties. A
commenter on this blog has expressed this well:

“Friday, March 13, 09

  I Almost missed a very short article buried on page 14a along side giant ads for an end-of- season clearance sale that took 4/5 of the page.
   The article was in the CHARLOTTE OBSERVER with an innocent small lead line of “An Aide to President Obama is on leave from his White House Job”.
   Normally I would not read anything on page 14a, but this was the most important atricle in this newspaper this morning…..and it was buried without pomp along with the ads.
   Of course the article was about VIVEK KUNDRA and his hi-tech computer technology company. The article stated  2 of Kundra’s employees had been arrested in a raid by the FBI in D.C. and were being held without bond. Also found at the home of one who was arrested (Yusuf Acar-sounds like an Arab too me) was over $70,000 in CASH.
   What the article DIDN’T say was that KUNDRA ran Obama’s internet operation during his campaign operations! What the article didn’t say was Obama received millions and millions of questionable contribution dollars during his primary and general election campaigns by computer! Also what the article didn’t say was this was an ongoing investigation which went back quite some time! What the article didn’t say was what was OBAMA’s connection to Kundra and this illegal operation! What the article didn’t say was why no bond was granted to the 2 people arrested…were they flight risk?
   I think this story has long legs and will fly once the full truth is known.
   The big question remains….will “Slick Barry” take his place along side the others involved in this fraud, or will he slide again?
    I doubt the OBSERVER will ever print the truth about this matter considering they have already drank the Obama Kool-Aide, but thats ok. The bloggers will cover it fully!”

RMinNC

Raleigh Tea Party, NC Tea Party, March 21, 2009, New American Tea Party, Raleigh NC, NC State Capitol, Downtown Raleigh, Government bailouts, North Carolinians for the Preservation of the Constitution

North Carolinians for the Preservation of the Constitution will
be hosting a Tea Party at the NC State Capitol in downtown
Raleigh on Saturday, March 21, 2009. Here is the notice that
was posted on Good Time Politics:
 
Raleigh, N.C New American Tea Party Saturday, March 21, 2009

A message from William/NC State Director to all members of
North Carolinians for the Preservation of the Constitution
on The Patriotic Resistance!

Please spread the word to every American you know who is fed
up with government bailouts! We are hoping for a large turn out,
please check the facebook group page for the latest news.

Raleigh, N.C New American Tea Party
Date: Saturday, March 21, 2009
Time: 12:00pm – 3:00pm
Location: NC State Capitol (east side) downtown Raleigh
Street: Wilmington St
City/Town: Raleigh, NC
Phone: 9196122141
Email: raleighteaparty@gmail.com
Facebook group page:
link is posted in the Main NC Group.
Thanks Donna
Visit North Carolinians for the Preservation of the Constitution
Lets have a big group in Raleigh, NC, lets make our voice heard
loud and clear that we’re tired of our tax money being spent
useless.
http://goodtimepolitics.com/2009/03/06/raleigh-nc-new-american-tea-party-saturday-march-21-2009/
Recent News

“Our permits have been approved and we will assemble on the East
Side of the State Capitol from 12-3 on Saturday afternoon
March 21, 2009.”

Facebook link

Representative Sue Myrick, United States Congressman, NC Representative , Andy Polk , Aide Polk, Obama ineligible, US Constitution, Congress, Electoral votes, North Carolina constituents, The WHY initiative. Restore the Constitutional Republic

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and
the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service
of their country; but he that stands now, deserves the love and
thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict,
the more glorious the triumph.” —Thomas Paine 1778

We

Are Watching

Congress

 

Citizen Wells Intro to WHY initiative

The last article revealed the responses that Dean Haskins received
from the Office of Senator Jim DeMint. This article reveals the
responses from Representative Sue Myrick’s office.

We are moving ahead with the “WHY” initiative to hold Congress
accountable now and moving forward. Dean Haskins has set up
Restore the Constitutional Republic under a .com for organizational
purposes and we are finalizing plans to challenge congressmen across
the nation now and henceforth. Dean Haskins, the Citizen Wells blog,
other internet websites, attorneys, businessmen, the military and
millions of Americans are united to uphold and defend the US
Constitution. We are determined to get answers from congressmen.

Why did they believe that Obama is eligible?

Why did no member of Congress challenge the Electoral votes?

Despite our many concerns about policies and actions such as the
so called stimulus bill, we are determined to uphold the US
Constitution and make Congress accountable. This effort will move
forward through the 2010 elections.

Millions of Americans were stunned as every institution in this
nation connected with the 2008 election, ignored the US
Constitution and pleas from masses of the public to vet Senator
Obama. Congressmen ignored their constituents, as if part of
some conspiracy to ensure that Obama got elected.

So we are asking WHY.

The obvious red flag that most people get, the one I am certain a
5th grader could understand is, if Obama was eligible, why did
Obama employ an army of attorneys and spend great sums of money
beginning with Philip Berg’s lawsuit in August 21, 2008, to avoid
proving his eligibility. All Obama had to do is what John McCain
did, provide Congress with a vault copy of his birth certificate,
i.e., a real birth certificate, not a record of a birth certificate
like Obama has tried to do.

If you’re not as smart as a fifth grader then consider the following:

Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981 on an Indonesian passport.

Obama’s father was Kenyan, under British rule.

Obama became an Indonesian citizen.

There is no legal proof that Obama was born in Hawaii.

If Obama was born in Kenya, his mother did not meet the eligibility
requirements for Obama to be a natural born citizen.

Consider this letter from a Brigadier General:

 
Charles E. Jones
Brigadier General US Air Force, Retired
Lifetime subject to recall for active duty
Recipient of the Distinguished Service Medal (AF)
02.04.09

“We the People of the United States of America” are entitled to know
the legal qualifications of the President and Commander in Chief. 
For the better good and National Security of “We the People of the
United States” and for Absolute Command of the Military Forces of the
United States, I whole heartedly support the efforts of Dr. Orly Taitz,
ESQ for taking legal action to determine whether or not Barack Hussein
 Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Citizen of Indonesia and possibly citizen
of Kenya, is eligible to become President of the United States and
Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.

We were notified recently that 4 TN state representatives
have agreed to cooperate with Orly Taitz in her lawsuit.
Eric Swafford, Stacy Camfield, Glen Casada and
Frank Niceley  have signed a document demanding Obama
produce his documents:

Dean Haskins and I have begun the process of contacting
congressmen and we started with Representative Sue Myrick
and Senator Jim DeMint. We have been discussing possible
reasons why so many senators were misinformed or apathetic.
Perhaps much of the information sent to them was filtered
or blocked by their aides. Regardless, we want answers.
Here is a comment received from Sue Myrick’s office:

 
From Sue Myrick’s office.
Polk, Andy :Andy.Polk@mail.house.gov

“ohhh- I understand it correctly based on US Supreme Court cases interpreting
what “natural born citizen” Constitutionally means.  Had he not met the
definition, Chief Justice Roberts, the worlds leading Constitutional scholar,
would not have sworn him in because he would have violated his duty to uphold
the Constitution.  You can argue with me all you want on this issue, but I can
do nothing for you on this point.  The only thing you can do, if you feel so
strongly about Obama not being a citizen, is file a lawsuit in federal court.”

I recently called Sue Myrick’s office and after a conversation with her staff,
was informed that I should email her. Here is the email that was sent on
February 5, 2009:

“I am Mr. Wells of the Citizen Wells Blog, based out of NC. I have done extensive
research and covered the 2008 election process. I am also part of a group that is
evolving to uphold and save the US Constitution and rule of law.
I am in the forefront of a group of people that will be holding Congress accountable
now and through the 2010 election and beyond.
 
I have been in touch with Philip J berg and his assistant, Dr. Orly Taitz and her assistant,
Cort Wrotnowski, Lt Cols in the AF, business people and regular Americans that are
deeply concerned and care about this country. We are not going away. Our resolve is
strengthening.
 
I do not know where you obtained your information regarding the eligibility of Obama to
be president. There was an Orwellian like effort by the MSM and Obama camp to distort
the truth. If Obama had been eligible, he would not have employed an army of attornies
and spents thousands of dollars to avoid presenting his proof. McCain in contrast
provided a vault version of his birth certificate to Congress.
 
I was asked to do research for a documentary on Obama and the provision for natural
born citizen in the US Constitution. This was specifically done to present to Ron Paul.
Congressmen were notified prior to the election of the eligibility cloud surrounding
Obama. I posted some of the ludicrous responses that were received from some
senators and representatives in a US Constitution Hall of Shame on my blog.
I am not a conspiracy theorist. However, we are going to find out why no member
of congress took this issue seriously, why they ignored the people that put them
in office and why no one spoke up in Congress when the Electoral College votes
were certified.
 
Our team is contacting a senator from the southeast and we hope to meet with him
soon. We are going to get some straight answers and will do whatever is necessary
under the law to do so. I decided to write you (I just called your office) because
you represent my district and you seem to be a straight shooter.
 
This initiative is designed to get some straight answers now, but will build into
a general effort to hold congress accountable and remove from office in 2010
those politicians that have a selfish, irresponsible agenda.
 

I deeply care about this country.
 
Respectfully,
 
Mr. Wells
 
https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/
I have received no response from Sue Myrick. I have recently
been trying to locate someone that knows her. It is a shame
isn’t it. It is so difficult to get the attention of our
congressmen. Well guess what. We are not going to stop until
we get their attention and that includes voting them out of
office if they continue to fail us. In fairness to Sue Myrick,
so far we have only gotten responses from her staff. Sooner
or later she will see our requests and sooner or later she
will have to respond.

If you have been frustrated by congressmen that have ignored
your pleas to examine Obama’s eligibility problems, take
comfort in the fact that Dean Haskin’s brother was heavily
involved in SC politics. However, as will become obvious soon,
we do not give up easily. We, on behalf of the American public,
demand straight answers and we intend to get them. All of this
correspondence will be recorded and all congressmen will be
accountable sooner or later. There will be a day of reckoning
at least by the 2010 elections.

This is going to be a nationwide effort. We will be asking for
volunteers and hope to have an organization for each state. If
you have the desire and the resolve, go to the Restore the
Constitutional Republic site (new .com) and check often. In the
forum, there is a place by state where you can interact and sign
up. We have another site set up to collect and gather information
about each congressmen. We will use this going forward as a
clearing house for all efforts to hold congressmen accountable.
Details will follow soon.

http://restoretheconstitutionalrepublic.com/

Continue to contact your congressmen as you want. One thing that
we are trying to do with the WHY intiative, is to notify
congressmen that we will meet with them or otherwise establish
a dialogue and we will speak on authority. Citizen Wells and
Dean Haskins are initially available. We will be contacting
Orly Taitz and others to form an expert panel to answer any
questions or challenges provided. Orly has been doing some
of this already.

I know that many are impatient and frustrated. As I have stated
on numerous occasions, these problems did not come about overnight
and will not go away overnight. However, each step that we take
brings us one step closer to a safer, more just country.

God bless.

2008 Electoral College votes, Certification of Voters, State laws, US Constitution, Electors signed Certification, Certifications invalid, Obama ineligible, Violators should be prosecuted, Constitution violated

The ultimate objective of a presidential election to inaugurate a
constitutionally qualified president that as closely as possible
reflects the will of the people.
The states have been given the power and the duty to control presidential
elections by the US Constitution.

The pervasive attitudes of the state officers and election officials is
that they, incorrectly, have no power to qualify presidential candidates
and/or they depend on political parties to vet the candidates.

The political parties have evolved and changed since the creation of the
US Consitution and are given no powers. However, members of the parties,
as US Citizens have an implied duty to uphold the Constitution and party
officers typically have taken oaths as elected officials to uphold the
US Constitution.

Clearly, the intent of the US Constitution and Federal Election Law is
for an eligible candidate to move through this election process to allow
for a constitutionally valid vote by Electors.

All officers and election officials, most judges and most Electoral
College Electors were informed prior to the general election and
particularly prior to the Electors meeting and voting, of compelling
evidence that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president. Despite
these warnings, Electors met and voted on the basis of party loyalty or
perceived directives from the states. State or party policies dictating
how an Elector votes violate the spirit and letter of constitutional
and federal law.

Even though the manner of Electoral College voting in clearly defined by
the US Constitution and Federal Election Law, some states have included
explicit references to law in their Certificates of Voters that are
signed by Electors and state officers. Below are certificates from 2004.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/2004_certificates/

Alabama

“pursuant to the Constitution and the laws of the United States
and this state, certify”

Alaska

“by authority of law vested in us”

Arizona

“by authority of law in us vested”

Arkansas

“as provided by law”

California

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

Connecticut

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States
and in the manner provided by the laws of the state of Connecticut”

Hawaii

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Idaho

“having met agreeably to the provisions of law”

Illinois

“as provided by law”

Indiana

“as required by the Twelfth Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States”

Iowa

“in accordance with law”

Kansas

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Kentucky

“In accordance with the Twelfth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and with sections 7-11 of Title III of the
United States Code”

UNITED STATES CODE

TITLE 3 THE PRESIDENT

Manner of voting

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

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.”
Minnesota

“In testimony whereof, and as required by the Twelth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States we have hereunto set
our hands”

Montana

“agreeable to the provisions of law”

Nevada

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

New Jersey

“proceeded to perform the duties required of us by the Constitution
and laws of the United States.”

North Carolina

“by authority of law in us vested”

Pennsylvania

“agreeably to the provisions of law”

Rhode Island

“in pursuance of law”

South Carolina

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Tennessee

“pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the United States and of
this state”

Utah

“in pursuance of the statutes of the United States and of the statutes
of the State of Utah”

Virginia

“in pursuance of the Constitution and laws of the United States”

Washington

“pursuant to the provisions of federal and state law”

Conclusion

  • The US Constitution is clear on presidential eligibility and how
    Electoral Colleges Electors are to vote.
  • Ignorance is no excuse. Everyone involved was forewarned. Voting
    party line over law will not be tolerated.
  • Electors and state officers have signed or will sign Certificates of Voters
    for the 2008 Election. As you can see from the above, they will
    certify that they are aware of the law and are abiding by the law.
  • Kentucky gets the award for the most constitutionally clear wording
    and should be applauded for doing so.
  • There are consequences for false attesting.
  • One of the consequences is that the votes of many Electors are now
    null and void.
  • Impeachment, recall, firing, criminal charges forthcoming?

Constitution 101 classes will begin soon.

State officers, election officials, judges and, of course,
US Supreme Court Justices will be invited. Stay tuned for a
class near you. I suppose Washington DC should be first.

Lt Col Donald Sullivan, TRO, NC Electors, Temporary Restraining Order, Stop NC Electoral College vote, Judge Baddour, Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh NC, December 10, 2008

Lt Col Donald Sullivan will appear in Wake County Superior Court, Raleigh NC, on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 with his TRO, Temporary Restraining Order, to attempt to stop the Electoral College vote in NC until Barack Obama’s eligibility can be confirmed. Lt Col Sullivan is scheduled to appear before Superior Court Judge Baddour at 2:15.