Category Archives: white house

Natural Born Citizen lies and misrepresentations, Congressional Research Service Propaganda, Founding fathers intent, Obama eligibility, Leo Donofrio response

Posted on December 1, 2011 | 53 comments

Natural Born Citizen lies and misrepresentations, Congressional Research Service Propaganda, Founding fathers intent, Obama eligibility, Leo Donofrio response

Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States, and is criminally occupying the White House and should immediately be arrested. Irrespective of any deficiencies in his birth certificate, Obama did not have 2 US citizen parents and is not a Natural Born Citizen.
Presidential eligibility from the US Constitution

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; 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.”

Notice that being a citizen was not enough, unless you were so at the time of the adoption of the US Constitution. One must be a Natural Born Citizen. That requires 2 US citizen parents. The founding fathers understood that definition. One of the best examples I can think of this contextual knowledge is from the movie “A few good men.”

In 2008, John McCain was challenged on his eligibility. He immediately presented a legitimate certified copy of his original birth certificate. But since he was born abroad, the US Senate provided a resolution to clarify his status as a Natural Born Citizen.

“110th CONGRESS

2d Session

S. RES. 511

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 10, 2008
Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary
April 24, 2008
Reported by Mr. LEAHY, without amendment
April 30, 2008
Considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the
United States;

Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in
the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;

Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the `natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States,
as evidenced by the First Congress’s own statute defining the term `natural born Citizen’;

Whereas the well-being of all citizens of the United States is preserved and enhanced by the men and women who are assigned to serve our country
outside of our national borders;

Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President; and

Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”

 Notice that emphasis was placed on the fact that McCain had 2 US citizen parents. Also note that Obama signed the resolution.

In 2008, numerous congressmen were contacted regarding Obama’s eligibility issues. It appeared at the time that they were all reading from the same scripted agenda. In 2010 we learned why members of congress responded with the same language.

From Citizen Wells November 8, 2010.

“Mario Apuzzo, attorney in Kerchner v Obama, first broke this story on November 5, 2010.

“Members of Congress Internal Memorandum — What to Tell Your Constituents in Answer to Obama Eligibility Questions – Their Talking Points Internal Memo Revealed. This was the spin that the Members of Congress were given to keep the American electorate at bay and confused in the debate about Obama’s eligibility issues all the while the Congress did nothing to investigate the matter in a congressional hearing like they did for similar concerns about John McCain.

We have obtained a copy of the talking points memorandum put out by a lawyer for the Congressional Research Service to the Members of Congress back in April 2009 as to what to tell their constituents when they write to the Members of Congress and ask questions about Obama’s eligibility. Now we know why all the answers coming back to constituents sounded like they were written by the same person and were full of the same obfuscations, omitted facts from history, and half truths & non-truths. This copy was obtained via the diligent and persistent efforts of a patriot going by the pen name of “Tom Deacon” who obtained it from a Senator’s office. Now we know the talking points the DC insiders and politicians have been groomed with to feed to their constituents who have been asking questions about the eligibility issues. Thank you Tom.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/congress-internal-memo-obama-eligibility-what-to-tell-your-constituents-jack-maskell-memo-citizen-wells-open-thread-november-8-2010/

Chris Strunk gave us a heads up yesterday that Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service is at it again.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/74176180/

Leo Donofrio has responded to this latest attempt at obfuscation of the meaning of Natural Born Citizen.
“Debunking The New Natural Born Citizen Congressional Research Propaganda.
 
Yesterday, attorney Jack Maskell issued yet another version of his ever changing Congressional Research Memo on POTUS eligibility and the natural-born citizen clause.  The CRS memo is actually a blessing for me in that I’ve been putting a comprehensive report together on this issue for about a month now.  But not having an official source standing behind the entire body of propaganda made my job more difficult.
The complete refutation will be available soon, but for now I will highlight one particularly deceptive example which illustrates blatant intellectual dishonesty.  On pg. 48, Maskell states:

In one case concerning the identity of a petitioner, the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”221
221 Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920). The Supreme Court also noted there: “It is better that many Chinese immigrants should be improperly admitted than that one natural born citizen of the United States should be permanently excluded from his country.” 253 U.S. at 464.
Reading this yesterday, I had a fleeting moment of self-doubt.  Could I have missed this case?  Did the Supreme Court really state that the son of two aliens was a natural-born citizen?  The Twilight Zone theme suddenly chimed in.  I then clicked over to the actual case, and of course, the Supreme Court said no such thing.

The petitioner was born in California to parents who were both US citizens.  His father was born in the United States and was a citizen by virtue of the holding in US v. Wong Kim Ark.  His mother’ place of birth was not mentioned.  Regardless, she was covered by the derivative citizenship statute, and was, therefore, a US citizen when the child was born.

It was alleged that the petitioner had obtained a false identity and that the citizen parents were not his real parents.  But the Supreme Court rejected the State’s secret evidence on this point and conducted their citizenship analysis based upon an assumption these were petitioner’s real parents.
Having been born in the US of parents who were citizens, petitioner was indeed a natural-born citizen.  But Maskell’s frightening quotation surgery makes it appear as if the petitioner was born of alien parents.  The Supreme Court rejected that contention.  And Maskell’s ruse highlights the depravity of lies being shoved down the nation’s throat on this issue.  I can imagine Mini-Me sitting on his lap while this was being prepared.
When you look carefully at Maskell’s creative use of quotation marks, you’ll see that the statement is NOT a quote from the case, but rather a Frankenstein inspired patchwork.  He starts the reversed vivisection off with the following:
“[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son…”

These are the first few words of a genuine quote from the Court’s opinion.  Then Maskell goes way out of context for the next two body parts.  The first is not in quotation marks:

of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is

And finally, an unrelated quote from elsewhere in the Court’s opinion:
“a natural born American citizen ….”
Put it all together and you get the following monstrosity:
…the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”
But the Supreme Court never said that.  Here’s what they actually said:
“It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 Sup. Ct. 456.”  Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920).

This real quote – when liberated from Maskell’s embalming fluid – does not resemble the propaganda at all.”

Read more:

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/debunking-the-new-natural-born-citizen-congressional-research-propaganda/

53 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Congress, constitution, Election 2012, Election Law, Eligibility, Lawyers, Leo Donofrio, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, Usurper, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

We are not hiring until Obama is gone, US Cranes New Company Policy, Bill Looman can’t afford to hire, Blames Obama administration

Posted on November 25, 2011 | 46 comments

We are not hiring until Obama is gone, US Cranes New Company Policy, Bill Looman can’t afford to hire, Blames Obama administration

From 11Alive in Waco, Georgia November 23, 2011.

“Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone”

“A west Georgia business owner is stirring up controversy with signs he posted on his company’s trucks, for all to see as the trucks roll up and down roads, highways and interstates:

“New Company Policy: We are not hiring until Obama is gone.”

“Can’t afford it,” explained the employer, Bill Looman, Tuesday evening. “I’ve got people that I want to hire now, but I just can’t afford it. And I don’t foresee that I’ll be able to afford it unless some things change in D.C.”

Looman’s company is U.S. Cranes, LLC.  He said he put up the signs, and first posted pictures of the signs on his personal Facebook page, six months ago, and he said he received mostly positive reaction from people, “about 20-to-one positive.”

But for some reason, one of the photos went viral on the Internet on Monday.

And the reaction has been so intense, pro and con, he’s had to have his phones disconnected because of the non-stop calls, and he’s had to temporarily shut down his company’s website because of all the traffic crashing the system.

Looman made it clear, talking with 11Alive’s Jon Shirek, that he is not refusing to hire to make some political point; it’s that he doesn’t believe he can hire anyone, because of the economy. And he blames the Obama administration.”

“”The Secret Service left here, they were in a good mood and laughing,” Looman said. “I got the feeling they thought it was kind of ridiculous, and a waste of their time.”

So Bill Looman is keeping the signs up, and the photos up — stirring up a lot of debate.

“I just spent 10 years in the Marine Corps protecting the rights of people… the First Amendment, and the Second Amendment and the [rest of the] Bill of Rights,” he said. “Lord knows they’re calling me at 2 in the morning, all night long, and voicing their opinion. And I respect their right to do that. I’m getting a reaction, a lot of it’s negative, now. But a lot of people are waking up.””

Read more:

http://www.11alive.com/news/article/214228/3/Company-Policy-We-are-not-hiring-until-Obama-is-gone

46 Comments

Posted in Americans, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Economy, Election 2012, First Amendment, News, Obama, Obama administration, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Obama taxes, Patriotism, The Case Against Barack Obama, US economy, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Obama should abandon his candidacy, Democratic pollsters Caddell and Schoen, Hillary Clinton, Obama 2012 campaign will exacerbate the divisions in our country and weaken our national identity

Posted on November 21, 2011 | 61 comments

Obama should abandon his candidacy, Democratic pollsters Caddell and Schoen, Hillary Clinton, Obama 2012 campaign will exacerbate the divisions in our country and weaken our national identity

From the Wall Street Journal November 21, 2011.

“The Hillary Moment
President Obama can’t win by running a constructive campaign, and he won’t be able to govern if he does win a second term”
“When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president’s accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor—one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president’s administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president’s political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.

President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics 2012 General Election Average (43.8%-43.%). Meanwhile, voters disapprove of the president’s performance 49%-41% in the most recent Gallup survey, and 63% of voters disapprove of his handling of the economy, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll.

Consequently, he has to make the case that the Republicans, who have garnered even lower ratings in the polls for their unwillingness to compromise and settle for gridlock, represent a more risky and dangerous choice than the current administration—an argument he’s clearly begun to articulate.

One year ago in these pages, we warned that if President Obama continued down his overly partisan road, the nation would be “guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it.” The result has been exactly as we predicted: stalemate in Washington, fights over the debt ceiling, an inability to tackle the debt and deficit, and paralysis exacerbating market turmoil and economic decline.

If President Obama were to withdraw, he would put great pressure on the Republicans to come to the table and negotiate—especially if the president singularly focused in the way we have suggested on the economy, job creation, and debt and deficit reduction. By taking himself out of the campaign, he would change the dynamic from who is more to blame—George W. Bush or Barack Obama?—to a more constructive dialogue about our nation’s future.

Even though Mrs. Clinton has expressed no interest in running, and we have no information to suggest that she is running any sort of stealth campaign, it is clear that she commands majority support throughout the country. A CNN/ORC poll released in late September had Mrs. Clinton’s approval rating at an all-time high of 69%—even better than when she was the nation’s first lady. Meanwhile, a Time Magazine poll shows that Mrs. Clinton is favored over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney by 17 points (55%-38%), and Texas Gov. Rick Perry by 26 points (58%-32%).

But this is about more than electoral politics. Not only is Mrs. Clinton better positioned to win in 2012 than Mr. Obama, but she is better positioned to govern if she does. Given her strong public support, she has the ability to step above partisan politics, reach out to Republicans, change the dialogue, and break the gridlock in Washington.”

“By going down the re-election road and into partisan mode, the president has effectively guaranteed that the remainder of his term will be marred by the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity, common purpose, and most of all, our economic strength. If he continues on this course it is certain that the 2012 campaign will exacerbate the divisions in our country and weaken our national identity to such a degree that the scorched-earth campaign that President George W. Bush ran in the 2002 midterms and the 2004 presidential election will pale in comparison.”

Read more:

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944-lMyQjAxMTAxMDIwMDEyNDAyWj.html?mod=wsj_share_email

61 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, Democrats, Election 2012, Hillary Clinton, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, republicans, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

NH presidential election law, Natural born citizen clause, Statute changed in 2010, Orly Taitz ballot challenge, Obama 2007 signature

Posted on November 19, 2011 | 41 comments

NH presidential election law, Natural born citizen clause, Statute changed in 2010, Orly Taitz ballot challenge, Obama 2007 signature

I am presenting this article on NH presidential election laws for 3 reasons.

1. To remind everyone what Obama signed in 2007.

2. To reveal a change in the wording on the Declaration of intent.

3. To ask why this change in wording is not more widely reported.

I saved a copy of the Declaration of intent by September 18, 2009 from the following link:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-LXIII-655.htm

“TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 655
NOMINATIONS
Nominations by Primary
Section 655:17-b
    655:17-b Declaration of Intent; Presidential and Vice-Presidential Candidates Who File Nomination Papers. –
    I. Declarations of intent for each candidate for president and vice-president who seeks nomination by nomination papers shall be in the form provided in paragraph II. Declarations of intent required by this section shall be filed with the secretary of state, signed by the candidate, and notarized by a notary public.
    II. I, __________, declare that I am domiciled in the city (or town or unincorporated place) of __________, county of __________, state of __________, and am a qualified voter therein; that I intend to be a candidate for the office of __________ to be chosen at the general election to be held on the __________ day of __________; and I intend to file nomination papers by the deadline established under RSA 655:43. I further declare that, if qualified as a candidate for said office, I shall not withdraw; and that, if elected, I shall be qualified for and shall assume the duties of said office.
Source. 1985, 121:3, eff. July 19, 1985.”

Using the same link today, I find the following version:

“TITLE LXIII
ELECTIONS
CHAPTER 655
NOMINATIONS
Nominations by Primary
Section 655:17-b
    655:17-b Declaration of Intent; Presidential Candidates Who File Nomination Papers. –
    I. Declarations of intent for each candidate for president who seeks nomination by nomination papers shall be in the form provided in paragraph II.Declarations of intent required by this section shall be filed with the secretary of state, signed by the candidate, and notarized by a notary public.
    II. I, __________, swear under penalties of perjury that I am qualified to be a candidate for president of the United States pursuant to article II, section 1, clause 4 of the United States Constitution, which 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.” I further declare that I am domiciled in the city (or town or unincorporated place) of __________, county of __________, state of __________, and am a qualified voter therein; that I intend to be a candidate for the office of president to be chosen at the general election to be held on the __________ day of __________; and I intend to file nomination papers by the deadline established under RSA 655:43. I further declare that, if qualified as a candidate for said office, I shall not withdraw; and that, if elected, I shall be qualified for and shall assume the duties of said office.
Source. 1985, 121:3, eff. July 19, 1985. 2010, 19:1, eff. July 6, 2010; 50:3, eff. July 17, 2010.”

Here is the Decaration of intent that Obama signed in October of 2007.

The wording in the document Obama signed in 2007 matches the wording of the Declaration of Intent I saved from September 18, 2009. Obama in 2007 did not certify that he was a natural born citizen.

41 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2008, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Presidential candidate, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , ,

Concord Monitor NH Obama ballot eligibility articles, Maddie Hanna, Obama birth certificate, Orly Taitz challenge, New Hampshire law violation?, Citizen Wells email

Posted on November 19, 2011 | 30 comments

Concord Monitor NH Obama ballot eligibility articles, Maddie Hanna, Obama birth certificate, Orly Taitz challenge, New Hampshire law violation?, Citizen Wells email

“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

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

First of all I would like to thank Maddie Hanna and the Concord Monitor for covering the Orly Taitz challenge of Obama’s eligibility to be on the New Hampshire ballot. It appears that an attempt was made to present both sides of the story. However, the incorrect, often repeated, mainstream media version of Obama’s birth certificate stories was presented. I sent Maddie Hanna the following email this morning.
“In your recent articles about the Obama eligibility ballot challenge you stated:
 
“The administration released Obama’s birth certificate from the state
of Hawaii in 2008. When that didn’t satisfy the skeptics, it posted a
long-form version online earlier this year.”
 
That is incorrect.
The document placed on the internet by some entities in 2008 is a COLB.
We have no proof that the image was legitimate. But given what a COLB represents, it does not matter.
Certification of Live Birth. Or as Lou Dobbs on CNN stated “A document that refers to another document.”
Per Hawaii law one did not have to be born in Hawaii to get one.
 
The image placed on WhiteHouse.gov this year is not proven by a legitimate chain of document.
Also, particulary damning is the following from the bottom of the image.
“I certify that this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file”
Since Obama could be born elsewhere and per HI law have birth records on file,
the word abstract immediately rules out the image as absolute proof of HI birth.
 
Perhaps the most damning information of all is what I have been presenting for years.
 
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?
 
I hope that you want the truth.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please contact me.”

I would also like to point out that news sites outside of the state of NH revealed that apparently the NH Ballot Law Commission is in violation of NH law.

“CHAPTER 665
BALLOT LAW COMMISSION

General Provisions

665:1 Organization. I. There shall be a ballot law commission
consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker
of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major
political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the
most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by
the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political
parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most
recent state general election.”

http://www.sos.nh.gov/665-web2011.pdf

The Concord Monitor article:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293382/birther-bid-to-derail-obama-blocked

I anxiously await a response from Maddie Hanna and welcome any dialogue to arrive at the truth in any of these matters.

Wells

30 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Board of Elections, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Hawaii, Lawsuits, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, The Case Against Barack Obama, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , , , ,

NH Obama ballot challenge denied, New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission all Democrats?, Obama eligibility, NH law violated

Posted on November 19, 2011 | 24 comments

NH Obama ballot challenge denied, New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission all Democrats?, Obama eligibility, NH law violated

“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

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

From the Concord Monitor November 19, 2011.

“‘Birther’ bid to derail Obama blocked
Ballot Law Commission members called traitors”

“As state election officials yesterday rejected California lawyer
Orly Taitz’s argument to keep President Obama’s name off the New
Hampshire presidential ballot, supporters lining the hearing room in
the Legislative Office Building cried out in protest.

“Traitors!” shouted one woman. “Spineless traitors!”

“Saying a treasonous liar can go on our ballot?” yelled State Rep.
Harry Accornero, a Republican from Laconia. “You’re going to have to
face the citizens of Laconia. You better wear a mask.”

The spectacle before the state Ballot Law Commission began with a
presentation by Taitz, who came to Concord yesterday afternoon to
continue her years-long

demand for proof of Obama’s U.S. citizenship.

Taitz, a dentist who was born in the Soviet Union, is running as a
Republican for a seat in the California Senate and runs what she bills
as the “world’s leading Obama eligibility challenge website,” refuses
to accept the veracity of the birth certificates released by the White
House in response to questions circulating through chain emails and on
the internet about Obama’s birth.

The administration released Obama’s birth certificate from the state
of Hawaii in 2008. When that didn’t satisfy the skeptics, it posted a
long-form version online earlier this year.

But Taitz insists that document is fake: The computer file is layered
and could have been altered with the Adobe Illustrator program, she
said.

“A child can see this is a forgery,” she told the commission. “Why are
they refusing to show the public the original?”

She also claims Obama doesn’t have a valid Social Security number.
Included in the 85-page packet Taitz submitted to the commission is a
tax return with “a number that was never assigned to him,” Taitz said.
She said Obama is using a Social Security number issued in Connecticut
around 1977.

In conducting her research, Taitz said she also found several birth
dates associated with Obama in a national database. And she found
information that she said contradicts Obama’s claim about the length
of time he spent attending Columbia University, which claims the
president as a 1983 graduate.

“We have an individual where we don’t know who he is,” Taitz said. “We
need to know that the person who is at the helm of this country, who
is leading our military, whose finger is on the red button of nuclear
weapons, has proper identification.”

She told the commission members they would be responsible for “the
most egregious election fraud ever committed” if they didn’t take
Obama’s name off the ballot.

“This is bigger than Watergate. This is a hundred times bigger than
Watergate,” Taitz said. “Ladies and gentlemen, in your hands is
national security for the United States of America.”

But the commission wasn’t convinced.”

“”I want to say, the Constitution is what makes America great,”
Sullivan said, drawing applause from the room.

It was out of the commission’s purview, however. Senior Assistant
Attorney General James Boffetti told commission members they could
only consider whether Obama had filed his declaration of candidacy
form in accordance with state law and paid his $1,000 filing fee. Both
form and fee were properly submitted by Vice President Joe Biden on
Oct. 20, according to Assistant Secretary of State Karen Ladd.

The five members voted unanimously to keep Obama’s name on the ballot.

Their response to the testimony during the hearing angered many of
those in the room, including state representatives.

“Unbelievable,” fumed state Rep. Susan DeLemus, a Republican from
Rochester, walking around the room during a break in the hearing,
before the commission took its vote.

“Let’s just bury the Constitution now and have a funeral,” DeLemus
said. “It just makes me want to throw up.””

Read more:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293382/birther-bid-to-derail-obama-blocked

From Commenter Starla

Submitted on 2011/11/19 at 1:44 am

““NEW HAMPSHIRE ELCTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS”

Obama Release Your Records on 2:00 PM
Friday, November 18, 2011

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS: ACCEPTS OBAMA’S BALLOT ACCESS PAPERWORK FOR 2012;
COMMITTEE MEMBERS BOOED AND CAQLLED TRAITORS”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-elections-committee-rules.html?showComment=1321679292167#c3169759953344384191

* * * *

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these
veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to
publish whatever I please on any subject.” – Elijah Parish
Lovejoy(1802-1837)

* * * *

Comments Under The Above Article:

Anonymous said…

“OH, YES, THANK GOD THEY WERE CALLED TRAITORS. THEY SHOULD BE CHARGED
WITH TREASON…..ALL OF THOSE NOT INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE WITHIN THAT
COMMITTEE SHOULD BE ARRESTED. WHERE ARE THE POLICE AND THE SHERIFFS?
THEY MUST ALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR TREASONABLE ACTIONS.
PEOPLE JUST KEEP WRITING AND WRITING FOR WE MUST SAVE OUR COUNTRY FROM
ALL OF THESE TRAITORS. “IN GOD WE TRUST.”

November 18, 2011

* * * *

Anonymous said:

“If Orly is right about all 5 members being a Democrat, then she has a
solid appeals case for the NH Supreme Court. Here is part of the law:

http://www.sos.nh.gov/665-web2011.pdf

CHAPTER 665
BALLOT LAW COMMISSION

General Provisions

665:1 Organization. I. There shall be a ballot law commission
consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker
of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major
political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the
most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by
the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political
parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most
recent state general election.”

November 18, 2011″

* * * *

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELCTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS”

Obama Release Your Records on 2:00 PM
Friday, November 18, 2011

“NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE RULES THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION
IN CRIMINAL MATTERS:   ACCEPTS OBAMA’S BALLOT ACCESS PAPERWORK FOR
2012; COMMITTEE MEMBERS BOOED AND CAQLLED TRAITORS”

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-hampshire-elections-committee-rules.html?showComment=1321679292167#c3169759953344384191

* * * *

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these
veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to
publish whatever I please on any subject.” – Elijah Parish
Lovejoy(1802-1837)

* * * *

Comments Under The Above Article:

Anonymous said…

“OH, YES, THANK GOD THEY WERE CALLED TRAITORS. THEY SHOULD BE CHARGED
WITH TREASON…..ALL OF THOSE NOT INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE WITHIN
THAT COMMITTEE SHOULD BE ARRESTED. WHERE ARE THE POLICE AND THE
SHERIFFS? THEY MUST ALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR TREASONABLE
ACTIONS. PEOPLE JUST KEEP WRITING AND WRITING FOR WE MUST SAVE OUR
COUNTRY FROM ALL OF THESE TRAITORS. “IN GOD WE TRUST.”

November 18, 2011

* * * *

Anonymous said:

“If Orly is right about all 5 members being a Democrat, then she has a
solid appeals case for the NH Supreme Court. Here is part of the law:

http://www.sos.nh.gov/665-web2011.pdf

CHAPTER 665
BALLOT LAW COMMISSION

General Provisions

665:1 Organization. I. There shall be a ballot law commission
consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker
of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major
political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the
most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by
the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political
parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most
recent state general election.”

November 18, 2011″”

Submitted on 2011/11/19 at 1:14 am

““EXCLUSIVE: ORLY TAITZ REPORTS ON NEW HAMPSHIRE BALLOT COMMISSION HEARING”

“PEOPLE WERE SCREAMING, ‘TRAITORS!’”

By Sharon Rondeau
© 2011, The Post & Email
November 18, 2011

Excerpt:

“Everybody jumped to their feet. They were screaming and yelling and
saying, “Traitors! You’re traitors! You have no decency! You have no
honesty! You’re committing treason!” It was huge. Cameras were
rolling, and they had to call security. (Rep.) Harry Accornero started
yelling at to the chair of the committee and the corrupt attorney, and
the attorney, Brad E. Cook, said, “Representative Accornero, you are
out of order.” And Accornero said, “No, you are out of order; you are
committing treason. You have to face the people of the state of New
Hampshire, and you better not get out of the house without a mask!”

I’ve never seen anything like it. People were so mad that I thought,
“In another minute, they’re going to bring a rope and start hanging
them all.” Representative Carol Vita kept getting right in the face of
the assistant attorney general; she was yelling and screaming at him.

Taitz reported that no one was hurt as a result of the hearing, which
lasted about two hours in total. She reported that Rep. Accornero said
that members of the New Hampshire House of Representatives went to the
Speaker of the House, and a meeting is set for Tuesday when they will
decide what to do. “I’m going to write an emergency appeal to the
Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Members of the House are going to join
my other cases in Hawaii, the Ninth Circuit, and in the DC Circuit.”

“The level of corruption was unbelievable. We found out that all five
members of the committee are Democrats,” Taitz said. “As I was
presenting all of the evidence, people were listening and getting more
and more angry.”

——————

Editor’s Note: If Taitz’s contention that all five members of the
Ballot Law Commission are from one party is correct, it is an apparent
violation of law.””

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/11/18/exclusive-orly-taitz-reports-on-new-hampshire-ballot-commission-hearing/

24 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Election update, Eligibility, Lawsuits, Lawyers, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Politics, US Constitution, voters, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

NH ballot challenge to Obama, Orly Taitz complaint, Obama eligibility questions, Four New Hampshire House members question birth certificate

Posted on November 18, 2011 | 76 comments

NH ballot challenge to Obama, Orly Taitz complaint, Obama eligibility questions, Four New Hampshire House members question birth certificate

“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

“Live Free or Die”…New Hampshire State Motto

From the Concord Monitor November 18, 2011.

“‘Birther’ challenges Obama”
“Don’t pencil in a victory for President Obama in New Hampshire’s
Democratic primary just yet. Today, the incumbent president must
withstand a legal challenge that again questions his eligibility to
seek the country’s highest office.

At 2 p.m. in Room 307 of the legislative office building, the state’s
Ballot Law Commission is set to hear a complaint filed by Orly Taitz,
a California lawyer who has continued to question the validity of
Obama’s birth certificate and Social Security number since his 2008
election.

Backing her complaint, Taitz said, are four Republican members of the
New Hampshire House: Harry Accornero of Laconia, Larry Rappaport of
Colebrook, and Lucien and Carol Vita of Middleton.

“There’s sufficient controversy that I want it investigated,”
Rappaport, a Ron Paul supporter, said yesterday. “Every time this is
brought up . . . we get a lot of flak, but we’ve never gotten an
answer.””

“”I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I could take that
apart and see that it was fraudulent,” Rappaport said of the long-form
certificate.

Lucien Vita said the birth certificate issue “should have been put to
bed years ago” and also believes the documents released by Obama were
forged.

“Don’t believe anything you read and only half of what you see,” he said.

Vita considers himself a constitutionalist and both he and his wife
support Ron Paul, he said.

“I have doubts because of the delay in the time it actually took to
come out with a long-form birth certificate,” Vita said. “I don’t want
to go through another four years of the same tripe.””

“Taitz’s complaint also questions the validity of Obama’s Social
Security number, and she said the exhibits presented to the Ballot Law
Commission show “undeniable, irrefutable evidence that Barack Obama is
using a Social Security number that was never assigned to him.”

Read more:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293101/birther-challenges-obama?CSAuthResp=1321635127%3Akac5p0ac2a53k27d9iernpe2m5%3ACSUserId%7CCSGroupId%3Aapproved%3AC7BFB10B487EEBB060A53F45DE1EA54D&CSUserId=94&CSGroupId=1

76 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Birthers, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Dr. Orly Taitz, Election 2012, Election Boards, Election Law, Eligibility, Lawyers, Natural born citizen, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,

Belmont Abbey sues feds over Obama care provision, Birth control, Federal mandate forces religious institutions opposed to birth control to violate their beliefs or face penalties

Posted on November 18, 2011 | 25 comments

Belmont Abbey sues feds over Obama care provision, Birth control, Federal mandate forces religious institutions opposed to birth control to violate their beliefs or face penalties

Belmont Abbey, a Catholic college just west of Charlotte, NC is challenging ObamaCare over a provision that requires employer insurance plans to cover contraception and other birth control.

From the Charlotte Observer November 18, 2011.

“Belmont Abbey sues feds over birth control rule”

“Belmont Abbey College has filed a broad legal challenge to the part of President Barack Obama’s health care reforms that requires employer insurance plans to cover contraception and other birth control.

The Catholic college in Gaston County says the federal mandate forces religious institutions opposed to birth control to violate their beliefs or face penalties. The rule goes into effect next August.

The school has sued a number of federal agencies. The defendants include Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

Keith Maley, an HHS spokesman, said the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, a nonprofit, public-interest law firm.

The debate began in 2007, when a group of Belmont Abbey faculty members challenged the school’s refusal to include prescription contraceptives in its health care plan.

In 2009, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that Belmont Abbey was violating federal law.

The school’s recent suit focuses on Obama’s 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which requires preventative health coverage on procedures like mammograms and cervical screenings, along with contraception and sterilizations.

A religious organization can be exempted if its spiritual values are central to its mission and if it primarily employs or serves “people who share its religious tenets.””

Read more:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/11/18/2784162/belmont-abbey-sues-feds-over-birth.html

One of my uncles attended Belmont Abbey College on a baseball scholarship many years ago. I went to a performance there several years ago. It is a beautiful small school.

Go get em Belmont Abbey. If I can be of assistance, let me know.

Wells

Belmont Abbey website.

http://www.bac.edu/

25 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, constitution, Government, Health Insurance, Healthcare bill, Lawsuits, Lawyers, NC, News, North Carolina, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, ObamaCare, US Constitution, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , ,

Daniel Frawley Tony Rezko sentencing, November 21 and November 22, 2011, Companion Security partners, Obama investigation witnesses, Fall guys or deals, Where is House Judiciary Committee?

Posted on November 17, 2011 | 14 comments

Daniel Frawley Tony Rezko sentencing, November 21 and November 22, 2011, Companion Security partners, Obama investigation witnesses, Fall guys or deals, Where is House Judiciary Committee?

“Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich, Governor of IL, prosecuted before Tony Rezko, a businessman?”…Citizen Wells

“I’m assuming the information is about the payments made by Rezko to Obama, so we know we’re talking about the right conversation, right?” …Attorney Daniel Konicek, Frawley Deposition

“I just think it’s very, very disturbing that we have these pay-to-play allegations going on for years.”…Patrick Fitzgerald

Next week Daniel Frawley and Tony Rezko are scheduled to be sentenced. Frawley on Monday, November 21 and Rezko on Tuesday, November 22. Both have information about Obama shady dealings. Both were partners. Both should be witnesses in an Obama investigation.

Next week we will learn if Tony Rezko is the fall guy in Operation Board Games. Set up to protect Obama. Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich prosecuted first? Why wasn’t Tony Rezko sentenced earlier? Rezko was never called as a witness.
We have a corrupt US Justice Department, with a corrupt prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, headed by a corrupt Attorney General, Eric Holder, headed by a corrupt occupant of the White House, Barack Obama.

We have little if any checks and balances left.

Where is the House Judiciary Committee?

From the  House Judiciary Committee website.

About the Judiciary Committee
The jurisdiction of the The House Committee on the Judiciary as follows:

1.The judiciary and judicial proceedings, civil and criminal.
2.Administrative practice and procedure.
3.Apportionment of Representatives.
4.Bankruptcy, mutiny, espionage, and counterfeiting.
5.Civil liberties.
6.Constitutional amendments.
7.Criminal law enforcement.
8.Federal courts and judges, and local courts in the Territories and possessions.
9.Immigration policy and non-border enforcement.
10.Interstate compacts generally.
11.Claims against the United States.
12.Members of Congress, attendance of members, Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner; and their acceptance of incompatible offices.
13.National penitentiaries.
14.Patents, the Patent and Trademark Office, copyrights, and trademarks.
15.Presidential succession.
16.Protection of trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies.
17.Revision and codification of the Statutes of the United States.
18.State and territorial boundary lines.
19.Subversive activities affecting the internal security of the United States.

Committee Members

Republicans
Hon. Smith Chairman (R) Texas, 21st

Hon. Sensenbrenner Jr. (R) Wisconsin, 5th

 Hon. Coble (R) North Carolina, 6th

 Hon. Gallegly (R) California, 24th

Hon. Goodlatte (R) Virginia, 6th

Hon. Lungren (R) California, 3rd

Hon. Chabot (R) Ohio, 1st

Hon. Issa (R) California, 49th

Hon. Pence (R) Indiana, 6th

Hon. Forbes (R) Virginia, 4th

Hon. King (R) Iowa, 5th

Hon. Franks (R) Arizona, 2nd

Hon. Gohmert (R) Texas, 1st

Hon. Jordan (R) Ohio, 4th

Hon. Poe (R) Texas, 2nd

Hon. Chaffetz (R) Utah, 3rd

Hon. Griffin (R) Arkansas, 2nd

Hon. Marino (R) Pennsylvania, 10th

Hon. Gowdy (R) South Carolina, 4th

Hon. Ross (R) Florida, 12th

Hon. Adams (R) Florida, 24th

Hon. Quayle (R) Arizona, 3rd

Hon. Amodei (R) Nevada, 2nd
  
Democrats
Hon. Conyers Jr. Ranking Member (D) Michigan, 14th

Hon. Berman (D) California, 28th

Hon. Nadler (D) New York, 8th

Hon. Scott (D) Virginia, 3rd

Hon. Watt (D) North Carolina, 12th

Hon. Lofgren (D) California, 16th

Hon. Jackson Lee (D) Texas, 18th

Hon. Waters (D) California, 35th

Hon. Cohen (D) Tennessee, 9th

Hon. Johnson (D) Georgia, 4th

Hon. Pierluisi (D) Puerto Rico, Resident Commissioner

Hon. Quigley (D) Illinois, 5th

Hon. Chu (D) California, 32nd

Hon. Deutch (D) Florida, 19th

Hon. Sánchez (D) California, 39th

http://judiciary.house.gov/index.html

14 Comments

Posted in Barack Obama, Blagojevich, Chicago, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, corruption, Crime, Eric Holder, FBI, Federal Court, Illinois, Judges, News, Obama, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Obama records, Patrick Fitzgerald, Pay to play politics, Prosecution, Rezko, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, white house, William Cellini

Tagged , , , , , ,

Daniel Frawley deposition and testimony could lead to Obama arrest or investigation, Ulsterman White House Insider report, FDIC vs Mutual Bank, Where is House Judiciary Committee?

Posted on November 16, 2011 | 42 comments

Daniel Frawley deposition and testimony could lead to Obama arrest or investigation, Ulsterman White House Insider report, FDIC vs Mutual Bank, Where is House Judiciary Committee?

On March 9, 2011, Ulsterman reported the following White House Insider report.

“You said earlier that Obama was more confident these days though…

He is.  Pelosi backed off.  Issa appears to have done the same.  Holder is holding the line.  Information coming out of Chicago is still being limited – clamped down upon.  That doesn’t mean they aren’t nervous.  They are.
 Watch the Blagojevich thing – the trial.  The deal to be made.  Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.  And what happened to Rezko?  That’s part of the same deal.  A company called Companion Security…Blago, Rezko, the Feds.  It’s all brewing – maybe boiling over?  Of course the national media is burying all of this.  Most of it – that’s partly why we gotta back off.  The risk, the exposure, it’s too great.  We need help – help that I thought was coming but never fully materialized.

Rezko?  That could still be a problem for Obama?

(Laughs)  Yeah – do you think?  Hell yeah it could be a problem.  The guy has been holed up in jail waiting for sentencing.  Why?  Why so long?  Holder’s people are all over that thing – just like Blago.  Obama is in the mix of that mess for sure.  Does anybody really dispute that?  But you see, it’s the Justice Department’s complicity in protecting Obama during the ongoing investigations – talking current crimes here now… that is what can really sink them.  Not that there is just bank fraud, RICO  laws that were broken, payoffs, intimidations, – that’s all basic Chicago business as usual, right?  But now add the White House’s handling of all of that since Obama became President  – now you got a presidential scandal.  Now you got an investigation that leads to uncovering all of that mess.  Now you got grounds to legally go after Holder, Jarrett, and even the President of the United States.  Hell, throw in the First Lady too…

So you think President Obama should be impeached?

Impeached?  -Expletive- no.  That’s too good for him.  President Obama should be arrested. What’s that word you used a while back – sedition?  Well there you go – that pretty much sums up this whole stinking cesspool of a White House right there.   Look, I was suspicious of this guy before – but based on what I was told these past few months…the man, those around him (pauses) …this president is the most corrupt thing to have sat in the White House in our lifetimes.  Being part of that campaign in 2008…it makes me sick.  Do you understand what I’m saying?  Sick.  To have played any part in getting him elected…Obama isn’t just incompetent…he’s something else. Something worse.  I’ve been around a lot of asshole-arrogant politicians.  Plenty of those.  Even a few outright criminals.  This is different.  This is a whole other level of corrupt.”

http://newsflavor.com/politics/world-politics/white-house-insider-president-obama-should-be-arrested/

On July 11, 2011 the Chicago SunTimes presented 2 articles.

Daniel Frawley sentencing delayed.

 “Ex-Rezko partner’s sentencing delayed”

“After this story was published Monday morning, U.S. District Judge Ronald A. Guzman canceled Daniel T. Frawley’s sentencing hearing, which had been scheduled for Tuesday. Court records did not indicate why Guzman did this. Frawley’s sentencing had not been re-scheduled.

Daniel T. Frawley once teamed with Tony Rezko — the political fixer who’s now in jail — in what turned out to be a doomed effort to open a training school for Iraqi security forces in western Illinois. Now, Frawley faces a federal prison stretch of his own.

On Tuesday, the 60-year-old onetime Chicago cop is set to appear before a federal judge for sentencing after pleading guilty in February in a $4.4 million bank fraud.

The scheme appears to have no connection to Rezko, the Wilmette businessman who was once a prolific campaign fund-raiser for politicians including the current president, Barack Obama, and the recently convicted former governor, Rod Blagojevich.

Still, federal prosecutors are seeking a reduced sentence for Frawley — of a year and a half in prison, rather than the 35 years he could face — apparently because Frawley has been secretly cooperating since at least 2006 in their investigation of Rezko, who was found guilty in June 2008 of having used his clout with the Blagojevich administration to enrich himself and his business associates.

Details about Frawley’s cooperation with the U.S. attorney’s office, the FBI and the Illinois attorney general’s office can be gleaned from a 65-page court deposition he gave seven months ago in a legal-malpractice lawsuit that he filed against his former longtime lawyer, George Weaver. In the lawsuit, Frawley accuses Weaver of having overbilled him and telling him to “withhold certain information from the government” when he was cooperating with authorities.

That sworn statement, given Dec. 1, 2010, is posted at suntimes.com/news/watchdogs. In it, Frawley talks about three meetings he’s had with law enforcement authorities since 2006. The deposition outlines how he secretly recorded Rezko, and it raises a new and unsubstantiated question about Rezko’s once-close relationship with Obama — an issue that dogged the then-U.S. senator during his presidential campaign four years ago.

Frawley says in the deposition that on March 13, 2006, he was in the Dirksen Federal Building at 219 S. Dearborn, making a phone call to Rezko’s cell phone and secretly recording him when attorney Weaver walked in and interrupted him.

Also in the room at the time, according to Frawley, were: Assistant U.S. Attorney Jacqueline Stern; James “Sam” Dorger Jr., of the Illinois attorney general’s office’s public-integrity unit; an “FBI agent whose name I do not recall”; and Thomas Durkin, a criminal attorney also representing Frawley.

“I was on the phone, making a phone call to Tony Rezko,” Frawley says, according to the transcript. “I had a luncheon engagement with him. George was outside of the room where I was making the telephone call, and the purpose of the call was for me to keep my luncheon engagement with Tony Rezko and to go over and to record Tony Rezko.

“George saw and heard me on the phone, came running in and went like this [demonstrating]: Cut it,” drawing his hand across his throat.

Later in the deposition, Weaver’s lawyer, Daniel F. Konicek, asks Frawley about what specific information Weaver is supposed to have told Frawley to withhold from federal authorities.

“I’m assuming the information is about the payments made by Rezko to Obama, so we know we’re talking about the right conversation, right?” Konicek asks Frawley.

Frawley doesn’t answer. So Konicek presses him: “Am I correct it was about Obama being paid by Rezko?”

Frawley replies: “I’m not answering that question, based upon my attorney’s instructions.”

Nobody directly involved with the deposition — including Frawley and his lawyers, Weaver and his lawyers, and the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office — would comment.

Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for Obama’s presidential campaign, called Konicek’s suggestion that Rezko might have made any cash payments to Obama “utter nonsense.”

Besides the Rezko-Obama issue, Konicek also asks Frawley during the deposition, without any explanation, about “the $1.5 million from Rezko.”

One of Frawley’s lawyers objects to the question, and there’s no explanation about what Konicek is talking about.

At Rezko’s trial in 2008, Rezko’s lawyers disclosed in a court filing that federal authorities had accused Rezko of paying a $1.5 million bribe to obtain the security-training contract from the Iraqi government. Rezko’s lawyers then called that allegation completely false. Prosecutors have declined to comment.”

 http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/6394342-452/ex-rezko-partner-being-sentenced-tuesday.html

Tony Rezko’s $50 million Iraq deal  (reprinted from August 7, 2007)
“Two years ago, Iraq’s Ministry of Electricity gave a $50 million contract to a start-up security company owned by now-indicted businessman Tony Rezko and a onetime Chicago cop with a checkered financial past. Within a month, an Iraqi leadership change left the deal in limbo.

Now the company, Companion Security, is working to revive its contract to train Iraqi power-plant guards in the United States.

Companion found support last summer from Gov. Blagojevich, whose staff offered to let the company lease a military facility in western Illinois. Since then, Companion has been lobbying officials from Washington to Baghdad about its Iraqi deal, according to documents obtained by the Chicago Sun-Times.

Blagojevich’s offer to assist Companion came as a federal investigation into Rezko’s state-government dealings was heating up. A former top fund-raiser for the governor and other politicians, Rezko was indicted on corruption charges in October — four months after Blagojevich’s homeland security chief wrote a letter inviting Companion to train the guards at the Savanna Army Depot.

The governor’s spokeswoman said state officials didn’t know Rezko had ties to Companion until the Sun-Times began asking questions. Blagojevich and his staff also didn’t know that Companion’s chief executive, former cop Daniel T. Frawley, had a history of financial problems, she said.

It’s unclear if Frawley and Rezko remain partners. They declined to comment.

After the state found a proposed training site, Frawley went to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) last August.

Obama’s staff declined to help.

“The Senate staff had two meetings, one conference call, and sporadically e-mailed with representatives of Companion Security about their request for Sen. Obama to write a letter introducing the company to senior officials in the Iraqi government,” Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt said. “That is not the kind of action Sen. Obama usually takes for individual companies, and our staff concluded on that basis to decline the requested assistance.”

LaBolt said Obama’s staff was unaware Companion had any ties to Rezko, who has raised campaign donations for Obama.

Companion beefed up its lobbying efforts in March, hiring a Washington attorney who has contacted the U.S. State and Commerce departments. Frawley wants U.S. officials to persuade the Iraqi government to honor the contract he signed on April 18, 2005, when Aiham Alsammarae, another friend of Rezko’s, ran Iraq’s electricity agency.”

“As Frawley sought to revive the contract in spring 2006, Blagojevich’s chief of staff, John Harris, directed the state’s homeland security adviser, Jill Morgenthaler, to find “a military site for the training of Iraqi police forces,” Morgenthaler wrote in an April 26, 2006, e-mail. She wrote the letter in June 2006 offering the Savanna site.

Two months later, Frawley sought help from Obama, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who is now running for president. Frawley met with Seamus Ahern, who runs Obama’s Moline office. Frawley and Ahern discussed the proposal over a period of about six months.

Obama and Blagojevich viewed Frawley’s efforts as a chance to create jobs in the Quad Cities area.”

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/6452990-418/tony-rezkos-50-million-iraq-deal.html

We have a corrupt US Justice Department.

Daniel Frawley is scheduled for sentencing, Monday, November 21, 2011. Frawley sentencing should be delayed.

I would like to hear more about the “payments made by Rezko to Obama” from the Frawley deposition.

The FDIC lawsuit against Mutual Bank and it’s officers also brings the ghost of Christmas past to Obama again.

Where is the House Judiciary Committtee?

There have been questions about the White House Insider report from Ulsterman as being real. Well, he was spot on about Companion Security and bank fraud in March of 2011.

42 Comments

Posted in Attorneys, Barack Obama, Blagojevich, Chicago, Chicago SunTimes, Citizen News, Citizens for the truth about Obama, CitizenWells, corruption, Crime, FBI, Federal Court, fraud, Illinois, Judges, Justice, News, Obama, Obama indictment, Obama lies, Obama Nation, Pay to play politics, Rezko, Stuart Levine, The Case Against Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, US Department of Justice, Washington DC, white house

Tagged , , ,