Tag Archives: 2008

Obama indictment, Obama should be arrested, Patrick Fitzgerald, Blagojevich, December 18, 2008, Obama corrupt, Obama ties to Rezko, Ali Ata, Joseph Cari, Chicago corruption, Evelyn Pringle, Operation Board Games, Chicago Tribune, Obama must be indicted

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 9

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months, perhaps we
should look to the Declaration of Independence or Thomas Jefferson,
for our next strategy.

The last article in this series, part 8, presented an article written by a Democrat
attorney who had formerly been a prosecutor. That article was written on February 6,
2008. Much of the information for this article comes from articles written by
Journalist Evelyn Pringle and Tony Rezko trial transcripts in March and April of
2008.

The Chicago Tribune has an article dated December 18, 2008 that reveals the difficulty
in impeachment proceedings against Governor Rod Blagojevich due to the ongoing
investigation by Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
“Ill. impeachment drive is slowed
By CHRISTOPHER WILLS | Associated Press Writer
5:44 PM CST, December 18, 2008
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – Illinois lawmakers could be forced to build their impeachment case against Gov. Rod Blagojevich on a raft of relatively small grievances, rather than the blockbuster Senate-seat-for-sale allegations, for fear of  undermining federal prosecutors’ criminal investigation.

Members of the state House impeachment committee said Thursday they will do nothing that would interfere with the investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. If Fitzgerald asks lawmakers not to interview certain witnesses, they will abide by that, they said.”

“The impeachment committee sent Fitzgerald a letter Thursday formally asking for information about people mentioned by pseudonyms in the criminal complaint, and requesting his guidance on who can be called to testify. Fitzgerald refused to comment.”

“Committee members said the criminal charges against Blagojevich will still play a part in the impeachment proceedings. If nothing else, lawmakers will be able to use the 76-page federal criminal complaint, which includes sworn statements from the FBI and damning excerpts from the governor’s wiretapped conversations.

“I think everything’s fair game,” said Rep. Chapin Rose, a Republican.”

“”We’ve got plenty of evidence out there of questionable activity on the part of the governor,” she said. The governor was arrested on charges that he schemed to see President-elect Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat for campaign cash or a plum job for himself. He was also accused of trying to strong-arm the Chicago Tribune into firing editorial writers who criticized him, and pressuring a hospital executive for campaign donations.”

“Aside from the federal charges, lawmakers have mentioned several issues that could be part of an impeachment case:

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

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

–A legislative panel turned down Blagojevich’s request to expand government health programs, but Blagojevich ignored the decision and went forward with the expansion.

–Blagojevich promised $1 million to a historic church destroyed by fire, but the money somehow ended up at a school run by a former felon. Blagojevich pardoned the felon to make her eligible to collect the grant.”

Read more here: 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-illinoisgovernor,0,7727696.story

What is significant about this story?

  • The Chicago Tribune provided transcripts and additional information
    on the Rezko trial.
  • Despite coverage of the Rezko trial and Obama’s ties to corruption,
    the Tribune endorsed Obama.
  • In the article above, Ali Ata and Joseph Cari connections to Blagojevich
    were listed as issues that could be used to impeach Blagojevich.
  • After you read the information below, ask why the Tribune and Fitzgerald
    should not ask for Obama’s indictment.

Pringle: Curtain Time for Obama — Part 1

By Evelyn Pringle, an investigative journalist

Obama’s ties to Ali Ata

“The morning after the prosecution announced that Loren would testify, Hamilton dropped another bombshell by informing the judge that Jordanian-native and co-schemer, Ali Ata, the former head of the Illinois Finance Authority, had pled guilty and entered into a plea agreement and he would testify that he received the same information in 2004.”

“Maloof is one of the donors used to funnel two $10,000 contributions to Obama through bank accounts from Rezko‘s pizza businesses from the pension fund kickback. An exhibit produced for the jury shows Maloof also made a $10,000 contribution to Blagojevich.”

“As predicted, on May 1, 2008, Ata testified that he was assured there was a plan in place to remove Fitzgerald after Bush was reelected in 2004. “Mr. Rezko informed me that they had just finished meeting with Mr. Kjellander and that there will be a change in U.S. attorney’s office come the new administration,” he said.”

“Ata told the jury he delivered one $25,000 contribution to Blagojevich at Rezko’s office in the latter part of 2002, and the three men discussed the prospects of Ata getting an appointment in the administration. He said people at the office that day included Blagojevich’s campaign chief and later chief of staff, Lon Monk, Christopher Kelly, and state Representative Jay Hoffman.”

““The way Ali Ata described it, the waiting room in the North Side office of Antoin “Tony” Rezko seemed as busy as an airport terminal,” the Tribune noted on May 1, 2008.

Ata brought another $25,000 check to a fundraiser on July 25, 2003, and he was appointed to lead the Finance Authority.

Ata made a $5,000 donation to Obama less than a month earlier on June 30, 2003. Ata is also an investor in Riverside Park. Almost without fail, the people identified in the Board Games cases as investors in Riverside Park contributed to Obama’s US senate campaign.”

Pringle: Curtain Time for Obama — Part 2 (Planning Board Scheme)

By Evelyn Pringle, an investigative journalist

Obama’s ties to Joseph Cari, Michelle Obama’s salary nearly triples

“At the time, Fitzgerald would not say whether anyone in Blagojevich’s office had been questioned or who else was tied to the scheme. But the Times quoted FBI Agent, Robert Grant, as saying: “Stay tuned; there will be more charges in the future.””

“This article noted that Kiferbaum was already cooperating. Five days later, the Times reported Rezko “had a hand in staffing decisions at the scandal-tainted Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.”

On May 20, 2005, the Times said, “Two Rezko associates gave Blagojevich $25,000 each just days after the governor named them to a state panel.”

However, the reporters either failed to notice, or failed to mention, that panel member Malek gave $10,000 to Obama on June 30, 2003.

Less than 3 months before Obama bought 10-feet of the lot, on October 31, 2005, the Times reported: “Investigations of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board and state Teachers’ Retirement System have yielded federal charges against six people.”

The article also noted that, “in a guilty plea … Joseph Cari alleged he had been told by a now-indicted former pension board member that Blagojevich and two top fund-raisers, Antoin “Tony” Rezko and Christopher G. Kelly, schemed to award pension business to consultants, lawyers and investment firms who donated to Blagojevich.”

Cari donated $1,335 to Obama’s campaign and gave $10,000 to Blagojevich. During the trial, Cari testified that Blagojevich, Rezko and Kelly tried to convince him to take over the national fundraising campaign for Blagojevich’s presidential bid.

Obama’s senate finance committee during Planning Board scheme

In his interview with the Tribune on March 14, Obama said Rezko “was a part of our finance committee and was listed as part of our finance committee.”

In 2003 and 2004, his finance committee raised the money as the Planning Board scheme was set up and the scandal unraveled. Yet Obama told the Tribune in regard to Rezko, “at that time, there were no indications that he was involved in anything inappropriate.”

Apparently, Obama expects the public to believe that nobody on this committee bothered to tell him he received a single contribution of $10,000, and the money came from a person he just recommended for the Board.” 

Valerie Jarrett and Michelle Obama’s salary almost triples

“Obama’s introduction into the “Combine” came when his wife Michelle was hired by Jarrett in the early 1990s, and served as Jarrett’s assistant in Daley’s office and followed her to the Department of Planning and Development.

Jarrett was appointed chairman of the University of Chicago Medical Center Board in June 2006. She was also made chairman of a newly created Executive Committee of that Board, according to a June 13, 2006 University announcement. In addition, Jarrett was named vice-chair of the University’s Board of Trustees, the announcement states.

Michelle landed a high paying job at the University of Chicago Hospitals. Two months after Obama became a US senator, she was appointed vice president for community and external affairs. Tax returns show the promotion nearly tripled her pay to $317,000 in 2005, from $122,000 in 2004.”

We will return to Valerie Jarrett in an upcoming article

Pringle Cliff Notes: Curtain Time for Barack Obama – Part 4 (Mansion Deal)

By Evelyn Pringle, an investigative journalist

Obama’s ties to Ali Ata, Auchi and shady mansion purchase
“Obama told the Tribune on November 1, 2006, that the lot next door had to be sold separately because, “It was already a stretch to buy the house.” However, affidavits filed in the Rezko case in November 2006, show the Rezkos had no money. Rita’s only income was a $37,000-a-year job when she paid $125,000 in cash and obtained a half a million dollar mortgage at the Mutual Bank to buy the $625,000 lot.

“When documents unsealed in the case revealed a $3.5 million loan made to Rezko a month before the real estate deal, the money transfer raised “the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago,” a February 26, 2008 report by James Bone and Dominic Kennedy in the Times of London noted.”
“Auchi’a firm, General Mediterranean Holding, owns 50% of AR Pizza and Rezko owns 50%. Auchi’’s lawyer told the Times of London the $3.5 million loan to Rezko in May 2005 was to “assist the financial position” of AR Pizza.”

 

“The corruption in this case involves the Illinois Finance Authority. The IFA was established, “to support the Governor of Illinois’ economic development agenda,” and “IFA approves about $3 billion in project financing each year,” according to its web site.

Co-schemer Ali Ata was appointed to lead the IFA. He made a $5,000 donation to Obama on June 30, 2003.”
“Talat Othman was appointed to the IFA Board, and he donated $1,000 to Obama on June 30, 2003.

David Gustman was made chairman, and his wife, Lisa, also gave Obama $1,000 on June 30.

Co-schemer Abdelhamid Chaib is the former the director of Rezko Concessions. Chaib’s wife was appointed to the

Department of Employment Security Review Board. Obama received $5,000 from Chaib on June 30, 2003.”

 

“As part of the scheme, Ata signed a letter on Finance Authority letterhead that falsely made it appear that Dr Paul Ray had applied for financing with the IFA for acquisition of the pizza restaurants. The letter stated that Ray’s financing would be recommended for approval by the IFA Board on March 15, 2004, and that the IFA would guarantee 50% of the total $16 million.”
“But Ata said Rezko scoffed at the concerns. “He said as far as the publicity, he will get the governor’s office to approve the transaction, and as far as the board,” Ata told the jury, Rezko said, “We put them there.”””
“”Ata is a former president of the Chicago Chapter of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. He represents “a deeper corruption” in the Arab American community, “an aspect of the story that has not received much attention,” according to a May 2, 2008 report by Ray Hanania in the Southwest News-Herald.”
“In his report, Hanania explains how Ata and others would help organize political dinners attended by Arab Americans from the suburbs at which politicians where “honored.”

“These Arab community “leaders,” he says, “would tell the community that if they bought tickets to their “candidate’s nights,” their organization fundraisers or donated through them to local politicians, these politicians would respond by giving the Arab American community empowerment.”

“In truth,” Hanania says, “these political leaders lied.”

“They did get jobs, contracts and clout,” he notes, “but the people who benefited were not members of the community but rather the relatives, children, friends and business associates of these leaders.”””

Pringle: Barack Obama — Operation Board Games For Slumlords

By Evelyn Pringle, an investigative journalist

More Obama ties to Ata and slumlords

“”The Illinois Finance Authority was established by Blagojevich in 2004. Its “role is to support the Governor of Illinois’ economic development agenda,” and “IFA approves about $3 billion in project financing each year,” according to the its site.

Rezko business associate, Ali Ata, was appointed to head the Finance Authority. He is now under indictment in a separate criminal case in which Rezko is also charged. On June 30, 2003, Ata contributed $5,000 to Obama’s US senate campaign.

On June 13, 2007, the Sun-Times reported that as a state senator, “Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko’s successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens.”

“I am writing in support of the New Kenwood LLC’s proposal to build a ninety-seven unit apartment building at 48th and Cottage Grove for senior citizens,” Obama wrote in October 28, 1998 letters to both city and state housing officials. “This project will provide much needed housing for Fourth Ward citizens.””
“In the Times, Novak reported that the deal included $855,000 in development fees for Rezko and Davis, while Obama was still working at the Davis law firm, for a bid on a project that was “four blocks outside Obama’s state Senate district.””

 Great summary of Chicago corruption and Operation Board Games

 Read the Evelyn Pringle series on Obama and Operation Board Games

Obvious conclusion:

Obama must be indicted

Obama arrested next?, Obama indictment?, Patrick Fitzgerald, December 18, 2008, Rezko connections, Pay for Play, FBI, Rezko Blagojevich investigations, Lobbyists, Poker, Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland, Rezko deals slums

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 8

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

 

Many great writers such as Evelyn Pringle and many bloggers and
websites have attempted to reveal the truth about Barack Obama by
early 2008 and in some cases past years. Very little coverage about Obama
has made it to the MSM except for the articles in the Chicago Tribune,
Sun-Times and a few other papers. Fox News has been the only major
TV outlet to attempt to uncover the real Obama. Barack Obama has long
time ties to crime and corruption in Chicago and Illinois. His guilt
and ties are every bit as strong as recently arrested Rod Blagojevich.

The Citizen Wells blog will be revisiting older news stories about Obama
and presenting them in the new light of Chicago corruption that is before
the public as a result of the Tony Rezko trial and Blagojevich
investigation and prosecution. After reading a few of the articles the
following will be clear.

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months, perhaps we
should look to the Declaration of Independence or Thomas Jefferson,
for our next strategy.

 
The following is from an article written by looseheadprop on February 6,
2008. As you read the article, consider this biographical description
provided by looseheadprop ( a Democrat ):

“About Me:
In rugby, the loosheadprop is the player in the front row of the scrum, who has the ability to collapse the scrum, pretty much at will and without the referee knowing who did it. While this can give the LHP’s team a great tactical advantage, it also exposes scrum players from both teams to the dangers of catastrophic spinal cord injury. Consequently, playing this position makes you understand your responsibility to put doing the right thing ahead of winning, and to think beyond your own wants and desires. It also makes you very law and order oriented. I am a former federal prosecutor who also served at other levels of government, both in civil and criminal law, including as Counsel to an Inspector General. These days, I’m a a soccer mom and a partner in a small law practice with a buddy of mine from the US Attorney’s Office.”

Article

“I have long been an admirer of Ms. Kennedy’s and I think she has point. Problem is, Obama has a Tony Rezko problem. Actually a whole bunch of Tony Rezko problems. And a few other problems here and there which do not say very good things about his character or his sense of ethics or his ability to spot the appearance of impropriety. I include on that list the recent revelations about the legislation which he claims to have “passed” relating to leakage of nuclear material into drinking water.

REZKO

When Obama became president of the Harvard Law Review, Rezko interviewed him for a job working for one of Rezko’s companies. Obama turned down the job, but instead accepted more indirect employment at the law firm representing a series of Rezko’s not-for-profit partners in the series of transactions to build and rehab low income housing that are now the subject of federal indictment in Chicago which US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald described as “pay to play on steroids.”

Obama was an attorney with a small Chicago law firm — Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland — that helped Rezmar get more than $43 million in government funding to rehab 15 of their 30 apartment buildings for the poor.

Resko got millions of dollars to build and rehab low income housing and according to the government, embezzled the money. The people in those houses had no heat, no water. They lived in squalor–many in Obama’s State senate district. You could assume constituent complaints would have come in and Obama’s law firm did the legal work for those government contracts and grants. Yet he denies knowing about it.”

“Barack Obama, for his part, went to Rezko for “advice” about how to buy a house he cannot afford and “poof” Rezko’s wife pays full price for a portion of the property and Obama gets a discount on the house. A while later, he bought back 1/6 of the lot from her for 1/6 of the price she paid for it. How is that different from an interest free loan equal to the amount paid for that 1/6 of the lot? According to MyDD, Obama pays for the landscaping of the Rezko lot and may have been using it to park his cars because his neighborhood does not allow on street parking, in which case how is this different from rent free occupancy of the land?”

“One of the things that came out about Abramoff et al. was that they would invite Congress critters to play poker and wine and dine in a hotel suite that the lobbyist paid for, and then let them win. It was a way of passing money to them without leaving a paper trail. The Chicago events were hosted at the HQ of a lobbying organization, I think it’s fair to assume that the cocktails and Cohibas were provided by the hosts and the article makes a point of saying that he was a stingy better and a cautious player–directly suggesting that he seldom lost. And what kind of message are you sending joking about the game being a “Committee Meeting”?

One of the reasons public corruption cases, at least the bribery part, are often so hard to prove is that the participants go to great lengths to have a “beard” for the transactions. Paying for vacations, losing at poker, doing repairs on the elected’s house without any invoices, throwing business to the elected’s (or their relative’s) law firms or companies, regularly taking the elected out for very expensive meals is known as soft bribery. In the Bess Meyerson case, which the government lost, the bribe was a job for the judge’s otherwise unemployable daughter.

Unless someone flips and gives you testimony, or unless, as in Operation Greylord, you have audio or video tapes, it’s really really hard to get a conviction because there usually is not much of a paper trail. Since there wouldn’t even be hotel records for the Chicago games, they are particulary fuzzy.”

“As a state senator, Barack Obama wrote letters to city and state officials supporting his political patron Tony Rezko’s successful bid to get more than $14 million from taxpayers to build apartments for senior citizens.

In that deal Rezko paid only $1 for the land. The rest of the deal, which included an $800,000 development fee paid to Rezko’s company, was entirely financed by public money.”

“Was it simply enough that Obama didn’t make waves about the lack of heat and deplorable conditions in the Rezko buildings situated within Obama’s state senate district? I don’t know. But I was struck by a comment Obama made in the debate on of the debates to the effect of “you know how Illinois politics are” or some such. Followed later on by

Nobody’s hands are perfectly clean in politics. That is true. I mean, there a distinction, though, between not taking PAC and federal lobbyist money and having that as a major way of driving your campaign and having some ancillary involvement.”

Comments below the article

“looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 4:57 pm 40
In response to Siun @ 13
Sorry Siun, maybe I just assumed eveybody would get the Abramoff reference. It’s not a leap at all.

Abramoff as you may recall did his bribery often in subtle ways, He took his “friends” on all expense paid luxury vacations/ he took his “golfing buddies” to play at St. Andrews, on him, er, his clients

He and other lobbyists would rent out hotel suites and with free flowing liquor and food, “lose” at poker to people from Capitol Hill.

The “Committee Meetings” seem even more brazen in that they took place in the actual building of a lobbying organization and because of the name.”
“looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 5:06 pm 62
In response to Siun @ 18
As much as the house deal troubles me-and folks you really DO want to click through to the MyDD piece. It’s obvious a lot of research hours went into it–the “committee Meetings” disturb me even more.

Rezko is just one bad guy. The Committee Meeting has all sorts of potenial. It’s an instinctive reaction, not per se based on fact. But if I were still a public corruption investigator I would want to know a lot more about those poker games.”

“looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 5:21 pm 87
In response to martha @ 51
Yes, the house deal looks bad, but the rest is quite circumstantial. Friendship with slumlord = crook.

I know slumlords. Am I a crook?

I never said friendship with a slumlord = crook. Don’t put a strawman argument in my mouth. I said that Obama is telling us to ignore the fact that he doesn’t have much of record to run on or much experience and instead to trust in his character.

That was the thrust of Caroline Kennedy’s argument on his behalf, ignore the other stuff and concentrate on his judgement and character.

Opposing the war and opposing land mines are examples of good judgement on his part.

Voting to fund the war, voting present during votes relating to a woman’s right to choose, hanging out at poker games in a lobbyist’s stronghold while imbibing the lobbyists’ liquor and cigars, APPROACHING a guy already publicly known to be under federal investigation for fraud and asking that guy for help in buying a house you cannot afford–and then accepting the equivalent of both an interest free loan and a rent free use of the the property the guy bought to help you out with your PERSONAL FINANCIAL transaction?

Examples of bad judgment and lack of character”

” looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 5:38 pm 123
In response to JoeBuck @ 73
I was trying to rebut paragraph by paragraph but the site keeps hanging up for me. And I am falling WAYY behind in reading the subsequent comments.
I stand behind my belief that someone as bright as Obama HAD TO KNOW how bad those poker games looked. There is a phrase used in government ethics (and until recently I sat as a voting member on a government ethics commsion) there is an actual legal standard called

“Appearance of impropriety”

The mere fact of these games, and their cheeky nickname “committee meetings” (committe of what? to do what?) certainly meets that standard.”

“looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 5:44 pm 137
In response to Scarecrow @ 92
Actually all I am trying to do, is get this stuff out now, on Dem terms.

Christy mentioned it above, it is trial tactics 101: Whatever problems your witness has, the jury better hear it from your side before the other side can play gotcha.

Obama would be a fool to think that the Rovians won’t go after him with this yet he has done virtually nothing to innoculate against it”
“looseheadprop February 6th, 2008 at 6:14 pm 187
In response to martha @ 141
If you mean why did Obama go to work for a firm that he was clearly overqualified for? This firm has had a spotty ethical history (one of the law firm’s partners left to become a partner of Rezko’s)

It’s not like he was doing something altruistic by joining this firm. It’s not like he went to work for the SCLU or Legal Aid.

I don’t think it equates with your not-for-profit service. BTW, Brava”

“looseheadprop February 7th, 2008 at 4:07 am 290
In response to Siun @ 214
The partner began working in Land develpoment with Rezko while the firm was still reprsenting the not for profits in the land deals –a clear conflict of interest, which is why the partner had to leave.

That kind of conlfict of interst is a violation of legal ethics which in most states (and I believe in Illinois) is written in law. So yeah, that’s an example of spotty ethical history”

“looseheadprop February 7th, 2008 at 8:09 am 326
In response to CasualObserver @ 300
LHP, by the quote above, I take it that you wrote this piece to actually protect Obama in a sense? In other words, knowing how rough things will get, you want to air this out now.

And not the alternative context, which would be that you support Hillary Clinton, and have written this piece in order to assist her campaign

I am not trying to protect Obama or Hillary per se. I am trying to prevent the election of a GOP candidate in November”

“looseheadprop February 7th, 2008 at 10:24 am 362
In response to Flavius @ 353
Thanks. I’m not sure why you think the voting “present” isn’t an example of not great character. It’s not henious, but it’s not admirable either.

The law firm’s actions, I do find very troubling. And I’m not sure we know the whole story about the firm and these not for profits, which apparently didn’t exist until Obama incorporated them. Where they incorporated soley to partner up with Rezko? And if they were actual functioning independant groups, how is it that they all coincidently went to the same law firm?

And yes, a partenr becoming involved with Rezko’s underlying business while still at the firm, is a clear conflict of interest.

So, I think sleazy –which does not = violation of law, but does connote suspect practices is prabably the right word”

Read more here:

http://firedoglake.com/2008/02/06/nobodys-hands-are-perfectly-clean-in-politics/

Consider the following:

Obama’s role in rigging the IL Health Board

Barack Obama must prove eligibility or step down, Obama not eligible, December 18, 2008, Citizen Wells request to Obama, Greatest Generation sacrifices, Obama me generation, Patrick Fitzgerald investigations, Will Obama be indicted?

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 7

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

Barack Obama

Prove you are eligible

or

Step down

 

I have the utmost respect for the “Greatest Generation.” This is
the generation that weathered the Great Depression, saved the
world in World War II and set a standard of self discipline and
sacrifice that is a model for generations to come. John McCain
comes from a long history of family sacrifice for country. He
serves as a bridge from the “Greatest Generation” to the baby
boomers and subsequent generations. Contrast these models of
self sacrifice and giving to others with Barack Obama and his
core support, the “me” generation. With Obama and much of his
support, it is all about me.

I read the obituaries each morning for two reasons. One to see
if anyone I know or a family member of theirs is listed. The other
reason is to read the short accounts of servicemen in World War II.
There were two side by side this morning that caught my attention.
One had been in the Marines in the South Pacific and the other was
in the Army Infantry and fought in the Battle of the Bulge. Those
two men, who at a young age were thrust into a hell on earth,
and along with others of their generation, made it possible for us
to have an election this year. We came closer to Nazi domination
than most people realize.

Fast forward over sixty years to the 2008 election year. We have a
candidate, Barack Obama, that has consistently only looked out for
himself at the expense of others. This includes community organizing
that was just a front for political agendas. Consider these quotes
from a report to Catholic Bishops:

“To be eligible to receive CHD funds, a program must be run by the poor, benefit the poor, and change social structures that harm the poor.” However, in light of the politically oriented thrust of ACORN’s activities, it is fair to ask whether the CHD subsidies to ACORN are advisable and commensurate with the purposes of CHD.”

“This commentary does not oppose CHD funding of genuine, grassroots community organizations, run and supported by individual members of a parish or diocese. There is potential value and virtue in the collective voice. However, when the CHD funds Alinsky-style, church-based community organizations as in the best interest of the poor and supports organizations which advance other agendas, it divests the poor of their right to an authentic voice. This process tends to treat the poor as exploited units of human capital, rather than as human beings created in the dignity of God’s image.”

What Acorn and Community Organizers are really about

Think Obama has been looking out for you?

Barack Obama has taken advantage of all that this country has to
offer including education. What has he given in return? A history
of posturing himself for the presidency and association with crime
and corruption to further his career. Obama appeals to people who
are just like him, classic takers, not givers. Obama promises free
college and tax breaks for almost everyone knowing full well he can
not come through with those promises and that they are not good for
the country. Why does he promise all those things? Because it is
all about getting elected. Me me me.

The soldiers returning from World II received college educations. They
paid for their educations with blood and guts and the greatest sacrifices.

Barack Obama, the Patrick Fitzgerald investigations are closing in
on you. You will be required to prove your eligibility to be
president sooner or later.

 

Barack Obama, for once in your life, do something for the people of this
country.

Prove you are eligible to be president or step down.

 

Tony Rezko sentencing delayed, Judge St. Eve delays again, December 16, 2008, Rezko Blagojevich and Obama linked, Rezko contributions to Obama, Obama indictment next?

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 6

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

 

The Chicago Tribune, in an article dated December 16, 2008,
has revealed that the sentencing of Tony rezko has been
delayed again. Apparently Rezko has been talking and revealing
corruption links to Blagovich and other lawmakers. Obama’s name
was mentioned during the Rezko trial and Patrick Fitzgerald has
recently been investigating a real estate deal between Rezko
and Obama. Here is an exerpt from the Tribune article:

 

“Fundraiser Rezko’s sentencing delayed _ could add to Illinois Gov. Blagojevich’s problems
By MIKE ROBINSON | Associated Press Writer
12:26 PM CST, December 16, 2008
CHICAGO (AP) — Jailed political fundraiser Tony Rezko’s sentencing for corruption was delayed indefinitely Tuesday, most likely adding to the legal problems of embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

The sentencing date of Jan. 6 was erased by U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve. The action appeared to signal that Rezko’s on-again, off-again relationship with the federal prosecutors investigating Illinois government was on again.

Both federal spokesman Randall Samborn and Rezko’s chief defense counsel, Joseph Duffy, declined to comment after the hearing. Duffy responded to a blizzard of questions by saying, “Merry Christmas, everybody.”

Rezko was a major adviser to Blagojevich and raised more than $1 million for his campaign fund. He started talking to federal prosecutors last summer, a few weeks after he was convicted of fraud, money laundering and bribery-related counts in June.

 

Then he stopped talking and demanded to be sentenced as soon as possible. Now that January date is canceled.”
“News stories about Rezko’s trial had put a spotlight on then-candidate Obama, who tried to distance himself from Rezko and sent $150,000 in Rezko-related contributions to charity. All of those contributions were to Obama’s state legislative and U.S. House and Senate campaigns — not his presidential race. Obama also had to answer questions about an unrelated 2006 real estate deal with Rezko that Obama now calls a mistake.”

Read more here:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-illinois-governor-fundraiser-trial,0,6039019.story

Patrick Fitzgerald investigation of Obama, Rezko land deal

Obama next?, Obama to be indicted?, Patrick Fitzgerald, December 15, 2008, Rezko kickback, Rezko real estate deal, Pay for Play, Kenneth J. Conner fired by bank, FBI, Land appraisals, Jerome Corsi article

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 5

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

 

fitzgerald
Just as Citizen Wells has predicted, Patrick Fitzgerald, the
federal prosecutor that led the investigation that indicted
Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine, Dr. Robert Weinstein and recently
arrested Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, is on the trail
of Barack Obama. Obama has long time close ties to these chicago
and Illinois corruption figures and conspired with one or more
of them to rig the IL Health Planning Facilities Board when
Obama was a member of the IL senate.

Jerome corsi has written an article for World Net Daily, dated
December 15, 2008 that reveals Fitzgerald’s ongoing investigation
into Rezko ties and specifically Obama. Here are some exerpts:

“U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald
 
Since arresting Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has renewed interest in convicted fundraiser Tony Rezko’s part in the purchase of Barack Obama’s Chicago mansion, according to a former real estate analyst who says he was interviewed by the federal prosecutor in the past 10 days.

Kenneth J. Conner told WND he was interviewed by investigators from Fitzgerald’s office regarding the purchase of the Obama mansion and the adjacent vacant lot that Rezko’s wife, Rita, purchased simultaneously. As WND reported last week, Connor filed a civil complaint in October with the Illinois Circuit Court in Cook County alleging he was fired by Mutual Bank of Harvey, Ill., because he objected to land appraisals submitted on behalf of the Rezkos and the Obamas, with the complicity of the bank.

Connor previously confirmed to WND that he told the FBI, months ago, when he initially was fired, that the bank and the Rezkos were engaged in “fraud, bribes or kickbacks, use whatever term you want,” to benefit the Obamas.

Connor said his lawyer, Glenn R. Gaffney, also has been interviewed by the FBI about the Rezko-Obama deal within the past 10 days.

Connor has disclosed that during the initial investigation he met with two FBI agents for approximately an hour and a half to discuss the Rezko-Obama home purchase.

“The entire deal amounted to a $125,000 payoff from Tony Rezko to Barack Obama,” Conner previously told WND.

He explained: “If in fact the entire deal was a payoff from Tony Rezko to Barack Obama, a payoff or kickback, use whatever word you like, then for the deal to work, what had to happen was that Rezko had to over-pay for the vacant lot by as much as possible, or by the desired amount of the payoff, in any event.” ”

Read more here:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/

April 7, 2008 article on Rezko, Blagojevich Obama

Obama’s role in rigging the IL Board

2008 Election Certificate of Vote, Electoral College Electors, Minnesota Certificate, Secretary of State, US Constitution, Twelfth Amendment, Governor, Obama not eligible, Citizen Wells, Democratic Disaster, December 16, 2008, Al Franken, Norm Coleman controversy

“Ignorance is not bliss.”

“Knowledge is Power.”

Minnesota could soon be famous for another 2008 Election
controversy aside from the Al Franken, Norm Coleman
senate race controversy. The Certificate of Voters must
be signed and mailed to the US Senate. If Minnesota uses
the same Certificate that was used in 2004, they had better
rethink sending it in without complying with the reference
to the Twelfth Amendment to the US Constitution. There are
2 places in the Twelfth Amendment that refer to presidential
eligibility:

“as in the case of the death or other
constitutional disability of the President.”

“But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of
President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the
United States.”

Everyone involved in the presidential election has an obligation
to uphold the US Constitution. MN has taken it one step further
and explicitly included it in their certificate.

One might ask how MN Electoral College Electors would know this.
The Citizen Wells blog along with organizations like Democratic
Disaster and many other people have been notifying election
officials in all 50 states regarding the serious eligibility
issues surrounding Barack Obama and the duties of all responsible.
In addition there are many court cases in state courts as well
as before the US Supreme Court. So, ignorance of the facts or
duties will be no excuse. Check the Certificate for signatures.
Those signing the 2008 Certificate without ensuring they are
complying with the Twelfth Amendment, are most certainly
guilty of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” and certainly removal
from office.

California Certificate of Voters is questionable

Do we have any takers?

Anyone want to call the Governor or Secretary of State’s office in Minnesota?

Recall initiatives, impeachment, removal from office?

2004 MN Certificate of Vote

mncertofvote

2008 Election Certificate of Vote, Electoral College Electors, California example, Secretary of State, US Constitution, Governor, Alan Keyes, Lawsuit, Obama not eligible, Citizen Wells, Democratic Disaster, December 16, 2008

“Ignorance is not bliss.”

“Knowledge is Power.”

The Citizen Wells blog and many other citizens have been busy for months
informing state officers, election officials, Electoral College Electors
and judges of eligibility issues surrounding Barack Obama and reminding
those people of their duty under the US Constitution, federal and state
laws. Despite these warnings and reminders, the states have plodded along
based on tradition, ignorance and party politics. Numerous lawsuits in
state and federal courts as well as the US Supreme court should have served
as a huge warning that something was wrong. We need someone like Harry
Truman to remind everyone that “The buck stops here.”

The Electoral College met yesterday and the next step in the process is for
state officials to prepare a certificate of vote and send it to the US Senate
and other locations described below. This is a very important document and in
highest sense of the word a legal document. The format of the document is
left up to the states. Remember, all of those people involved in the election
process are sworn to uphold the US Constitution. However, some of the states
have wording in their documents as a reminder of the obligation to uphold
the various laws.

We will focus on California for multiple reasons.

The following is taken from the 2004 certificate of vote:

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

From the dictionary:

pursuant to

in conformance to or agreement with; “pursuant to our agreement”; “pursuant to the dictates of one’s conscience”  

Now consider the following:

Electoral College Questions and Answers

Citizen Wells letter to Electoral College Electors

The Alan Keyes lawsuit is still alive questioning the eligibility
of Barack Obama.

The CA Secretary of State was contacted by the Citizen Wells blog,
the Democratic Disaster organization and numerous other entities.

It is clear to even a casual observer that Barack Obama is not
eligible to be president and that Electors in CA and throughout
the nation, despite compelling evidence that Obama is not eligible,
plodded along and engaged in the worst kind of party politics, and
violated the US Constitution.

2004 CA Certificate of Vote

cacertofvote2004

Electoral College Vote and subsequent procedures:

4.   Hold the Meeting of Electors
On the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (December 15, 2008), the electors meet in their respective States. Federal law does not permit the States to choose an alternate date for the meeting of electors – it must be held on December 15, 2008. The State legislature may designate where in the State the meeting will take place, usually in the State capital. At this meeting, the electors cast their votes for President and Vice President.

If any electors are unable to carry out their duties on the day of the Electoral College meeting, the laws of each State would govern the method for filling vacancies. Any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of electors must be decided under State law at least six days prior to the meeting of the electors.

See Title 3, Section 6 of the U.S. Code
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law requiring electors to vote in accordance with the popular vote in their States. Some States have such requirements.

5.   Prepare the Certificate of Vote
Federal law does not govern the general appearance of the Certificate of Vote. The format is determined under the law or custom of the submitting State. The electors must execute six Certificates of Vote. Federal law requires that the Certificates be prepared and authenticated in the following manner:
The Certificates of Vote must contain two distinct lists, one for President and one for Vice President.
The Certificates must list all persons who received electoral votes for President and the number of electors who voted for each person.
The Certificates must list all persons who received votes for Vice President and the number of electors who voted for each person.
The Certificates do not contain the names of persons who did not receive electoral votes.
Each of the six Certificates of Vote must be signed by all of the electors.

One of the six Certificates of Ascertainment provided to the electors by the Governor must be attached to each of the six Certificates of Vote.

Finally, each of the six pairs of Certificates must be sealed and certified by the electors as containing the list of electoral votes of that State for President and Vice President.
6.   Distribute the Paired Certificates of Vote and Certificates of Ascertainment
The six pairs of Certificates must be sent to the designated Federal and State officials as follows:
One is sent by registered mail to:
The Honorable Richard B. Cheney
President of the United States Senate
The Capitol
Washington, DC 20510

Two are sent by registered mail to:
Allen Weinstein
Archivist of the United States
National Archives and Records Administration
c/o Office of the Federal Register (NF)
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001

Two are sent to:

The Secretary of State of each State.

One of these is held subject to the order of the President of the United States Senate or the Archivist of the United States in case the electoral votes fail to reach the Senate or the Archivist.
The other one is to be preserved by the Secretary of State for public inspection for one year.
One is sent to:

The Chief Judge of the Federal District Court located where the electors meet.

It is held subject to the order of the President of the United States Senate or the Archivist of the United States in case the electoral votes fail to reach the Senate or the Archivist.
The statutory deadline for the designated Federal and State officials to receive the electoral votes is December 24, 2008. Because of the very short time between the meetings of the electors in the States on December 15 and the December 24 statutory deadline, followed closely by the counting of electoral votes in Congress on January 6, 2009, it is imperative that the Certificates be mailed as soon as possible.

We strongly recommend that the sealed pairs of Certificates be taken to the Post Office on December 15, or no later than the morning of December 16, to minimize delays that could occur during the holiday mail season. Some States may find it useful to alert their local Postmaster to the extraordinarily important nature of the mailing. When the paired Certificates of Vote and Certificates of Ascertainment have been delivered to the designated Federal and State officials, the States’ Electoral College duties are complete.

Prior to the election this year, the Legal Staff of the Office of the Federal Register will telephone Secretaries of State and other election officials to establish contact with the States and assure the smooth operation of the Electoral College process.

Read more here:

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/state_responsibilities.html#vote

 

Illinois Electors, Electoral College votes, December 15, 2008, Cspan coverage, Chicago IL and Democrat party in IL are revolting, IL corruption

I just observed on of the most sickening spectacles of my life.
One of the great commenters on this blog, ms. helga, notified
me that the IL Electors voting was being covered live on Cspan.
The first Elector that I heard presenting her praise, Lauren Beth
Gash, nauseated me. She lavished such undue praise on Obama that
I stood their incredulous in disbelief. Another one spoke of
knowing Obama since he was from Illinois. Most Electors that I
observed said a few obligatory party line words. After about six
Electors, I could stomach no more. No wonder Chicago and Illinois
are such a cesspool of crime and corruption. Democratic Party
Politics in IL is void of integrity. Electors are putting party
politics above the US Constitution and the American People.
Is it any wonder that the Democrat Governor of IL, Rod Blagojevich,
has been arrested and urged to resign. Obama should be next.

If someone out there was able to stomach the entire debacle,
please let us know if all Electors followed the party dictate.

Perhaps there will be electors in other states that will put
country first. If not, let’s pursue some legal remedies to
begin the huge enema that needs to be given to this country.

Wrotnowski V Bysiewicz, US Supreme Court, December 15, 2008, Justices decide Cort Wrotnowski versus Connecticut Secretary of State Bysiewicz, Writ of Mandamus, Obama not eligible, Stay denied

The US Supreme Court today, Monday, December 15, 2008, the same day
that the Electoral College is meeting to vote for president and vice
president, has decided:

 

08A469

 

 

WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE

 

 

The application for stay and/or injunction addressed

 

 

to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.

 

 

 

Most of the Electors believe, falsely, that they have an overriding
obligation to vote base on political party dictates and/or state laws
dictating they must vote based on the popular vote. The Electors owe
allegiance only to the US Constitution and the American public.

Electoral College Questions and Answers

Citizen Wells letter to Electoral College Electors

This is the opinion of Citizen Wells and I will stand by the following:

The US Supreme Court, on multiple occasions, in regard to several
lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president, have not
addressed three distinct constitutional issues that need to either
be ruled on or clarified:

  • Obama’s eligibility to be president and the relevance of natural
    born citizen.
  • Clarification of state powers and duties to ensure that Electoral
    College Electors have a qualified candidate on the ballot to vote for.
  • Applicability of oaths taken to uphold and defend the Constitution
    to the election process. Marbury V Madison is clear on oaths. Why are
    the states ignoring this?

I respect the institution of the US Supreme Court. That respect does
not automatically flow to the individual Justices. Respect must be
earned. Every citizen of this country has a duty to uphold the US
Constitution. Supreme Court Justices have the highest duty to
uphold the US Constitution. They are not above the law. We will hold
them accountable.

Unless I read something soon that encourages me to believe that the
US Supreme Court is functioning as it should, I am compelled to
believe that some or all of the Supreme Court Justices are guilty of
dereliction of duty, if not “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

Here is the heart of the complaint

“HOLDING BY THE PLAINTIFF

 

Holding Regarding the Role of the State Supreme Court
 

The plaintiff asserts that Connecticut law is not explicit with respect to taking action against potential election fraud at the national level.  It neither authorizes nor prohibits.  In fact, it is silent on this important issue.  The only statutes providing direction are 9-323, and for Federal Election Disputes, sec. 10-13, 10-14, 10-15, and 10-17(a) (as found in  Connecticut Appellate Practice and Procedure, 3rd Edition, chapter titled:  Original Proceedings in the Supreme Court, pages 385-387.)

We do not have a federal ballot controlled by the federal government, we have Connecticut state election for electors who are pledged for a particular candidate which allows each state to determine how and in what manner they choose to project their power at the National Electoral College.

 
In the special case of individuals seeking the office of President of the United States, the US constitution prescribes a system of electors where citizens of the respective state have a state controlled election wherein electors representing the interest of the named individual on the state ballot are so elected as to represent the interests of the respective state at the Electoral College.
 

State law determines how the electors are determined and act. Since this is in actual fact a state election, our Secretary of State has prevue over certification of not just the counts of the ballots so cast for the named candidate for President, but also the veracity of the system which including publishing and promoting the ballot and for certifying or decertifying challenged candidates; in this case the electors who act as proxies for the candidate.
 

The plaintiff argues that the Connecticut constitution and statutes and enforcement should be consistent with the principles of the U.S. constitution.  When Connecticut law provides no guidance, then an electoral duty ascribed at the national level applies at the state level as well.  If there are national standards for preventing fraud in an election, then there need to be similar standards at the state level.  The state Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring that that Connecticut laws follows the U.S. Constitution.  In particular, Sec. 10-17(a) sets forth how the State Supreme Court can provide remedy.

 

Holding regarding Responsibility of the Secretary of State in National Elections
 

It is argued that the lack of language in the state law does not preclude the Secretary of State, as the Chief of Elections, from verifying national candidates for whom her constituents will vote especially so when allegations of blatant profound fraud is widely asserted.

 

She has threaded a path to inaction by her selective choice of words.  Hers is a “sin of omission” argument.  Estopple argument would say otherwise. Furthermore, without explicate legislative direction, there are still very clear “implied duties” that follow from Connecticut Statutes, Connecticut Constitution and  the U.S. Constitution that demand consideration and action from this independent branch of Government charged with action.

 

There are at least four statutes that set forth the duties of the Secretary of  State.  Plaintiff bolded passages in Sec. 9-3 for emphasis.

 

From:  Connecticut General Statutes

 

Sec. 3-77. General duties; salary. Office of Secretary full time.

…  provisions of section 11-4c. The Secretary may give certified copies of any entries in such records, files, books or other papers and of the files and records of said Superior Court and of the Supreme Court, remaining in the office, which copies shall be legal evidence. … The Secretary shall receive an annual salary of one hundred ten thousand dollars and shall devote full time to the duties of the office.

 

 Sec. 9-3. Secretary to be Commissioner of Elections. Presumption concerning rulings and opinions.

The Secretary of the State, by virtue of the office, shall be the Commissioner of Elections of the state, with such powers and duties relating to the conduct of elections as are prescribed by law and, unless otherwise provided by state statute, the secretary’s regulations, declaratory rulings, instructions and opinions, if in written form, shall be presumed as correctly interpreting and effectuating the administration of elections and primaries under this title, except for chapter 155, provided nothing in this section shall be construed to alter the right of appeal provided under the provisions of chapter 54.

 

 

The bolded language in Sec. 9-3  demonstrates that the legislature fully expected the Secretary of State to act independently and proactively to address situations germane to the task of executing elections consistent with all requirements of the constitutions and statutes.

 

The implied duty argument is vital for circumstances where questions about candidates remain, even up to Election Day.  She claims no such responsibility, yet the “national system” to which Secretary Bysiewicz refers to does not exist and/or has provided no remedy.  Despite popular misunderstanding, the FEC provides no verification whatsoever.  As the Chief of Elections, the Secretary of State is responsible for protecting Connecticut voters from fraud and unfair elections. Buck stops there.

 

Eligibility is a fundamental issue that strikes at the heart of fair elections.  Where the question of eligibility has become so obvious and clear, as in the case of Sen. Obama’s missing birth certificate, the Secretary of State must move to protect the voters, investigating the allegations of fraud or directing such agency as deemed proper such as the SEEC which would investigate and inform the Secretary of State of their findings.”

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Citizen Wells comment

“There is apparently more chicanery going on at the US Supreme Court. First, Leo Donofrio had an unjust encounter
with clerk Danny Bickell. Now, Cort Wrotnowski has filed an emergency stay application with the US Supreme
Court and he is receiving the same unjust treatment from clerk Danny Bickell.”
Leo Donofrio

 

“US Supreme Court stay clerk Danny Bickell is guilty of obstruction of justice for the second time. Yesterday, Cort Wrotnowski filed an emergency stay application in the case WROTNOWSKI V. BYSIEWICZ, CONNECTICUT SECRETARY OF STATE, which is coming directly from a Connecticut Supreme Court order of Chief Justic Chase Rogers.

Mr. Wrotnowski was informed by Danny Bickell that Mr. Bickell denied Cort’s motion based on Rule 23.3, the same grounds Mr. Bickell had illegally improperly relied on to obstruct Donofrio v. Wells, the same case which is now going before the entire Supreme Court for Conference of Dec. 5th and to which Donofrio has pointed out Mr. Bickell was guilty of attemping to overturn Justice Powell’s holding in McCarthy v. Briscoe 429 U.S. 1317 n.1 (1976) and Justice O’Conner in Western Airlines, Inc. v. Teamsters, 480 U.S. 1301 (1987).”

“Donofrio (me) believes Mr. Wrotnowski’s case is at least as strong as his own, if not stronger. And Donofrio warned Wrotnowski that Bickell was going to try the same tactic again.”

“Courageously, Mr. Wrotnowski refused to back down and eventually Bickell said he would, reluctantly, docket the case.”

December 2, 2008

Leo Donofrio

“Cort Wrotnowski, (SCOTUS Docket No. 08A469), a day after facing the shock of his life when told by a SCOTUS clerk that his renewed application to Justice Scalia would be held back for 7 days due to anthrax screening, hand delivered 10 copies of his renewed application to the Security booth at SCOTUS this morning at 10:30 AM.  Cort was told by the Clerk’s office that the papers would “probably” be in the Clerk’s office by 2:00 PM.   Cort’s application, according to Supreme Court Rule 22.1, should be “transmitted promptly” to the Honorable Associate Justice Antonin Scalia.  Keep your eyes on that Docket to see if they will follow the Rules of Court.

Obama indictment to follow Blagojevich arrest?, Patrick Fitzgerald, December 14, 2008, Rezko trial, Rezko Blagojevich and Obama involved in corruption, Health Planning Board, Pay for Play, Rezko related Blagojevich donors, US Department of Justice investigation

Why Barack Obama should be indicted

Part 4

One or more of the following events should happen:

  • Obama steps down.
  • Obama is forced to prove eligibility.
  • Obama is indicted and/or arrested.

If one of the above does not occur within a few months,
perhaps we should look to the Declaration of Independence
or Thomas Jefferson, for our next strategy.

 

I began learning about Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich early in
2008 and wrote my first article mentioning Blagojevich in April.
Why did I begin scrutinizing Rod Blagojevich? I was reading the
transcripts from the Tony Rezko trial and investigation and the
names of Rezko, Obama and Blagojevich were intertwined in a web
of corruption and deception. On December 12, 2008, the Citizen
Wells blog presented an article about corruption in the IL Health
Planning Facilities Board. The article revealed the ties to Rezko,
Levine and Weinstein in their indictments and Blagojevich in
criminal charges placed against him. The article also requests
that Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald indict and/or arrest
Barack Obama for his role in rigging the board when Obama was in
the IL Senate. Article that was published and faxed to Fitzgerald

Patrick Fitzgerald and the investigators working with him have
obviously been aware of Obama’s ties to crime and corruption in
Chicago and IL for many months. They have been proceeding in a
logical and methodical manner. Sentencing of Tony Rezko was delayed
and obviously he has been talking. Anyone following this story all
year knows much about Obama’s ties to corruption and Fitzgerald
knows much more. Obama is the next logical target of indictment
and/or arrest.

Consider this article from the LA Times Top of The Ticket Blog from
April 7, 2008. Here are some exerpts from the article written by
Andrew Malcolm.

“It’s an unfolding, seemingly local political story that’s fascinating
in its revealing details about the subterranean world of business,
financial and family connections in Illinois and Chicago politics
that helped take a virtually unknown black Chicago attorney, nurtured
him politically and financially and turned him into….

the polished candidate who today thrills crowds of thousands across
the country with his eloquence.

Obama currently leads in delegates for the Democratic nomination for
president.”

“This story concerns two men, neither of whom face any legal charges
today. They are two of Illinois’ top Democratic politicians — Gov.
Blagojevich, who’s been mentioned often in court, and Sen. Obama,
who’s received only passing mentions. They’re entwined in the Rezko
saga, particularly through the bounteous campaign money he raised
for them both.

Get used to that name. Rezko’s currently in a long-running Chicago
trial on federal extortion and bribery charges. Few campaign donors
were more responsible than Rezko for the rise of Blagojevich
(Blah-goy-ah-vitch) and Obama. Both politicians came to rely on him
for political and personal advice — and lots of campaign money.”

So far, Blagojevich, reelected in 2006, is more deeply enmeshed in
the scandal than Obama, who’s not been implicated in any wrongdoing.

But all three operated in the murky world of Illinois Democratic
politics, where money, family relationships and long business
associations provide the invisible glue of the local political world.

Witnesses in Rezko’s trial have testified that Rezko recommended friends
and associates for government jobs and posts on Illinois state boards
when Blagojevich took office in 2003, and some of those friends were
generous donors to Blagojevich.

An early trial exhibit from prosecutors was a spreadsheet. Prepared by
an FBI agent , the spreadsheet identifies Rezko-related donors who
supplied $1.43 million between 2001 and 2004 to Blagojevich, who was
first elected governor in 2002.

Using Federal Election Commission and Illinois state records, The
Times’ Dan Morain compared donors on the FBI spreadsheet to Obama’s
contributors. Guess what.

Sen. Obama received $222,000 during the same 2001-2004 period from
Rezko-related Blagojevich donors.”

Read more here:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/obamarezko.html
Several things are important about this article and facts that were
surfacing about Rezko, Blagojevich and Obama. Rezko had already been
indicted. It was clear that Blagojevich and Obama were heavily
involved with Rezko. Blagojevich has just recently been indicted.
The fact that Obama has not been officially implicated and charged
is meaningless. That is standard operating procedure.

Get used to this expression:

Obama trial.