Tag Archives: Part 5

Obama GA ballot challenge, FEC Hassan opinion quotes Natural born citizen requirement, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 5, Fec US Constitution presidential eligibility

Obama GA ballot challenge, FEC Hassan opinion quotes Natural born citizen requirement, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 5, Fec US Constitution presidential eligibility

“I am certain that the devil is watching Barack Obama and taking notes.”…Citizen Wells

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

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

WHY DID OBAMA REFUSE MATCHING FUNDS IN 2008?

PART 5

FEC Hassan opinion quotes Natural born citizen requirement

On July 5, 2011, Abdul Hassan, an attorney from NY, submitted a request for an advisory opinion from the FEC. Hassan acknowledged that he was a naturalized citizen and not a natural born citizen. Abdul Hassan posed the following questions:

“1. Whether, as a naturalized American citizen, I am included in the meaning of
“candidate” or “person” or “individual” running for President as used in the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”)?

2. Whether, as a naturalized American citizen, I am prohibited from receiving matching funds under the FECA?

3. Whether, as a naturalized American citizen, I would be in violation of 2 USC §
441h(b) ifi solicit and/or receive presidential campaign contributions?

4. Whether, in light of the steps I have taken in my presidential run as outlined above, I am subject to the expenditure, contribution and record-keeping requirements of FECA and the regulations thereunder? (Note: I have not yet crossed the $5,000 threshold that triggers the registration and reporting requirements – it is therefore important that I receive an answer before
these requirements are triggered.).”

http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/63383043?extension=pdf

The FEC responded with an Advisory Opinion on September 2, 2011.

Here are some interesting exerpts:
“We are responding to your advisory opinion request concerning the application of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the “Act”), the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, as amended, and Commission regulations to your campaign for President of the United States, given your status as a naturalized citizen.

The Commission concludes that the Act does not prohibit Mr. Hassan, a
naturalized citizen, from becoming a “candidate” as that term is defined under the Act. However, Mr. Hassan will not be eligible to receive Federal matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act.”
“Mr. Hassan indicates that he satisfies all of the constitutional requirements for
serving as President, except the natural born citizen requirement in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution. 1”
“2. As a naturalized American citizen, is Mr. Hassan eligible to receive
presidential matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act?”
“No, as a naturalized American citizen, Mr. Hassan is not eligible to receive
presidential matching funds under the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act (“Matching Payment Act”).

The United States Constitution provides that “[n]o 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 . . . .” U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 1, cl. 5.”
“2 The Act does not contain separate definitions for candidates for different Federal offices. The Constitution’s “natural born Citizen” provision only pertains to “the Office of President.” U.S. Const., art. II, sec. 1, cl. 5.
3 Mr. Hassan’s status as a “candidate” under the Act does not in any way affect whether Mr. Hassan will be eligible to appear on State ballots or to be a candidate under various State laws. In fact, it is the Commission’s understanding that some State ballot access laws provide that a person cannot appear on the
ballot or be considered a candidate unless the person will be qualified for the office he or she purports to seek.”
“Although the Matching Payment Act does not specifically address the citizenship requirement for serving as President, it sets forth the eligibility requirements to receive matching funds. See 26 U.S.C. 9033; 11 CFR 9033.2. See also, e.g., Advisory Opinion 1996-07 (Browne for President) (describing the steps a candidate must take to become eligible for matching funds). These provisions collectively reflect Congressional intent to ensure that U.S. Treasury funds in the form of matching funds are only paid to eligible candidates. 5”
“The Commission is charged under the Matching Payment Act with administering the Federal matching funds program and has some discretion when certifying eligibility for matching funds. While the Commission may not “appraise candidates’ good faith, honesty, probity or general reliability when reviewing the agreements and other forwardlooking commitments required” by the Matching Payment Act, see LaRouche v. FEC, 996 F.2d 1263, 1269 (D.C. Cir. 1993), situations may exist in which, “without assessment of subjective candidate intent, the Commission might conceivably withhold funds despite
formal compliance with the statutorily expressed criteria.” Id. Clear and self-avowed constitutional ineligibility for office is one of the few instances where the Commission’s exercise of its discretion to withhold funds is appropriate.”

http://saos.nictusa.com/aodocs/AO%202011-15.pdf

Observations

The FEC refers to the US Constitition requirement for the presidency, natural born citizen.

The FEC notes the distinction between a natural born citizen and naturalized citizen.

The Fec states that a naturalized citizen is not eligible for the presidency.

The FEC states that only a natural born citizen may receive presidential matching funds.

The FEC acknowledges that although they do not have the authority to keep ineligible candidates off of ballots, some of the states do.

“3 Mr. Hassan’s status as a “candidate” under the Act does not in any way affect whether Mr. Hassan will be  eligible to appear on State ballots or to be a candidate under various State laws. In fact, it is the Commission’s understanding that some State ballot access laws provide that a person cannot appear on the
ballot or be considered a candidate unless the person will be qualified for the office he or she purports to seek.”

Hence the GA and other state ballot challenges to Obama.

Conclusions

The FEC still acknowledges the US Constitution.

However, in 2007 when Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie submitted an advisory opinion request on behalf of Barack Obama to keep open the option for presidential matching funds, Bauer knew that Obama was not a natural born citizen. Ellen Weintraub, on the FEC committee that responded with an advisory opinion in the affirmative for Obama, was a former Perkins Coie staff member. Fraud was committed by Obama and Bauer and one has to question the ethics of Weintraub’s involvement.

The FEC acknowledges with these statements:

“Although the Matching Payment Act does not specifically address the citizenship requirement for serving as President, it sets forth the eligibility requirements to receive matching funds. See 26 U.S.C. 9033; 11 CFR 9033.2. See also, e.g., Advisory Opinion 1996-07 (Browne for President) (describing the steps a candidate must take to become eligible for matching funds). These provisions collectively reflect Congressional intent to ensure that U.S. Treasury funds in the form of matching funds are only paid to eligible candidates. 5”

“The Commission is charged under the Matching Payment Act with administering the Federal matching funds program and has some discretion when certifying eligibility for matching funds. While the Commission may not “appraise candidates’ good faith, honesty, probity or general reliability when reviewing the agreements and other forwardlooking commitments required” by the Matching Payment Act, see LaRouche v. FEC, 996 F.2d 1263, 1269 (D.C. Cir. 1993), situations may exist in which, “without assessment of subjective candidate intent, the Commission might conceivably withhold funds despite
formal compliance with the statutorily expressed criteria.” Id. Clear and self-avowed constitutional ineligibility for office is one of the few instances where the Commission’s exercise of its discretion to withhold funds is appropriate.”

that there are eligibility requirements for receiving presidential matching funds and that the FEC is charged with administering these funds. It is clear
that the FEC should always require proof of eligibility. It should have done so in 2007. We know there was inherent bias in 2007 (see part 4 of this series).

Court cases also clarify the powers given to the FEC. The FEC has more power than they have alluded to.

See Doug Teper, et al V. Zell Miller, et al, April 24, 1996.

http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/82/82.F3d.989.96-8147.html

 

Blagojevich trial, US Justice Department corruption, Protecting Obama, Part 5, Tony Rezko and Stuart Levine are best witnesses, Where is Tony Rezko?, Why hasn’t Rezko been sentenced?

Blagojevich trial, US Justice Department corruption, Protecting Obama, Part 5

“The last thing Sen. Barack Obama and Gov. Rod Blagojevich needed was that letter written by convicted Illinois influence peddler Tony Rezko promising he’d never rat out his pals.”…John Kass, Chicago tribune

“Federal authorities have obtained an arrest warrant for Rezko, who is believed to be traveling abroad.”..Rezko indictment press release
“That was when U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve learned he had received a $3.5 million wire transfer from a business associate abroad.”…Rezko trial transcripts

Blagojevich trial

Protecting Obama

Part 5

Where is Tony Rezko?

What unholy alliance prevented Tony Rezko from being called as a prosecution witness? Was it a pact between Rezko, Blagojevich and Obama? Is the US Justice Department complicit in a coverup? Was there pressure from entities in the Middle East? Perhaps a combination of those forces. In Blagojevich’s own words.

Citizen Wells August 28, 2008
“As his sentencing nears, pressure is mounting on Tony Rezko to cooperate with federal investigations into some of the highest-profile politicians in the state — including Gov. Blagojevich.”

“Now, sources tell the Chicago Sun-Times that Rezko has been seen at the federal courthouse as many as a dozen times since his June conviction. He’s been held since then at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in downtown Chicago.”

“If Rezko’s cooperating, that would be a major development in “Operation Board Games,” the government’s ongoing probe into state boards that’s widened into a broader corruption probe.”

Read more

From the Chicago SunTimes October 9, 2008
“A federal judge this morning officially postponed the sentencing of political fund-raiser Tony Rezko as he continues his discussions with the government.

U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve indefinitely delayed Rezko’s Oct. 28 sentencing date and told the parties to meet again for a status in the case in December.
The sentencing, originally scheduled for Oct. 28, just before the election, was likely to bring unfavorable publicity to Rezko’s onetime friend Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama.

Prosecutors and Rezko lawyers said this morning they did not want to set a future date for sentencing.

Rezko lawyer William Ziegelmueller said they sought the delay to “work together to agree to otherwise narrow differences at sentencing.”

The agreement comes as Rezko is talking to federal prosecutors. The Sun-Times first reported Rezko’s meetings with the feds in August and sources close to the investigation later confirmed the talks last month.”

Read more:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/rezko/1208918,rezko100808.article

From the Chicago SunTimes February 3, 2009

“Convicted businessman Tony Rezko — who is poised to become a crucial witness in the massive corruption case against ex-Gov. Blagojevich — was quietly moved out of a downtown jail and into another facility last month, the Sun-Times has learned.
Authorities seeking Rezko’s cooperation pushed for the move after Rezko complained about being held in the tough confines of solitary imprisonment, known as “the hole,” even as he was providing information to prosecutors, sources said.”

 
“Rezko’s relocation is a sign that even with thousands of taped conversations of the governor, investigators still highly value Rezko’s potential as a witness.”
“Rezko, who served as an adviser and fund-raiser to Blagojevich, provided authorities with substantial information involving the governor and bolstered pay-to-play testimony by former Illinois Finance Authority director Ali Ata, as well as talking about other alleged deals.”

Read more:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/rezko/2009/02/prosecutors_help_move_rezko_ou.html
 

From the Washington Examiner April 20, 2010.

“Where in the world is Tony Rezko?”

“Why is Antoin “Tony” Rezko under lock and key at an undisclosed location, like some sort of CIA-renditioned al Qaeda operative? And why hasn’t he been sentenced yet?

As the June 3 corruption trial of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich for allegedly trying to sell Obama’s former Illinois Senate seat approaches, the whereabouts of the former Blago and Obama fundraiser is literally a state secret.”

“Rezko’s not listed on the federal Bureau of Prisons’ inmate locator, either.”

“Randall Samborn, spokesman for Fitzgerald, told The Examiner that Rezko “remains in federal custody,” although admitting that he didn’t know exactly where the convicted businessman was being held. Samborn also confirmed that “there is no sentencing date,” but would not elaborate. Sources in Chicago tell us that the long delay is “very unusual.””

“Is Rezko being held at another prison facility for his own safety? There are plenty of people in Chicago and Washington who might not want Rezko on the witness stand. They include:

Democratic Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias.

Rezko was such an enthusiastic customer of Giannoulias’ failing Broadway Bank that he wrote $450,000 in bad checks against his account to pay off gambling debts.

Alderman Eddie Burke

Rezko hired Burke’s law firm to get a 77 percent reduction in the real estate taxes of a 62-acre property along the Chicago River he planned to develop using $140 million in city subsidies. After assuring the Chicago Board of Ethics that he would abstain from any Council votes on Rezko’s project, Burke voted for it anyway, blaming his conflict of interest on “an error.” The project was later abandoned.

President Barack Obama

Rezko was the president’s “real estate fairy,” as one Chicago columnist likes to put it. Remember how they bought a house together in Chicago? Rezko was one of Obama’s earliest and biggest fundraisers and donors. Obama was one of his go-to guys for housing legislation in the Illinois state Senate.

If I were Tony Rezko, I’d be hiding, too.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/where-in-the-world-is-tony-rezko-91619594.html
It is understandable why the Blagojevich defense team does not want Rezko on the stand. Judge Zagel’s comment about Rezko being a bad witness is at least horsecrap and reeks of conspiracy. Convicted felons of all categories are regularly used as witnesses. Stuart Levine, the key witness in the Rezko trial was not only enmeshed in corruption but was a long time drug user.
Here are the approximate number of times that “Rezko” is mentioned in US Justice Department documents.

Indictment:  100 times.

Criminal complaint:  170 times.

Evidentiary Proffer:  288 times.
Even if a strong argument is made against using Rezko as a witness, and good luck with that argument, Stuart Levine was used extensively as a witness in the Rezko trial, and his name was mentioned approx. 146 times in the Blagojevich Criminal Complaint. And don’t forget, Blagojevich’s name was mentioned at least 30 times on one day of the Rezko trial.

Patrick Fitzgerald, I am damn angry and am speaking up about US Justice Department corruption.

The Chicago Tribune just reported this:
“”I felt all along and believed all along that I was going to testify,” he said. But he said the government case wasn’t as they presented it, without calling witnesses  Antoin “Tony” Rezko and Stuart Levine, both convicted in the federal probe.”

Read more:

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/blagojevich-on-trial/2010/07/blago-prosecutors-proved-my-innocence-1.html