Tag Archives: September 16

Hawaii 2008 Obama certification, United States Constitution omitted, Obama not certified per Constitution, Citizen Wells open thread, September 16, 2010

Hawaii 2008 Obama certification, United States Constitution omitted, Obama not certified per Constitution

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

From BirtherReport.com September 15, 2010.

“The State Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President that he was running for which was the normal procedure by the State Democratic Party of Hawaii in all the prior election cycles. See the State Democratic Party of Hawaii certification of nomination forms attached[embedded below] for the Presidential election years of 2008 for Obama, 2004 for Kerry, and 2000 for Gore.”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/09/breaking-democratic-party-of-hawaii.html

Here is the wording they are referring to:

Democratic Party of Hawaii

2008 Official certification of nomination

“This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties”
2004 Official certification of nomination

“This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution”

Judge Clay D Land ruling, Judicial misconduct, Captain Connie Rhodes motion, September 16, 2009, Orly Taitz, Rules for judicial conduct, 28 U.S.C., Judge Land guilty of judicial misconduct

*** Update below September 17, 2009  5:30 PM  **

Despite the lack of respect for the US Constitution, the rule of law, concerned American citizens and not obeying their oaths of office by judges and state election officials over the past year, I, Citizen Wells, respect the office of the judiciary and do not take lightly charging a judge with judicial misconduct. However, due to the serious nature of the Captain Connie Rhodes’ motion, it’s consequences for the military and nation in general, and the non judicious attitude of Judge Land in dismissing the motion, I believe it is the lesser of evils, and certainly in the best interest of ongoing jurisprudence, to check this judicial abuse of power.

The Citizen Wells blog reported yesterday, Wednesday, September16, 2009, on the ruling by Judge Land.
Citizen Wells response to Judge Land ruling
For simplicity’s sake, we reported on the ruling by Judge Land. We will leave to others to debate the courtroom banter, motion word smithing and argument methodologies.

This is indeed a serious matter. At stake is the integrity of our judicial system, upholding the US Constitution and rule of law, insuring that we have a qualified president and supporting the military as they faithfully uphold the oath they have taken to defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Judge Land, as a District Court Judge, is subject to the RULES FOR JUDICIAL-CONDUCT AND JUDICIAL-DISABILITY PROCEEDINGS.

“These Rules govern proceedings under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 351–364 (the Act), to determine whether a covered judge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts or is unable to discharge the duties of office because of mental or physical disability.”

“these Rules provide mandatory and nationally uniform provisions governing the substantive and procedural aspects of misconduct and disability proceedings under the Act.”

“(e) Disability. “Disability” is a temporary or permanent condition rendering a judge unable to discharge the duties of the particular judicial office. Examples of disability include substance abuse, the inability to stay awake during court proceedings, or a severe impairment of cognitive abilities.”

Disability, such as “severe impairment of cognitive abilities”, will not be addressed, although after reading the ruling, that possibility did occur to me.

“(h) Misconduct. Cognizable misconduct:

6 (1) is conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the  business of the courts. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

(A) using the judge’s office to obtain special treatment for friends or relatives;
(B) accepting bribes, gifts, or other personal favors related to the judicial office;
(C) having improper discussions with parties or counsel for one side in a case;
(D) treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner;
(E) engaging in partisan political activity or making inappropriately partisan statements;
(F) soliciting funds for organizations; or
(G) violating other specific, mandatory standards of judicial conduct, such as those pertaining to restrictions on outside income and requirements for financial disclosure.”

First, note, “Misconduct includes, but is not limited to”

Judge Land is obvious guilty of two of the offenses above.

 

(D) treating litigants or attorneys in a demonstrably egregious and hostile manner

Egregious defined: “conspicuously bad : flagrant <egregious errors>”

(Note dictionary example – “egregious errors”)

This motion was filed by a captain in the US Military who was required to take an oath to defend the US Constitution. The following was also made clear to Captain Connie Rhodes:

Officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.

Judge Land’s persistent reference to “birther” and “birther claim”, aside from having political connotations, is condescending  and demeaning. Judge Land is  both ignorant and misinformed regarding Obama’s eligibility.

“5 of “evidence” Plaintiff’s counsel relies upon deserves further discussion. Counsel has produced a document that she claims shows the President was born in Kenya, yet she has not authenticated that document. She has produced an affidavit from someone who allegedly obtained the document from a hospital in Mombasa, Kenya by paying “a cash ‘consideration’ to a Kenyan military officer on duty to look the other way, while [he] obtained the copy” of the document. (Smith Decl. ¶ 7, Sept. 3, 2009.) Counsel has not, however, produced an original certificate of authentication from the government agency that supposedly has official custody of the document. Therefore, the Court finds that the alleged document is unreliable due to counsel’s failure to properly authenticate the document. See Fed. R. Evid. 901.”

Judge Land dismisses an alleged birth certificate with an attached affidavit yet he quotes the COLB, Certification of Live Birth, a document with no affadavit of authenticity, which is not a birth certificate and refers to the presence of another document. Judge Land has requested no authenticating of the COLB.

“Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our Country was founded in order to purportedly “protect and preserve” those very principles.”

Judge Land has made another demeaning statement. The irony of that statement is that any middle school student knows that the president must be a natural born citizen and that the judicial system is part of the checks and balances to prevent a usurper from taking office.

“Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.”

There is no reason to believe that Captain Rhodes was motivated politically. What is readily apparent is that Captain Rhodes takes her oath of office seriously.

“I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully
discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
So help me God.”
US Military officer’s oath of office

This clearly qualifies as an unwarranted and hostile attack upon the character of the plaintiff.

(E) engaging in partisan political activity or making inappropriately partisan statements

“To press her “birther agenda,” Plaintiff’s counsel has filed the present action on behalf of Captain Rhodes.”

Judge Land’s repeated use of the term “birther”, a hallmark insult from the far left and Obama camp, reveals not only his political agenda but a disregard for the US Constitution, an officer in the US military, the plaintiff’s attorney and decent American citizens. That term has no place in the courtroom, especially being flung by a misinformed, biased judge.

“Counsel makes these allegations although a “short-form” birth certificate has been made publicly available which indicates that the President was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961.“

“Acknowledging the existence of a document that shows the President was born in Hawaii, Plaintiff alleges that the document “cannot be verified as genuine, and should be presumed fraudulent.”

Judge Land uses as the basis for part of his decision a politically motivated, display of an unsubstantiated COLB.

 

Summary
Judge Land, who is clearly misinformed and makes uninformed decisions that certainly appear to be politically motivated, should be brought before a judicial review board. And, if Judge Land believes that he is making well founded statements based on substantiated facts, then the spectre of his ability to sit judiciously on the bench arises.

It is hoped that one or both of two scenarios will occur.

1. Someone will file a complaint.

 
2. I believe it is in the best interest of the judiciary system to self police this matter. Confidence in the judiciary and other branches of government is at an all time low. The American citizens need a clear signal that they will get fair treatment in court and that the judicial branch of government will fulfill it’s crucial part in the checks and balances system of our government.

How to file a complaint:

http://www.uscourts.gov/library/judicialmisconduct/jud_conduct_and_disability_308_app_B_rev.pdf

 

** Update **

“Dr. Orly Taitz, counsel for Captain Connie Rhodes, M.D, filed today an Emergency Request for Stay of Deployment, pending the filing of a Motion for Re-Hearing, in the Case Rhodes vs. Mac Donald.

Yesterday, Judge Clay D. Land garnered nationally notoriety for his rejection of Captain’s Rhodes’ case, with a severe ruling that was widely faulted by legal experts across the nation.

Attorney Taitz in today’s filings details the errors of Land’s ruling.  What follows is The Post & Email’s summary of Tatiz’s Motions, using a copy forwarded us, by Mr. Neil B. Turner.

First, Attorney Taitz alleges that Judge Land’s ruling “violates the 5th Amendment rights” of her client, “to due process of law, in particular, by” the Court’s “violation of Local Rule 7 of the United States Middle District of Georgia, to wit:”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/taitz-files-emergency-stay-and-motion-for-rehearing/

 

Judge Clay D Land ruling, September 16, 2009, Captain Connie Rhodes, Orly Taitz, Motion for temporary restraining order, Motion denied, US District Court, Thomas D. MacDonald, Colonel, Garrison Commander Fort Benning, Judge Land uninformed, Biased?, US Constitution, Oath of office, Treason?

“I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully
discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
So help me God.”
US Military officer’s oath of office


Officers in the service of the United States are
bound by this oath to disobey any order that
violates the Constitution of the United States.

 

To:

Judge Clay D. Land, US District Judge

Thomas D. MacDonald, Colonel, Garrison Commander Fort Benning

Is there any reason that I and the American public should not consider you cowards, un American or guilty of treason?

You both have taken oaths to defend the US Constitition against enemies, both foreign and domestic.

The motion made by Connie Rhodes, Captain, is not about the beliefs of her legal counsel, Orly Taitz, it is about the refusal of the usurper, Barack Obama, to prove that he is eligible to be president. The very fact that Obama has gone to such lengths to avoid proving he is a natural born citizen, should be enough to raise many large red flags.

The motion of Captain Connie Rhodes, an active military officer, who apparently takes her oath to defend the US Constitution, very seriously, was flawed. Of course, every motion, every pleading before any court in this nation is flawed. This is not a perfect world. Judge Land has made a ruling not based on merits, not based on facts and apparently, with malice aforethought, for reasons unknown. Judge Clay D. Land, a US District Court judge, has denied Captain Rhodes’ motion on September 16, 2009. The motion was for a temporary restraining order to prevent her pending deployment to Iraq based on the fact that the orders and any future orders come from an illegal, usurper Commander in Chief, Obama.

Judge Land has referred to this motion as frivolous. Based on the following, Judge Land should minimally be subject to judicial review.

I can state with certainty that the following is true:

  • We are in the middle of the Constitutional crisis foretold by attorney Philip J Berg in 2008.
  • Barack Hussein Obama is not President of the United States.
  • Obama is by any reasonable definition a usurper.
  • Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States.
  • Obama’s father was a citizen of Kenya and therefore a British citizen.
  • There is absolutely no evidence that Obama was born in the US.
  • There is much compelling evidence that Obama does not have a long form birth certificate proving eligibility.
  • Obama has expended enormous resources to hide his past and associated documents that would clear up eligibility.
  • Barack Obama signed a form in Arizona before the primaries stating that he was a natural born citizen.
  • Barack Obama has kept hidden all documents recording his past except for a few notable exceptions such as his IL bar application. Obama lied on his bar application regarding his numerous traffic tickets and aliases.
  • Commander Walter Fitzpatrick (Ret.) and other military officers have charged Obama with treason.
  • By all indications, Captain Connie Rhodes is following her oath to defend the US Constituton.

Consider the following exerpts from Judge Land’s ruling:

“Plaintiff alleges that her deployment orders are unconstitutional and unenforceable because President Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible to act as Commander in Chief of the United States armed forces. After conducting a hearing on Plaintiff’s motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous.”

Judge Land, you are either uninformed, complicit in treason or incompetent.

“Plaintiff’s counsel speculates that President Obama was not born in the United States based upon the President’s alleged refusal to disclose publicly an “official birth certificate” that is satisfactory to Plaintiff’s counsel and her followers. She therefore seeks to have the judiciary compel the President to produce “satisfactory” proof that he was born in the United States. Counsel makes these allegations although a “short-form” birth certificate has been made publicly available which indicates that the President was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961.3
3 The court observes that the President defeated seven opponents in
a grueling campaign for his party’s nomination that lasted more than
eighteen months and cost those opponents well over $300 million. See
Federal Election Commission, Presidential Pre-Nomination Campaign
Disbursements Dec. 31, 2008, http://www.fec.gov/press/press2009/
20090608Pres/3_2008PresPrimaryCmpgnDis.pdf (last visited Sept. 15, 2009).
Then the President faced a formidable opponent in the general election who
received $84 million to conduct his general election campaign against the
President. Press Release, Federal Election Commission, 2008 Presidential
Campaign Financial Activity Summarized (June 8, 2009), available at
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2009/20090608PresStat.shtml. It would
appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would
support any contention that the President was not eligible for the office
he sought.
Furthermore, Congress is apparently satisfied that the President is
qualified to serve. Congress has not instituted impeachment proceedings,
and in fact, the House of Representatives in a broad bipartisan manner has
rejected the suggestion that the President is not eligible for office.
See H.R. Res. 593, 111th Cong. (2009) (commemorating, by vote of 378-0,
the 50th anniversary of Hawaii’s statehood and stating, “the 44th
President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August
4, 1961”).”

There is no alleged refusal to disclose an “official birth certificate.” Obama has gone to great lengths to avoid this. Judge Land, if you have a legitimate copy, please share it.
A short form birth certificate has not been produced. Even Lou Dobbs of CNN was able to discern that the document produced by the Obama camp, a COLB, Certification of live birth, is just a document referring to another document and we have no proof that the COLB is genuine.

Judge Land, and/or his assistants, reveal ignorance about the vetting process and are complicit with Congress in this coverup.

“Moreover, mere allegations of a constitutional violation unsupported by a reasonable factual foundation are insufficient to warrant judicial review. To hold otherwise would be to create chaos within the military decision-making process and chain of command. As explained below, the Court must balance several factors to determine whether judicial review of a military decision is authorized.”

Judge Land, all we have are allegations that Obama is qualified to be president. We have a constitutional crisis caused by the deceit of Obama and non vetting by the Democrat party.

“She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated,
conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States.

Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.” (Compl. ¶ 21.) She continues with bare, conclusory allegations that the President is “an alien, possibly even an unnaturalized or even an unadmitted illegal alien . . . without so much as lawful residency in the United States.” (Id. ¶ 26.) Then, implying that the President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud crook, she alleges that the President “might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 social security numbers prior to assuming the office of President.” (Id. ¶ 110 (emphasis added).

Acknowledging the existence of a document that shows the President was born in Hawaii, Plaintiff alleges that the document “cannot be verified as genuine, and should be presumed fraudulent.””

Once again, Judge Land exhibits ignorance of the facts. The only document that the Obama camp has produced is a COLB that has not been proven to be legitimate.

“As explained previously, Plaintiff has demonstrated no likelihood of success on the merits. Her claims are based on sheer
conjecture and speculation.”

Conjecture?

Judge Land, you are the one guilty of conjecture.
Judge Land, you have taken a similar oath one or more times. Do you take this oath seriously?

Her likelihood for success is only limited by your bias and lack of knowledge.

Colonel Thomas D MacDonald, are we to believe that you take your oath to defend the US Constitution seriously?

I understand that the court must weigh interfering with the Military. But this goes to the core of military rule and order, having a  Commander in Chief who is legitimate.

I do not criticize Judge Land for his comments on how the case was plead, however, given the serious nature of the motion, I do criticize Judge Land for calling this a frivolous motion and accusing the plaintiff of conjecture when most of his basis for attacking Captain Rhodes’ position was based on conjecture and misinformation.

Judge Land referring to concerned American patriots as “birthers” is condescending, uninformed and unacceptable.

It is apparent that of the three major players in this motion, Captain Rhodes, Judge Land and Colonel MacDonald, Captain Rhodes is the only one that lives out her oath to defend the US Constitution.

I am shocked and infuriated by the attitude of Judge Clay D Land and believe that his actions should be investigated.

Citizen Wells