Archive for the 'Obama Ballot Challenge' Category

Court Rules Natural Born Citizenship Required for Presidency

©2012 drkate

Abdul Karim Hassan is a naturalized citizen who wishes to run for the Presidency of the United States. This even though the Constitution says “[n]o person except a natural born Citizen . . . shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Hassan v Scott Gessler,  Colorado SoS

Business Insider reported on September 5, 2012, Abdul Karim Hassan’s series of lawsuits claiming his right to run for the Presidency have been denied in the Second, Third, and now Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.  A similar ruling was issued September 28, 2012 for the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

The significance of these rulings cannot be underestimated as they affirm that the natural born citizen clause of Article II of the U.S. Constitution has not been trumped, abrogated, or implicitly repealed by the Equal Protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment nor the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  These arguments are the same ones used by Obama’s lawyers in fending off the legitimate challenges to Barack Obama’s candidacy and presidency; by the secretaries of state to refute ballot challenges, and by the media, pundits, Congress and the academics to cover up the usurpation of the presidency by Obama/Soetoro.  Of course, the corrupt SCOTUS hears nothing, sees nothing, and says nothing.

Obama and his supporters, the Congressional eligibility deniers, and the media have been soundly defeated and Obama is still ineligible to hold or run for the office he seeks.  What is more interesting is that the legal rulings lend support to the charges of misprision of felony that all members of Congress, and all the secretaries of state face in contributing to the overthrow of the White House.

This article briefly reviews the history of this case and its rulings.

The FEC Filing 

Presidential Candidate Abdul Hassan ruled ineligible as he is not a natural born citizen

Hassan, a Guyana-born naturalized American citizen, filed papers with the Federal Election Commission to run for the presidency.  Astoundingly, the FEC ruled in September 2011 that Hassan could file papers and raise money to run for president of the United States:

But the agency also told the prospective candidate, Abdul Hassan, that his campaign may not receive federal matching funds because he was not born in America. However, the agency’s decision stopped short of addressing the constitutional issue of whether someone born outside the United States can be president.

Importantly, the FEC made clear that it was outside it’s jurisdiction to decide the constitutional merits of Mr. Hassan’s candidacy, saying that vetting was up to the States:

“This does not mean that he can go and say ‘look the FEC has said that I am a candidate, give me money, I’m official,’” said Republican Commissioner Donald McGahn. “That is not what we do here; we don’t certify you as a candidate. That’s what the states do.” (emphasis added)

Democratic FEC Commissioners had ‘trepidation’ in issuing this unanimous opinion because of how it might be perceived.  They attempted to qualify and explain their rationale:

“By saying that it is okay — it does give the impression that we don’t see a problem,” said Democratic Commissioner Steven Walther. “I think that we really need to be cognizant of how this could be misconstrued.”

To address this problem, one of the final sections added to approved opinion states:

“Notwithstanding this conclusion, the Commission expresses no opinion on Mr. Hassan’s potential liability arising out of his proposed activities under any other Federal or State law, including any laws concerning fraudulent misrepresentation. Any such issues are outside the Commission’s jurisdiction.”

“For us this is really all about what we are empowered to decide and what we are not empowered to decide,” said Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub. “Nobody is saying that it is fine and nobody is saying it’s okay for this guy to be going out and raising funds.’

Ballot Access Denied in Colorado, New Hampshire

Hassan then proceeded to set up a website and attempted to get on the ballot in New Hampshire and Colorado.  When denied access by both Secretaries of State of each state, he sued.  He has filed five lawsuits which argued that:

… the Constitution’s natural-born-citizen requirement is a vestige of our less noble past, before we decided that discrimination based on national origin is a grievous wrong. (He points in his briefs to Dred Scott v. Sandford.)The lawsuits say the Constitution’s admonition that “[n]o person  except a natural born Citizen . . . shall be eligible to the Office of President” violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Hassan’s lawsuits have already been denied in the First and Second U.S. court of appeals. And the Tenth Circuit rounded out the trio on Tuesday when it too shut down Hassan’s case.

Complaint Against the FEC’s Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act

Hassan initiated other lawsuits aimed at the natural born citizen requirement based on these assumptions, and filed against the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act  (26 U.S.C. §§ 9001-9013) which provides public funding to Presidential nominees of major or minor political parties after the FEC issued an advisory opinion that Hassan did not qualify for any matching funding because he was not a natural born citizen.  Hassan argues that the Presidential Campaign Fund Act is:

(1) unconstitutional and invalid, and (2) the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution1 is irreconcilable with, and has been“trumped, abrogated and implicitly repealed” by, the Equal Protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment and the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Now this is where it gets interesting.  The FEC as defendant submitted a motion to dismiss the case based on the same premises that have been used to try to defeat challenges to Obama’s eligibility.  That is,

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1), or in the alternative, for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (emphasis added)

The FEC also argued that Defendant argued that this Court should deny Plaintiff’s Application because

the Complaint fails to present an Article III case or controversy, and alternatively, because it does not present a substantial constitutional question. (emphasis added)

The government moved to dismiss the case–using the same arguments it has used to dismiss other cases against Obama–(1) failure to present a claim upon which relief can be granted, (2) lack of jurisdiction, (3) failing to present an Article III case or controversy, and (4) failure to present a substantial constitutional question.

The one argument missing from the government’s defense?  STANDING.

American Jurisprudence and Constitutional Legal Thinking

The DC circuit court dismissed Abdul Hassan’s case. The judge’s ruling denying Abdul Hassans suit against the FEC is illustrative for the process the Judge followed in making its conclusions.  As opposed to ducking jurisdiction and ducking its Article III responsibility to hear cases involving constitutional questions, the court determined:

Because subject matter jurisdiction focuses on the court’s power to hear the claim, however, the court must give the plaintiff’s factual allegations closer scrutiny when resolving a Rule 12(b)(1) motion than would be required for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. Macharia v. United States, 334 F.3d 61, 67-68 (D.C. Cir. 2003). Thus, to determine whether it has jurisdiction over a claim, the court may consider materials outside the pleadings where necessary to resolve disputed jurisdictional facts. Herbert v. Nat’l Acad. of Scis., 974 F.2d 192, 197 (D.C. Cir. 1992). (emphasis added)

Regarding FRCP Rule 12 (b), the court determined:

A court need not, however, “accept inferences drawn by plaintiffs if such inferences are unsupported by the facts set out in the complaint. Nor must the court accept legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations.” Id. In addition,“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” (emphasis added)

In other words, the Court actually took on the issue, was legally entitled to review additional information, and ruled it did not have to accept inferences or ‘legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations’.  Every one of the Obama challenge cases was thrown out first, on standing, and second, using the measly excuses such as failure to present a case, lack of Article III jurisdiction, or the ‘political question’.

Article II Still Stands

I hope everyone who has been involved in the eligibility movement can appreciate the significance of these rulings for the Constitution, the requirements of the Presidency, and all the work we have accomplished over the last several years.  It is critical to inform your friends who are skeptical of the ‘birthers’ or disappointed in the perceived failure of the 100+ cases challenging Obama that several courts have affirmed the natural born citizen requirement of the presidency–that it still stands, and that we are right and always have been on this issue.

Significantly the FEC believes the States are responsible for the determination of eligibility, just as the Article II Superpac, the Obama Ballot Challenge, the extensive legal work of many scholars, and manymany others have indicated.  The 2009 Continental Congress recommended vetting laws at the state level were required, and the Article II Superpac will continue its efforts after this election and into 2013 to ensure a vetting process is in place at multiple levels, to make sure the usurpation of the White House by an unknown, unvetted foreign national never happens again.

Please donate to the Article II Superpac to ensure its efforts continue through and beyond the 2012 election.  The national security of our Nation is at stake.

DNC Takes Off Without Obama

©2012 drkate

As the DNC takes off without Obama, the empty chair

Article II activists are busy letting everyone know that the Democrats have a problem, and so will every secretary of state if they certify Obama as eligible to be placed on their state’s ballot. Misprision of Felony is in everyone’s future, notwithstanding the poor job the judiciary did in ‘protecting’ Obama by violating the law.

The Article II SuperPac sent its CPD letter out early this week, followed by another terrific full page ad in the Washington Times. Meanwhile, attorney Larry Klayman sent a letter to Bob Bauer–Obama’s forger in chief–warning him of certifying Obama as eligible when there is no proof that he is…suggesting that charges of election fraud are forthcoming. And the Patriot’s Union has a great initiative underway that everyone can participate in…

And while you’re at it letting everyone know about Obama’s Achilles Heel, take a moment to caption this photo!

Open thread!  :smile:

Article II Superpac Challenges Commission on Presidential Debates

©2012 drkate

In another bold move, the Article II Superpac challenged the Commission on Presidential Debates to live up to their charter and set forth their criteria for determining whether a presidential candidate is a natural born citizen.  Quietly working behind the scenes to place three full page ads in the Washington Times, and planning more critical advertisements at the Democrat National Convention in Charlotte next week, this is a powerful reminder to the Commission on Presidential Debates that one Barack Hussein Obama should not even be allowed to debate on the national stage, as he is not constitutionally eligible for the job.

Do we expect the CPD to do anything?  No.  But it is one more nail in the coffin where those who are anti-American and anti-Constitution are exposed for the public to really see.  We have seen Congress fail to vet Obama and wipe clean the Congressional Record through the Congressional Research Service; we’ve seen the judiciary time and time again refuse to follow the law, and we’ve seen the media turn into high-pitched desperate shillers for the penultimate failure known as Barack Obama.  Apparently the Supreme Court doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to deal with Obama’s usurpation of the Presidency.

Head on over to the Article II Superpac site…please take the survey/petition and if you can, donate $1 to the effort at the address listed on the site!

The Superpac is not done.  Key media buys will be made in the certain-swing states of Ohio, Florida and Virginia in the fall campaign to inform as many people as possible–including the electors–of the Constitutional crisis facing our Nation in form of Obama.  Send Obama and the wookie packing!!!

Article II Super PAC, Letter to Commission on Presidential Debates, 8-30-2012

RE: Commission on Presidential Debates: 2012 Nonpartisan Selection Criteria

Dear Mr. Fahrenkopf and Mr. McCurry:

As advocates for the Framers’ original intent, establishing in Article II, Section 1 that every President must be a “natural born Citizen,” the Article II Super PAC wishes to extend our sincere thanks to the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) for the proper priority you place on the faithful observation of this national security provision of the Constitution by citing it in the first of your 2012 Nonpartisan Selection Criteria.

It has come to our attention that CPD may not recognize or apply any specific definition for “natural born Citizen” in the process of qualifying candidates’ satisfaction of Presidential eligibility. If this is in error, we would appreciate any information on how you qualify Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates’ eligibility as natural born Citizens.

We are deeply concerned with the efficacy of our electoral process in general since we learned in recent years that no known state or federal government office, nor any agency or elected official makes any effort to authenticate Presidential or Vice Presidential candidates’ constitutional eligibility prior to their name appearing on the ballot. Instead, we are genuinely alarmed to find that stewardship of this keystone of our national security is deferred to the same biased, unelected and unaccountable political parties which advance their respective nominees. Furthermore, no official examination to substantiate any party’s claims of their candidate’s eligibility is ever conducted or even sought. For example, it is the FBI’s position that they do not presume to contravene the will of voters, so no background checks are conducted on candidates for any office.

As you are aware, a simple majority vote cannot overturn Constitutional requirements.

This utter failure of ballot security and blatant voter disenfranchisement, still unknown to most of the US electorate, represents a profound breach of public trust. Questions raised by the electorate in the 2008 presidential election cycle as to candidates’ true legal identity have exposed a lethal vulnerability in the Constitutional integrity of the Presidential election process. These unanswered questions remain an issue in the ongoing 2012 election cycle and must be addressed immediately.

Citizens pay for elections with their taxes and rely on elected officials, the media, and non-profit entities such as CPD to ensure the integrity of our election process. Voters harbor a very reasonable expectation that the true legal identity of all candidates be authenticated, that candidates are eligible for the office they seek, and that the elections, and the debates which precede and shape them, are incontrovertibly legitimate. In 2008, the media completely failed to meet its obligation in this process and, as we have already stated, our elected officials do not seem willing to accept the responsibility.

CPD performs a key leadership role as organizers of the Presidential debates and has a unique opportunity now to help mend this rift in our social fabric. Consequently, CPD’s working definition of “natural born Citizen” plays a central role in this unprecedented controversy.

Obviously, Presidential debates are, and have always been, an integral part of the election process. Because these iconic events have fallen under the direct control of the CPD since 1988, we urge you to take very seriously the ethical obligation established by your charter, your mission statement, and your candidate selection criteria to assertively act in the public interest to ensure that all Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are constitutionally eligible for office.

Toward that end, please be aware that, at this time, surveys consistently show that at least one-third of American voters either are suspicious of or completely reject representations of Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility for the office of President. A considerably smaller number question whether or not Mitt Romney’s parents were US citizens when he was born, partly because his father was born in Mexico. That concern merits equal examination and resolution.

The point is that the issue of presidential constitutional eligibility persistently plagues the electoral process and aggravates the relationship between taxpayers/voters and their representative government.

Supreme Court precedent, recorded in Minor v. Happersett, recognizes a natural born Citizen as one who is “born in a country of parents who were its citizens.” This definition is a logical extension of the progressively restrictive citizenship requirements for House Representatives (seven years) and Senators (nine years). It is also the definition most in keeping with the underlying intent of the Framers to avoid, to the greatest possible extent within a free society, the insinuation of any foreign influence on the power vested in the Oval Office.

The idea that “citizen” and “natural born Citizen” are equivalent in status completely ignores the fact that the Constitution itself distinguishes between these two citizenship classes in the same paragraph of Article II Section 1 that establishes Presidential eligibility qualifications. It is important to bear in mind that the Constitution has never been amended to eliminate this distinction, and that the Fourteenth Amendment does not address natural born citizenship at all. (For more information, see: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html)

Some suggest that any “anchor baby” is a natural born Citizen, regardless of citizenship status of the child’s parents. However, Article II Super PAC absolutely rejects that any such interpretation could be reconciled with the Framers’ original intent. The Founding Fathers intended that a person who would be President after the founding generation had passed must be born with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance at birth. The President must have sole allegiance to the United States and natural born citizen status is the Constitution’s primary tool to secure that objective.

To say that every child born in America is a natural born Citizen is also to say that any foreign citizen whose child was born in the US could be allowed to raise that child abroad as an enemy of the US and return that child to this country in time to meet the Constitution’s 14-year residency requirement for President. By that reasoning, world class terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, born in Las Cruces, NM to Yemeni parents, but raised and trained in the culture of Al Qaida, should have been eligible as a natural born Citizen at some point, assuming only that his tactics had remained law-abiding.

The assertion that mere place of birth or length of residency establishes natural born Citizen status flies in the face of repeated attempts over decades by numerous members of Congress – all failed – to modify the definition of “natural-born Citizen” to that very effect, or to abolish the requirement entirely. However, most recently, non-binding Senate Resolution 511, dated April 30, 2008 and ironically co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama, recognizes Sen. John McCain as a natural born Citizen, partly on the basis that he “was born to American citizens” (plural) which would seem to contradict Obama’s claim to eligibility.

Despite his full knowledge of and participation in this controversy, and his avowed credentials as a Constitutional law professor, Barack Obama has never publicly claimed to be a “natural born Citizen” of the United States. His eligibility has appropriately remained in question since he admits that he was born with dual citizenship by virtue of the fact that his father’s citizenship was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948. In addition, various corroborating evidence indicates that Obama may have become a citizen of Indonesia as a youth.

His repeated denials and ridicule for those who question his constitutional eligibility notwithstanding, Mr. Obama’s birthplace remains unknown since the “documentation” offered to authenticate his birthplace has been determined to be an outright forgery by the only duly-elected law enforcement officer in America who has ever conducted an official investigation into the matter, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, of Maricopa County, Arizona. Rather than an official certification, it is believed to be an electronic composite of selected data from his birth records and possibly from other sources. Sheriff Arpaio has pointedly asked Congress to investigate.

In summary, we ask that the CPD clarify its official position on this national security issue and explain how the CPD qualifies Presidential candidates’ constitutional eligibility as natural born Citizens of the United States.

We look forward to the opportunity to share your response with our membership and associated organizations.

Respectfully,
Helen Tansey, Executive Director
Article II Super PAC

Article II Super PAC Letter to Commission on Presidential Debates 8-30-2012

You Didn’t Win That Election, Obama

©2012 drkate

The ‘gift that keeps on giving‘…

Photo h/t Reality Zone Unfiltered News

Open Thread!

DNC Commits Nation-wide Election Fraud

©2012 drkate

The fundamental election fraud committed by the Democratic Party and the Democratic National Convention in 2008  is  documented in the nomination papers submitted to every Secretary of State.  In 2008 Nancy Pelosi swore that Obama met the constitutional requirements for the Presidency when he did not.   After the nomination convention, then-Chair of the DNC  Pelosi certified to the States that Obama was duly nominated the office as specified by the Democratic Party with the exception of Hawaii, where Nancy Pelosi swore that that Obama was constitutionally eligible–i.e., a natural born citizen.

Mouthpiece of 2012 democrat fraud

The Democrats will  commit the same kind of fraud in 2012 after the nomination of Barack Obama when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz in her private capacity as Chair of the DNC, a private club, certifies to every state that Obama is constitutionally qualified for the Presidency. This will happen in early September, and at that point  DWS commits the same fraud as Pelosi did in 2008  on the SoS of your state, which is a prosecutable crime.  Follow the paperwork.

Next up in the Obama ballot challenges is Florida’s case Voeltz v. Obama set for hearings on June 18 on the defendants move to dismiss the case.  Voeltz advances the ballot challenges on an important front challenging the authority of the Democratic Party to defraud the citizens of Florida by fraudulently advancing Obama’s name on the ballot.  Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been subpoenaed to appear.

The proceedings will be carried live on WND TV beginning at 9 AM eastern. Well said from The Steady Drip:

The Voeltz v Obama case is finally getting its first day in court Monday, June 18. Like all such cases, it challenges the right of the man who calls himself “Barack Hussein Obama” to be on the state ballot, because he hasn’t established that he is a natural born Citizen. The U.S. Constitution and Florida law require that, although they don’t specify how that is to be verified.

~snip

Florida is a must-win “swing state” for “Obama.” If he is not on the ballot, he simply cannot win. If he is successfully challenged here, or even nearly-successfully, it will create a host of problems in other states. Win or lose, millions will learn that they have been lied to– by the Democrats, Republicans, media, causing mass revulsion and rejection of Obama and any Democrats foolish enough to be closely identified with him.

Win or lose, these ballot challenges are important for the public education and the attention it provides.  The more the courts ignore the issue and the media fail to cover Obama’s lack of Constitutional eligibility, the more they are exposed as complicit and demonstrate their unworthiness to hold any position of public trust.  The more attention raised in key states the more each of those states’ Senators and Congressmen have cover for are obligated to object to the certification of electoral votes come the joint session of Congress on January 9, 2013.

Of political parties or factions George Washington warned, citing in his farewell address :

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Corruption is an equal opportunity player in today’s charade of the republicans v democrats. As the “old democratic party” witnessed its hijack  in 2008 by the extreme left and other interests, so too are the GOP rank and file witnessing and challenging the republican establishment’s  hijack of binding delegates to the establishment choice at the Republican Convention. How far will the establishment republicans go?

It will be a fatal blow to the republicans if they choose a constitutionally ineligible candidate for the Vice Presidency…both parties are then officially dead adverse to the Constitution.  None of the information or evidence on Obama is going away,  and options for  prosecuting Obama while he is in and after he is out of office still exist, with more information developed every day.  There are no more rugs to sweep this under. That is why we can continue to expect many false flags this summer from the Obama regime.

The more Obama/Soetoro is exposed and his criminal activities revealed, the more desperate the diversion tactics will become.  The murders already completed have already rather blatantly revealed their hand and identity; any more will just confirm the information and further expose the network.

Lock him out, lock him up

Open Letter to Joe Biden

©2012 drkate

Ever wonder who the real president  of the United States is right now?  Technically, its Joe Biden.

Obama is constitutionally unqualified for the presidency under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5. At the end of the long process of voter fraud, voter intimidation, misinformation by the media, voting, vote theft, DNC fraud, and electoral college counts, the joint session of Congress assembled in early January 2009 to certify the electoral college votes.  Both the certification of the candidates and the call for objections to Obama’s eligibility that could have been raised on January 8, 2009 were not allowed/implemented/conducted  by then Vice President Cheney and/or Speaker Pelosi.

If Amendment Twelve would have been implemented– a legal, constitutional, and proper legislative action –Joe Biden would have been President and Sarah Palin Vice President.

Amendment Twelve says in part:

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be   counted…

In Kerchner v. Obama  et al –including Cheney and Pelosi, government lawyers argued that these duties under the 12th Amendment were ministerial and not ‘official’; yet they used the official status of Cheney and Pelosi as a shield to prevent legal action while performing ‘official duties’.

But the duties involving the constitutional certification of the President and Vice President are consequential, serious, and constitutional.  Thus, President of the Senate and VP Joe Biden, and Speaker John Boehner need to be reminded of their duties under their solemn oath of office and their Constitutional responsibilities when it comes to Amendment Twelve.

Open Letter to President Joe Biden:

Dear President Biden:

As you are undoubtedly aware by now, Mr. Obama is not constitutionally eligible to hold the presidency. This makes you the current legal president of the United States and Mr. Obama an unlawful occupant of your office.  Since no one has officially acknowledged this I will be the first to congratulate you, and probably the first to offer condolences for the lack of recognition of this fact.

Since you are operating as Vice President, you are simultaneously the President of the Senate.  In that role you have a number of awesome responsibilities, including the certification and counting of the Electoral College vote on January 9, 2013.  That task requires, historically and under Amendment Twelve, the certification that the president/vice president-elect meet the constitutional qualifications of the office.

You have always had it within your power to redress the situation of Congress’ failure to certify Mr. Obama’s constitutional qualifications.  Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, you are able to recommend, with the majority of the cabinet, the removal of the President for a ‘disability‘ that makes him unable to fulfill the obligations of the office. As an officer of the United States, you should also know about Title 18 and the misprision of treason and felony statutes requiring the disclosure of activity that would be considered a crime under the laws of the United States.

During that day of January 2013, a number of objections to the certification of Barack Obama, if he is re-elected, are likely from several states, and will include representatives and senators. It is your constitutional duty to call for and hear those objections and ascertain the next steps. 

In 2009, your predecessor VP Dick Cheney refused to call for or hear any objections.  Speaker Pelosi ignored the requirement to certify constitutional eligibility contained in Amendment Twelve. 

However, unlike 2009, in 2013 millions of Americans are aware of the duty you have as President of the Senate, and as a sworn constitutional officer of the United States.  We will be watching and witnessing your actions that  significant day when your legacy, honor, office, and integrity will all be on the line.

Will history disdainfully conclude that you conspired to overthrow the United States by allowing and working with a constitutionally ineligible foreigner to usurp the office of the President?  Or will history glorify your action and integrity as the man who saved the Presidency?

Honor America, Mr. President. 

Well I am sure there are many improvements and better zingers possible with a letter to Biden. :lol:   I hope you use this one, or draft your own…we can work on many levels to exert influence on those who must be told what to do.

The next officials that I will target letters to are those senators and congressmen in each of the states where a ballot challenge or other legal actions have been undertaken.  In theory anyway, the Senators and Representatives are obligated to object on behalf of their constituents.

Ballot Challenges are Not Over

Remember the ballot challenges are not over;  some suggest that the precedent set by of all the cases trying to get at Obama’s eligibility led to specific legal timing of a challenge–which has to be after he’s nominated but before his name is placed on a ballot.  The window of time is very short and each state varies.  Find your state’s window for the challenge to the state’s General Election ballot.

Your thoughts?  After that, open thread! :smile:

Amendment 12 and January 9, 2013: The Last Line of Defense

©2012 drkate

Collectively, these actions, questions, investigations and research militate for and require the representatives and senators in each state where these actions have been undertaken to raise objections to the electoral college vote count on January 9, 2013.

This post will look far off into the future, and assumes for the moment that none of the legal and proper efforts Constitutionalists have undertaken since 2008 to have Barrack Obama Soetoro investigated and removed from office based on his lack of constitutional eligibility will have worked. We have created letter-writing campaigns, demonstrations, multiple lawsuits, ballot challenges, treason charges and trials, and citizen grand jury investigations.  History will record the efforts of American patriots to fight this injustice done to our country, and the world already knows of our efforts and knows that Obama is a usurper.  Obama has used tax dollars, drugs, weapons, or CIA threats to bribe Kenya, Indonesia, Pakistan, the muslim community, individual states, and so many others to keep silent about his illegality.  He is a legend–in name only–and history and God will judge all of those complicit as traitorous individuals not worthy of the spit on a street corner.

While we have been able to fully expose Obama/Soetoro and the network of criminals inside and outside of government who have enabled this usurpation, our efforts to have action taken on behalf of our Country and American citizens have been thwarted by the media, the judiciary, the Congress, law enforcement, the military, and the legion of insaneobots paid to harass Americans.  Assuming Obama and the democrats/republicans, in concert with the media will rig the 2012 presidential election and put Obama in the office again,  our last line of defense will be the counting and certification of the electoral college votes by a joint session of Congress on January 9, 2013.

Amendment 12:  Choosing the President

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

Appointment of the Electors.  States appoint the electors and the number of electors is based on the number of house and Senate seats in each state.  48 States and the District of Columbia “appoint” their Electors on a winner-take-all basis (that is, the presidential/vice-presidential ticket with the plurality of the Statewide vote [= most votes from the State] is intended to get all that jurisdiction’s Electors). In each of the two remaining States, Maine and Nebraska, the presidential/vice-presidential ticket that receives the plurality of the vote in each Congressional District is intended to get the vote of the 1 “district” Elector from that CD, while the presidential/vice-presidential ticket receiving the most votes Statewide is intended to get the votes of 2 “at-large” Electors from the State. The candidate that wins the popular vote in the other 48 states receives all of that state’s electoral college votesThis site describes the number of electoral votes in each state.

In most states, electoral college members are required to vote for the person who won the popular vote in the state, and in some cases there are financial and other penalties involved if one doesn’t follow that rule.  In 2008 there were attempts to file lawsuits at that point in time to prevent the vote for Obama, but the courts ruled that ‘the process had to be completed’ before any lawsuit on the merits could be filed (cough, cough).

Challenging the Vote in the Joint Session of Congress

The next point in time that we have to challenge the vote for Obama is on January 9, 2013, during a joint session of Congress to count the electoral college votes as specified in the Twelveth Amendment.

A few times in history this electoral vote counting was challenged by members of the House and Senate.  In 2000, while then VP Gore was presiding over the joint session of Congress, the vote was challenged by democrats, the black congressional caucus, and a few Senators based on the Florida recount debacle, where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bush by taking away the State’s presumed jurisdiction over the vote count.  The objection was based on a possible fraudulent vote count.

In 2008, there were several reasons why the vote could have been challenged, including:

  • Obama’s lack of constitutional eligibility
  • The Democrat’s Rules and Bylaws theft of votes from HRC
  • Voter intimidation and caucus fraud
  • Illegal foreign campaign contributions
  • The insufficiency of Obama’s ballot access (forged signatures, for which Indiana democrats have recently been punished)
  • Voter machine tampering
  • Shutting down the Democrat’s convention without fully voting
  • Suspicious deaths of key HRC supporters

Former Speaker of the House of Lies

But no one challenged the electoral college vote, in fact I heard Nancy Pelosi was so drunk with power that she rushed the vote improperly, aided and abetted by VP Dick Cheney, without the requisite analysis of citizenship status or calling for objections.  All those who could have challenged this vote were too afraid to do so, and yes that includes Ron Paul.  They made a calculation that their paychecks and perks were more important than defending the Constitution from all enemies, domestic and foreign.

Every member of Congress, and every Senator on January 8, 2009, violated their oath of office and failed to protect America.  They will be held accountable in this lifetime, or clearly when they stand before their maker and try to explain away their treason.

The 2013 Scenario

As of this date, there have been millions of letters written to Congress, no less than 100 lawsuits that have never been heard on the merits, a dozen ballot challenges, a law enforcement investigation, citizen petitions to investigate, proven fraudulent ballot access in 2008 by Obama, proven voter intimidation, and public opinion polls that continue to demonstrate that most Americans do not believe Obama and want his status investigated.

Collectively, these actions, questions, investigations and research militate for and require the representatives and senators in each state where these actions have been undertaken to raise objections to the electoral college vote count on January 9, 2013.

The scoundrels known as our Senators and Congressmen, including the so-called ‘tea party favorites’, have one last chance to meet their oath of office, and of course, they want ‘cover’ for doing the right thing.  So here is, and hear, your cover, boys and girls:
  • Each state in which there has been a ballot challenge, petition, grand jury investigation, lawsuit, and letter writing campaign regarding Obama’s lack of eligibility needs to assemble a packet for each of their Congressmen and Senators requiring that they raise an objection to the electoral college count on January 9, 2013.  This effort must begin now, and make it clear that they will either be recalled, boycotted, or publically shamed if they fail to do so.  For new ‘tea party’ or other candidates (like John Dennis in California, trying to defeat Pelosi), pledges that they will raise an objection–regardless of the effect on their political career–must be secured, and if not, do not support them financially.  They only need to listen to their constituents to have enough ‘cover‘ reason to do so–it is the right thing to do.  We are talking New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Arizona, California, Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Georgia, New York…to name a few.
  • Any state that can demonstrate voter fraud in 2012, including the caucuses, should require its congressional delegation to challenge the electoral college vote for their state
  • The State legislatures should be petitioned to send a directive to their congressional delegate to challenge the vote, based on the request of the public
  • A scientifically-sound poll should be commissioned in each state asking the direct question to the public whether they would support a challenge to the electoral college vote in 2013 if Obama is ‘re-elected’ to office.
  • Plans should be made to shut the Congress down in January–preventing their leaving their offices–until this issue is addressed.  Similar plans should be made for each congressional and senatorial office in each state.
  • A national strike should be considered in lieu of the Congress taking any action.

Remember that the Twelveth Amendment provides a legal, constitutional procedure to select the President and Vice President should the presidential candidate fail to meet the qualifications of the office.

Lock him out, lock him up

Americans v. Usurper

©2012 drkate

Sheriff Arpaio answers audience questions March 31, 2012

I walked into the crowded room to find hundreds of people closely listening to the words of Mike Zullo, Cold Case Posse Investigator for Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.  The listening was so intent you could hear a pin drop. I made the hours long drive in order to sign a petition, for Arizona residents, and to hear the latest report from the Cold Case Posse.

Petition Requesting a RESOLUTION as per ARS 41-121-1

For Arizona Residents Only.

To: The Arizona State Senate; The Arizona State House; Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett

Petition Requesting a RESOLUTION as per ARS 41-121-1. The Secretary of State shall: Receive bills and resolutions from the legislature, and perform such other duties as devolve upon the Secretary of State by resolution of the two houses or either of them.

Hundreds crowd Cold Case Posse meeting

We the undersigned Arizona citizens are requesting that the Arizona House, and / or the Arizona Senate pass a RESOLUTION directing Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett to send a certified letter to Democratic National Committee Chairperson, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, requesting that she produce certified source documents that are satisfactory to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office that positively identify the U.S. natural born citizenship and the Selective Service System Registration of Barack Hussein Obama II, With the recent findings of the MCSO Cold-Case Posse, there is probable cause to believe that Barack Hussein Obama II’s Selective Service System Registration Form and his State of Hawaii Certification of Live Birth Form are criminal forgeries, it is imperative to determine Barack Hussein Obama II’s status regarding his eligibility to be placed on the 2012 Arizona ballot.

Methodically, Mike Zullo briefed the audience on many of the facets of this now criminal investigation into the production of Obama’s false documentation, which he used to cheat and lie his way into the White House in 2008 with full democratic party cover.  They intend to cover for him again, that is, unless the Sheriff and American citizens have their say.

Zullo discussed several factors on the forged selective service registration form that have not been shared widely, including the necessary manipulation of the “8″ in “80″ in order for the upside down stamp from a ’2008′ official stamp to actually look like “80″ instead of an upside down ’8′.  This selective service registration form must have been one of those ‘forgotten’ forms to fill the record, because it had to use a 2008 stamp…meaning that this form was placed in the file in 2008, not 1980 as claimed.

Several long-time constitutional activists have been in Arizona for the last week, where Lord Monkton–who warned Americans of the global warming scam– and other individuals have visited with and been interviewed by Sheriff Arpaio.  While the criminal investigation is underway in the United States, the investigation will soon have international fronts opening up.  Other countries, who surely see the danger America is in from this criminal usurper, may be of assistance as they are threatened by the illegal actions of Obama as well. How can you sign treaties with a criminal usurper who can’t represent the United States?

Constitutional activists George Miller (Obama Ballot Challenge), Tony Dolz (CA candidate), Gary Wilmot (Article II Superpac) in Arizona

The audience was very concerned about the next steps, particularly in light of the petition being signed and our collective knowledge that the DNC will ignore this request even from a state legislature, or would sue in Federal Court to prevent states from controlling their own elections.  Several audience members suggested a grand jury be called to investigate–the Sheriff may have access to a sitting grand jury in Maricopa County. Since a Grand Jury indictment or presentment is required to charge anyone with a capital or infamous crime (felony), pursuing a Grand Jury presentment seems properAny seated Grand Jury should be able to consider the evidence as being probable cause for an official criminal charge within their respective jurisdiction. (h/t Tenacity)

Please continue to support the Sheriff’s Cold Case Posse.  By the way, the Sheriff told me that if he had won the recent megamillions lottery, he’d be running for President!   Now there is one candidate who would have the testicular fortitude to challenge Obama on his credentials to even run for the office! :smile:

The Investigators

Open thread!

Totalitariansim as the ‘Collective Good’

©2012 drkate

In a previous post, we discussed the concepts of the individual vs the collective, determining  the uniqueness of America as representing and protecting the rights of the individual.   The American constitution protects against democracy, or ‘mob rule’, where the rights of the individual are overridden by the ‘majority’.  One could say that democracy is totalitarianism, where the rights of the individual are sacrificed for the whole.

A common ridiculous argument of the anti-American, flat earth eligibility deniers is that “60 million people” confirmed that Obama is a ‘natural born citizen’.  This is a not so subtle message underlying the socialist democrats enabling the usurper Obama.

Is collectivism the ‘highest morality‘ of human society?

Carnival Barky

©2012 drkate

The Chief Carnival Barker, Barrack Hussein Soetoro Soebarka Obama talks about what a distraction it is to focus on the fact that he has no legal identity in the United States.  So much of a distraction it prevents him from completely annihilating our country as quickly as he wants to.

This classic video was re-released by the White House on March 1, 2012, the day Sheriff Joe Arapio’s law enforcement investigation proved what Carnival Barky has been afraid of all along:

  • Obama cannot prove he was born in the United States because he can’t produce documents to prove it. Hence, we do not know his legal identity, nor can we say he ws born in the United States…

Hence, Obama’s nominating petition in each and every state is defective

  • Obama was not born to citizen parents

Hence, Obama has not proven he is an Article II ‘natural born citizen’ because he has not proven place of birth and citizen parents.

  • Obama is not eligible for the office of the president

Lock him out, lock him up

In each and every county, and in each and every state, the papers that the Democrats are putting forward–and Obama is signing–that proffer him as the candidate of the Party are defective.  The Democrats are committing fraud in each state right now. These are very simple points to hammer on, and now you have law enforcement to back you up.  What about the Sheriffs in your county…do they have the courage to stand up for the Constitution and to actually live their oath of office?

Head on down to your local democrat party office with a few signs letting them know you know they are committing fraud.  Write a few letters to the editor with these simple facts.  Put out a flyer or postcard, a poster or road sign: its time to challenge them on every single corner of every street in this nation.  If you can’t do that, support the Obama Ballot Challenge and the educational efforts of the Article II SuperPac. Yes, its been a long road, and yes, we’re asking again for your support.

Mouthpiece of 2012 democrat fraud

Create the record so that all of history and time, and our Creator will know, that we opposed the usurpation of the United States Constitution by the jackals, jackasses, and carnival barkers of the left wing sociopathic communist new world order odors of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

Update on Arizona Ballot Challenge

Plaintiff in the Pima County Ballot Challenge, Kenneth Allen, submitted a brief in opposition to the Arizona Democrat party’s motion to dismiss his challenge that is sure to make headlines and has already made the democrats steaming mad…so mad they have moved to strike the brief itself.  While it is expected that the judge in the case will dismiss it as all others before him, it is worth reviewing the standard democrat arguments and Plaintiff Allen’s challenges to them so as to ‘try your hand’ at using these arguments yourself.

Plaintiff Allen’s introduction to his argument opposing defendant AZDems motion to dismiss:

Comes now Plaintiff Kenneth L. Allen in opposition to Defendant Arizona Democratic Party (“the Party”) Motion to Dismiss on the grounds that Defendant cannot guarantee to the Plaintiff nor the citizens of Pima County that it will not commit fraud as it certifies that candidate Barack H. Obama is constitutionally eligible for the office of President of the United States. 

Typically, the democrats cite disparagingly the “49 cases that have been dismissed resolving forever the discussion the Obama’s eligibility:

Exhibit A (listing 49 federal cases and 3S state cases rejecting arguments made by “birthers” in one form or another. Motion to Dismiss, Az Democrats

Plaintiff Allen’s response:

VII. Defendants Erroneously Rely on Case Law that is Irrelevant to this Complaint.

Defendants, in a footnote (fn3 p 2), erroneously claim that candidate Obama’s eligibility for president has been addressed already by a series of cases across the country, cases which have never argued the merits of candidate Obama’s status as a natural born citizen, and cases which have never addressed specifically a ballot challenge. Defendants compare apples to oranges. Contrary to Defendants haughty claim, there is no legal authority or court in the country that has ruled on or definitively stated that candidate Obama meets the constitutional qualifications for the presidency

Defendants proffer Obama’s birth certificate released by the White House as proof positive of Obama’s birth in the United States, making it a central part of the case.   Plaintiff Allen’s response:

VIII. Defendants “Make Up” a Definition of Natural Born Citizen that Conflicts with Existing Case Law, cannot be supported by the facts and Cite No legal authority for their Definition.

While erroneously relying on case law that does not address the merits of the definition of natural born citizen, Defendants make up a definition by stating that candidate Obama is a ‘natural born citizen’ because he was born in the United States (Hawaii) to an American citizen mother, that is, a single citizen parent (Defendants at 2, 1-7). Defendants proffer Exhibit A, a purported copy of candidate Obama’s birth certificate, as proof of his birth in the United States.

Plaintiff asks this Court to take judicial notice of the March 1, 2012 findings of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio which state that there is probable cause that the Hawaii birth certificate proffered as evidence that candidate Obama was born in the United States to a U.S. citizen mother is a forgery and thus a fraudulent document . Defendants cannot definitively state that candidate Obama was born anywhere in the United States, which is just one of the characteristics of a natural born citizen.

Defendants also erroneously interpret Minor v Happersett and include the Fourteenth Amendment as necessary to the discussion of the term natural born citizen (fn6 p 5). The Fourteenth Amendment is not relevant to the discussion of natural born citizen as it concerns only the requirements to be a citizen of the United States; did not refer to or modify Article II; and never once mentions ‘natural born citizen’.

The purported Birth Certificate of candidate Obama (Exhibit (A) has been proven to be fraudulent through investigation of Sheriff Joe Arapaio. Because the defendants have brought the argument about the birth certificate here they should provide all documents for inspection and have made this issue relevant in this case.

The Arizona Democrats step in the pile big time…making up out of thin air their own definition of natural born citizen, and relying on fraudulent documents to do so.  They also erroneously try to use the case of Wong Kim Ark–long a standard bulwark of the flat-earth eligibility deniers–and the Fourteenth Amendment to argue for the illegitimate Carnival Barky:

XII.  Defendants Erroneously suggest the Fourteenth Amendment grants ‘natural born citizen’ status to candidate Obama.

 Defendant erroneously focuses on the case of Wong Kim Ark (69 U.S. 649 (1898)) and the term ‘citizen’, failing to recognize that the case is completely separate from and did not decide that Wong Kim Ark was a ‘natural born citizen’.  Wong Kim Ark became a citizen, not a  natural born citizen, of the United States.[1] Defendants also claim that candidate Obama is a natural born citizen based on his birth in the United States, a statement that is now without merit in light of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arapio’s report (id note 2). 


[1] Wong Kim Ark’s children would be natural born citizens of the United States if Wong Kim Ark married an American citizen.

Finishing the party off in grand style, Plaintiff Allen reasonably concludes:

Because Defendant cannot prove that candidate Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States as required by the Constitution, and cannot prove he was born in the United States,  this case should proceed on the merits of the questions initially asked of this Court. Absent this case, Defendant is likely to commit fraud on this Plaintiff, the citizens of Pima County, state and county officials of Arizona, and the citizens of Arizona by failing to conclusively validate the Party’s candidate for the president.

It is important to note for this case, as probably in others, the Democrats argue that they have exclusive privilege to select their candidate for president–irrespective of whether that candidate is eligible or not.  In this case, the Democrats argued that even with that right, the Plaintiff should bring in all other counties in Arizona to the dispute.  Challenging their authority, the Plaintiff retorts:

IX. Defendants claim a right to choose the Party’s candidate—irrespective of qualifications—to place on the Arizona ballot.

 Defendants ask this Court to dismiss this ballot challenge because it has the right to choose the Party’s candidate whether it has proof of the candidate’s eligibility or not. By stating this, the Party represents that it is representing candidate Obama’s efforts to secure a place on the Arizona ballot. Plaintiff opposes Defendant’s motion to dismiss because Plaintiff does not believe that the Party has a right to defraud the citizens of Arizona by putting forth a candidate that does not meet the qualifications of the office sought.  Defendants have offered no proof of candidate Obama’s constitutional qualifications for the office, rely on patently fraudulent documentation (fn 5 p 5), and demonstrate disrespect of the Plaintiff and the voters of Arizona who have a right to vote for a constitutionally eligible candidate.  Defendants also demonstrate spurious disrespect for Constitution of the United States (fn 3, 4 p 2).

What the Plaintiff is pointing out to all of us is how much information we have already and that we don’t need to be lawyers to start taking them on.  This is a citizen complaint, written by ordinary citizens. Get copies of these documents from the Obama Ballot Challenge site, there is a lot of good material to use in your own letters and documents.  You will be well-versed in how the democrats use smoke and mirrors to deceive, and how to break them into so many shards of glass.

Rise America

Democrats as Agents of Fraud

©2012 drkate

Misprision of Felony:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. Title 18 U.S.C. § 4

Reporting on the Obama Ballot Challenges across the nation and in Arizona specifically, in each and every instance the Democrat Party has been served with summons’ and complaints by the various elector-plaintiffs who have challenged Obama’s right to be on their state’s ballot.  And in each and every state; in every town and city where the Democrats operate, they are actively perpetuating fraud upon the citizens of their state by falsely pushing Obama’s name  onto the ballot.

For the record, Obama is not a natural born citizen due to his father’s citizenship and foreign allegiance, and is at best a dual citizen; Obama has also failed to prove conclusively that he was born in the United States. Finally, Obama has failed to provide evidence of his repatriation to the United States or evidence of a legal name change after his adoption by an Indonesian citizen.  His legal identity as Barack Hussein Obama is what his hat-hangs on.

In 2008,

  • DNC Chair and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi lied to each state by stating Obama was ‘constitutionally qualified’ for the position of president.
  • Obama himself knowingly falsely swore in Arizona to be a ‘natural born citizen’, affixing his personal signature to a document which was required for him to be on the 2008 ballot in Arizona.  Perjury or false swearing is recognized as a crime in Arizona and other states

The state of Arizona accepted as true the false sworn statements by Obama and thereafter placed his name on the ballots.  He was then elected President.  The voters in Arizona were directly defrauded by Obama’s false affirmations.

When Obama  swore he was eligible, he lied.  He didn’t swear that he might be eligible or that there was a good chance he would be found eligible.  He swore that he was – in fact – eligible. Obama’s certain affirmations under oath and penalty of perjury are false.  He could not have been certain and he should not have sworn that he was.   He’s guilty of false swearing despite whatever definition of natural-born citizen comes down the pike.

  • The Hawaii Democrat party went against its own rules and certified Obama as constitutionally eligible to appear on their ballot…a mysterious visit to Granny Dunham, her death, and the appointment of the HI Democrat Party Chair as Lt. Governor in 2010 followed.

Current DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Shultz promises to do the same to the American people–knowingly falsely certify Obama as constitutionally qualified for the party’s nomination.  Swimming in bribery money or drowning in threats to life and limb, all the democrats who work for Obama and place him on the ballot, produce and distribute literature on his behalf are committing a crime.

And they should be told about it.  Send them all a copy of Title 18 Section 4.  And advise them to quit their jobs before they are all finally ensnared in conspiracy to defraud along with the chief Obutt and his repulsive ‘wife’–herself no stranger to false ids and social security numbers…Guadelupe and Harrison Bonnel, anyone?

Oh how the Democrats scream and yell when they are served with legal papers summoning their presence in a lawsuit challenging their Obutt’s name on the ballot.  They run away, block your car from exiting the parking lot, or throw the papers on the floor.  But there is no way they–the Democrat party’s subdivisions, officers and employees– will be able to avoid criminal charges for their participation in one of the greatest thefts and scams in United States history, second only to the FED and the Sixteenth Amendment.

In Pima County, Arizona, plaintiff Ken Allen recently filed a ballot challenge pursuant to Arizona regulations.  The Democrat party was served, along with county officials and a status conference held on February 23, 2011.  The Judge in the case was ‘not certain’ he had jurisdiction but when presented with evidence that he had, quickly granted leave to the plaintiff to file an amended complaint by March 1, 2012.  The Democrat party, Pima County Attorney, Barack Hussein Obama, and others will be served and trial strategy is being planned.  Remember, Obama has already lied to Arizonans once before, and we know he will do it again if the Democrats are complicit in submitting fraudulent documentation to the Arizona Secretary of State.

In the meantime ballot challenges in Pennsylvania, Florida, California, Indiana, Alaska, Illinois, Georgia, and several other states are continuing.  In Georgia, plaintiff’s attorney has submitted a motion to suspend the Georgia primary election based on the egregious, arbitrary and capricious actions of Georgia’s SoS and “Judge” Malihi.  Don’t forget that Georgia got two nuclear plants in exchange for the Judge and State officials’ betrayal of their citizens.

Looking for Balls

©2012 drkate

Well, the republicans don’t have any, and the democrats never had them. But these two can’t seem to stop looking for them…

did they really roll down the hill?

(h/t Jan)

If you’d like to add a caption, by all means be my guest! :lol:

In the meantime, here are some excellent interviews and events that took place this week:

  • Joe Bannister, retired IRS agent, along with Terry Dodd and Red Beckmann, discuss “The Law that Never Was”–the Sixteenth Amendment–on drkates Revolution Radio February 16, 2012. Pay attention to the questions that are asked, and answered, such as ‘what is income’? Check out these two websites for more information on one of the greatest hoaxes played on Americans since the founding of our country.  DON’T FORGET…that a free hard copy of Red Beckman’s “The Law that Never Was” will be given to the person with the 50,000th comment on DrKatesview! 
  • Obama ballot access challenges were filed in Arizona and Pennsylvania this week by two well-known patriots.  Please be sure to support these efforts at the legal fund established to defray costs of these suits as the Article II SuperPac, and check in on the efforts at the Obama Ballot Access Challenge site.
  • Georgia Superior Court asked to overrule the GA SOS and the judge-less Maliki’s erroneous decision

You see boys above, real Patriots do have balls, we don’t need to go looking for them.  The establishment will not have an easy time of it, as the Revolution will not be televised.

Have fun!

Why the Militia?

©2012 drkate

After the Georgia court’s decision, why not the militia?

Malihi is a traitor and has blatantly violated his OATH OF OFFICE, if you ever signed one. I call for his resignation from the bench. You are unworthy sir and have betrayed our constitution, our republic and the PEOPLE who are your employers. You are a de facto government agent, incapable of making an impartial finding of fact or determination of law…a disgrace. When a man is incapable of putting his own personal interest, even under duress, beneath that of his oath of office, then he must recuse or resign. You fail to do the first and now it is time you did the latter. (~h/t reader Tenacity)

As reader Troy points out, however, Malihi left the door wide open for the case to go up to the U.S. Supreme Court, knowingly or not.  When it gets before SCOTUS, we do expect them to rule in the Obutt’s favor, because to do otherwise would convict Chief Justice Roberts of treason for knowingly swearing in a usurper.  That will be our signal.

In 1789, Thomas Jefferson warned that the judiciary, if given too much power, might ruin our Republic and destroy our rights:

“…the Federal Judiciary: an irresponsible body, working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all be consolidated into one…it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we are separated…”

Like Judge Carter, Judge Malihi woke up one recent morning with a bloody horse’s head in his bed, and decided to save his life and his paycheck instead of uphold the law and rule properly in favor of the Constitution for the united States of America.  The state and citizens of Georgia were unmercifully threatened…and promised nuclear power plants (aka union jobs)….if….

Waking up to corruption in America is nothing new, and after years of battling the most corrupt administration in our history, led by a usurper, we find the judiciary, and the 99% of attorneys and law schools in this country, are corrupt to the core…intent upon destroying our republic.  Appeals of course are possible, and I suppose if the GA Secretary of State has not found a horse head yet in his bed, he could ignore Malihi’s  administrative ruling…but this is the power of a usurper and his accomplices to ruin our country.

If the source of your wealth and power has been a gullible public, you will not want someone interfering with your racket.  Politicians are criminals who use deceit and deception to separate great numbers of people from their money and power.  Bureaucrats are people who trade in their conscience for the security of a paycheck and benefits  Beneficiaries of government are those who trade their votes for goodies promised by the politicians.  The major media are the communicators who lie for a living.

The Militia is a Constitutional Defense ForceA well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State.

The Militia are a threat to Obama and all those who gave us this $14 trillion dollar debt, over one hundred thousand dead in no-win Korean, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan wars, Ruby Ridge, Waco, and the terrorist IHS, DHS, Department of Justice and the attacks of 911. Thinking Americans know those who believe political propaganda are the most dangerous people in the world.

******

At various show times over the next few weeks, drkates Revolution Radio will be reading excerpts from Red Beckman’s “Why the Militia”.  These shows will likely be recorded at odd hours–due to my schedule–but will be available as archived material for your review.

With Red Beckman’s permission, Drkatesview is also pleased to offer “Why the Militia” at special discounted rates.  A reader suggested that each of us adopt our local sheriffs and give them a copy of this book.  If you are interested in purchasing a copy, kindly let me know in the comments or email me at drkatesview@gmail.com. Purchase prices are based on the number of books you buy, and range from $4-$8 plus postage.

In the meantime, lets use this thread to discuss some pro-active actions we can take at our state levels to begin to start nullifying unlawful federal actions.  Georgia’s ‘lack of courage is not enough to stop any of us in our tracks.  We true Patriots love America too much to let her fall by the hands of tyrants. Think strategy!

Be strong and of good courage; be not frightened, neither be dismayed: for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go. ~Joshua 1:9

Wire Fraud in the Land of Obama

©2012 drkate

Title 18 U.S.C. § 1343 provides, in part:

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

Write-in Presidential candidate Montgomery Blair Sibley asserts that by knowingly submitting a forged  certificate of live birth and ‘long form birth certificate’ on line to the American public,

the “scheme” that President Obama appears to have intended is to obtain a job that he is not eligible to hold given his lack of “natural born Citizen” status. See, e.g., United States v. Granberry, 908 F.2d 278, 279 (8th Cir. 1990)

Initially, it is well-settled that the “use of the Internet for transmission of images or messages satisfies the requirement of interstate commerce.” See, e.g., United States v. Carroll, 105 F.3d 740, 742 (1st Cir. 1997). Moreover, to seek to obtain public money – here the salary of the President of the United States – has been recognized as satisfying the “money” element of §1343. See, e.g., Pasquantino v. United States, 544 U.S. 349, 356-57 (2005) (recognizing that money in the public treasury is the government’s “money” for purposes of the mail fraud statute.) 

Candidate Sibley submitted a  certified petition for Writs Quo Warranto and Mandamus to  the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, requesting a jury trial,  setting forth outcomes (a) that Obama be ousted from office and/or prevented from being placed on the ballot for the 2012 presidential election, (b) a directive to the U.S. Attorney to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3332 and reveal to the Grand Jury the alleged offense of Obama, with the right of Sibley to inform in writing each and every one of the jurors of the offenses of Obama and other criminal acts of federal actors in the District of Columbia.

As with other cases of Quo Warranto  seeking to compel proof of natural born citizenship, the politically-influenced Department of Justice has refused to forward any case or respond to it, just like Jablonski’s  contemptuous and ill-fated attempt to go around the judiciary to quash any action against Obama.

However, Candidate Sibley will not go away quietly, and in a press release issued January 31, 2012 takes the following action:

WASHINGTON D.C. – Coming on the heels of the sworn testimony taken in the Georgia Administrative Law hearing at which expert witnesses testified under oath as to the indications of forgery in Barack Obama’s putative certificates of live birth, POTUS Write-In Candidate Montgomery Blair Sibley has this day amended his Quo Warranto lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to demand that the Court enforce 18 U.S.C. §3332.That section requires, upon request of a citizen, that the United States Attorney present information concerning such an alleged offense to the grand jury.

On January 12, 2012, Sibley made such a request. In so much as the United States Attorney has refused to acknowledge the request, Sibley has moved for a writ of mandamus from the Court to compel U.S. Attorney Machen, Jr., to comply with §3332.

Though several individuals have requested state police and/or the F.B.I. to investigate Obama’s putative COLBs, this is the first instance where an individual has invoked 18 U.S.C. §3332 to removed the matter from the discretion of the politically-influenced Department of Justice. Instead, Sibley is taking the allegations of Obama’s wire fraud directly to a federal Grand Jury which has the unfettered power to indict Obama if it finds “there is sufficient evidence of probable cause to justify bringing the accused to trial.”

~snip~

Citing not only the evidence attached to the First Amended Complaint, Sibley also now has required the assigned Judge – John D. Bates – to take judicial notice of the proceedings in the Georgia Administrative Law matter. In that Georgia case, two expert document examiners testified under oath on January 27, 2012, that the certificates of live birth released by Obama appear to be forgeries.

The ball is now in the Court of the Honorable John D. Bates who must decide whether to enforce the law or allow the questions of: (i) Obama’s eligibility to be President and (ii) his alleged criminal behavior to be shielded from determination by his judicial inaction on these questions.

The battery of lawyers Obama must hire now have to fight fires on all fronts, including the ballot challenges being taken in six (6) more states against Obama, are costing taxpayers and Obama a fortune…the ill-gotten gains of Obama’s entire life of lies.

Obama leads Dems over a waterfall

Georgia on My Mind: Full Faith and Credit

©2012 drkate

Obama is going to have to flip more than 30 million votes to cheat his way back into the pResidency.

The stunning victory of the Constitutionalists over Barack Obama/Soetoro/Soebarkah in Georgia on January 26 was also a victory for the judicial system and the rule of law.  No doubt the pressure on Georgia officials is significant so it is important to remind them of the support that exists for their courage.

Scofflaw

Defiant Obama–nothing new, of course–blows it by not showing up, but when has he ever showed up even through his lawyers?  He has dismissed all of us as just so much toilet paper, and his attack on the judiciary, the people, and the states will not stop with this positive ruling.

The Obama ballot challenge and the Article II SuperPac have had a considerable impact in beginning the process of outright removal of his name from the ballot and has the additional very important impact of raising awareness and doubt about Obama in the electorate.  Rather demoralizing for the Obots, Congress, and the media to have spent their wad, ‘credibility‘, and resources defending a fake, fraud, liar, and criminal, don’t you agree? They will stay home, not vote, and ‘blame it on Bush’.

Its time now to go on the offense and cripple Obama in the states he needs to “win” the election.  Some 130 electoral college votes are needed in the states of Pennsylvania, Florida, Texas, Ohio, and New York in order for Obama to give the appearance of  have(ing) a chance of winning the 2012 election.  Given the Georgia ruling, our next step is…get prepared…use the Constitution: (h/t slcraignbc)

U.S. Constitution Article IV Section 1.

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

JUDGMENTS: EFFECT TO BE GIVEN IN FORUM STATE

In General

Article IV, Sec. 1, has had its principal operation in relation to judgments. Embraced within the relevant discussions are two principal classes of judgments. First, those in which the judgment involved was offered as a basis of proceedings for its own enforcement outside the State where rendered, as for example, when an action for debt is brought in the courts of State B on a judgment for money damages rendered in State A; second, those in which the judgment involved was offered, in conformance with the principle of res judicata, in defense in a new or collateral proceeding growing out of the same facts as the original suit, as for example, when a decree of divorce granted in State A is offered as barring a suit for divorce by the other party to the marriage in the courts of State B.

The English courts and the different state courts in the United States, while recognizing “foreign judgments in personam” which were reducible to money terms as affording a basis for actions in debt, originally accorded them generally only the status of prima facie evidence in support thereof, so that the merits of the original controversy could always be opened. When offered in defense, on the other hand, “foreign judgments in personam” were regarded as conclusive upon everybody on the theory that, as stated by Chief Justice Marshall, “it is a proceeding in rem, to which all the world are parties.”

The Obama ballot challenge must move now to these states as a new State Challenge Campaign, and those readers here in those states I would hope would immediately contact the Obama Ballot Challenge and the Article II SuperPac to initiate proceedings:

A State District Court filing of a Show Cause Order asking why the State of (x) should not honor the State of Georgia’s determination under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution, addressed to the State Gov., Atty Gen., SoS , and State Election Commission/Board/Agency as Respondents is a logical next step. (h/t slcraignbc).

Already ballot challenges in Illinois and Alabama are underway, for  30 more electoral votes.  If we raise enough awareness and enough challenges to make our state officials pay attention, Obama is going to have to flip more than 30 million votes to win the election.

The knowing liar

And don’t forget Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse and the report due out in February.  The justice department and individuals have threatened the Sheriff with removal and death, and are finally being held accountable.  I doubt that Arizona will have an easy time of putting him back on the ballot, notwithstanding Governor Brewer’s lack of courage and membership in the usurper’s’ ‘council of governors‘.

We will not forget that everything Obama has signed as an illegal occupant of the White House has no effect in law.  Think of the tens of thousands of people, including our soldiers, that have died under this illegality.

Section 2 of Article 4 states, in part:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

How correct it would be to have the charges against Obama in any state lead to the arrest and detainment of Obama?  Would it stop his endless campaigning?

No Enthusiasm for the Usurper

Obama has already lost the youth vote to Ron Paul.  There is no enthusiasm for the Obutt or Moose-hell anymore.  Oh, and they’ll have to arrest the OWS people first before they declare martial law, as the Patriots will be at home keeping our power dry.  And there is nothing more ugly than the left scorned.  We told you Obots, you’re the first ones to be detained under martial law.

Get out of Our White House

Obama’s Libelous Punt Fails

©2012 drkate

…Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.~ Brian Kemp, GA Secretary of State, to Obama’s “attorney” Jablonski

Employing the arrogance and stupidity that is the hallmark of the Obama regime, Jablonski the attorney submitted a last minute libelous letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp which completely misrepresents the entire case history of the challenges to Obama’s constitutional eligibility to hold the office he now occupies.  Contrary to this so-called lawyer’s assertions, no court has even considered the facts of the case, preferring to arbitrarily rule that plaintiffs have ‘no standing’.

This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia – that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process. (emphasis added)

The ‘theory’ of Obama’s ineligibility has never been discredited.  In fact, by rule, because Obama’s attorneys  responded to each case by never submitting anything contrary to what all plaintiffs have presented, Obama has admitted he is ineligible to hold the office of the president.  By never challenging the facts, the facts must be accepted as true.

Here are Jablonski’s ‘legalpolitical desperate illegitimate ‘concerns’:

  1. It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. Um, what planet are you on? Did you too go to Harvard Law School?
  2. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there. No, they didn’t.
  3. [the pResident] made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website. You mean those forged, photo-shopped, no raised embossed seal pieces of trash paper, made available only to one reporter?
  4. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011).  Oh, the discredited and blatant incompetent liar named Jack the constitutional ripper Maskell?
  5. The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. You mean politically uncomfortable but legally correct hearing?
  6. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. So the political party is in charge of determining eligibility, and as has been proven, can lie about it to every state?
  7.  Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires. A state can most certainly decide if a political party has lied and enforce the Constitution’s requirements, as stipulated in Georgia’s statutes!
  8. …we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26… Go ahead and do so at your own peril.

Jablonski should be sanctioned. An Order to Show Cause Why Jablonski should not be held in contempt of Court and charged with undue influence on a public official would be appropriate.  In addition, a complaint should be filed with the Bar Association for blatant misrepresentation of facts and libel. (h/t Tenacity).

Remember that Occupy Wall Street began with Obama’s OCCUPY THE WHITE HOUSE.

Get out of Our White House, and our Country!

Put Up or Stand Down, Mr. Obama

Letter to the Editor reprinted with permission

January 23, 2012

Dear Editor,

The nation appears to be catching on to the fact that they were duped by the Democrat National Convention (DNC), through dissembling and deceit, nominating a candidate that was not eligible to be on the 2008 presidential ballot. The forces that worked to keep the fraud concealed are now using the entire power of all branches of the federal government to keep a never-vetted and unqualified putative president in office by whatever means necessary.

There are 9 types of citizen in the United States. “U.S. Citizen” and “Natural Born Citizen” do not equate yet liberal propagandists “dumb-downed” Americans through the decades to believe both types of citizenships are the same. It has been a deliberate plan to marginalize and/or silence the Article II, Section 2.5 Constitutionalists by calling them “birthers” and “racists.” The majority of Americans believe one only needs to be born in the United States to run for president. This misconception is the handiwork of anti-American entities who have worked diligently to shred the Constitution and usher in a different form of government.

All eyes and ears will be focused on an Atlanta courtroom on January 26, 2012 to see if Barack Hussein Obama will appear as a private citizen and prove his eligibility to be on the state ballot as compelled by subpoenas issued by Administrative Judge Michael Malihi. Obama’s counsel in Atlanta, Michael Jablonski, filed a Motion to Dismiss attorney Orly Taitz’s challenge to Obama’s eligibility to be on the GA ballot and for the first time in three years a judge denied an Obama request/motion in a court of law and the case moved forward. Then Obama’s counsel filed a request to quash the subpoena compelling Obama to attend the hearing complaining that [His] duties as president of the United States would be interrupted and that the subpoena was, “on its face, unreasonable.” Ironically, the motion was filed the day after Obama sang a solo at a fundraiser at the Apollo Theatre in Harlem. Again, request DENIED.

Contrary to popular opinion Obama’s eligibility to be president has never been heard on merit in a court of law. Until now all lawsuits filed against Obama had been dismissed for “no standing” or “wrong jurisdiction.” The decisions came from federal judges under the auspices of Eric Holder’s Justice department and Elena Kagan, Obama’s pre-election counsel and now, of course, sitting Supreme Court Justice.

There are many of us ‘birthers’ living in fear because we never fell for what we knew was brainwashing and propaganda being fed to the American people for generations. But we ‘birthers’ never forgot the words of a letter dated 25 July 1787 from John Jay to General George Washington as the Constitution was being drafted: “Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

On January 26th, 2012, will Obama again defy the will of the American people and maintain his status quo of living above the law or will we, the Article II Constitutionalists, have our day in court? Judge Malihi will consider the Supreme Court ruling in Minor vs. Happersett establishing the definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ as born in the United States of parents who are themselves United States citizens. The ruling is binding precedent as to the Constitutional definition of a natural born Citizen. Constitutional attorney, Mario Apuzzo at puzo1.blogspot.com in my opinion has the most consistent and well-documented papers on the eligibility issue where I suggest is the place to go to for back up.

Obama is also compelled to produce his historic documents including but not limited to his birth certificate, adoption papers and Indonesian school records. Should he not comply with the subpoena to appear or present his papers he will lose anyway because his name will not be put on the GA State ballot and the plaintiffs in the three cases to be heard will submit evidence of Obama’s deception and fraud not the least of which is lying on his application to the Illinois Bar. In the space asking for other names used by the applicant Obama entered “none.” Add to this his use of a CT social security number that was never issued to him and fails the E-Verify check. Intriguingly, the social security number is shared by a Harrison J. Bounell from CT, long since deceased but at one time a roomer/tenant in a home owned by the Robinson family. Now that’s just too speculative, too coincidental to be Michelle Robinson Obama’s CT relatives.

But then there’s the selective service record that ties to the social security number but is so fraught with anomalies that taken with the recent problems of a suspicious “Frankenstein” document posted on the WhiteHouse.gov website on April 27, 2011, the whole business reeks of ineptitude or is it deliberate subversive activity.

I for one will be all eyes and ears on Jan. 26. A decision one way or another will help me in my plan to form a coalition of Oklahoma Ballot Challengers to take our case to the Oklahoma House of Representatives. We have been rebuffed by gatekeeper, “Fran” on the election board [who says we have to be a presidential candidate from Oklahoma to file a complaint] and by the Attorney General’s office who will only take cases from the FBI and the FBI that says, “Its beensettled” and by our own Sen. Tom Coburn who says “Its a non-issue” to Sen. James Inhofe who says “Its a non issue” but co-sponsored a bill to change the definition of natural born Citizen to mean born anywhere as long as one parent is a citizen. Thank God and the wisdom of our founding fathers the bill failed as did the other eight or so attempts in congress between 2004-2008 during Obama’s rise to political power.

Respectfully submitted,

Miki Booth
Former Congressional Candidate D2-OK


April 2014
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

PROTECT OUR LIBERTY HERE!

Get Your Copy at drkatesview@gmail.com

Blog Archive

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Donate to DrKatesView!

Donate Now!

Since 8/15/09

  • 1,641,624 views

Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS Logistics Monster

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Atlas Shrugs

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90
Site Build It!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 603 other followers