I just received this from MoniQue of the moniquemonicat blog:
“This is MoniQue from moniquemonicat blog. I sent requests to 50+ Secretary of State offices through the Public Records Act (PRA) requesting Obama’s original filing papers for each state and some other docs too.
Attached is one I just got back from THE SOS IN ARIZONA.
A NOTARIZED AND SIGNED BY OBAMA SWEARING AND CERTIFYING HE IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. HIS SIGNATURE IS ON THIS DOCUMENT TESTIFYING HE IS “A NATURAL BORN U.S. CITIZEN.”
I think this document is important because it is HIS word [which I believe to be a lie] that he is a natural born us citizen. He says “i do solemnly swear he is a natural u.s. born citizen”
So this would be one document to urge others to request from the SOS Public Records Act (not the Freedome of Information Act (FOIA) because the FOIA is FEDERAL so that is why a lot of the SOS would not provide this stuff when I first submitted my requests to them.
EITHER WAY, CAN YOU PLEASE POST THIS ON YOUR SITE?”
“I got other documents back but thought this one says it all AND IN HIS OWN HAND is pretty significant. Really shows the audacity of lying.”
MoniQue
http://moniquemonicat.wordpress.com/
Citizen WElls 
This sure looks like PURJURY to me. I believe this is still a felony.
No wonder Obama don’t want to release his birth records!
My question, why is information like,not being to lawsuits that are being filed?
My questionis, why is information such as this not being attached to these lawsuits that are beig filed. This could be a factor in him being forced to produce an original birth certificate, which I’m sure he doesn’t have.
Do the SCOTUS know about this?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82984
This is scary!!!!!
Pingback: The Right Side of Life » Blog Archive » Candidate Qualification: Obama Certifies Himself as Natural Born
Bill Cunningham is on the radio talking about the BC. He took over Drudge’s Sunday night radio show. He is heard on many stations across the country.
We have our answer to the question “Who vetted Obama?” Why, Obama himself, of course!
The choice facing the Supreme Court boils down to civil unrest to protect the Constitution or civil war to proceed to ‘inaugurate’ a non-”natural born citizen”.
Legal statutes , of fraud, may depend upon, “intent” of Obama, to defraud, which, is evident, that he and other conspiring senators, attempted to change, the law, by adding Language, that it is well know that “many US Presidents, were not “natural born citizens”,
….thus he along with strong arming the Hi, vital statistics, office to put out a Partizen Lie 3 days before Nov, 4 . election, referring to factcheck.org, or “annanenburg Obama Fondation.”:
So the next step is: As a voter in this area, sue the person who accepted this form signed by Obama to produce the legally acceptable proof of natural born citizenship which is the LONG FORM birth certificate. It’s that simple, right? Obama has to prove he is indeed as he claims by giving proof.
FAQ on OBama’s birth
http://sites.google.com/site/obamabirth/
Visit now.
“Do the SCOTUS know about this?”
Being a Christian is not a prerequisite for the US presidency. In fact, the US has had atheist presidents already, among them Thomas Jefferson. If only we could return to our roots, instead of having Republican political strategists rewriting our history for their party’s political gain.
An article in the Kansas City Star…
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/57036.html
Handled as you ight expect, but at least it is mentioned.
Found this on Rosetta’s web. Quite interesting:
Check this link out if you have a second. It’s the University of Hawaii Photographs Collection archive.
web.archive.org/web/20010121110500/www.hawaii.edu/speccoll/arch/univphoto/txtlist.htm
Search the page for Barack and see what it says. The link below is a screen shot just in case the page gets bleached.
img.photobucket.com/albums/v605/letstalk/Pics/Barack.jpg
Senator Obama resigned from the US Senate effective Nov 16, 2008.
While the MSM has anointed him “President elect”, I don’t think that is correct.
Technically, the President elect is determined when the electoral votes are counted in a joint session of congress.
# Public Law 110-430 changed the date of the electoral vote in Congress in 2009 from January 6 to January 8. This date change is effective only for the 2008 presidential election.
At this point, Mr. Obama is simply a retired US Senator.
Are our Federal government agencies, exposing information to Mr. Obama to which he is not entitled? Are agencies like Homeland Security, NSA, DoD sharing classified information with this man?
If so, I think this is a major problem that requires the immediate attention of the Administration.
At this point they should be doing no more than providing informal introductions to someone who MAY become the President on January 20.
Here the site is again:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010121110500/www.hawaii.edu/speccoll/arch/univphoto/txtlist.htm
Thomas Jefferson was not an atheist in any way. Some considered him a deist.
I do agree with you, Mike, about returning to our roots — 52 of the 56 signers of the Dec of Independence were devout Christians, and the other 4 believed in God & the Bible as the devine truth. While it’s not mandatory that our leaders be Christians, our forefathers thought it an important quality.
http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/forsakenroots.html This website has some interesting & neat quotes regarding “our roots.”
I thought that you had to use your FULL legal name! He left out Hussein…..
“For nothing is hidden that shall not become evident, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.”
(Mark 8: 17)
Yes.
I saw that months ago.
Fae: the photo description refers to Obama Sr. in 1962.
Greetings Citizen,
The signature on that document above is a forgery. This I can tell you beyond doubt being a trained forensic graphologist that it is just that, a forgery.
I will followup on that.
Here are 4 of Obama’s other signed filing papers to compare signatures from.
1. OBAMA’S SIGNATURE, FILING PAPER [NEW HAMPSHIRE] http://moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/new-hampshire-obama-signed-declaration-of-candidacy.pdf
2. OBAMA’S SIGNATURE, FILING PAPER [ILLINOIS]
Click to access illinois-state-board-of-elections-statement-of-candidacy-and-no-objection-made-letter.pdf
3. OBAMA’S SIGNATURE, FILING PAPER [RHODE ISLAND]
Click to access rhode-island-obamas-signed-statement-of-intent-to-seek-the-nomination-of-president.pdf
4. OBAMA’S SIGNATURE, FILING PAPER [KENTUCKY]
Click to access kentucky-obamas-signed-notice-of-candidacy.pdf
I’ve examined the hardcopies here at my desk and the signature appears to be made by the same person on all the documents. I’m not a forensic specialist, but I am an artist, expertise in lettering as a matter of fact, which is basically a type of “forgery,” without the crime 🙂
Most notaries take their jobs pretty seriously and although I can understand why Obama would forge a birth certification, but not sure what he’d gain by forging his filing papers.
But as a secretary for many years I know I have signed my bosses paperwork–even sensitive and official documents, so it wouldn’t shock me if someone else signed it for him. Yes, we are “supposed” to initial it when we do that, but many times we do not.
Either way, he is responsible for the documents filed in each state whether his secretary, wife, or he signed them, he knew it was filed with his signature.
Pingback: Obama not eligible, Obama fraud, Obama lies, Obama signature on Arizona Candidate Nomination Paper, Moniquemonicat.wordpress.com blog, Obama not natural born citizen, Obama bar application, Selective Service application, Obama pattern of deception, Decemb
The website http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1703 has a document, with Barack Obama’s signature on it, that purports to be a “Presidential Preference Election Candidate Nomination Paper” required in Arizona by A.R.S. § 16-242. The significant thing about this is that it is completely invalid. The notarization of Obama’s signature was made by a Virginia notary and as such is subject to Va. Code 47.1-16 (effective July 1, 2007). The Virginia law requires that: “Every notarization shall include the date upon which the notarial act was performed, and the COUNTY or CITY IN WHICH it was performed.” Violation number two occurred when Ray Anderson, Notary failed to note when his own authority to notarize documents expired. The Virginia law requires that requires it with the word “shall” is stated here, “Upon every writing which is the subject of a notarial act, the notary shall, after his certificate, state the date of the expiration of his commission.” Obama may try to seek safe harbor from any criminal fraud allegation on account of “swearing that he is qualified to hold the office he sought” that such document was invalid and thus could not be used as evidence against him. This is just one piece of evidence applicable to the state of Arizona. Obama inc. may well have bungled the other 57 states requirements on candidate eligibility. In the worst case scenario for Obama, the invalid candidate attestation invalidates the amount of Arizona electoral college votes which in turn invalidates the 2008 Joint Session of Congress certifying electoral votes.
This is a very technical application of the rules but we should not apologize for applying the law when Obama never apologized for his own hardball tactics where he used the rule book to win his first race for Illinois state Senate against Alice Palmer. See http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29/obamas.first.campaign/index.html . I also suggest that any discovery questions relating to this “notary issue” is fair game when standing is based upon 3 U.S.C. § 15. As has been said, possibly multiple provisions were not properly followed on January 8, 2009 when the votes for Obama were counted. And the district court therefore does have jurisdiction to review a failure of the Government to follow the laws enacted to protect the integrity of the electoral process.
Therefore, upon the Leo Donofrio, basis: since the DOJ raised the statute and relied upon it for the motion to dismiss, and since Judge Carter has allowed immediate discovery necessary for purposes of opposing the motion to dismiss, Orly should also demand discovery for any issue related to the invalidity of each individual state presidential eligibility documents. Apparently, the Arizona documents are invalid because they require a valid Notary endorsement, which Obama failed to provide.
(Note this argument fails if the Arizona document was merely cropped and the original actually contains the location of the notarial act and identifies the commission expiration date.)
Requests for Admissions
1. Admit that the “Presidential Preference Election Candidate Nomination Paper” required in Arizona by A.R.S. § 16-242, is genuine, attached as Exhibit A.
2. Admit that the notarial act is invalid in reference to exhibit A because it does not comply with all the requirements of Va. Code 47.1-16.
3. Admit that the notarial act is invalid in reference to exhibit A because it fails to identify the location of the notarial act.
4. Admit that the notarial act is invalid in reference to exhibit A because it fails to identify the commission expiration date.
There is such a thing as ‘harmless error.’ All the notory has to do is correct the clerical error.
paralegalnm – A paralegal from New Mexico should never attempt to proffer legal advice concerning an issue of Arizona law. You, being a paralegal, are, at best, minimally trained in the operation of law within you own state and your “harmless error” opinion is totally without legal merit and completely outside your realm of expertise. You have cited no legal references of any sort, and even if you had, they would only reflect your personal opinion, not the applicable and established Arizona statutes. Should you wish to offer any more unsolicited and erroneous legal advice regarding the laws of Arizona, which you are well aware you are legally prohibited from doing, I shall discover your true identity and you can be certain you will no longer be a licensed paralegal in any state. The proper legal term for what you so feebly attempted to say is known as a “scrivener’s error” and not all alleged “scrivener’s errors” are “harmless errors” or correctable after the fact – simply “correcting” an existing document can easily result in the person making the “corrections” being charged with the crime of forgery. In order to be legally enforceable, most documents which contain “scrivener’s errors” require that an entirely new document be drawn in correct form after all parties have reached an agreement to do so and a local judge has officially approved the “corrections”. It is patently obvious that those who blindly express support for Obama and his policies invariably possess very limited knowledge of law, and/or they are pathological liars.
Pingback: The Post & Email Speaks with Cody Robert Judy, Presidential Candidate| The Post & Email
Pingback: BUYER BEWARE BIRTHER BALONEY (1 of 2) « jbjd