Tag Archives: April 11

Obama NJ eligibility court case update, April 11, 2012, Judge Masin rules in Obama’s favor, Mario Apuzzo files exception, WhiteHouse.gov image irrelevant

Obama NJ eligibility court case update, April 11, 2012, Judge Masin rules in Obama’s favor, Mario Apuzzo files exception, WhiteHouse.gov image irrelevant

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

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

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

From Conservative New and Views April 10, 2012.

“OBAMA ELIGIBILITY: NJ ALJ DUCKS ISSUES”

“In the latest Obama eligibility challenge, an Administrative Law Judge cleared Obama for the New Jersey Democratic Primary today. The two men who objected to Obama’s nominating petition vowed to appeal.”

“Obama eligibility issues

Nick Purpura of Wall Township, NJ, and Ted Moran of Toms River, NJ, filed their objection Thursday with the New Jersey Board of Elections. Lawyer Mario Apuzzo of Jamesberg, NJ, delivered the brief and spoke directly to Robert Giles, Director of Elections. Apuzzo argued Purpura and Moran’s case today (Tuesday, April 10) at the Office of Administrative Law in Mercerville. The Elections Division notified the Obama campaign at once, and they sent their own lawyer, Alexandra Hill, to appear. Administrative Law Judge (and Associate Director of the OAL) Jeff Masin presided.

Purpura and Moran objected to Obama appearing on the June 5 Democratic Primary ballot on two grounds:

No one knows exactly who Barack H. Obama is, because he has had three different names in life. Furthermore, he has never furnished a true copy of his birth certificate to the Secretary of State. So no one can be sure that Obama was born in the United States.
Obama’s father was a British colonial subject. He not only was not a naturalized citizen on the alleged date of Obama’s birth, but indeed never sought naturalization. Therefore Obama could never be a natural-born citizen no matter where he was born.
Ms. Hill offered no evidence, but spent her time objecting to the entire case, to every witness whom Apuzzo called, and every document he tried to introduce. In every specific case, she said that the documents were neither originals nor certified copies. More generally, she said repeatedly that New Jersey law did not obligate Obama in any way to prove that he was eligible to the office of President. The only grounds for challenging a nominating petition, said Hill, were whether the petitions were in the proper form, all who signed were registered voters, no voter signed more than one petition, whether the campaign gathered enough signatures, etc.

Apuzzo countered that the New Jersey Constitution and at least one case on point (Strother, 6 NJ @ 565), obliged the Secretary of State to find affirmatively whether a given candidate was qualified for the office he or she sought, or not.

A surprise admission
About two-thirds of the way through the hearing, Hill admitted in open court something that no lawyer for the Obama campaign has ever admitted. Obama never furnished a true copy of his birth certificate to the New Jersey Secretary of State. Furthermore, the PDF file that the White House has served to the Internet since April 27, 2012, is not relevant to the case in any way.

Hill conceded this point after Apuzzo tried to call Brian Wilcox, an expert document analyst. He was ready to show that no one could rely on the PDF file as a substitute for a hard-copy long-form birth certificate. But Judge Masin said at once that neither he nor Secretary of State Kim Guadagno had ever seen a birth certificate, whether on paper, as a PDF file, or on the Internet. He told Apuzzo that calling Wilcox would be “premature.”

Then Masin turned to Hill and asked her directly:

Is it your legal position that the document on the Internet is irrelevant to this case?

Hill replied, “Yes.” Masin then asked:

And indeed you concede that Mr. Obama has not produced an alleged birth certificate to the Secretary of State.

Hill at first said, “It has been released nationally,” but then admitted that she did not know personally that Obama had given any such document to the Secretary of State, nor did she intend giving such a document to the court today. But she also argued, after Judge Masin asked her repeatedly, that Obama need not produce any evidence at all.

Apuzzo told CNAV during a recess in the hearing that this was the most stunning thing that any lawyer for Obama had ever admitted, in an Obama eligibility case or in any other case. When the hearing finally adjourned at 12:30 p.m., Apuzzo was confident of prevailing on this point. He observed that Hill, after objecting to everything that Apuzzo tried to introduce into evidence, offered no evidence on her own behalf and even admitted that the infamous PDF document was legally worthless.

A shocking turnabout
But the judge shocked Apuzzo when, at about 7:30 p.m., he called Apuzzo to tell him that the Obama campaign had prevailed on both points. Said the judge, according to Apuzzo:

As far as I’m concerned, Obama was born in Hawaii.

Apuzzo could not explain how Judge Masin could rule that way, after observing in open court that neither Obama nor his surrogates had shown that he was born in Hawaii.

Within two hours, according to a deadline that Masin gave him, Apuzzo filed an exception to Masin’s ruling. Apuzzo took exception to the following:

Judge Masin ruled that Obama was born in Hawaii with no evidence on record, after acknowledging that fact during the hearing.
Judge Masin ruled that Obama need not comply with statute to show that he is eligible, solely because he need not “consent” to someone circulating a nominating petition for him.
The judge suggested that Obama might have to show eligibility later. He laid no basis for such a ruling.
The judge misread the precedents and gave short shrift to the historical evidence that the Framers of the Constitution defined “natural-born citizen” as one born in-country to two citizen parents. Apuzzo devoted half of his 30-page exception to this analysis alone.

Apuzzo plans to appeal directly to the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court. He earlier told CNAV that he was ready to argue before the State and even United States Supreme Courts if he had to.”

http://www.conservativenewsandviews.com/2012/04/10/constitution/obama-eligibility-nj-alj-ducks-issues/

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, April 11, 2010, Appellants Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Appendix, Obama not natural born citizen, US Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Attorney Mario Apuzzo

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, April 11, 2010, Appellants Motion

From Charles Kerchner, lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama and Congress.

“For Immediate Release – 10 April 2010

Kerchner v Obama Appeal – Activity in Appeal Case

Atty Apuzzo Files Appellants Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Appendix. Copy of the Appendix Also Filed.

Kerchner v Obama & Congress Appeal – Atty Mario Apuzzo Filed on 10 April 2010 to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals an Appellants Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Appendix. Along with the motion he also filed a copy of the Supplemental Appendix. You can read the Motion and the Supplemental Appendix which has been combined into one file for release purposes via the link to the filing documents at this link.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/kerchner-v-obama-appeal-atty-apuzzo_10.html

Comment from Commander Kerchner, the Lead Plaintiff:
Our side is ready and rhetorically locked and loaded for the epic struggle. General Quarters has been sounded and the We the People are now awake on this issue and on the move to remove the unconstitutional Usurper from the Oval Office along with his corrupt and socialist backers with their foreign influences, money, and agenda for America to take our nation into a direction that is not American and violates our Constitution, the fundamental law of our land.  We are a nation of laws not men. Our hearing in court is coming. If we don’t prevail in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals this case will be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court. We the People will not quit.  This issue is not going away until Obama’s true legal identity is revealed and his constitutional eligibility to be President and Commander-in-Chief of our Military is thoroughly vetted in a court of law on the merits of the charges. The truth and the Constitution will win this fight in the end. We the People will insure that. So help us God.

CDR Kerchner
www.protectourliberty.org
####”

April 10, 2008, April 11, 2008 polls, polling data, Obama, Clinton, McCain, Obama slipping, Associated Press-Ipsos national poll, AOL poll

Barack Obama has lost his 10 point lead over John McCain in a presidential matchup. Obama and McCain are in a statistical tie in a Associated Press-Ipsos national poll taken Thursday, April 10, 2008. Obama dropped 10 points among women from February to April. Clinton and Obama basically maintained their prior positions against each other.

The results from a unscientific poll taken  on AOL, Friday, April 11, 2008 at 9:00 EDST are as follows:

Who do you think will win the Democratic nomination?
Barack Obama 63%
Hillary Clinton 37%

April 11, 2007, Barack Obama, First Amendment rights, constitutional lawyer, toxic information, feeding our kids, useful diversion, Don Imus, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan

The main stream media appears to be giving Barack Obama a free ride. After Obama has apparently lied about not knowing about the hate sermons of pastor Jeremiah Wright and after his 20 year association with pastor Wright in the same church attended by Louis Farrakhan, Barack Obama had the audacity to make the following statement about Don Imus on April 11, 2007:
“And the notion that somehow it’s cute or amusing, or a useful diversion, I think, is something that all of us have to recognize is just not the case. We all have First Amendment rights. And I am a constitutional lawyer and strongly believe in free speech, but as a culture, we really have to do some soul-searching to think about what kind of toxic information are we feeding our kids,”

Think of what his children and others were subjected to in his church and community. To read the rest of the hypocritical comments from Barack Obama, read my earlier post on the subject.