Category Archives: Eligibility

H. Brooke Paige V Vermont et al US Supreme Court case update, April 24, 2014, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen status challege, Marbury V Madison revisited

H. Brooke Paige V Vermont et al US Supreme Court case update, April 24, 2014, Obama eligibility, Natural born citizen status challege, Marbury V Madison revisited

 

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“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 H. Brooke Paige April 24, 2014.

“Wells,

Current “scoop” at: http://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docket.aspx  docket
13-1076 additional information appears at:
https://certpool.com/dockets/13-1076 where the case will be shown as
scheduled for conference when a date is set (no sooner than 14 days after
date set for response).

The State filed a response waver March 26th, if the case passes muster in
the conference, SCOTUS would request that the State file a response – in
the absence of which the case would proceed on the merits outlined in my
writ.

Another Vermont SCOTUS case just after mine – Daniel Brown v Vermont,
State filed response waver on was received on April 4th with the case
“distributed” on April 16th for the conference on May 2nd.
https://certpool.com/dockets/13-1113, the conference schedule is found at:
https://certpool.com/conferences/2014-05-02

I suspect that SCOTUS is awaiting “candidate Obama’s” response
(required by April 9th) before scheduling the case for conference. All
cases are considered in conference.

For now patience seems in order – the conference review is the
“gatekeeper” for SCOTUS cases – the “rule of four” decides which cases
will proceed – possibly on the May 22 or 29
http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/2013termcourtcalendar.pdf

Thank You for Your Continued Interest,

Brooke”

The FEC recently ruled in Hassan that since he was not a natural born citizen, he was ineligible for federal matching funds. That case was simple. Hassan admitted that he was not born in the US. The FEC may soon be confronted with a more complex ruling because the definition of natural born citizen has not been clarified. The US Supreme Court has failed to do their duty.

 
“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined, and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be pruledassed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction, between a government with limited and unlimited powers, is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed, are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.

So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution, disregarding the law; the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.

If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.”
“The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution. Could it be the intention of those who gave this power, to say that, in using it, the constitution should not be looked into? That a case arising under the constitution should be decided without examining the instrument under which it arises? This is too extravagant to be maintained.”
“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?”

Marbury V Madison

 

Michael Shrimpton trial delayed until after 2014 elections, Shrimpton Obama born in Mombasa Kenya, CIA collected DNA from Obama and grandparent, Shrimpton to subpoena CIA and British intelligence records on Obama

Michael Shrimpton trial delayed until after 2014 elections, Shrimpton Obama born in Mombasa Kenya, CIA collected DNA from Obama and grandparent, Shrimpton to subpoena CIA and British intelligence records on Obama

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

From WND April 20, 2014.
“In a nearly empty courtroom at the Southwerk Crown Court by the historic London Bridge, a hearing took place in a criminal case that not only has national security implications for the United Kingdom, but, curiously, is woven into the increasingly bizarre fabric of the controversy over Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility.

When it came his time to speak, defendant Michael Shrimpton, a middle-aged London barrister by profession and self-proclaimed intelligence expert, politely issued to the judge a series of interrogatories that made clear he plans to launch a vigorous defense, representing himself before the court.

The criminal charges brought by the British government against Shrimpton under Section 51(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1977 accuse him of falsely notifying the British government to prepare for a terrorist nuclear attack on the 2012 Olympics in London that the British government claims had no basis in reality.

It’s the same Michael Shrimpton who appears in a 2008 video that began re-circulating earlier this year on the Internet in which he claims to have been privy to shocking intelligence information on Obama’s origins. Shrimpton contends to this day that the CIA collected DNA from then-Sen. Obama and a grandparent, establishing that Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s biological mother.”
“On March 17, in a courtroom devoid of news media except for WND, a short-tempered Senior Circuit Judge Alistair William McCreath, a resident judge based at Southwark Crown Court, surprised the Crown Prosecution Service and the defense by postponing Shrimpton’s trial until Nov. 10.

It was originally scheduled to begin that day.

The postponement meant any issues Shrimpton wants to pursue in his defense will not be aired in court until after the November mid-term elections in the U.S.”

“Shrimpton says he was informed that Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya, in about 1960, which means, he said, the information sits in British intelligence files, because that territory was under the British Empire at the time.

Shrimpton alleged that through DNA tests conducted during Obama’s initial presidential campaign, the CIA established Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s biological mother.

He said Dunham was not pregnant in July 1961, yet it is claimed that she gave birth to Barack Obama Jr. on Aug. 4, 1961.

Shrimpton said it was his understanding that the DNA samples were collected at a fundraising dinner from water glasses that were bagged after the dinner.

However, Stanley Ann Dunham’s father, Stanley Amour Dunham, died in 1992. Her mother, Madelyn Dunham, died of cancer Nov. 2, 2008, and was not know to have made public appearances in Obama’s campaign, though she did turn up briefly in an April 2008 Obama TV commercial. A TV news report on the commercial by Honolulu’s KITV said Madelyn Dunham had tried to stay out of the campaign and declined formal interviews. When a KITV reporter reached her by phone, she said she hadn’t seen the commercial and was surprised to learn she was in it.”

“In conversations with WND, nevertheless, Shrimpton doubled down on the claims he made in 2008 by asserting that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, as part of his negotiations to leave Hong Kong, agreed to deliver to Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow the classified U.S. military intelligence file on Obama’s DNA.

Shrimpton made clear he intends to subpoena from the CIA and from British intelligence any records either agency may have on Obama’s DNA.

“I intend to stand by my allegations regarding the Obama birth certificate, knowing that U.S. intelligence agencies will prefer to characterize me as crazy and delusional rather than admit the CIA has the files I believe they have on Obama DNA,” Shrimpton insisted.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/2014/04/obamas-origins-resurface-at-intel-experts-trial/

From Citizen Wells March 2, 2014.

“The Barrister Michael Shrimpton video is not a recent fabrication and is by all indications legitimate.

Here is what we know.

The video was produced circa February 2008. We know this by the context of Shrimpton’s statements.

Barrister Michael Shrimpton provided the same info as stated in the video to Israel Insider in August 2008.

“Reuven Koret, Israel Insider Publisher

In August I received a curious email. As a magazine that covers international politics, with a focus on Mideast affairs, Israel Insider gets more from its fair share of baseless tips and phony rumors. I ignore most and delete them unread. This one was a bit different. It came from a national security lawyer with extensive credentials and intelligence connections that checked out, and a phone number.”

The video was placed on Google Videos by at least February 11, 2010.

The video was referenced on the following Google Group on February 11, 2010.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.media.tv.misc/zZIROZDq3eg

According to Google it was scheduled  to be removed on April 29, 2011.

“On April 29, 2011, videos that have been uploaded to Google Video will no longer be available for playback. We’ve added a Download button to the video status page, so you can download any video content you want to save. If you don’t want to download your content, you don’t need to do anything. (The Download feature will be disabled after May 13, 2011.)

We encourage you to move to your content to YouTube if you haven’t done so already.”

Google videos shut down on August 20, 2012. The remaining videos were moved to Youtube.

The video was rediscovered by Gaia Militia.

“It isn’t that much of a story…I’ve been researching the German involvement in the European Union & the New World Order, I was listening to WW2 Codebreaker Dr Harry Beckhough in a playlist…the next video that came on was Shrimpton…who has never let me down yet…so I let it play…all of a sudden, I heard the name Obama mentioned and Kenya…it brought a big smile to my face, and I thought of America straight away…so I cut out the Obama parts, stuck them together and uploaded…I contact Carl Gallups straight away as I knew he was the person who would get this video where it needed to go…as far as I am aware it was from 2008…I got it from MRG – Michael Shrimpton – European Union – Legal & Legitimate? which is dated 2012…I care about the American people, and I want the best for your country…since Obama has come to power ‘watched America go down hill…I’ve watched him lie over and over and over…It all started 5 years ago when I stumbled across Dr Steven Greer…I’ve been on a roller coaster ride since then…Google deleted 5 years worth of research 3 times, I’ve been locked out of Facebook and banned from twitter 7 times…I’ve been gang stalked and had posts changed by sys admins…alot of things…all I wanted to know was if aliens are real and we ended up here”

http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/02/report-who-is-british-intel-advisor.html#IDComment799310781

The video is important for a number of reasons.

First, Barrister Michael Shrimpton  has the credentials and apparent access to privileged and classified information.

Second, Shrimpton’s statements were made matter of factly prior to Obama securing the Democrat nomination.

We knew that the Clintons found out about Obama’s eligibility deficiencies by early 2008. Bettina Viviano has spoken of this. Shrimpton states that he informed them.

Most of the information about Obama prior to and going into 2008 indicated that he was  born in Kenya. This is further corroboration.

Next step?

Barrister Michael Shrimpton should be subpoenaed by Congress and perhaps the Alabama Supreme court which still has before it the Obama eligibility appeal.

If the statements of Shrimpton are validated. Barack Hussein Obama should be arrested.

More information:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/barrister-michael-shrimpton-obama-born-in-mombasa-kenya-in-1960-cia-dna-testing-confirms-obama-dunham-grandparents-not-linked-wikipedia-scrubs-shrimpton-profile-british-intelligence-files/

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/barrister-michael-shrimpton-video-facts-2008-video-shrimpton-claimed-obama-born-in-mombasa-kenya-in-1960-obama-camp-john-edwards-clintons-mccain-informed-shrimpton-should-be-subpoened/

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/03/01/barrister-michael-shrimpton-tipped-off-israel-insider-in-august-2008-obama-mombasa-kenya-birth-cia-dna-tests-dunhams-not-grandparents-obama-is-a-german-sleeper-agent-shrimpton-video/

http://www.birtherreport.com/

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/03/02/obama-arrest-barrister-michael-shrimpton-video-timeline-obama-born-in-mombasa-kenya-cia-dna-testing-dunhams-not-grandparents-shrimpton-testimony-could-lead-to-obama-arrest/

 

Thanks to commenter GORDO>

Another Loretta Fuddy mysterious death smoking gun, HI medical examiner autopsy reports public records, Hawaii’s Uniform Information Practices Act, UIPA, Most of Fuddy report blacked out

Another Loretta Fuddy mysterious death smoking gun, HI medical examiner autopsy reports public records, Hawaii’s Uniform Information Practices Act, UIPA, Most of Fuddy report blacked out

“Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Orlando Jones?
Who benefited most from the murder of Donald Young?
Who benefited most from the murder of Lt. Quarles Harris Jr.?
Who benefited most from the suicide/murder of Christopher Kelly?
Who benefited most from the murder of Bill Gwatney?
Who benefited most from the death/murder of Andrew Breitbart?
And now
Loretta Fuddy?”…Citizen Wells

“Was Loretta Fuddy’s plane fueled or fuel tainted in Molokai?”…Citizen Wells

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Another smoking gun in another mysterious death associated with Obama.

Most of the HI medical examiner autopsy report on Loretta Fuddy was blacked out even though these reports are subject to Hawaii’s Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) and are a public record.

From Birther Report April 18, 2014.

“Revealed: Hawaii Keeps Autopsy Report Top Secret; Evidence Of Fuddy Death Withheld”

“Hawaii’s Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) (HRS 92F) [1] classifies medical examiner autopsy reports as public records subject to UIPA and dictates that copies be released to an “agency or business entity” upon request. [2] Accordingly this reporter requested Loretta Fuddy’s autopsy report on April 7, 2014. [3]

When I opened my copy a week or so later I was surprised to find the seven page report was a big black hole. Every single medical observation noted during the autopsy detailing the physical examination of Loretta’s body, had faded to black.

Citing HRS 92F-13(1)(4), 92F-22 [4] and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) [5] the Maui Police Department had taken a virtual Sharpie to almost every word of the Medical Examiner’s report before releasing it.

The Hawaii Office of Information Practices (OIP) [6] is charged with administering UIPA. OIP has concluded several times that Hawaii autopsy reports are subject to UIPA and that “deceased individuals do not have a recognizable privacy interest in their autopsy reports “. [7] In fact this December 31, 1991 OIP opinion also concluded that, “Our research disclosed no provision of chapter 841, Hawaii Revised Statutes, entitled “Inquests, Coroners,” that expressly prohibits the disclosure of autopsy reports. Accordingly, it is our opinion that autopsy reports are not protected from disclosure by section 92F-13(4), Hawaii Revised Statutes.” [8] I find no evidence that HRS 841 been repealed or amended to void this section.

However, in 2003, an OIP opinion determined that, in light of HIPAA, their previous views on the rights of deceased individuals “medical records” needed to be re-visited and concluded that medical records from agencies covered under HIPAA, would also be kept private under UIPA.

But here’s the problem, coroners and medical examiners are not considered a “covered entity” under HIPAA. They are not a health care provider, a health care plan or a health care clearinghouse. [9]”

Read more:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/04/revealed-hawaii-keeps-autopsy-report.html

fuddy autopsy page 4221--800

I still believe that it is entirely possible that water was introduced to the fuel supply of the plane with the intent of it crashing.

A fail safe plan could have taken out Fuddy when it safely glided to the water.

 

Obama I know where my birth certificate is, I think it’s still up on a website somewhere, That was some crazy stuff, Crazy treasonous unconstitutional, Obama lies have no end, Arpaio Zullo investigation results imminent

Obama I know where my birth certificate is, I think it’s still up on a website somewhere, That was some crazy stuff, Crazy treasonous unconstitutional, Obama lies have no end, Arpaio Zullo investigation results imminent

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich

 

Obama’s audacity and lies have manifested again. Of course, this is a regular occurrence.

Obama states:

“I know where my birth certificate is”

“but a lot of people don’t”

” I think it’s still up on a website somewhere”

“You remember that? That was crazy”

” That was some crazy stuff”

There was a kernel of  truth in that.

A lot of people do not know where a legitimate, proof of US birth, birth certificate is.

He may not either.

And certainly crazy and treasonous and unconstitutional.

So, why did Obama resurrect the birth certificate controversy?

Preemptive strike to diffuse the coming Arpaio Zullo investigation results?

What we know of Obama’s past and records is scary enough.

His Chicago and Illinois corruption ties for example.

“There is enough corruption in Illinois so that all it takes is someone who is serious about finding it to uncover it. If a U.S. attorney is not finding corruption in Illinois, they’re not seriously looking for it.”…Northwestern Law Professor James Lindgren

The results of the Arpaio Zullo investigation will be presented soon.

There was much to investigate and the results will no doubt be earth shattering.

We know for a fact that Obama has not presented a birth certificate that proves US birth. This is irrefutable.

We know for a fact that Obama lied on his IL bar application. This is irrefutable.

We know for a fact that Obama used numerous private attorneys, and Justice Dept. attorneys at taxpayer expense, to help keep his records hidden.

There is much more.

This includes murder and much other illegal activity.

I have a dream.

Obama in handcuffs.

John Boehner blocks Obama investigation, Mike Zullo confirms, Boehner continues status quo disregard for US Constitution, Boehner used citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably

John Boehner blocks Obama investigation, Mike Zullo confirms, Boehner continues status quo disregard for US Constitution, Boehner used citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably

“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 and millions of concerned Americans

“Why did Obama make Robert F. Bauer, an attorney with Perkins Coie, who helped Obama keep his records hidden before taking control of the White House, part of his administration as White House Counsel?”…Citizen Wells

 

“I believe that the president is a citizen. I believe the president is a Christian. I’ll take him at his word,”…John Boehner, NBC Meet the Press
Speaker of the House John Boehner has proven that he is a RINO, status quo politician and not a supporter of the US Constitution.

From Citizen Wells January 6, 2011.

I

Am

Pissed!

John Boehner, you just took the oath and read the US Constitution! The requirement for president is not citizen! It is Natural Born Citizen! And while we are at it, the State of Hawaii has not verified that Obama was born there!

From The Hill January 6, 2011.

“An individual who believes President Obama wasn’t born in the United States interrupted a House reading Thursday of the U.S. Constitution.”

“Birthers accuse Obama of not having been born in the U.S., despite the release of his birth certificate showing that he was born in Hawaii.”

“Update, 3:51 p.m.: In an interview to air this evening on NBC Nightly News, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reacted to the outburst and said he believed Obama is a U.S. citizen.
“The state of Hawaii has said that President Obama was born there,” Boehner said. “That’s good enough for me.””

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/136379-birther-interrupts-house-reading-of-constitution

The following statement is a lie:

” despite the release of his birth certificate showing that he was born in Hawaii.”

John Boehner, call me!

We will be calling John Boehner!”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/john-boehner-call-me-call-john-boehner-us-constitution-natural-born-citizen-you-just-took-the-oath-you-just-read-the-us-constitution/

From Citizen Wells January 13, 2011.

“Speaker of the House John Boehner was interviewed by Brian Williams last friday after the reading of the US Constitution in the House Chambers and the shout of “Except Obama, except Obama” when the Natural Born Citizen clause was read. Williams continues the Orwellian tradition of the mainstream media of obfuscating the Obama eligibility issues by using citizen instead of Natural Born Citizen. Boehner, as Speaker of the House, should know better and should have corrected Williams. Otherwise, we have just another Pelosi look alike.

At approx one minute Williams brings up the fact that twelve congressmen have challenged Obama’s eligibility. Apparently he was referring to HR 1503 that was initiated by Representative Posey with twelve cosponsors.

HR 1503, which expired with the end of the 111th Congress contained the following language:

“To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.”

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1503/text

Williams speaks in the present tense about the twelve congressmen. Is he referring to the 2009 bill or new initiatives?

John Boehner needs a quick tutoring on the US Constitution and the status of Obama eligibility questions. He did state that he would not tell the other congressmen what to think. That is good, but he can and must do better.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/hr-1503-revisited-presidential-eligibility-act-brian-williams-interview-of-speaker-boehner-williams-says-citizen-natural-born-citizen/

From CDR Charles Kerchner June 20, 2011.

“When will the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives John Boehner call for an investigation of the criminal act of forging a birth certificate and then placing the forged long from birth certificate document onto the White House servers?  We need to demand he do so.   Send a letter and/or telephone Speaker John Boehner and demand an investigation of Obama’s criminal activities which include forging a birth certificate, using a stolen or invalid SSN, and filing a back dated and forged draft registration form.  The House of Representatives has the power and duty to investigate the criminal acts perpetrated using government property and servers in the White House. Here is Speaker Boehner’s address in Washington DC. Contact him today: http://www.speaker.gov/Contact/

Keep writing to the Speaker.  Call his office.  Ask him to repeat to himself his oath to the U.S. Constitution while looking at himself in the mirror.  He is betraying his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC!  Speaker John Boehner is the roadblock in Congress to resolving the constitutional crisis facing us with an impostor, fraud, and criminal in the Oval Office.  He and his staff tell people they have more important things to work on.  What is more important than supporting and defending the U.S. Constitution as per the oath he took.  He did not take an oath to support and defend “more important things to do”.  Can’t Speaker Boehner’s lead People’s House chew gum and walk at the same time! All he has to do is tell the appropriate committee to start an investigation and announce to the world he has so ordered it. Let him know what you think of his intransigence on this matter. And if he does not listen to the pleas of We the People and act to launch investigations into the criminal activities of Obama, then John Boehner should not be re-elected as a congressional representative from Ohio in Nov 2012, let alone Speaker of the People’s House.”

I contacted the office of John Boehner after he used citizen and natural born citizen interchangeably, just after the congress Constitution 101 class.

Now we learn from investigator Mike Zullo of the Joe Arpaio Obama records investigation that John Boehner is blocking an investigation of Obama by congress.

 

 

Obama resignation or arrest, Douglas Vogt McInnish V Chapman Paige V Vermont US Supreme Court cases, Arpaio Zullo investigation results, Obama not natural born citizen?, Treasonous activities by Obama et al

Obama resignation or arrest, Douglas Vogt McInnish V Chapman Paige V Vermont US Supreme Court cases, Arpaio Zullo investigation results, Obama not natural born citizen?, Treasonous activities by Obama et al

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

 

 

It does indeed look like the chickens are coming home to roost.

High profile individuals such as Barrister Michael Shrimpton believe that Obama should resign.

Will Obama resign before he is arrested ?

There is too much evidence that Obama was not born in the US and zero evidence that proves he was.

Up to and beyond early 2008 there is numerous compelling circumstantial evidence that Obama was born in Kenya.

The stakes have gotten much higher.

It is no longer just a matter of Obama being removed from office.

Apparently treason and treasonous activities have been engaged in by the Obama camp.

From MMD Newswire March 28, 2014.
“Compelling Evidence of the Forgery of Obama’s Birth Certificate Lodged with the United States Supreme Court, Case No.: 13-1158″

“Douglas Vogt has lodged with the United States Supreme Court his compelling forensic evidence that the Birth Certificate of Barack Hussein Obama, II is indisputably a forgery.

That forensic evidence is contained in Vogt’s 95 page Public and 75 page Sealed Affidavits. Barack Hussein Obama, II – at his White House Press Conference on April 27, 2011 – released his Birth Certificate to prove that he was Constitutionally-eligible to be President. The lodging of the Affidavits accompanied Vogt’s filing of a Petition for Certiorari with the Supreme Court which has been assigned Case No: 13-1158. That Petition seeks review of the refusal of the Federal District Court to refer Vogt’s Affidavits to a federal Grand Jury as required by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(a).

Rule 6(a) states: “When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned.” Vogt’s Petition argues that there can be no higher “public interest” than the issue of whether Barack Hussein Obama, II, has foisted a forged Birth Certificate upon the Citizens of the United States. Accordingly, the Petition argues, the lower federal court has breached its Congressionally-imposed duty to “summon” a Grand Jury to hear Vogt’s well-founded, forensic proof of the forgery of Obama’s Birth Certificate.”

Read more:

http://mmdnewswire.com/forgery-of-obama-birth-certificate-130521.html

From the US Supreme Court.

No. 13-1158
Title:
Douglas Vogt, Petitioner
v.
United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Docketed: March 24, 2014
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  Case Nos.: (13-74137)
  Decision Date: January 14, 2014
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings  and  Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mar 24 2014 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 23, 2014)
Mar 24 2014 Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari and for leave to file an affidavit under seal filed by petitioner.
Mar 26 2014 Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 18, 2014.

 


 

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Douglas Vogt 12819 S.E. 38th Street (425) 643-1131
Suite 115
Bellevue, WA  98006
Party name: Douglas Vogt

 

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/13-1158.htm

We expect McInnish V Chapman to be sent to the SCOTUS.

The opinions from the Alabama Supreme Court are significant for 2 important reasons.

Chief Justice Roy Moore in his extensive dissenting opinion made the strong case that the secretary of state, once confronted by a potential deficiency in a presidential candidate’s qualifications, has a duty to investigate.

Justice Parker, also dissenting, stated that there are reasons to suspect Obama’s eligibility.

“McInnish attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Obama that have been made
public.”

H. Brooke Paige has a case before the SCOTUS challenging Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen because Obama’s father was Kenyan and therefore British.

And of course we are awaiting the news conference from Mike Zullo regarding the Arpaio Zullo investigation into Obama’s records.

Something’s gotta give

 

AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman, Justice Bolin concurrence opinion flawed, Status quo tradition and pass the buck, States control presidential election to electoral certification, Qualified candidates on ballot

AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman, Justice Bolin concurrence opinion flawed, Status quo tradition and pass the buck, States control presidential election to electoral certification, Qualified candidates on ballot

“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

“Moore said he’s seen no convincing evidence that Obama is a “natural born citizen” and a lot of evidence that suggests he is not.”…Judge Roy Moore interview by WND

“Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the
constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no
rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be
inspected by him?”… Marbury versus Madison

 

 

I still do not know how to take the concurrence opinion from Justice Bolin in the AL Supreme Court McInnish V Chapman decision.

It is still a bit surreal.

On the one hand, Justice Bolin agrees that the disired result is qualified candidates with any difficiencies discovered by the state. I.E. an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure. He also states that the Alabama legislature should pass laws to facilitate this.

On the other hand, he (in sync with most of the nation) passes the buck, abrogating the responsibility of the state of AL to place a qualified candidate on
the ballot. This is in direct contradiction to the US Constitution as well as federal and state election laws. This is well clarified by Chief Justice Moore.

Most law school graduates are intelligent and take a rigorous course of study.

Perhaps all do not take logic 101.
I will address the “High spots” of what Justice Bolin wrote and why I believe that he erred.

Justice Bolin:

“I respectfully disagree with Chief Justice Moore’s dissent to the extent that it concludes that the Secretary of State presently has an affirmative duty to
investigate the qualifications of a candidate for President of the United States of America before printing that candidate’s name on the general-election
ballot in this State. I fully agree with the desired result; however, I do not agree that Alabama presently has a defined means to obtain it.”

The following AL election statute seems clear to me.

“Section 17-13-6

Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.

The name of no candidate shall be printed upon any official ballot used at any primary election unless such person is legally qualified to hold the office
for which he or she is a candidate and unless he or she is eligible to vote in the primary election in which he or she seeks to be a candidate and possesses
the political qualifications prescribed by the governing body of his or her political party.”

Justice Bolin:

“The evidence suggests that the Secretary of State had expressed to the plaintiffs and their representatives well prior to the primary and as early as February 2, 2012, that she had no duty to investigate the eligibility qualifications 3 of a presidential candidate. Barack Obama was nominated as
his party’s presidential candidate at the Democratic National Convention on September 5, 2012. For this election, ballots were required to be printed and delivered to the absentee election manager of each county by at least September 27, 2012. See § 17-11-12, Ala. Code 1975. The plaintiffs did not
file their petition challenging Barack Obama’s ballot access until October 11, 2012, approximately eight months after being apprised of the Secretary of State’s position that she had no affirmative duty to investigate and two weeks after the ballots were to be printed and delivered to the various
counties. The failure by the plaintiffs to at least file their petition challenging ballot access during the intervening time between Barack Obama’s nomination as his party’s presidential candidate and the time in which the ballots were due to be printed and delivered to the various counties constitutes, I believe, “inexcusable delay” on the part of the plaintiffs. The prejudice that would have ensued from such a late challenge, if successful, would have been
twofold: first, assuming it could have been accomplished from a practical standpoint, the reprinting and distribution of general-election ballots would have come, at that late date, at great financial cost to the State; and second, and just as important, the reprinted ballots would differ from absentee
ballots already sent to the members of our military and other citizens overseas. This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”

Justice Bolin seems more concerned about a CYA for the Secretary of State than in upholding the constitution.

From the McInnish V Chapman Writ of Mandamus.

“13. On February 2,2072 Plaintiff MCINNISH, together with his attorney and others, visited the Office of the Secretaryo f State,a t which the Hon. Emily
Thompson,Deputy Secretaryo f State,speaking in the absence of and for the Secretary of State, s tated that her office would not investigate the legitimacy of
any candidate ,thus violating her duties under the U.S. and Alabama Constitutions.”

The AL Secretary of State’s office was forewarned.

If the AL Secretary of State had reacted in a responsible, constitutional way, minimally the Attorney General could have been consulted and simple steps
taken to remedy the situation. The plaintiffs were forced to file the Writ of Mandamus. The state of urgency was created by the state of AL. Justice Bolin
attempts to lay the blame on the plaintiffs.

None of the concerns Justice Bolin stated related to upholding the constitution.

“This would not be a proper way to conduct such an important election.”

What about the thousands of disenfranchised voters casting votes for a disqualified candidate?

Justice Bolin:

“Moving beyond the merits of the matter before us, and
with due regard to the vital importance to the citizenry of
the State of Alabama that the names of only properly qualified
candidates appear on a presidential-election ballot for
election to the highest office in our country, I write
specially to note the absence of a statutory framework that
imposes an affirmative duty upon the Secretary of State to
investigate claims such as the one asserted here, as well as
a procedure to adjudicate those claims. The right of a lawful
and proper potential candidate for President to have ballot
access must be tempered and balanced against a clear process
for removal of an unqualified candidate. Nothing in this
process should be left to guesswork, or, with all proper
respect, to unwritten policies of the Secretary of State, and
certainly not without a disqualified candidate having a clear
avenue for judicial review consistent with the time
constraints involved and due-process considerations.”

Nothing in this process should be left to guesswork ???

That is exactly the situation we had in 2008 and 2012. The states abrogating their responsibilities with the last check of checks and balances being the
certification of electoral votes by congress. Congress failed in their duty despite being notified.

Talk about guesswork!

Justice Bolin:

“The general duties and scope of the Secretary of State’s
office are codified in § 36-14-1 et seq., Ala. Code 1975.
Section 17-1-3, Ala. Code 1975, provides that the Secretary of
State is the chief elections official in the State and, as
such, shall provide uniform “guidance” for election
activities. It is, however, a nonjudicial office without
subpoena power or investigative authority or the personnel
necessary to undertake a duty to investigate a nonresident
candidate’s qualifications, even if such a duty could properly
be implied.”

What is his point? There were multiple avenues open to the Secretary of State. The AL Attorney General could have been queried and if necessary a
clarification from the courts. The Secretary of state “shall provide uniform ‘guidance'” and “Only qualified candidates to be listed on ballots.” Do your job
and let others do theirs. The common sense analogy is from the business world. Managers are responsible but delegate or refer tasks to the appropriate
personnel.

Justice Bolin:

“These sections, when read together, require only that the
Secretary of State certify and include on the general-election
ballot those presidential candidates who have been nominated
by their respective parties following that party’s national
convention and who are otherwise qualified to hold the office
of President. However, nothing in the express wording of
these statutory provisions imposes upon the Secretary of State
the duty to affirmatively investigate the qualifications of a
1120465
11
presidential candidate. Consistent with this conclusion is
Op. Att’y Gen. No. 1998-00200 (August 12, 1998), which states:
“The Secretary of State does not have an
obligation to evaluate all of the qualifications of
the nominees of the political parties and
independent candidates for state offices prior to
certifying such nominees and candidates to the
probate judges pursuant to [§ 17-9-3, Ala. Code
1975]. If the Secretary of State has knowledge
gained from an official source arising from the
performance of duties prescribed by law, that a
candidate has not met a certifying qualification,
the Secretary of State should not certify the
candidate.””

Bingo!

“If the Secretary of State has knowledge gained from an official source arising from the performance of duties prescribed by law, that a candidate has not
met a certifying qualification, the Secretary of State should not certify the candidate.”

He just made my point!

Justice Bolin:

“Rather, the Secretary of State contends that the task of ensuring a candidate’s qualifications is left to the leadership of that candidate’s respective political party, a less than ideal procedure for all challengers because of its partisan nature. See generally Knight v. Gray, 420 So. 2d 247
(Ala. 1982) (holding that the Democratic Party had the authority to hear pre-primary challenges to the political or legal qualifications of its candidates).”

Here is the common thread with most states. Tradition within and without state laws wields more power than it should. State officials are used to getting
their cues from political parties. This is written into state laws. However, political parties have no particular consititutional power or responsibility.

Justice Bolin:

“Courts in other states have tended to agree that the investigation of eligibility requirements of a particular candidate is best left to the candidate’s political party. In Keyes v. Bowen, 189 Cal. App. 4th 647, 117 Cal. Rptr. 3d 207 (2010), the plaintiffs brought an action against California’s
Secretary of State and others, alleging that there was reasonable doubt that President Obama was a natural-born citizen, as is required to become President of the United States (U.S. Const., Art. II, § 1) and that the Secretary of State had a ministerial duty to verify that President Obama met the constitutional qualifications for office before certifying him for inclusion on the ballot. The trial court entered a judgment against the plaintiffs, concluding that the
Secretary of State was required to see that state election laws were enforced, but that the plaintiffs had failed to identify a state election law imposing a duty upon the Secretary of State to demand documentary proof of birthplace from presidential candidates. Id. The plaintiffs appealed.”

He quotes a CA ruling (speaks for itself).
2 wrongs don’t make a right.

Finally lucidity and responsibility.

Justice Bolin:

“Looking forward, I would respectfully call upon the legislature to provide legislation that imposes this duty upon the Secretary of State and to give that office the authority and tools necessary to compel the compliance by a candidate, and that candidate’s party, upon penalty of disqualification.”

“However, it should not be necessary to rely on a post-election Congressional remedy if it can be proven before the election that the candidate is not qualified. The Secretary of State should have the written mandate to determine requisite qualifications, and a disqualified candidate should have a defined path of expedited judicial review.”

“There are obvious reasons why such post-election challenges would be undesirable. As Rick Hasen has argued in Beyond the Margin of Litigation, pre-election litigation is generally preferable to post-election litigation. It is generally better to resolve disputes before an election, allowing problems to be avoided in advance rather than putting courts in the difficult position of cleaning up the mess afterwards. This is particularly true in the context of a challenge to a presidential candidate’s qualifications. In the event that a candidate is deemed ineligible, the party could still put up a substitute.
“Of course, it is up to states–and, in particular, to state legislatures–to define the rights and remedies available in cases where a presidential candidate is alleged to be ineligible. There is certainly no constitutional requirement that the state provide either a pre-election remedy
(such as denial of ballot access) or a post-election remedy (like an order invalidating election results) for such disputes. But there remains no
constitutional bar to such state-law remedies. In fact, such remedies would seem to fall squarely within what Article II contemplates in leaving it to
state legislatures to define the manner by which presidential electors are appointed.”

Alabama Supreme Court ruling.

https://acis.alabama.gov/displaydocs.cfm?no=565288&event=40Y0LG67K