Category Archives: US District Court

Corrupt Obama Justice Department delays Blagojevich appeal, Transcripts still not ready, Delay in appeal protects Obama, Obama still has a Rezko problem

Corrupt Obama Justice Department delays Blagojevich appeal, Transcripts still not ready, Delay in appeal protects Obama, Obama still has a Rezko problem

“this guy is more Tony’d up than I am. …. they got the Chicago media to f…ing make me wear Rezko more. To f…ing dilute it from him.…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008
“BLAGOJEVICH: You know, Axelrod and Obama’s people, you know, clearly turned, you know, got the Chicago media to make Rezko all about me. And hardly about…

HARRIS: Yeah, in other words, they focus their,they focus their attention on you. They couldn’t make it go away so the bes-, next best strategy is deflect it.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right.

HARRIS: This is somewhere where it, it’ll satisfy the, the hunger of the beast, being the media.

BLAGOJEVICH: Right, right.

HARRIS: Yeah, it makes sense. It’s not a stretch. If I’m, if I’m his message advisor, media advisor or whatever, operative, yeah I’m gonna try to feed the beast by giving ‘em something else to eat on.”…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 12, 2008

“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich wiretap November 7, 2008

The transcripts needed for the Rod Blagojevich appeal, overdue by almost a year, are still not ready and the appeals court judge is faulting Blagojevich attorney Lauren Kaeseberg, despite the fact that the appeals court has responsibility in this matter.

From Fox News Philly October 23, 2012.

“Blago attorney questioned about continued delay in appeal process”

“FOX Chicago News has learned that Rod Blagojevich’s appeal is still having trouble getting off the ground, because of delays in producing transcripts from his two trials.

For the second time in the last four months, Lauren Kaeseberg, one of the attorney’s handling Rod Blagojevich’s appeal, has been threatened with disciplinary action because she still hasn’t provided a complete copy of the Blagojevichtrial transcripts to the appellate court.

The appellate court won’t set a briefing schedule to get the appeal moving until the transcripts are available.

As FOX Chicago reported exclusively in August, the court reporter responsible for producing the 16,000 pages of transcripts took a leave of absence for five and a half months after Blagojevich was convicted. So, the appellate court agreed to wait until September 28th for the transcripts.

But, now in October, they’re still not completed. On Monday, the court issued an order, warning Kaeseberg again that she could face monetary or disciplinary sanctions. She responded Tuesday with an explanation, saying transcripts are still missing because they were under seal, or were handled by a different court reporter and she hopes to have them soon.

Kaeseberg told the appellate court that Blagojevich is aware of the delay. Attorneys who talk with him say he never fails to ask about the progress of his appeal.”

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/19896931/blagojevichs-attorney-responsible-for-continued-delay-in-appeal-process

Delays in the appeal clearly help Obama.

From Citizen Wells August 7, 2012.

“DATE: 11/12/2008
TIME: 12:36 P.M.
ACTIVITY: Rod Blagojevich home line incoming call.
SESSION: 558
SPEAKERS:
BLAGOJEVICH: Rod Blagojevich
HARRIS: John Harris

BLAGOJEVICH I mean think about that. I mean they, they want me here in Illinois. That’s a faraway Illinois problem from my old life.

HARRIS Mm-hmm.

BLAGOJEVICH The governor’s got that problem with Rezko, boom. But if I’m in the Senate it’s not just mine anymore, it’s his too. Isn’t it? If the Rezko thing got worse?

HARRIS Mm-hmm, Mm-hmm. Well we’ve always thought that.

BLAGOJEVICH And, and from a legal stand point on the substance of, you know, did, did you do something wrong or didn’t do something wrong it doesn’t change that. But in terms of the, the people who are trying to chase all that down and does it change any dynamic if you’re there verses being left back here.

(gap)

BLAGOJEVICH But don’t forget uh, Obama’s gonna have uh, you know, do something about that. And is Obama more or less likely to wanna contain that if I’m out there with him. I mean I’ve got this theory that even Knapp says could be possible and Balanoff. You know, Axelrod and Obama’s people, you know, clearly turned, you know, got the Chicago media to make Rezko all about me. And hardly about…

HARRIS Yeah, in other words, they focus their,they focus their attention on you. They couldn’t make it go away so the bes-, next best strategy is deflect it.

BLAGOJEVICH Right.

HARRIS This is somewhere where it, it’ll satisfy the, the hunger of the beast, being the media.

BLAGOJEVICH Right, right.

HARRIS Yeah, it makes sense. It’s not a stretch. If I’m, if I’m his message advisor, media advisor or whatever, operative, yeah I’m gonna try to feed the beast by giving ‘em something else to eat on.

BLAGOJEVICH So, if I wanna be safe from Rezko, am I a little bit safer over there with him.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/blagojevich-appeal-delayed-waiting-on-transcripts-court-clerk-5-12-month-leave-of-absence-delays-help-obama-transcripts-of-blagojevich-wiretaps-hurt-obama/

The court reporter, trial judge James Zagel and the appeals court all have a responsibility to produce transcripts needed for an appeal in a timely manner.

From Citizen Wells August 25, 2012.

“Vol 6: Court Reporting

Ҥ 130.20.20 District Court
Each district court must develop a Court Reporting Management Plan.”

“(g) Providing for avoidance of backlogs of transcripts and assuring prompt
delivery of high quality transcripts, particularly for cases on appeal to the
court of appeals; “
Ҥ 440.60 Judge Appointed (Involuntary) Use of Substitute Reporter

§ 440.60.10 Introduction

A district judge or the chief judge of a circuit may appoint a substitute reporter in the event a court reporter is unable to complete transcripts in a timely fashion.”

“(1) Appeals to a Circuit from a District Court
Transcripts for appealed cases should be delivered within 30 days from the date ordered or from the date satisfactory arrangements for payment have been made.”

Ҥ 540 Transcripts for Cases on Appeal

§ 540.10 Introduction

Cases appealed to the United States courts of appeals require the timely transmission of the record from the lower court. A transcript of the proceedings normally is a required part of the record to be transmitted to the court of appeals.”

Ҥ 540.20.20 Rule 11, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (Forwarding the Record)
The statute states:”
“(B)
If the transcript cannot be completed within 30 days of the reporters receipt of the order, the reporter may request the circuit clerk to grant additional time to complete it. The clerk must note on the docket the action taken and notify the parties.”
“(D)
If the reporter fails to file the transcript on time, the circuit clerk must notify the district judge and do whatever else the court of appeals directs.”

Who engineered these delays and who is responsible?

What were Obama and Blagojevich discussing in 2008?

“Just because it’s a conspiracy theory doesn’t mean it is not true.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/08/25/blagojevich-appeal-delay-perfect-chicago-crime-prosecution-and-appeal-delay-protect-obama-help-blagojevich-judge-zagel-usdoj-violate-federal-court-rules/

It is obvious to any rational person paying attention that this delay was orchestrated by the Obama controlled US Justice Department to keep Obama corruption ties out of the election cycle news.

Obama ties to Chicago corruption still haunt, Obama’s Ghosts of Christmas Past, Blagojevich appeal delay hard evidence of conspiracy to obstruct justice

Obama ties to Chicago corruption still haunt, Obama’s Ghosts of Christmas Past, Blagojevich appeal delay hard evidence of conspiracy to obstruct justice

“There is no doubt that Marley was dead. This must be distinctly understood, or nothing wonderful can come of the story I am going to relate.”

“You will be haunted,” resumed the Ghost, “by Three Spirits.”

“I am the Ghost of Christmas Past.”
“Long Past?”
“No. Your past.”…Charles Dicken, “A Christmas Carol”

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“Regardless of how this plays out, it benefits Obama. If there is no appeal or the appeal is denied, Blagojevich will be sequestered. If the appeal proceeds, it could drag out beyond impacting the 2012 election cycle. The intent is obvious.”…Citizen Wells, July 19, 2011

I recently issued a request for citizen journalists to assist in researching an important story that is playing out before us in real time.

The Rod Blagojevich appeal process has been delayed in direct contradiction to US Court rules and guidelines. The court reporter for Judge James Zagel, the person responsible for producing trial transcripts needed for the appeal, took a 5 and 1/2 month leave of absence and now has filed a request for an extension. She now claims to have the transcripts ready by late September.

Read the guidelines for yourself. The Court Reporter has accountability, Judge James Zagel has accountability and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has accountability.

This case impacts a former governor and current occupant of the White House.

Over the past almost 4 years I have presented compelling circumstantial evidence why Blagojevich should have been arrested much earlier and before Tony Rezko. Certainly not after the 2008 election to protect Obama.

There is so much to keep up with about Obama, some may have forgotten some details and new readers come along, so I will be presenting some information again.

In part 1 of a multi part series, I will lay out the facts in detail that support my contention. To paraphrase Dickens, it is important to know this information to understand what is happening now.

Part 1 – Events leading up to the Blagojevich arrest.

Part 2 – Prosecution.

Part 3 – Appeal.

Oh, and by the way, another spectre from Obama’s past is about to pay him a visit soon. I will say more about this when I am permitted.

Obama Rezko Chicago corruption ties news making but hidden, Mutual Bank v Mahajan update, August 30, 2012, Judge Kendall motion ruling, Obama 2005 tax return

Obama Rezko Chicago corruption ties news making but hidden, Mutual Bank v Mahajan update, August 30, 2012, Judge Kendall motion ruling, Obama 2005 tax return

“Why is news about the FDIC lawsuit, Mutual Bank v. Mahajan, the bank that loaned the Rezkos money for the Obama lot, so hard to find?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Obama switch to Harvey Wineberg’s firm to have his 2005 tax return prepared?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Mutual Bank fire whistleblower Kenneth J Connor after he challenged the appraisal on the land purchased by Rita Rezko, just prior to the land sale to Obama?”…Citizen Wells

There are 3 cases I have been checking on daily.

1. The status of the Blagojevich appeal.
2. The status of the Kenneth J. Conner whistleblower lawsuit.
3. The staus of the FDIC Mutual Bank lawsuit against Amrish Mahajan, et al.

All of the above reveal Obama Chicago corruption ties.

My daily activities include checking the docket for the US District Court Northern District Illinois, the courts of the Rezko and Blagojevich prosecutions and FDIC Mutual Bank lawsuit. By doing so, I discovered the following hearing.

The FDIC lawsuit against Amrish Mahajan, former president of Mutual Bank, et al is scheduled for a status hearing in the courtroom of Judge Virginia M. Kendall on July 19, 2012. Mutual Bank loaned Rita Rezko the money for the lot that was purchased by the Obama’s. It is also the bank that fired whistleblower Kenneth J. Conner after he questioned the appraisal of that lot.

Daily Calendar

Thursday, July 19, 2012 (As of 07/12/12 at 06:48:37 AM )

Honorable Virginia M. Kendall               Courtroom 2319 (VMK)

1:11-cv-07590 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporatio 09:00 Status Hearing

http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/home/DailyCal/0.htm

After doing some more digging, I discovered that Judge Kendall had ruled on the motion to dismiss. More later on why I had to dig.

Mutual Bank v. Mahajan
Case Number: 1:11-cv-07590

“In May 2005, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulations (the “IDFPR”) conducted an examination of the Bank and delivered its report to the Board on June 10, 2005. That report warned the Board that its high concentration in hotel loans carried more risk than other properties, and that many of the loans the Bank extended were inappropriately based on
projections rather than historical data and/or had collateral consisting of distressed properties. The 2005 report also noted that many of the properties securing gas and convenience store loans were difficult for the Bank to monitor for collateral purposes as they were outside the Bank’s immediate
market area. As a result of the 2005 report, IDFPR regulators made several recommendations to manage risk, yet these recommendations were not followed by the Bank.”

“In May 2006, the FDIC investigated the Bank and delivered its report to the Board on July 29, 2006. The 2006 report again raised concerns about the Bank’s risk management, record asset growth, and lack of increase in staffing to keep pace with the increase in the loan portfolio. The 2006 report also stressed the geographic dispersion of properties subject to loans, and potential
flaws with asset quality. As with the 2005 report, the 2006 report made recommendations to enhance risk management which were again not followed by the Bank.”

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/illinois/ilndce/1:2011cv04545/257510/54/0.pdf?ts=1344338689

The Obama 2005 tax return is interesting.

From Citizen Wells August 14, 2012.

“Read the following sequence of events and decide for yourself if it looks suspicious.

Lawrence A. Horwich & Associates prepared the Obama’s 2004 tax return.

June 15, 2005: Obama purchases home next door to Rezko for $1.65 million, $300,000 less than the asking price.

June 15, 2005: Rita Rezko, Tony’s wife purchased plot next door for $625,000 asking price.

Late 2005 early 2006: From the Kenneth J. Conner complaint against Mutual Bank filed Oct. 16, 2008. The lawsuit is still active.

“11. In late 2005 or early 2006, Conner performed an appraisal review of the Adams Appraisal (Exhibit C) per the directive of Richard Barth and James Murphy. Conner prepared a written Appraisal Review report (ARR) opining that the Adams Appraisal overvalued the Greenwood lot by a minimum of $ 125,000.00″

“18. On October 23, 2007, eight days after Conner’s October 15, 2007 email to Schlabach attached as Exhibit J, Mutual Bank terminated Conner’s employment for pretextual reasons.”

Conner later told World Net daily when he initially was fired, that the bank and the Rezkos were engaged in “fraud, bribes or kickbacks, use whatever term you want,” to benefit the Obamas.

Soon after the Blagojevich arrest, Conner was interviewed by investigators from Fitzgerald’s office.
Jan. 2006: Rita Rezko sells the Obamas one-sixth of her lot for $104,500.

Harvey Wineberg’s firm prepared the Obama’s 2005 tax return.

Harvey Wineberg is on the Obama house deed.

“WND reported in December 2008 that William Miceli, the attorney for convicted political operative Tony Rezko and a fundraiser for Obama, owns the Obama home at 5046 S. Greenwood.

Miceli is a lawyer at the Chicago law firm Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which employed Obama when he did legal work for Rezko.”

“Now, a search of records shows that, in addition to Miceli, the Obama mansion is owned by Chicago Probate Judge Jane L. Stuart and Obama accountant Harvey Wineberg, both of whom are paying taxes on the property.”

http://www.wnd.com/2011/04/289501/

December 09, 2010

The President also announced his intent to appoint Harvey S. Wineberg as a Member of the President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability.  His biography is below.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/12/09/president-obama-announces-more-key-administration-posts

By the way,  Harvey Wineberg was the Treasurer of Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign and a bundler for Obama’s 2008 campaign.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/08/14/obama-tax-returns-for-2004-and-2005-rezko-deals-why-did-obama-have-harvey-wineberg-prepare-2005-tax-return-why-is-wineberg-on-deed-why-did-wineberg-get-administration-post/

Obama Chicago corruption ties are still news makers, they are just not making the news.

Except here.

 

Obama Chicago style corruption continues, Blagojevich appeal delayed, Appeal of former governor affecting White House delayed, Obama judicial appointments provide clues?

Obama Chicago style corruption continues, Blagojevich appeal delayed, Appeal of former governor affecting White House delayed, Obama judicial appointments provide clues?

“Why wasn’t Rod Blagojevich, Governor of IL, prosecuted before Tony Rezko, a businessman?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

“Why has the production of transcripts for the Blagojevich Appeal been allowed to be delayed far beyond US Court guidelines and who permitted this to happen?”…Citizen Wells

With all of the huge Obama corruption, radical ties and hidden records stories we have tried to get reported, one of the biggest scandals ever to hit this country is playing out now. It is barely being reported and mostly here.

I am calling for all citizen journalists to join in this effort. To bring this enormous chicanery to the surface & discover who is orchestrating it.

As some of you know, and predicted here in 2011, the Blagojevich appeal process is being delayed.

What is the biggest reason for the delay?

The court reporter assigned to Judge James Zagel took a 5 and 1/2 month leave of absence.

Your response might be, well things like this happen, and that is true. However, there are strict guidelines, especially when a case is being appealed.

And this case impacts a former governor and sitting occupant of the White House.

Judges are in general terms considered supervisors of court reporters, but I wanted more clarification. Eralier today I called the Court Reporter Coordinator, Brooke Wilson. I received a voice message indicating she will return next Tuesday.

My next move was to present an article on the court reporter and associated rules. However, my mind began playing connect the dots and I then began looking for connections to district court judges for the Northern District of Illinois.

Here are the judges listed on the website:

Judge Bucklo
Judge Castillo
Judge Chang
Judge Coleman
Judge Darrah
Judge Der-Yeghiayan
Judge Dow Jr.
Judge Feinerman
Judge Gettleman
Judge Gottschall
Judge Holderman
Judge Kapala
Judge Kendall
Judge Kennelly
Judge Kocoras
Judge Lee
Judge Lefkow
Judge Leinenweber
Judge Norgle
Judge Pallmeyer
Judge Shadur
Judge St. Eve
Judge Tharp
Judge Zagel

http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/clerksoffice/judicial/CourtReporters.aspx

Judge St. Eve presided over the Rezko and Levine trial and sentencing. She took part in the delay of sentencing of Rezko until November 22, 2011 and Levine June 28, 2012.

Judge Zagel presided over both trials of Blagojevich and made several controversial rulings and statements. He also, presumably supervises his court reporter, Blanca Lara. Regardless, he has accountability for her job performance.

Judge Kendall is presiding over the trial of FDIC lawsuit, Mutual Bank v. Mahajan . Mutual Bank loaned the Rezkos the money for the lot purchase that was sold to the Obamas. Mutual Bank also fired whistleblower Kenneth J. Conner who questioned the appraisal of the lot. The lawsuit is still active and moving slowly.

Judges Chang, Coleman, Feinerman, Lee and Tharp were appointed by Obama.

From NBC Chicago November 10, 2011.

“President Obama on Thursday nominated two men for federal judgeships in the Northern District of Illinois, both of whom once worked at the same law firm as his current chief of staff, Bill Daley.

Nominated Thursday were John Lee, a partner specializing in commercial litigation at Freeborn & Peters law firm, and John Tharp, a partner at Mayer Brown and co-leader of its securities litigation and enforcement practice.

Daley was once a partner at Mayer Brown.”

“Lee began his legal career as a trial attorney in the Environmental and Natural Resources Division of the United States Department of Justice. He received his J.D. in 1992 from Harvard Law School and his A.B. in 1989 from Harvard College. He worked as an associate at Mayer Brown from 1994 to 1996 and at Grippo & Elden from 1996 to 1999. He’s currently a partner at Freeborn & Peters.

Tharp served in the United States Marine Corps for five years before earning law degrees at Northwestern University and Duke University. He worked in private practice at Kirkland & Ellis from 1991 to 1992 and is currently partner at Mayer Brown.”

http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/obama-district-court-judges-northern-illinois-133670588.html

This has never been about me and never will be.

I am requesting that you help in this investigation.

I am also requesting that you contact other organizations like Hannity Radio, Rush Limbaugh, Breitbart, WND, etc.

I do not care who gets credit for this. It will take a collective effort from concerned Americans.

Let’s roll!

Obama GA ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 2, Robert Bauer et al help Obama hide records

Obama GA ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 2, Robert Bauer et al help Obama hide records

“Why did Obama, prior to occupying the White House, employ Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie, to assist him in avoiding the presentation of a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“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

WHY DID OBAMA REFUSE MATCHING FUNDS IN 2008?

PART 2

Robert Bauer, et al help Obama keep his records hidden.

In Part 1 it was revealed that Obama, in 2008, despite support for and a earlier pledge to accept them, opted out of Federal Matching Funds.

“If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

“Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, announced this morning that he will not enter into the public financing system, despite a previous pledge to do so.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-1/

Advisory Opinion Request: General Election Public Funding

From Obama attorney Robert Bauer to FEC

February 1,2007
“This request for an Advisory Opinion is filed on behalf of Senator Barack Obama and the committee, the Obama Exploratory Committee, that he established to fund his exploration of a Presidential candidacy. The question on which he seeks the Commission’s guidance is whether, if Senator Obama becomes a candidate, he may provisionally raise funds for the general election but retain the option, upon nomination, of returning these contributions and accepting the public funds for which he would be eligible as the Democratic Party’s nominee.”

“Senator Obama, fully committed to competition on the same terms as all other
candidates, has decided that, if he becomes a candidate, he will also instruct his campaign to proceed with active fundraising for the general election. But the Senator would not, if the law allows, rule out the possibility of a publicly funded campaign if both major parties’ nominees eventually decide, or even agree, on this course. Should both major party nominees elect to receive public funding, this would preserve the public financing system, now in danger of collapse, and facilitate the conduct of campaigns freed from any dependence on private fundraising.”

“The legal question presented under Commission regulations is whether a candidate provisionally raising general election funds, segregated from other funds and not available for expenditure until nomination, has “accepted” this money. Candidates establishing eligibility must certify that they have not accepted money for the general election. 11 C.F.R. § 9003.2(a)(2). The rules do not address the question posed here: has the candidate accepted the money if it is held in escrow and never used, allowing for these funds to be returned and for the candidate to qualify for public funding?”

FEC advisory opinion

From Robert D. Lenhard to Robert Bauer

March 1, 2007

“We are responding to your advisory opinion request on behalf of Senator Barack Obama and Obama for America, formerly known as the Obama Exploratory  Committee (the “Committee”),1 requesting whether Senator Obama may, under the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act (the “Fund Act”), as amended, the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (“FECA”), and Commission regulations, solicit and receive private contributions for the 2008 presidential general election while retaining the option of refunding the contributions and receiving public funds for the general election if he receives his party’s nomination for President.

The Commission concludes that Senator Obama may solicit and receive private contributions for the 2008 presidential general election without losing his
eligibility to receive public funding if he receives his party’s nomination for President, if he (1) deposits and maintains all private contributions
designated for the general election in a separate account, (2) refrains from using these contributions for any purpose, and (3) refunds the private
contributions in full if he ultimately decides to receive public funds.”
“Senator Barack Obama is a United States Senator from Illinois, elected in 2004, who is a candidate seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party for the office of President of the United States in the 2008 election. The Committee is his principal campaign committee.”

“If a candidate fails to qualify for the general election, any contributions designated for the general election that have been received from contributors who have already reached their contribution limit for the primary election would exceed FECA’s contribution limits.”

Obama helps block Republican FEC appointee.

From the Washington Post December 11, 2007.

“Paralyze The FEC? Splendid.”

“What if the country held an election and there was no one to make sure that candidates played by the rules — no agency that could issue regulations, write advisory opinions or bring enforcement actions against those breaking the law?”

“The six-person FEC — three members from each party — enforces the rules it writes about how Americans are permitted to participate in politics.”

“The FEC’s policing powers may soon be splendidly paralyzed. Three current FEC members, two Democrats and one Republican, are recess appointees whose terms will end in a few days when this session of Congress ends — unless they are confirmed to full six-year terms.

Four Senate Democrats decided to block the Republican, Hans von Spakovsky. Republicans have responded: “All three or none.” If this standoff persists until Congress adjourns, the three recess appointments will expire and the FEC will have just two members — a Republican vacancy has existed since April. If so, the commission will be prohibited from official actions, including the disbursement of funds for presidential candidates seeking taxpayer financing.”

“The Post wants von Spakovsky confirmed only to keep the FEC functioning. He is being blocked because four senators have put “holds” on his nomination. One of those four who might be responsible for preventing the FEC from being able to disburse taxpayer funds to Democratic presidential candidates Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and John Edwards is . . . Barack Obama.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001559.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Philip J Berg files lawsuit in Philadelphia Federal Court

August 21, 2008

Defendants: Obama, DNC, FEC

Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and therefore ineligible to be President.

August 27, 2008

Complaint served on the U.S. Attorney for DNC and FEC

Motion filed by Robert Bauer, et al October 6, 2008

“BRIEF OF DEFENDANT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
AND DEFENDANT SENATOR BARACK OBAMA
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON
DISPOSITIVE MOTION”
“In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges (falsely), Senator Obama is purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr. Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama is ineligible to run for President; an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests for admission on Senator Obama. On that same date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production of five categories of documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.”

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S OPPOSITION TO
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR AN IMMEDIATE INJUNCTION TO STAY
THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 4, 2008

October 21, 2008

“II. BECAUSE THE COMMISSION HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE WHETHER CANDIDATES MEET THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRITERIA FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY, IT SHOULD BE DISMISSED FROM THIS CASE

The Commission is the independent agency of the United States government vested with exclusive jurisdiction to administer, interpret and enforce civilly the FECA. See 2 U.S.C. §§ 437c(b)(1), 437d(a), 437d(e) and 437g. The Commission also exercises jurisdiction over the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, 26 U.S.C. §§ 9001 et seq., and the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, 26 U.S.C. §§ 9031 et seq.2 These statutes only confer on the Commission jurisdiction over issues concerning the financing of federal campaigns: regulating the organization of campaign committees; the raising, spending, and disclosing of campaign funds; and the receipt and use of public funding for qualifying candidates.

None of these statutes delegates to the FEC authority to determine the constitutional eligibility of federal candidates, and Berg does not allege otherwise. Although the Commission determines whether certain presidential candidates are eligible for public funding, it has no power to determine who qualifies for ballot access or who is eligible to serve as president. Thus, because the Commission has no authority to take action against Senator Obama as suggested by Berg, the Commission should be dismissed from this case with prejudice.”

From the FEC motion above:

“On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.”

This is true.

From Robert Bauer, et al’s motion:

“Although the Commission determines whether certain presidential candidates are eligible for public funding, it has no power to determine who qualifies for ballot access or who is eligible to serve as president.”

This is also true. However, if an advisory opinion requesting Obama’s eligibility for matching funds, questioning his Natural Born Citizen status, had been submitted before Obama opted out, it appears that the FEC would have been compelled to respond and their response could be challenged.

It is becoming clear why Obama did not accept matching federal funds in 2008.

More on this chicanery to come.

Blagojevich appeal process begins, Court filing December 20, 2011, Blagojevich prison sentence begins March 15

Blagojevich appeal process begins, Court filing December 20, 2011, Blagojevich prison sentence begins March 15

From the Chicago Tribune December 20, 2011.

“Blagojevich attorneys begin appeals process”

“Attorneys for Rod Blagojevich have formally begun the process of appealing the former Illinois governor’s conviction and prison sentence.

They did so in a court filing late Tuesday, notifying the U.S. District Court in Chicago that they intended to appeal to a higher court.

Blagojevich has been ordered to report to prison on March 15. The 55-year-old was convicted earlier this year of corruption charges that included allegations that he tried to sell or trade an appointment to President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat for campaign cash or a top job.

Attorneys had said they planned to appeal.

However, the process of filing a full appeal is likely to drag on for several weeks or even months. After notification, transcripts and other documents are typically transferred to the higher court.”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-blagojevichtrial-,0,2339978.story

Daniel Frawley sentencing scheduled for August 24, 2011, Judge Ronald A. Guzman, Frawley deposition links Rezko Obama money

Daniel Frawley sentencing scheduled for August 24, 2011, Judge Ronald A. Guzman, Frawley deposition links Rezko Obama money

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

“Why did Mutual Bank fire whistleblower Kenneth J Connor after he challenged the appraisal on the land purchased by Rita Rezko, just prior to the land sale to Obama?”…Citizen Wells

“Why do 3 supporters own Obama’s home?”…World Net Daily

Daily Calendar   

Wednesday, August 24, 2011  (As of 08/17/11 at 07:47:49 AM 

Honorable Ronald A. Guzman                  Courtroom 1219 (RAG)

1:11-cr-00056   USA v. Frawley                         10:30   Sentencing     

From Citizen Wells August 3, 2011.

“Has Daniel Frawley been talking to the Feds? Apparently Frawley will be sentenced on August 24, 2011. This comes after his sentencing hearing was suddenly delayed recently. A Chicago SunTimes article dated July 11, 2011 indicated that Frawley has been cooperating with the Feds.

“UPDATE: After this story was published Monday morning, U.S. District Judge Ronald A. Guzman canceled Daniel T. Frawley’s sentencing hearing, which had been scheduled for Tuesday. Court records did not indicate why Guzman did this. Frawley’s sentencing had not been re-scheduled.
Daniel T. Frawley once teamed with Tony Rezko — the political fixer who’s now in jail — in what turned out to be a doomed effort to open a training school for Iraqi security forces in western Illinois. Now, Frawley faces a federal prison stretch of his own.

On Tuesday, the 60-year-old onetime Chicago cop is set to appear before a federal judge for sentencing after pleading guilty in February in a $4.4 million bank fraud.

The scheme appears to have no connection to Rezko, the Wilmette businessman who was once a prolific campaign fund-raiser for politicians including the current president, Barack Obama, and the recently convicted former governor, Rod Blagojevich.

Still, federal prosecutors are seeking a reduced sentence for Frawley — of a year and a half in prison, rather than the 35 years he could face — apparently because Frawley has been secretly cooperating since at least 2006 in their investigation of Rezko, who was found guilty in June 2008 of having used his clout with the Blagojevich administration to enrich himself and his business associates.

Details about Frawley’s cooperation with the U.S. attorney’s office, the FBI and the Illinois attorney general’s office can be gleaned from a 65-page court deposition he gave seven months ago in a legal-malpractice lawsuit that he filed against his former longtime lawyer, George Weaver. In the lawsuit, Frawley accuses Weaver of having overbilled him and telling him to “withhold certain information from the government” when he was cooperating with authorities.

That sworn statement, given Dec. 1, 2010, is posted at suntimes.com/news/watchdogs. In it, Frawley talks about three meetings he’s had with law enforcement authorities since 2006. The deposition outlines how he secretly recorded Rezko, and it raises a new and unsubstantiated question about Rezko’s once-close relationship with Obama — an issue that dogged the then-U.S. senator during his presidential campaign four years ago.”

“More compelling passages from the Daniel Frawley deposition were presented at Citizen Wells on July 15, 2011.

“Attorneys Franklin & Schutte represent Frawley, plaintiff.

Attorney Konicek represents George Weaver, defendant.

Frawley: “George told me that he had a meeting at his office on LaSalle Street with Dan Mahru, with some people from First Bank–I didn’t know how many at the time–and himself. And George instructed me not to attend.”

Konicek: “So who said it to you, and where was it said to you?”

Frawley: “Dan Mahru told me that First Bank was agreeable to a settlement.”

Konicek: “In March 13, 2006, you had a conversation with Mr. Weaver where you say he instructed me not to cooperate.”

Frawley: “Yes, I had a conversation with Mr. Weaver where he instructed me not to cooperate.”
Frawley: “I was on the phone, making a phone call to Tony Rezko. I had a luncheon engagement with him.”

“George was outside of the room where I was making the telephone call, and the purpose of the call was for me to keep my luncheon engagement with Tony Rezko and to go over and to record Tony Rezko.”

“George saw and heard me on the phone, came running in and went like this [demonstrating]: Cut it,”

Franklin: “For the record, the deponent is crossing his hands across his throat.”

Konicek: “And Tony Rezko was where when you were speaking to him?”

Frawley: “He was on the other end of the phone. I don’t recall where he was.”
Konicek: “I’m assuming the information is about the payments made by Rezko to Obama, so we know we’re talking about the right conversation, right?”

Konicek: “Am I correct it was about Obama being paid by Rezko?”

Frawley: “I’m not answering that question, based upon my attorney’s instructions.”

Konicek: “But on March 13, 2006, you’ve already indentified for me being at 219 South Dearborn. You’re talking to Tony rezko on the phone, and Mr. Weaver makes this gesture to you, right?”

Frawley: “Mr. Weaver made the gesture and told me to get off the phone, to end the phone call.”
Konicek: “Okay. And then where were you instructed not to cooperate?”

Frawley: “In the same building, at 219 South Dearborn….in a different room.”
Konicek: “Did you bring to Mr. Weaver in Hinsdale a statement showing payment to Tony Rezko in the amount of $ 1.5 million?”
Konicek: “Are you going to answer?”

Frawley: “No.”

Konicek: “Are you asserting your Fifth Amendment privilege?”

Frawley: “Yes.””

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2011/08/03/daniel-frawley-sentencing-august-24-2011-frawley-talking-for-lighter-sentence-daniel-frawley-throwing-rezko-and-obama-under-bus/

Hollister v. Soetoro aka Barack Obama update and history, Judge James Robertson biased or incompetent, Bias or conspiracy?

Hollister v. Soetoro aka Barack Obama update and history, Judge James Robertson biased or incompetent, Bias or conspiracy?

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

“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.”

“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 versus Madison

Is Judge James Robertson biased, incompetent or part of a conspiracy?

Citizen Wells December 30, 2008.

“Berg today, with co-counsel Lawrence J. Joyce, Esquire, filed another lawsuit in Federal Court in the United States District for the District of Columbia on behalf of Retired Colonel Hollister against Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama demanding to know Obama’s real name and if he is constitutionally qualified to be President. Plaintiff, Gregory S. Hollister, is a resident of Colorado Springs, Colorado and Hollister has “standing” and needs a decision so he knows whether or not to follow any Order of Soetoro a/k/a Obama.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/30/philip-j-berg-lawrence-j-joyce-esquire-retired-colonel-hollister-lawsuit-december-30-2008-obama%e2%80%99s-lack-of-qualifications-challenged-gregory-s-hollister-hollister-has-standing-inter/

Citizen Wells February 5, 2009.

“The following Order from DC District Court Judge James Robertson was issued for Hollister v. Soetoro yesterday:

ORDER
Plaintiff’s motion to file interpleader and deposit funds with the court [#2] is frivolous and is denied. His motion to shorten time for defendants to respond to his complaint [#3] is moot and is denied. The motions of his counsel [#4, #5] for the admission pro hac vice of Philip J. Berg and Lawrence J. Joyce are in abeyance until the Court has had the opportunity, in open court, to examine their credentials, their competence, their good faith, and the factual and legal bases of the complaint they have signed.
JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/hollister-v-soetoro-philip-j-berg-dc-district-court-judge-james-robertson-february-4-2009-colonel-hollister-motion-for-response-time-denied-interpleader-motion-denied-motion-for-pro-hac-vice/

Citizen Wells March 6, 2009.

“The following is from a Memorandum issued by
United States District Judge James Robertson
on March 5, 2009. The Memorandum is a response
to the Hollister vs Soetoro lawsuit.”

 
“This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve
mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is
foolish or that America has too many lawyers with not enough to
do. Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the
blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The right thing to do
is to bring it to an early end.”
“The plaintiff says that he is a retired Air Force
colonel who continues to owe fealty to his Commander-in-Chief
(because he might possibly be recalled to duty) and who is
tortured by uncertainty as to whether he would have to obey
orders from Barack Obama because it has not been proven — to the
colonel’s satisfaction — that Mr. Obama is a native-born
American citizen, qualified under the Constitution to be
President. The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,
vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by
America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign
for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a
court.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2009/03/06/hollister-vs-soetoro-us-district-judge-james-robertson-march-5-2009-philip-berg-hemenway-obama-not-eligible-col-hollister-barry-soetoro-judicial-judge-robertson-memorandum-air-force-colonel/

The following statement by Judge Robertson should be sufficient to have him impeached:

“The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,
vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by
America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign
for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a
court.”

Obama’s citizenship may be an issue, but it is not the critical issue, which is his natural born citizen status and eligibility for the presidency per the US Constitution. Judge Robertson’s reference to the vetting of Obama on social media sites stands on it’s own for a high level of stupidity. The quote from Marbury v Madison above is the final arbiter of Judge Robertson’s guilt.

From World Net Daily November 26, 2010.

“Supremes challenged to put Constitution above Twitter”

“The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether the Constitution will trump Twitter on issues of national importance, including the eligibility of a president, which could determine the very future of the American form of government.

The request is being made in a petition for writ of certiori, or a request for the Supreme Court to review the decision of a lower appellate court, in a case brought on behalf of Col. Gregory S. Hollister, a retired Air Force officer.

He is among the many who have brought court challenges to Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office based on doubts about whether Obama qualifies for the position under the U.S. Constitution’s demand that presidents be a “natural born citizen,” a qualification not imposed on other many other federal officers.

The pleadings submitted to the court, compiled by longtime attorney John D. Hemenway, cite the incredible importance of the claims that Obama, in fact, failed to qualify for the office.”

“The questions suggested by the petition are weighty:

  • “Did the district court examine the complaint, as required by the decisions of this and every other federal court, to see if it alleged facts to support its claims?”
  • “By refusing to consider the issue of defendant Obama not being a ‘natural born citizen’ as set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, did the district court violate its obligations to consider the issues raised by the complaint?”
  • “In … relying on extrajudicial criteria such as an assertion that ‘the issue of the president’s citizenship was raised, vetted, blogged, texted, twittered and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency’ combined with an attack on petitioner … did the district court not engage in such obvious political bias and upon extrajudicial factors as to render its opinion void?”
  • “Did the … bias engaged in lead to a decision which ignored the law as set out above and as a result place the respondent-defendant Obama above that law and the rule of law in this country generally and threaten the constitutional basis and very existence of our rule of law?”
  • “Did the courts below not completely ignore the decisions of this court and the clear language of Rule 15 of the federal Rules of Civil Procedure concerning amendments so as to compound its biased elevation of the defendant Obama above the rule of constitutional law?”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=233177

Thanks to commenter GORDO.

Vrdolyak prison sentence, Fast Eddie sentenced to 10 months, Citizen Wells open thread, October 16, 2010

Vrdolyak prison sentence, Fast Eddie sentenced to 10 months

From the Chicago Tribune.

“Former Chicago Ald. Ed Vrdolyak was long known as “Fast Eddie” for his ability to work the angles in city politics and remain clear of criminal probes. He burnished that image last year when a judge spurned prosecution calls for prison and sentenced him instead to probation for a fraud conviction.

But his day of reckoning finally came Friday when Vrdolyak, forced by an appeals court to be sentenced again, was given 10 months in prison — followed by 5 months in a work-release center and an additional 5 months in home confinement. He was also fined $250,000.”

“The legendary dealmaker had thought he had escaped prison time after U.S. District Judge Milton Shadur sentenced him to five years of probation for setting up a $1.5 million kickback on a Gold Coast real estate deal.

But prosecutors objected, and the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ordered that a different judge resentence Vrdolyak, calling Shadur’s punishment a “slap on the wrist” that ignored Vrdolyak’s status as one of Chicago’s most influential insiders and gave too much weight to dozens of letters attesting to his acts of generosity.

On Friday prosecutors again sought about 31/2 years for Vrdolyak. Federal sentencing guidelines called for a minimum sentence of 21/2 years in prison. But U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly said the guidelines were too stiff a punishment for Vrdolyak and imposed the 10-month prison term as well as the additional work release and home confinement.

Monico said Vrdolyak will not appeal the sentence. He was ordered to report to prison Jan. 19.

Vrdolyak had pleaded guilty to steering the sale of a building owned by Rosalind Franklin University to a developer that agreed to secretly pay him a $1.5 million “finders fee.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Christopher Niewoehner said prosecutors were pleased Vrdolyak will serve some time in prison.

“The rich and powerful in this city deserve to be treated the same as anyone else,” Niewoehner had told the judge. “And if somebody else was involved in a fraud for $1.5 million … they would be looking at a long time in prison.””

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-vrdolyak-sentencing-1016-20101015,0,1233629.story

Barnett Keyes et al v Obama, Obama attorneys response, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Citizen Wells open thread, October 15, 2010

Barnett Keyes et al v Obama, Obama attorneys response, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

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

What does the above statement mean? Those in denial about Obama, his character and his past tend to dismiss such statements as fiction. I assure you that it is based on solid facts, court records. Here is one of many examples.

From the Obama attorneys response to the appeal in the Barnett/Keyes lawsuit appeal in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“PAMELA BARNETT, Captain, et al., )
Plaintiffs/Appellants,

v.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, et al.,

Defendants/Appellees.”

“APPELLEES’ ANSWERING BRIEF
APPEAL FROM THE
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SANTA ANA
SA CV 09-00082 DOC
ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR.
United States Attorney
LEON W. WEIDMAN
Assistant United States Attorney
Chief, Civil Division
ROGER E. WEST
Assistant United States Attorney
First Assistant Chief, Civil Division
DAVID A. DeJUTE
Assistant United States Attorney
Room 7516 Federal Building
300 North Los Angeles Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Telephone: (213) 894-2461/2574
Facsimile: (213) 894-7819
Attorneys for Defendants/Appellees”

Yes, that’s right, three taxpayer funded government attorneys representing Obama, helping him to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and proof that he is eligible to be president.

Instead of presenting simple proof of eligibility, as John McCain and others have done, Obama has continued for over 2 years to avoid presenting proof.

Here is just a snippet of the legalese, the horsecrap, what I believe is an illegal manuever by government attorneys to aid and abet Obama in violating the law of the  land.
“Regarding the military plaintiffs, any injury which they may be suffering has
never been identified with any precision at all. Certainly, military personnel may
face risk of injury in the course of their duties, but the military plaintiffs have
pointed to no such concrete risks that they themselves presently face. Even if the Court could find standing on the basis of such injuries, however, it is even more highly speculative that any such injury would be redressed by a change in the identity of the Commander-in-Chief. The military plaintiffs, therefore, cannot meet the redressability prong on this basis.”

“Moreover, the military plaintiffs also lack standing because members of the
military cannot challenge the orders of a superior in a judicial forum. See, e.g.
Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296, 300, 304, 103 S.Ct 2362, 76 L.Ed.2d 586
(1984) (holding that “[c]ivilian courts must, at the very least, hesitate long before entertaining a suit which asks the court to tamper with the established relationship between enlisted military personnel and their superior officers” because “that relationship is at the heart of a necessarily unique structure of the military establishment” and noting that the “disruption of ‘[t]he peculiar and special relationship of the soldier to his superiors’ that might result if the soldier were allowed to hale his superiors into court.” (quotation omitted); United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669, 682-83, 107 S.Ct 3054, 97 L.Ed.2d 550 (1987) (holding that members of the military cannot raise Constitutional claims against military officials for injuries incident to service because “congressionally uninvited intrusion into military affairs by the judiciary is inappropriate”).”

“It is well settled that when the United States Constitution makes a “textually
demonstrable constitutional commitment” of an issue to another branch of
government, other than the judiciary, that issue presents a non-justiciable political question.”

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39302812/Barnett-Keyes-et-al-v-Obama-et-al-9th-Circuit-Court-of-Appeals-Appellees-Obama-Answering-Brief-10-13-10

Citizen Wells ending comment.

Aside from the fact that the attorneys helping Obama are engaging in an illegal activity, knowing full well that he has no proof of eligibility:
Congress does indeed have the right and responsibility to insure that the president is eligble. That, however, does not preclude other branches from performing their critical functions of checks and balances and highest responsibility to uphold and defend the US Constitution. Nor does any power provided by the Constitution preclude or preempt a citizen, having taken an oath to defend the Constitution or not, from adhering to the rule of law, the supreme law of the land and performing their civic duty.