Monday, December 15, 2008

Is the Judicial Review Allowed Only After the Electoral College Vote and Congressional Certification?

Is this why the Donofrio v. Wells (NJ) case is still "pending?" Is it only after the Electoral College votes and Congress certifies the election, that the Supreme Court believes it may take action regarding the eligibility of presidential candidates? The cases currently before the court, except for the Berg (PA) case, are versus state secretaries of state, not against Barack Obama, but perhaps that does not make a difference.

Is it similar to a prosecutor only allowed to prosecute after the crime and not before?

You may see this blog post, from Leo Donofrio's new hit thread, "Mother of all Conspiracy Theories, Obama has a Twin" (catchy tune, BTW).
Everyman Says:
December 14, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Yes, we have been betrayed by men… church-wise in the 60’s and maybe tomorrow, civil-wise by the SCOTUS;
Hell man, do you think you are any more protected from betrayal than our Saviour… take a long look at a crucifix… and remember his best friend Peter?

The only thing within your power is you… don’t betray yourself… know you are fighting the good fight and will continue to fight until you have satisfied yourself that you have done all that you can do to right the wrong… understand this…
if the case fails tomorrow that is not because you didn’t fight … if it dies tomorrow and you fail to continue to fight … you must answer to yourself and all those who have given their life to protect the constitution.

Oh you of little faith; so gifted in knowledge and talent to express your thoughts.
You have but to ask yourself have I done the best I could have done? … is there anything more I can do?
Perhaps the electoral must vote as directed in the following:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/100108.html#5
Judge Alsup wrote, “Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course.” Timing is everything… you maybe the only one able to raise an “objection”

Pity-party is over.
Regardless of what they say… you and I will Know the truth …and that makes all the difference.
You will call upon your Ancestors, for at this moment, YOU are the sole reason for Their existence.

And here, from the blog, Ballot Access News, Oct. 1, 2008, is the post about the McCain court case and the ruling of Judge Alsip.
McCAIN WINS BALLOT ACCESS LAWSUIT

On September 16, U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup ruled that John McCain should be on the California ballot. Robinson v Bowen, C08-3836, n.d. The plaintiff, a presidential elector candidate for Alan Keyes, had argued that McCain is not "natural-born". Judge Alsup said that McCain is "natural-born." He also said that even if a candidate does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president, he or she should still be on the ballot.

Every time a minor party presidential candidate who does not meet the constitutional qualifications to be president tries to get on the ballot, and the matter goes to court, courts rule that the candidate should not be on the ballot. The two leading cases are Cleaver v Jordan, in which the California Supreme Court said that Eldridge Cleaver should not be on the 1968 California ballot, and Jenness v Brown, in which a U.S. District Court in Ohio said that Linda Jenness (Socialist Workers Party presidential candidate in 1972) should not be on the ballot. Both Cleaver and Jenness were under age 35. Unfortunately, neither decision is reported, although the briefs in Robinson v Bowen cited the Cleaver case.

Judge Alsup wrote, "Mechanisms exist under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted, and the Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding qualifications or lack thereof can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in Congress. Therefore, this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance. Judicial review � if any � should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course."

The party that most often nominates a presidential candidate, or a vice-presidential candidate, who does not meet the Constitutional qualifications, is the Socialist Workers Party, which has done this in 1972, 1980, 2004, and 2008. Each time the party used a stand-in who did meet the Constitutional qualifications (but only in those states which refuse to print an unqualified presidential candidate on the ballot). Each time except 1972, the party did not fight in court to place its actual nominee on the ballot. Perhaps, if the SWP or any other party nominates someone in 2012 who doesn't meet the Constitutional qualifications, the party can raise the issue in court again, this time depending on the Robinson v McCain precedent.

What exactly do you think is going on? The "comments" link works just fine. Was Justice Alsip (no disrespect intended, Judge) just conning here, finding an excuse to allow McCain on the ballot, while passing the buck?

Is this the view of proper procedure that the SCOTUS maintains?

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Obama's Presidential Ineligibility Makes the Media!

What could be more mainstream than this?

From their site:

Obama - Born in the USA?
PRESIDENT-elect Barack Obama is being rocked by a series of shocking new lawsuits charging his election was illegal! GLOBE's special report reveals why some national leaders believe his Hawaiian birth certificate was forged - and that America's next commander-in-chief was born in Kenya, which could doom his presidency. It's must reading.

From the point of view of the dominant Marxstream Media, this is the venue to handle Obama's ineligibility to be U.S. President. Take yours home today! Then a different issue comes out a week later and that's it. Let the "respected" media go and stay dark.

Who needs to get involved with futile attempts at refuting his disqualification, due to his father? I mean, how can a guy claim he hadn't inherited a foreign citizenship and allegiance by his foreign father, when it's a well-known biographical fact? But, that's just the ticket! Best to put the hide in plane sight strategy to work, instead.

So, Obama confesses to his U.K. birthright -- right on his own Web site -- just puts it out there in that cool, matter-of-fact, Obama way. The meta-message is, "If the idea that this would disqualify me weren't ridiculous, why would I have run for president in the first place? Of course I'm qualified. I mean, Constitution? I have a Harvard J.D. in this stuff." He sure can gain people's confidence -- and that is the sign of a great leader, right?

And then, we get some of the media players to discredit, besmirch, and otherwise ridicule the "birther-truthers," the few and the odd, and he has it made! It's in the book -- you know, the Alinsky book (rule 5, if you're keeping track). And Granduncle Trotsky's playbook too, as long as the end justifies the means, of course. And the masterstroke is for this to work so well that even some conservative pundits run up and hop on the ridicule train. Chuggin' that hot air from the useful-idiots-dot-com. LOL!

Constitutional, natural born Citizenship crisis? Who needs to know?

Just make it all about a perpetually withheld birth certificate, while... with a mix of impatience and pity... anyone bestirred by any allegations is comforted back into slumber by the "validity" of the (meaningless) certificate already released by Obama, online. Let the story hang there -- on a huge, lurid headline, FRONTPAGE: GLOBE.

That'll put the unwashed masses in their place, while we elites continue preparing our "rule." After all, "We are the ones we've have been waiting for." Man, it's cool that line got the big ovations -- confirmed the whole thing.

And if we disintegrate the U.S. Constitution in the process, so much the better! As Barack said in the Public Radio interview, that archaic document gets in the way of our redistribution model.

Best to get that Constitution out of the Obama way.

Gotta get to the store and pick up my souvenir!
Maybe stock up on water, plastic sheets, duct-tape, oh! Don't forget the tinfoil!!
Seriously, let's make sure they sell out -- and create buzz on their Web site.

Daddy Says No! - Articles Assessing the Constitution's "Natural Born Citizen" Clause, Barack Hussien Obama I, and BHO II

What are those criteria again, for a United States president? "Natural born Citizen?" Whatever does that mean, how can we tell, and why should it matter?

These are articles on the Web, most of which have been circulating among those in the know, about the challenges to the candidacies of both Barack Obama and John McCain. Regarding Obama, this is due to his foreign father, Barack Sr., who by natural law (and British code) passed along his U.K. citizenship, thus bequeathing a foreign jurisdiction to the little tyke, in the eyes of America. Well, at least in any open American eyes. In the case of McCain, the problem was his birth in the Republic of Panama, even though his parents were both true blue Americans.

How could this happen? That is for another article. But here is Barack Obama's "Daddy says no!" list, in chronological order. On January 2 or 3, I.O. intends to draw the Top Five Natural Born Citizen Articles from this list and feature them in a new posting.

"From Feudalism to Consent: Rethinking Birthright Citizenship," John C. Eastman, Ph.D., Mar. 30, 2006, The Heritage Foundation, heritage.org

"Why U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark Can Never Be Considered Settled Birthright Law," P.A. Madison, Dec. 10, 2006, updated Dec. 1, 2008, The Federalist Blog

"John Jay Did Not Want the Top Offices to be Open to Foreigners," John S. Bolton, June 29, 2008, Open City and its Natural Enemies

"Dual Citizenship Makes Obama Ineligible Under Article II," Judah Benjamin, Sept. 25, 2008, TD Blog

"The Betrayal of Mystery Babylon," Sidney Allen Johnson, Nov. 23, 2008, The Prophet of Wrath

"Natural Born Citizens: Or How to Beat a Subject to Death with a Stick," Judah Benjamin, Nov. 28, 2008, TD Blog

"Leo Donofrio Comments on Judah Benjamin Article Concerning Natural Born Citizen and the Common Law," Leo Donofrio, Dec. 1, 2008, Natural Born Citizen (Web log)

"Letters to Military Associations - CALL TO ACTION - File in US Federal Court Regarding Obama's Citizenship Status," Robert Reece, Dec. 3, 2008, Article 2, Sect 1, Clause 5 (Natural Born Citizen) (Web log)

"Defining Natural-Born Citizen," P.A. Madison, Nov. 18, 2008, updated Dec. 4, 2008, The Federalist Blog

"Stand by Me..." user: "DrKate," Dec. 5, 2008, TD Blog

"The Donofrio 'Natural Born Citizen' Challenge," Dec. 5, 2008, Investigating Obama (Web log)

"The Law -- Perkins v. ELG," user: "CalperniaUSA," Dec. 8, 2008, NYC Bedroom Communities (Web log)

"Obama and the Natural Born Citizen Clause," Randall Hoven, Dec. 9, 2008, American Thinker (Web log)

"Constituting A Natural Born Citizen," David Mivshek, Dec. 11, 2008, PolitiCode (Web log)

'Natural Born Citizen': Defined by 14th Amendment Framers and in Treatise Relied on by Scalia," Leo Donofrio, Dec. 13, 2008, Natural Born Citizen (Web log)

"The Definition of Natural Born Citizen," by "Ken-in-AR," Dec. 24, 2008, The Liberty Pole (Web Social Network)

Shortly, I.O. will give each article a very brief characterization and... announce The Top-5 "Daddy Says No!" Articles Awards. It might have been a more traditional "Top-10," if I had been able to find that many really, specifically pertinent and illustrative ones, amid the dark, Mordorian mists of the Marxstream Media.

In the mean time, have a search for the truth, yourself, whatever Congress and the SCOTUS does.


Know of any other articles?
Hint: don't bother with cbsnews.com, newyorktimes.com, and their comrades.

If you have a link, please leave it in a comment.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Orly Taitz: Urgent! What Needs to be Done Now



The following is posted from the blog of Orly Taiz, DDS, one of the patriots leading the natural born Citizen charge, from California and Hawaii -- and now to the Supreme Court.

What can we do?

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Urgent! What needs to be done now

There are a number of things you can do:

1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524

2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.

3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:

a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud

b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses

c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)

d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged

e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".

f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.

Please call FBI and US attorneys office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009.

4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.


Contact Information

United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300

United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444

Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:

U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:

E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.

For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.


Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq

Friday, December 12, 2008

Video: Natural Born Citizen Press Conference, National Press Club, Monday 12/8/2008: Bob Shultz, Philip Berg, Orly Taitz, James Manning; Must See TV


As you may switch it on to see, Monday's NPC conference describes well, the constitutional crisis which America has been suffering since the Iowa Caucuses at least. It proceeds as follows:


0.00:00 - Bob Schulz, We the People Foundation, frames the reasons for calling for the presser.

0.15:50 - Philip Berg, obamacrimes.com, who does a very good job of summarizing the numerous problems which the Constitution's "natural born Citizen" clause has, with Barack Obama, to date. Berg also reprimands the Obamedia quite nicely.

0.36:00 - Bob Schultz, discussing the Donofrio suit -- thus, also the Wrotnowski petition, pending SCOTUS conference Friday, 12/12, presenting essentially an expanded version of Donofrio v. Wells, chiefly based upon Obama's foreign patrilineal descent. Also, the separate matter of the Chicago Tribune ad, which pleads for access to Obama's actual, original birth certificate.

0.44:50 - Orly Taitz (introduced by Bob Schultz) who, among numerous actions and along with Gary Kreep, is bringing "the Alan Keyes suit" in California, destined for the SCOTUS, blog: A Natural Born Citizen...Orly?.

1:09:15 - Pastor James David Manning, PhD., atlah.org, who leads the press conference in prayer, explains his use of inflammatory 1960's-ebonic terminology, and does not let up on Barack Hussein Obama II.

1:35:55 - Questions from reporters, answers from the panel, and more...
Update: more to come on the mystery woman who takes the microphone to speak of the influence of foreign oil money...
2:28:00 - You may especially wish to hear Orly Taitz at this point.
She get
s to the point with the news media. A very refreshing point in a very informative and challenging segment.

Just one potential admonition if you will allow. I did not hear the term "fictitious presiden
cy" used; maybe I just missed it. I did hear "usurper," though. Both apply. Come to think of it, I.O. should have been using these terms more its prior articles, too...

Note: We the People Foundation and google.com allow this entire press conference to be downloaded from its Google residence.

Hey, be sure to let me know when this shows up on C-Span...
Is there anyone to whom you wish to email the link, instead of waiting?

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Email to David Horowitz and Some Others: Constitution's in the Balance, What's New with You?

From:
To: "David Horowitz" (editor/at/frontpagemag.com), "Rush Limbaugh" (ElRushbo/at/eibnet.com), "Sean Hannity" (Hannity/at/foxnews.com), "Hugh Hewitt" (hhewitt/at/hughhewitt.com), "Mark Levin" (marklevin.show/at/citcomm.com), "Kathryn Jean Lopez" (klopez/at/nationalreview.com), "Rich Lowrey"(omments.lowry/at/nationalreview.com), "Glenn Beck" (me/at/glennbeck.com), "Dennis Prager" (dennis/at/pragerradio.com), "David Brody" (thebrodyfile/at/gmail.com), "Michelle Malkin" (michelle/at/hotair.com), et. al.

Subject: Friday: The Two Criteria of Natural Born Citizenship; Constitution in the Balance

Tomorrow is a critical day at the Supreme Court, and in the imminent future of our republic. The Court will have to decide, before the Electoral College is to vote on Monday, whether they will allow three candidates for president to stand, whom by their own reported biographies, are not natural born Citizens according to the two criteria accepted and documented from the framing of the Constitution.

In case some have missed it, I hope to provide by morning, a summary of the numerous ways in which Barack Obama is, or in some cases may be, a fictitious presidential candidate. Along with this, the right sidebar of Investigating Obama is humbly provided as a means of tracking immediate developments.

Your choice and mine, is to pay attention and inform the Citizenry, or to simply follow what is observably a fraud, protected and propagated by the power called "the fourth estate" -- leading to America's denial of its Constitution and whatever disorder this promises. What each of us has done or may do about this, is "upon our heads."

A week's worth of articles in Investigating Obama:


If, somehow, I might assist you, please let me know.

Highest regards to fellow American Sovereigns,
Arlen Williams
I.O.

PS: Reader, there is still time to contact media... friends...

I.O. suggests using your own, short message with a couple references including the two critera:
1. born in the nation, and 2. parents of American citizenship.

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Donofrio Ups the Ante v. Comments Discrediting Scalia's Referral and Full Court's Distribution to Conference

There seems to be an effort to discredit the action that Scalia and the SCOTUS took on Friday, Dec. 5, upon the Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz petition to stay the Electoral College vote. As you may know, this case was referred by Justice Alito and accepted by the full court to committee, which will assess the case this Friday, Dec. 12, in order to decide upon any further action. It could grant a stay, deny the case, call for a brief from the opposition, call for oral arguments, etc.

Whether the debunking effort is merely ad hoc, or being orchestrated, I cannot say, though the Axelrod Astroturfers are infamous. But I can relate this blogospheric attack, then post Leo Donofrio's replies. While Donofrio's own suit of the New Jersey Secretary of State was denied, he is representing Cort Wrotnowski, in his petition of the SCOTUS, based upon a Connecticut filing against its own SoS.

In the comments below an illinoisreview.com piece, "Supreme Court refers Obama natural born citizen question and moves forward," on Monday 12/8, is found this bold attempt at the debunk:

The Supreme Court has a rule: a litigant may request a stay from the Justice for the circuit where their case arose. If it is denied, they can come back and ask another Justice of their choice. When that happens, the 2nd Justice always refers the matter to the court for conference, so they can get all 9 to agree on throwing it out and be done with it.

If they ever get something they want to grant, they ALWAYS issue an order to the other side requesting opposition. No court would ever issue a stay without having first have heard from both sides.

Obviously, publicity-seeking vexatious litigants have now figured out that they can get a lot of attention by this 2-step process -- its a sure way to get the trash they file listed on the docket. I suppose we can expect this to continue all the way up through January 20th.

Similarly, in Donofrio's own Natural Born Citizen blog article, today: "The Washington Times Coverage of Donofrio and Wrotnowski SCOTUS Cases," he cites this criticism, as reported by Times reporter, Tom Ramstack:
Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s nonvoting Democratic delegate to Congress, speculated that the Supreme Court is considering appeals that challenge Mr. Obama’s citizenship only long enough to reject them “and lay to rest manufactured doubts about the legitimacy of Obama’s election before the inauguration.”
To this denigration dealt by Rep. Norton, Donofrio responds in his piece:

That’s a rather absurd statement. Frivolous cases aren’t graced with any respect at all. If it deserves immediate denial, then they deny it. But on the same day the order came down rejecting my case, Justice Scalia referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz to the full Court and it was distributed for the Dec. 12 conference.

If the Court wanted to send a message as Norton suggests, they could have denied Cort’s case at the same time as mine. Now that would have sent the message she suggests.

For example, when a stay application is renewed to a second Justice, that Justice may deny it straight away rather than referring it to the full Court. Examine the following two SCOTUS dockets where stay applications were denied by the first Justice and then denied by the second Justice upon renewed application:

No. 07A638
Title:
Ate Kays Company, Applicant
v.
Pennsylvania Department of General Services, et al.
Docketed:
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District
Case Nos.: (175 EM 2007)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feb 1 2008 Application (07A638) for a stay pending appeal, submitted to Justice Souter.
Feb 2 2008 Application (07A638) denied by Justice Souter.
Feb 6 2008 Application (07A638) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.
Feb 7 2008 Application (07A638) denied by Justice Scalia.

—————

No. 7A421

Michigan, Applicant
v.
Corey Ramone Frazier
Docketed:
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of Michigan
Case Nos.: (131041)


Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) for stay pending disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Stevens.
Nov 20 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Stevens.
Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) refiled and submitted to Justice Alito.
Nov 28 2007 Application (07A421) denied by Justice Alito.
The intrepid New Jerseyan draws two examples from the SCOTUS record and puts more chips on the table. But, this does not satisfy one comments poster, who sees the bet and raises, as follows:
JudgeDredd Says:
December 10, 2008 at 12:06 pm

The second time you submit to a second justice, if they deny without submitting to the full court for review, you can submit it a third time. By sending it to the full court for review they can get rid of your case FASTER because that is your last shot. Your case will be one of thousands that the clerks pick through and recommend.It is very very possible (likely?) that not one justice has even seen your brief much less read it.The justices never even see the vast majority of applications.The court takes up such cases at its discretion and you have no Constitutional right whatsoever to even have it considered.
Donofrio sees the bet of JudgeDredd and calls:
Doesn't matter. If you submit it the first time or the second time, the Justice you submit it to has the option of referring it to the full Court and once it's referred, the Court may then deny it together. Upon the referral, if the full Court denies it without distributing it for conference, THEN NO 3RD RENEWAL IS ALLOWED. So, if the Court wanted to send a stern message they could have denied Cort's case as a full court on Monday without scheduling it for conference. Your point is in error. Once the full Court denies the application, you can't resubmit it to a 3rd Justice.
Thus, Leo maintains a countenance of confidence in his case and certainty in his place at the SCOTUS conference table. That tends to boost I.O.'s confidence.


Are you a student of the SCOTUS who would like to state your case, here? If so, the "comments" link awaits you. Or, maybe something just "strikes you," somehow.

Or, if you wish to pass this question on to a litigious lifeline, please click the envelope.

<<<<<<<<<<<<> I.O. <>>>>>>>>>>>>

Addendum: Since much of this post comes across on the negative, I will mention another, rosier scenario, postulated by many. It "holds" that Scalia (and Thomas, perhaps others) may have wanted to dispose of the Donofrio suit in favor of a stronger Wrotnowski case and thus, he waited for the denial of Donofrio v. Wells and immediately referred Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.

In the same set of comments, Donofrio's remarks:
December 10, 2008 at 11:36 am

Just because a Justice refers it to the full Court, the full Court is not obligated to distribute it for conference. Upon Scalia's referral, the Court could have sent a stern message of denial without ever having distributed it for conference. The Court could have acted on Cort's application on the same day they denied mine by simply denying his. But they didn't. I don't know what it means, but neither does anybody else who isn't a SCOTUS Justice.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Fitzgerald Finally Makes a Move: Blagojevich - and what of Obama?

Law enforcement never sleeps -- and in Chicago the Feds can hardly catch a nap

Illinois Governor, Rod Blagojevich is under arrest. It's the Rezko investigation, which led to much more, into a "political corruption crime spree." This includes trying to sell Barack Obama's seat on the U.S. Senate. And this, along with fresh evidence of attempted manipulation of the Chicago Tribune by Blagojevich, apparently triggered the arrest, in an otherwise long, arduous effort of collecting information, the kind for which Fitzgerald is famous. What I.O. has noted throughout the day follows.

On Illinois Review - "Source: Feds take Gov. Blagojevich into custody" (The FBI took him from home shortly after 6am CT.) This is also subject matter that HillBuzz covers. And let's give John Kass a day or two and see what he says. And, the I.O. sidebar should be interesting to watch.

On CBS-2 News Chicago, via Drudge - "CROOK COUNTY: GOVERNOR, YOU'RE UNDER ARREST"

11:30am CT, on TV - Patrick Fitzgerald is giving a press conference (C-SPAN link). He credits the Chicago Tribune, which found key information (in its face) held it from the public for awhile at the request of federal investigators, then published it Friday. This apparently led to even further evidence via bug or "wire," and wiretap. Instances of pay to play in state contracts are also in the complaint.

On Obama - Fitzgerald said that the complaint makes no allegations about him, "and that's all I can say," an interesting way to put it. See the exact quote, below.

Fitzgerald also stressed, "I encourage people to talk to us... to let us get to the bottom of what has happened here," and later reiterated, "...we need people, in the public, to stand up and say 'enough.'"

Later - Talking Democrat heads are starting to play Blago as a nutty oddball, while Obama tried to stay away from it all, yada, yada, "aloof," yada.

2:21pm CT. on TV - Obama: "saddened and sobered" about Blago, but since there is an ongoing investigation, he does not want to comment. (Instead, he focuses on spreading Al Gore's ploy for man-made global socialism, now inconveniently relabeled "climate change," as if this is news to the Earth.) Reporters lunge. Obama: "...sad day... ...won't comment..." Oh, but he hasn't spoken with the Illinois Governor lately, not even about the Senate seat he has just vacated. Even though he by some reports, had Valerie Jarrett in mind for it.

4:46 CT - The Patriot Room is requesting information about which of the Obama advisers were communicating to Blagojevich.

5:19 CT - A video of the entire federal investigator interview is on C-SPAN.org. In the video, the first question and answer I find, specifically about Obama occurs at about 18:07. He is asked if he would address whether or not "Obama was aware that any of these things were taking place." Fitzgerald replied, "I'm not gonna speak for what the president-elect [sic] was aware of. We make no allegations that he is aware of anything and that's i-as simply as I can put it."

The second Obama Q&A occurs at 32:19. Fitzgerald was asked a question in an interesting way:
"You spoke before about if senator - you didn't know the awareness that senator - president-elect Barack Obama knew about this [I.O., he did not say this. The reporter seems to be grappling for words to put in Fitzgerald's mouth, prone to clear Obama.] so is it safe to say he has not been briefed and can you also tell us if any phone calls were made to president-elect Obama that you intercepted or to Rahm Emanuel?
Fitzgerald responded:
I'm not going to go down anything that's not in the complaint and what I simply said before is I'm not gonna -- I have enough trouble speaking for myself -- I'm never gonna try and speak in the voice of a president or a president-elect. So, I simply pointed out that if you look at the complaint, there is no allegation that the president-elect -- there's no reference in the complaint to any conversations involving the president-elect, or indicating that the president-elect was aware of it and that's all I can say.
What does this mean for Barack Obama, regarding any matters such as: the Rezko land deal, the Broadway Bank loan, and the odd favor of anointing Alexi Giannoulias, his man for IL Treasury Secretary? Did Obama or his staff know of Blago's senatorial shakedown and come clean to the Feds? Have Obama and Blago been in touch, lately, as David Axelrod has stated, but Obama and staff later denied?

There are many allegations in the federal complaint and it has taken a great deal of time for the FBI to collect all the evidence gained so far, in its ongoing work. One does wonder how much they have learned about Obama during this time and why Fitzgerald continues to plea to citizens in the know, to come clean.


PS, 12/11 - I think I've seen Brando give that hug... or was it Pacino?

Monday, December 8, 2008

Plains Radio Webcast, Listener's Notes: Wrotnowski, Donofrio, Pidgeon

Live updating through the evening -- my notes from tonight's Plains Radio Webcast. (Parenthetical comments are by I.O., AW.) After Jill Stanek, on the state of the pro-life movement in an American culture steeped in death are featured Natural Born Citizen Challengers, Cort Wrotnowski (CT), Steve Pidgeon (WA) and Leo Donofrio (NJ) and... Chester A. Arthur.

Interview of Cort Wrotnowski...
  • Donofrio's research on President Chester A. Arthur's covered-up U.K. citizenship brings new implications that will be included in the filing before the SCOTUS.
  • If a SCOTUS hearing is held, Wrotnowski plans for Donofrio to present his case.
  • Press is avoiding Wrotnowski, while it plays up the denial of Donofrio's hearing.
  • Adam Liptak of the New York Times is inqiring, also Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune (obdurate leftist propagandist I've had experience with - AW).
  • Joe Thunder reporting on the liveliness of the National Press Club press conference today, by others bringing suit (on the birth certificate). Thunder videotaped it. Pastor Manning was there (oh, oh) in addition to Orly Taitz. Thunder will post on his site, tomorrow afternoon, freedommarch.org. [I.O. Ed., audiotape, here]
  • At one point, one of our objective-as-Goebbels journalists told Ms. Taitz, "...just go home...."
During the break, I see on I.O's sidebar that Leo Donofrio has updated his blog about the Wrotnowski progress at the SCOTUS.
  • Adulterated allegiances are very dangerous for a nation's Commander in Chief to have.
  • After December 15, charge of the process of determining the presidency is passed from the Electoral College (provided they vote, that day) to Congress and the chances of effectiveness of law suits are diminished.
  • Ed Hale pass along from Leo Donofrio that he believes Wrotnowski's case is very strong, with advantages over Donofrio vs. Wells. "Layman" Ed says he thinks this is indicative of positive results.
  • A caller wonders if and when Obama's side will be called in and will weigh in.
  • Cort has to beg off -- claims he's busy. ;-`
  • The Political Pastor program is signing off; TPP announces his chat room at Plains Radio.
  • Ed Hale will have Steve Pidgeon on, who is bringing suit before the Washington Supreme Court.
Break -- if they need to keep beating the SCOTUS over the head with 2x4's so be it, until they gain constitutional sense.

Now, Karen and Ed Hale's Lions' Den program - it's a long, rich, historical evening at Plains Radio, interviewing Steve Pidgeon...
  • Pidgeon's case has standing.
  • Discussion of the 1790 statute, setting forth a "natural born citizen" (BTW, this phrase was specifically stricken from the stature in 1795.) requiring both parents to be citizens and the father, a resident of the USA. This disqualifies Obama.
  • The 14th Amendment calls anyone born in the USA a "citizen." (However, see the declaration of the framer of the 14th amendment, about being a "natural born citizen!"). And this requires Obama's mother to have been 19 (longer story made short) when Barack-II was born. She was 18.
  • Suit says Obama, a. not a natural born citizen, b. not a citizen, and c. arrrghhh!! the program winked out on me and it isn't coming back up!
If/when I can regain the broadcast, I'll be back to it. Coffee... want... coffee.... // OK, it's back for me.
  • I'm guessing that point "c." above is that his Indonesian citizenship revokes his American citizenship (or perhaps he point "c." has to do with the birth certificate).
  • Pidgeon's suit may bring the first case with standing having to do with the birth certificate before the SCOTUS.
  • Caller from New Zealand brings up the writing of John A. Bingham (framer of the 14th Amendment) regarding allegiance, to be a natural born citizen.
  • Obama became a Kenyan citizen officially in 1963, then an Indonesian citizen. He was apparently adopted, from the Lolo Soetoro / Ann divorce records, by an Indonesian citizen. If he is an American citizen after these facts, this means Obama is a naturalized citizen, and utterly not a natural born citizen by anyone's construct.
The one and only Leo Donofrio, Esq. is now on the program...
  • Talking about how lame and inexperienced the states are, at even considering how to verify the citizenship qualifications of candidates. (How can one certify without verifying?)
  • About the history of Chester A. Arthur's huge cover-up campaign to hide his U.K. citizenship. He appointed Justice Gray, who is the very one who wrote the opinion in the Wong Kim Ark case which liberalized American citizenship requirements! (That sounds eerily familiar, if you have read what friends of BHO are opining about citizenship.)
Break. I'm getting angrier, now. Blood pressure rising. "History repeats itself." -- history of corruption of the sacred trust we place in elected officials. God, if you are judging America, please spare the most innocent and punish most, those who most deserve it.
  • Donofrio's point seems to be that allowing a fictitious president allows a great deal of dishonesty -- it allows a corrupt U.S. President. Justice Gray may have been writing "that opinion to sanitize Arthur's citizenship." Quid pro quo dealing is implied.
  • All of Arthur's decisions and actions are tainted for history.
  • Per Arthur's example, "You can't have a precedent if it is a fraud."
  • Donofrio being Donofrio -- warns Pidgeon to investigate how Roger Calero was not allowed ballot access, for the sake of precedent. (Whatever one says about his NJ style, Donofrio is an excellent tactician and strategist.) Says that someone from the SoS had Calero removed and who did that should provide sworn testimony, to build the case. (Selective investigation and disqualification.) There could be a cover-up in WA.
  • Donofrio believes Wrotnowski's application is much better drafted.
  • Donofrio explains how the judge in NJ misapplied his suit: action in lieu of a prerogative writ became forced by the court into a writ of lesser application. Then, they refused his motion by a hoodwink excuse, based upon the procedural error the court itself created. (I'm not a lawyer and don't even play one on TV, so pardon my terminology.)
  • (BTW, I'm wondering, since Wrotnowski is not a lawyer and Donforio says he was/is pleased at how much better his case is drafted -- it would seem, before Donofrio got to it -- did they get help from another attorney, in cognito? I did take Latin and I played a lawyer in a couple 5th grade vignettes.)
  • The goofball idea that the SCOTUS should turn down the challenges, to avoid unrest and "overturning the will of the people." (David Horowitz is haranguing at conservatives challengers on this, for one.) Donofrio: "I'm sorry, it's not a real election if it's two fraudulent candidates."
  • Pidgeon tells Donofrio that if the SCOTUS weren't interested in the case, it would have been rejected without going to conference. (My point: depends on the Justice.)
  • Donofrio: even though he blogged about the idea that the SCOTUS might have preferred the strength of the Wrotnowski case, he was (stunned) when blog commentators told him Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz was referred to conference, a few minutes later!
  • A stay of the Electors before Dec. 15 would be in order, because otherwise there would be a conflict of laws.
  • Allowing not a strictly "natural born Citizen," could allow an orchestrated agent provocateur to become U.S. President. (What about someone of the kind who, during his campaign, would hold a rally in Germany, before hundreds of thousands, claiming himself a "Citizen of the World?")
  • Caller commends those bringing these cases, affirming that the United States Constitution is worth sacrifice.
  • Ed Hale asks someone for a pack of cigarettes and to his credit says "please."
  • Discussion shifts (degrades? I hope not) into some contention of the likely success of the quest for the original certificate of live birth (COLB) but rises back to the point that this is the responsibility of the states' Secretaries of State, to which Pidgeon and Donofrio agree.
  • Ed Hale requests that Donofrio and Pidgeon come back Friday night.
  • Leo has to work all night on the new Chester A. Arthur brief and Cort Wrotnowski will drop it off in SCOTUSville tomorrow.
End of broadcast.
Prayers are in order.
  • End note, 12/9, 2:10am: Despite the media gates, some do pay attention, but just who? Well, among others, I.O. just got a view from Hanoi -- via a Google search: "Wrotnowski obama."
Hey, here's an idea -- pick some of the media gatekeepers you most wish to bother and...
SEND it to the psy-ops jocks!! -- email envelope, below
(And they've called President Bush "incurious." -- Try, ostrich-headed.)


PS: my apologies, but not inclined to do much proof reading of the above.

Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz "Natural Born Citizen" Case Referred to Full Court by Justice Scalia (about Obama's foreign father)


Justice Scalia, by referring Wrotnowski v.
Bysiewicz to committee on December 12 may allow the Supreme Court to decide upon Barack Obama's status as a presidential candidate before the currently scheduled Electoral College election day, December 15.

This case is essentially similar to the case of Leo Donofrio, who assisted Connecticut resident, Cort Wrotnoski, in drafting it. According to Donofrio, the basis is very much the same (not essentially about the birth certificate, but regarding a foreign father) and it includes additional corroborative research and/or reasoning. Also, the history of this case is less problematic for the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) than the Donofrio case, due to a suspicious misfiling of the latter case by a New Jersey judge which may have provoked a question of standing before the Supreme Court.

My best suggestion for getting good interpretation of this is to visit Leo Donofrio's blog, where he has opined about Justice Scalia's potential thinking. Also, FreeRepublic.com, keyword: obamatruthfile (which will also likely include interesting discussion of numerous kinds). Also,
Plains Radio Network, Inc. forum and The Obama File, Latest News.

Wrotnowski and Donofrio may be interviewed tonight on the Plains Radio Network, to discuss today's actions, possibly at 7pm CT (I do not know, but this has been their habit).

See The Donofrio "Natural Born Citizen" Challenge, for an analysis of this case, which would disqualify Obama, based upon the foreign citizenship of his father (and disqualify McCain, based upon his birth outside of American territory). It has very weighty constitutional merit, by documented contemporaneous meaning of "natural born Citizen."

The Donofrio case was denied, this morning. I will be updating this Weblog, to help you give you a snapshot of where the entire process is.


John Jay's request of the "natural born Citizen" requirement
click image to enlarge | h/t: FReeper: BP2

Friday, December 5, 2008

The Donofrio "Natural Born Citizen" Challenge

12/17 I.O. update:

1.
The essence of the Donofrio v. Wells case (NJ) is contained in the Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz case (CT). In both cases, injunctions were denied, but this may be due to a jurisdictional issue [edit: or an issue of standing]. In September, a federal court ruled against a somewhat similar challenge (to John McCain) based, oddly, upon both its particular merits and an overall, jurisdictional observation. Mysteriously, the Donofrio case has remained listed as "pending," somehow, which may or may not have to do with the jurisdictional matter.

2.
A research work in process, this article failed to address the most central document besides the Constitution itself, to the understanding of the
original intent and thereby meaning of the "natural born Citizen" criteria, the letter from John Jay to George Washington, July 25, 1787. In it, Jay cites the reason for the criteria being one of national security, that is to guard against a "Commander in Chief of the American army" having foreign allegiance in the way anyone might, who is not a natural born Citizen. This lends essential merit to the dual natural born Citizen criteria pointed out in this article, as a strategist in matters of defense and security would naturally know. Metaphorically, in a neighborhood where crime is high, one does not lock the front door (born in U.S. territory) and leave the back door wide open (commonly and "naturally" understood national allegiance by hereditary right). When security is the concern, one thoroughly guards all of one's vulnerabilities which are pertinent and feasible to be made secure.

12/5/2008

The Donofrio Case: "Natural Born Citizen" -- not about Obama's birth certificate, but the one that goes, "We the People...."

Today, before the United States Supreme Court lies Leo Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey Secretary of State. This suit was received by Justice Thomas and by the determination of the entire court, it is scheduled for conference on Friday December 5. This conference is held to decide what, if any, further steps should be taken. Only two of these steps would be to intervene in the process of selecting the president, or to hear oral arguments.

Essence of the case

By this case Barack Obama, John McCain, and Roger Calero (of the Socialist Workers Party, on the New Jersey ballot) do not qualify as “natural born Citizens” under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, which states the following:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Standing

Other cases against Obama's candidacy have been rejected by various courts, due to a private citizen's apparent lack of standing to sue a candidate. However, this case is an action against the Secretary of State of New Jersey and as such, has precedent, as Donofrio relates. He originally sought to motivate the Secretary to qualify or disqualify these three candidates on the New Jersey ballot. Donofrio also cites 2000's famous Florida case, Bush v. Gore, as precedent for a state case regarding a presidential election to be brought to the Supreme Court for emergency action.

Merit: reasoning behind Donofrio v. Wells

To interpret the U.S. Constitution with intellectual honesty, one must maintain the integrity of the meaning of the Constitution. That means interpreting the letter of the law: its words and phrases, based upon the immediate context of the Constitution itself, any explanations of the framers, traditional meaning inherited by the framers, and the generally accepted, legal meanings of words and phrases in use at the time of its drafting. Further, attention is to be paid to the spirit of the law, by understanding the purposes of the framers and the results they sought or sought to avoid, as they drafted each element of the Constitution.

In view of these considerations, being a “natural born Citizen,” here requires meeting both of these two criteria: 1. citizenship must be passed on by the constitutionally pertinent principle of natural law, which assumes that citizenship is inherited from one’s father’s citizenship and, 2. citizenship must be granted by means of being born in the actual territory of the United States. Accordingly, to maintain the original intention of the Constitution's framers, a U.S. President is to be free of competing allegiances with other nations, from birth onward. To cite Donofrio's own words from his blog:

The Framers wanted to make themselves eligible to be President, but they didn't want future generations to be Governed by a Commander In Chief who had split loyalty to another Country. [I.O. ed., letter by John Jay] The Framers were comfortable making an exception for themselves. They did, after all, create the Constitution. But they were not comfortable with the possibility of future generations of Presidents being born under the jurisdiction of Foreign Powers, especially Great Britain and its monarchy, who the Framers and Colonists fought so hard in the American Revolution to be free of.
According to this case, Barack H. Obama II is not qualified, because his father, Barack H. Obama I, was a citizen of the United Kingdom as a Kenyan. Kenya was a British colony at the time of Obama II’s birth in 1961. This citizenship was conferred to Obama II by U.K. law. Further to this case is the apparent fact that Obama II became a citizen of Indonesia, when he lived there as a child with his mother and adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro. This would mean Obama's U.S. Citizenship status was revoked, since Indonesia had no dual-citizenship provision with the U.S.A.

According to this case, John McCain is not qualified, because he was born in Panama or the Panama Canal Zone, which was a protectorate of the United States and has never been a territory of the Untied States, even though his parents were U.S. Citizens.

According to this case, Roger Calero is not qualified, because he was born a citizen of Nicaragua, to foreign parents, on foreign soil. The mere fact that Roger Calero was on the ballot in five states indicates to the Supreme Court and the nation, that the process of qualifying a presidential candidate is broken and intervention is necessary.

Merit: context, corroboration, and case law

Corroborative to this case, the Constitution's Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10 states that a power of Congress is to "define and punish... offenses against the law of nations." The Law of Nations has been international law, which as documented by Emmerich de Vatel (1758) states, in Chapter XIX, paragraph 212, "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."

Vatel follows with paragraph 215, in which he asserts, "It is asked whether the children born of citizens in a foreign country are citizens? The laws have decided this question in several countries, and their regulations must be followed.(59) By the law of nature alone, children follow the condition of their fathers, and enter into all their rights (§ 212); the place of birth produces no change in this particular, and cannot, of itself, furnish any reason for taking from a child what nature has given him; I say 'of itself,' for, civil or political laws may, for particular reasons, ordain otherwise."

The chief framer of the related 14th Amendment of the Constitution, John A. Bingham corroborated this dual criteria stating, "every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen." An extensive analysis citing this is "Defining Natural-Born Citizen," by P.A. Madison, The Federalist Blog.

Since then, the case of Perkins v. ELG, U.S. 325 (1939) provides precedent for requiring these two criteria, for one to be called a "native born citizen" (see, "The Law -- Perkins v. ELG," blog, The Betrayal).

St. George Tucker, Justice of the Supreme Court of Virgina, wrote a version of the authoritative Blackstone's Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to the Constitution... which became a recognized resource for determining the framers' original intent. In his Volume 1 -- Appendix; Note D, he explained that the Article 2 "natural born Citizen" requirement was purposed to avoid competing allegiances:

That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, whereever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. It was by means of foreign connections that the stadtholder of Holland, whose powers at first were probably not equal to those of a president of the United States, became a sovereign hereditary prince before the late revolution in that country. Nor is it with levity that I remark, that the very title of our first magistrate, in some measure exempts us from the danger of those calamities by which European nations are almost perpetually visited. The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora's Box.

If anyone knows of an applicable contemporaneous definition of "hereditary right" which does not include patrilineal descent, he is welcome to inform this writer. Certainly, this applied to sons of subjects of the United Kingdom (and the fact that one subject would travel abroad to declare himself a "Citizen of the World" before hundreds of thousands might also have provided relevant warning).

Intended result of this case

The Donofrio suit calls for a stay of the Dec. 15 Electoral College vote, until a constitutionally acceptable means is attained, of presenting the Electors a set of qualified candidates.

During or after their Dec. 5 conference, the Supreme Court could decide upon a number of directions. Their next step may be revealed this very day, or on Monday, Dec. 8, or at some other time. A book could be written of the many potential outcomes -- and historians will write libraries about one set of results, in their hindsight.

"Post Script" in HTML

Leo Donofrio reports that numerous obstacles have been intentionally placed in the way of his petitioning the courts, in both New Jersey and at the Supreme Court. He also names public officials who have at times attempted to mislead him and by their treatment of his case, have obstructed his path to the Supreme Court. That is another story and not an undramatic one.

Donofrio has had three blogs -- and Internet harassment, as follows:

  1. http://blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen -- used through November 21, until its blog service was hit by a denial of service attack, bringing it down (servers have been repaired)
  2. http://thenaturalborncitizen.blogspot.com -- used through November 27, until it became clear that Google has not been at all swift to remove a "flag page," inappropriately citing that blog for "possible Blogger Terms of Service violations"
  3. http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com -- hopefully, unmolested as of your reading

This report may be updated as progress is made. For information about the operations of the Supreme Court in such matters, see "A Reporter's Guide to Applications Pending Before the Supreme Court of the United States."


h/t: numerous bloggers and forum posters including FReepers: BP2, joygrace, andMamaTexan

Wish to spread the news of this case? Just click the envelope, below...