CONFIRMED BY SCOTUS: DONOFRIO V. WELLS WAS DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE OF DECEMBER 5, 2008 BY THE FULL UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

[UPDATE] Leo Donofrio and Cort Wrotnowski will be on Plains Radio tonight at 7:00 PM EST

CONFIRMED BY SCOTUS: DONOFRIO V. WELLS WAS DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE OF DECEMBER 5, 2008 BY THE FULL UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AFTER FIRST HAVING BEEN REFERRED TO THE COURT BY JUSTICE THOMAS

by Bob Vernon, Honest American News – Plains Radio Network

December 1, 2008

On November 19, 2008, the official United States Supreme Court Docket for case number 08A407 – Leo C. Donofrio v. Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey – was updated to show that the “emergency stay application” to halt the national election and Electoral College meeting of 2008… was “DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008.”  At that time, it was not clear whether this was scheduled for conference by Justice Thomas alone or by the full Court.

In multiple interviews with Leo C. Donofrio, this reporter and other members of the Plains Radio Network, were informed by Mr. Donofrio that he suspected the distribution for conference was an action taken by more than Justice Thomas alone.  Mr. Donofrio suggested that another docket update stating the emergency application was referred to the full court by Justice Thomas should have appeared on the docket prior to the distribution for conference.

Since the docket did not reflect a prior referral it was widely accepted that the distribution for conference was an act of Justice Thomas alone. Honest American News can now confirm – by direct contact with the Supreme Court’s Public Information Office – that the distribution for conference of DONOFRIO V. WELLS was an action taken by the full court.

On November 28, 2008, the docket for case number 08A407 was updated to show, retroactively, that Justice Clarence Thomas did in fact refer Donofrio’s emergency stay application to the full court on November 19, 2008.  Last night in an interview with…Plains Radio Network, Mr. Donofrio suggested that this new update, nine days later, indicated that the full Court had taken action to distribute the case for conference.  Mr. Donofrio cited a SCOTUS public information document issued to reporters entitled:

A REPORTER’S GUIDE TO APPLICATIONS Pending Before The Supreme Court of the United States

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/reportersguide.pdf

In that document, on page 3, it advises:

“The Circuit Justice may act on an application alone or refer it to the full Court for consideration. The fact that an application has been referred to the full Court may not be known publicly until the Court acts on the application and the referral is noted in the Court’s order.”

Mr. Donofrio pointed out in various interviews that since his case had been made public by the SCOTUS, there was probably a referral by Justice Thomas prior to the actual distribution for conference.  Mr. Donofrio was correct.

Today I spoke with Patricia McCabe Estrada, Deputy Director of Public Information at the United States Supreme Court.  She informed me that Mr. Donofrio’s application was first referred to the full Court by Justice Clarence Thomas on November 19, 2008.  After that referral took place the full Court, and not Justice Thomas alone, distributed the application for an emergency stay for Conference of December 5, 2008.

Let me reiterate the main point: DONOFRIO V. WELLS was distributed for conference of December 5, 2008 by the full Court after a prior referral of the application by Justice Thomas.

Mr. Donofrio will be on the Plains Radio Network tonight.  See Plainsradio.com for details.

Bob Vernon
Honest American News
Plains Radio Network
State: Texas

116 Responses to “CONFIRMED BY SCOTUS: DONOFRIO V. WELLS WAS DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE OF DECEMBER 5, 2008 BY THE FULL UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT”

  1. sliderblaze Says:

    Leo, we will be burning up the lines, it’s on….

  2. sliderblaze Says:

    uh, scot, it wasnt him that said it, it was the people hosting the radio…..how about you get facts straight before you come in here an make a fool of yourself

  3. citizenwells Says:

    Leo.
    I have been busting my ass all year on researching Obama and trying to get the truth out.
    Don’t give up.
    We cannot give up.
    Wells

  4. truthbetold11 Says:

    scotworkman, you are obvious not a truth seeker ,if he lied then this case would be thrown out immediatley and believe me the supreme court takes no pleasure in fools who lie to them.” he who takes crooked ways will be found out” proverbs. the halls of justice are a slow grind but justice comes swiftly. this case has total merit and deserves the total american support regardless of who you voter for. we all certainly wouldnt want our founding forefathers who shed there BLOOD for you and me and maybe your great great great grandfather was one of them who died for our freedom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. Irregularities at the Supreme Court apparently on behalf of Obama currently usurping YOUR Constitution: Leo Donofrio’s companion case, brought by Cort Wrotnowski, with fuller/better briefing showing Obama is not an Article II “natural born citizen” reportedly has been sidetracked to the anthrax lab to deprive the full Court from seeing those filings in connection with Donofrio’s case this Friday, Dec 5, 2008. DO SOMETHING AMERICA!!!

  6. Great.You posted just in time!

  7. Hang in there Leo! Keep fighting the good fight!

    The Constitution needs SOMEONE to defend it!

  8. Objective Analysis Says:

    Donofrio,

    I can sense the frustration in you. You need to relax and understand the bits and pieces are coming together. I wrote this for a blog on the Obama File and it applies for you as well.

    A good friend of mine stated to me a couple of days ago is that usually the Courts are the best defense against wrong. The main reason for this is that it allows REASON and LOGIC to prevail (application of law to facts of a case/controversy after both sides have had a fair opportunity to present their sides). The Judge is required to be impartial and fair in its decision. That is one reason why the Civil Rights cases of the 1930’s through the 1960’s were so successful at the Supreme Court level. It went through various legal challenges at various levels, but at the end it worked out for the good/betterment of the country regardless if you agree with them.

    Patience is a virtue. The pieces are coming together. One case will not be the final death knell, but an ACCUMULATIVE effect will expose those who have done a classic coup de tat. All of the cases against Obama and the DNC in some or fashion are important because it allows STRONG EVIDENCE of fraudulent intent by the Obama and the DNC and that is going to be needed to persuade the masses of cult like people who followed Obama unconditionally without questioning him to make sure he was valid.

    Just like the Nuremburg trials against the Nazis, evidence is the key.

    Eventually good will prevail over those who have done evil and wrongdoing. But, we have to put the pieces of the puzzle together to let it be so.

  9. I just want to tell Mr. Donofrio how grateful I am for being persistent and courageous with his suit. My prayers are with him as his case is reviewed in closed session by SCOTUS this Friday. Once again, THANK YOU!

  10. “DISTRIBUTED” implies “everyone got a copy”. Why would Thomas distribute it to himself?

    BY Thomas, TO the other 8…?

  11. What is the source of this anthrax story?

  12. tess aghee Says:

    I am an 80 year old woman. I’ve been around a long time
    but I always thought I had “..some rights..”
    With the advent of the Democrats and OBAMA I feel that
    my rights were taken away from me.
    The main media refuses to even mention that the man who
    the Democrats touted for president is not eligible for the
    job. He is not an ‘natural born citizen’.
    He is an elitist that refuses to allow a view of his
    “…Birth Certificate..”
    He refuses to mention anything about the fact
    that we know he is ineligible.
    He has bought off all the major politicians so
    that no one will mention his background.

    Now, in my waning years I fear for my children and my
    wonderful grandchildren. What will happen when Senator
    Barack OBAMA has finished shredding our CONSTITUTION?

    How many times was I told this was a “Nation of Laws”
    and how many times did I repeat it to my children. It
    was great to mention it when I disciplined my kids. I
    pointed out that the country had laws just as I had laws
    in our home. You were honest with one another and you
    always did your homework. You never laid your blame
    on someone else. That home Constitution worked because
    our country’[s worked so well.

    Tell me – Why would OBAMA spend $800.000.00 to avoid
    showing the Certificate if it were valid?
    Tell me – Who vetted the man? I have read on the
    internet that he was vetted and is eligible but no one will
    admit to having vetted him. (Are they afraid of TREASON)?

  13. it is logical by now to believe our mass media has been BOUGHT OUT BY SAUDI ARABIA…. did you know there was a full page AD in THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE.. today asking OBAMA to present his vaulted BIRTH CERTIFICATE….12 01 2008n no REPORTS of this incident DURING his live broadcast for CLINTON over all the MAJOR NETWORKS…..PITIFUL our statue of liberty cries TEARS OF PAIN

  14. [...] CONFIRMED BY SCOTUS: DONOFRIO V. WELLS WAS DISTRIBUTED FOR CONFERENCE OF DECEMBER 5, 2008 BY THE FUL… Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Jody A. Brockhausen vs Esparanza Andrade, Secretary of State of State of TexasMore Than 100 Reasons to Vote Against Barack ObamaCardinal Bertone speaksRice criticizes “isolated” Russia [...]

  15. Free America Says:

    Leo, take a deep breath. We will do anything / everything we can to support you. But we need you to be the cool hand Luke that you have exhibited up to now. Stay cool, stay diligent, stay focused. God bless you Leo.

  16. Scotworkman needs to go back to democrat-disaster.com and do something constructive. I have been reading about and listening to Leo for the past couple of weeks and one thing I know he is not is a liar and he is a true patriot in my book. Leo, do not give up!!!

  17. Are you aware of this Hawiian statute — check out (5)

    §338-17.7 Establishment of new certificates of birth, when. (a) The department of health shall establish, in the following circumstances, a new certificate of birth for a person born in this State who already has a birth certificate filed with the department and who is referred to below as the “birth registrant”:

    (1) Upon receipt of an affidavit of paternity, a court order establishing paternity, or a certificate of marriage establishing the marriage of the natural parents to each other, together with a request from the birth registrant, or the birth registrant’s parent or other person having legal custody of the birth registrant, that a new birth certificate be prepared because previously recorded information has been altered pursuant to law;

    (2) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a final order, judgment, or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction that determined the nonexistence of a parent and child relationship between a person identified as a parent on the birth certificate on file and the birth registrant;

    (3) Upon receipt of a certified copy of a final adoption decree, or of an abstract of the decree, pursuant to sections 338-20 and 578-14;

    (4) Upon receipt of an affidavit of a physician that the physician has examined the birth registrant and has determined the following:

    (A) The birth registrant’s sex designation was entered incorrectly on the birth registrant’s birth certificate; or

    (B) The birth registrant has had a sex change operation and the sex designation on the birth registrant’s birth certificate is no longer correct; provided that the director of health may further investigate and require additional information that the director deems necessary; or

    (5) Upon request of a law enforcement agency certifying that a new birth certificate showing different information would provide for the safety of the birth registrant; provided that the new birth certificate shall contain information requested by the law enforcement agency, shall be assigned a new number and filed accordingly, and shall not substitute for the birth registrant’s original birth certificate, which shall remain in place.

    (b) When a new certificate of birth is established under this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth. Thereafter, the original certificate and the evidence supporting the preparation of the new certificate shall be sealed and filed. Such sealed document shall be opened only by an order of a court of record. [L 1973, c 39, §1; am L 1975, c 66, §2(3); am L 1979, c 130, §1 and c 203, §1; am L 1982, c 4, §1; am L 1983, c 65, §1; am L 1984, c 167, §1; am L 1993, c 131, §2]

  18. The ultimate evidence pertaining to birth resides, not in birth certificates, but in the hospital records signed by the attending physician. If Obama was born in an American hospital, the birth record is there. Even if Kenya refuses to release its records, the presence or absence of American hospital birth records is definitive with respect to place of birth. I pray the Court demands such evidence. There may be other issues at stake pertaining to status as “natural born,” but place of birth can be determined definitively if it was in a hospital on American soil.

  19. Researcher on Obama Says:

    http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html

    an excellent read on the issues. I hope Donofrio looks this over. Some good ideas for presentation to SC.

  20. The South Says:

    Leo, keep your head and don’t walk out on us. Good “WILL” prevail and those that are responsible will pay the ultimate price.I bet you money that Obama and the DNC “Never in their wildest dreams” thought these cases would be pouring in from all over the country. I bet they never took into account the power of the internet either. We are helping you and pasting and posting every single hour of the day to get the word out and make people aware that our country is being HIGHJACKED ! Keep on keeping on Leo, we are behind you and this fight is not anywhere close to being over !!!!!!!!!

    GOD BLESS AMERICA !!!!!!!!! We won’t go down like this !!!!!!!!!

  21. truthseeker Says:

    Leo can you clarify what the situation is in regards to Corts case. Was his brief laced with Anthrax by someone? If this is the case they must know your getting close to the truth.

  22. Leo (and Cort)

    You have my husband and my support and nightly prayers. If we can help get Cort’s papers and your additional brief to the Supreme Court overnight or FAX please give us instruction on EXACTLY what we need to make sure the paperwork is sent PROPERLY.

    Obviously someone at the Supreme Court is hell bent on stopping you. This is as intriging (and upsetting) as any John Grisham novel I have ever read!

    Not all of America is sleeping. Many of us are with you. Just hard breaking through walls to make people understand what is going on and what “Natural Born Citizen” means. Most seem to think that “U.S. Citizen” is good enough because of a lack of understanding the meaning.

  23. mtngoat61 Says:

    Leo:

    Cort should prepare another set of the brief and drive down to SCOTUS, with a witness, and refile it in person to Justice Scalia. Is there anyone reading who lives in CT who would be willing to drive Cort down to SCOTUS. If it is driven down in person tomorrow, it can still be filed in time with Justice Scalia to get to the Friday conference with Leo’s case. After this is all over, I think the clerk’s office needs to be investigated and whoever is behind these targeted delays and dirty tricks needs to be fired or prosecuted. JMHO.

    Goat

  24. mtngoat61 Says:

    I’ve created a FACTS type site to counter act online the FactCheck.org and Snopes.com sites which are out there and in the tank for Obama. There are registered in a foreign country so the O-Bots cannot shut them down or attack them with frivolous complaints like they did with Leo’s earlier bogs. Feel free to post these links in any other forum or blog to counter the misrepresented information the O-Bots continue to put out. Paraphrasing a few lines and then posting the link will provide a source for any lurkers reading in that blog. You won’t convince the O-Bots, but readers who don’t post are the ones we need to inform. In addition to Leo’s blog here, check these two URLs from time to time for the latest on this issue and the various cases:

    “http://www.obamacitizenshipfacts.org”
    or
    “http://www.obamabirthcertificatefacts.org”

    and
    “http://americamustknow.com”

    Mountain Publius Goat

    P.S. Go Leo. Keep up the good work.

  25. Leo – hang in there and God bless you for trying to get to the truth. You’re a hero in my eyes. Onward. Tens of thousands of us have got your back.

  26. HANG IN THERE LEO.
    THERES A LOT OF US OUT HERE THATS BEHIND YOU.
    THANKS FOR WHAT YOUR DOING.

  27. Sir — I have heard that you have threatened to withdraw your case. Please do not do so, that would be a mistake.

    Has Mr. Cort thought of resubmitting ton Justice Stevens? Stevens originally became famous as a special prosecutor in Chicago putting away members of the Chicago Machine. He may be sympathetic.

    Everyone involved in these cases will have to make sure to have friends in Washington ready to hand-submit briefs to SCOTUS.

  28. I heard Mr. Donofrio this evening on Plainsradio and my heart pounding fears were reignited, the same as on election night. He needs to understand that there are hundreds of us sending off letters and participating in organized support for the Constitution.
    I’ll help in any way I can…need a ride from the train station to the SC? I’ll be there; anything to ease the stress he is taking on.

  29. PLEASE, Do not give up! So many people are working so hard on this….it is all coming together….Please Believe!

    ************************* BELIEVE ***************************

  30. Will be posting this to get the info out! keep up the fight!

  31. Please explain the significance of the difference between Donofrio’s case being referred by just Justice Thomas vs. being referred by the whole court? Thank you.

  32. Mac Ewan Robb Says:

    … actually my forefathers, Clan Mac Ewan of Raritan NJ ‘DID’ indeed fight for freedom, and so will I in this matter, if BLOOD be shed, for what is right, then ii fact – it is required ! Our Clan Motto – ‘We will Rise again, when and as needed’ … only the TRUTH will set US ALL FREE.

  33. Leo,

    Check http://usatodayadforobamarecords.blogspot.com/ for information on We The People Foundation Ad in today’s Chicago Tribune. It questions Mr. Obama’s eligibility.

    Also, read Sen. Mel Martinez’s response at http://www.dequalss.com/wp/2008/12/01/sen-martinezs-response-to-the-obama-birth-certificate-question/.

  34. After listening to your interview on Patriot Brigade Radio with Lan Lamphen, I’m feeling hopeful that this issue will be satisfied legally and with merit. Oftentimes the answer is right in front of our faces, ie, Obama admitting that he was a British citizen “at birth”. I hope that your case will be speedily and expeditiously decided by the Justices of the Supreme Court and justice will prevail.

    Thank you for your efforts to ensure the continuation of our Constitutional Law.

  35. Steph In Seattle Says:

    Thank you Leo-for all of your work. As the above mentioned, please explain how the significance b/w Justice Thomas vs. the whole court is such a relief? I mean, I know its positive-But, how and why? Also, what can WE do in the meantime-write letters, to whom? Thank you & God Bless!

  36. sliderblaze Says:

    This is insane, this IS the only thing people around me are talking about and yet, no truthful/if any MSM coverage on it. Trust me, its not for lack of trying, but we’ll definitely keep plugging away….dont lose faith in us, we havent in you

  37. article2section1 Says:

    Leo,
    I am eternally grateful for your advocacy of our Constitution. Please do not give up on us. We are working as hard as we can to get the word out through blogging, faxing, petitioning, posting, and all means available to us. We understand what is at stake here.

    Anyone who would be available on Friday, December 5 at the Supreme Court of the United States please let me know.

    The e-mail is article2section1@yahoo.com
    scotusmarch@gmail.com

  38. Leo, My prayers are with you. I am hoping and praying that the Supreme Court will fully support and implement our Constitution and stop Obama from ever becoming our President. Please be encouraged that you are doing the right thing. The incredible resistance you are experiencing is because of the INCREDIBLE DECEPTION BY OBAMA (and it may involve many enablers). Do the best you can each day and ride this out. You have done a good job. The outcome will be in God’s hands.

  39. Leo,
    Thank you for the time and effort that you are putting into this fight. Please know that you fight for all of us and you have thousands at the very least (and the number is growing) supporting and assisting you in whatever way they are able.

    I heard you on plainsradio and fully understand your anger and frustration. PLEASE don’t give up the fight.

    “The South” is right when he said that Obama and the DNC seems not to realize the power of the internet, in spite of the fact that the Internet is how Obama got the “power” he got during this election season. Now it’s coming back to bite him.

    Please know that there are people all over the country writing their Senators and Congressmen, as well as their Secretary of States concerning this matter. Many more thousands have “mobilized” in spirit if not physically. In my case, I’ve not only written letters and such, but also been using the internet and word of mouth to continually put the word out about this issue. If I were financially able to do so, you would see me in Washington on Dec. 5 to support you there as well. We must stop Obama if he truly is ineligible, and thus far, all evidence has pointed toward that fact. GOD I wish this was a great spy novel instead of reality…

  40. Thank you Mr. Donofrio for all your incredible efforts.
    We ARE behind you.
    I will be spending the entire day faxing the Supreme Court.
    Again, sincerely, thank you.

  41. Not sure if it’s relevant, but I was just thinking… The Founding Fathers obviously wanted their children to be able to become President. So any children of the Founding Fathers born after the adoption of the Constitution should be eligible for President. This means that a person would still be eligible for President even if his (or her) parents were non-natural born citizens (like the Founding Fathers were not natural born, or at least those where the second part of the clause would apply). The parents would simply need to be citizens (and you can become one by the act of naturalization or whatever else).

    Like I said, not sure if the fact that parents don’t need to be natural born citizens matters much, but there it is.

    BTW, you probably already know, but your supplemental brief has been distributed on the 26th.

  42. I want to join in with all of the other Patriotic voices to say, “hang in there and know that all of us are behind you Leo”. Our country is too important to allow the obama-machine to take over and destroy us.

    I too felt a strong hurt in my heart on November 4th when it was determined that obama won the election. BUT, he hasn’t won yet!

    We honest, natural born citizens are not going to stand for this hoax on America.

    Keep fighting. Keep holding your heads up high and trust our God! He will intervene!

  43. Keep on a keep’n on!!!! America must know the truth!!

  44. Leo,
    Our hearts and prayers are with you. My husband and I have written over 300 letters to Electorates and to the Supreme Court. We are behind you all the way.
    Roberta

  45. Mom in Va Says:

    Leo,

    I want to express my deepest gratitude to you…you are America’s Hero!!!! Take a deep breath and forge ahead, you are NOT ALONE in this. We are helping in any and every way we can. I woke up this morning with renewed hope that I have not felt in quite a while, and it is only because of YOU!!!!!
    We will all get together and celebrate our Freedom when this is over, Thanks to YOU!!!!!

    God Bless You

  46. Over 133,000 signatures on just the first petition and 124,000 on the second. You are not alone. These are not the only petitions like this out there.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=81550
    http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244/stop-obama-constitutional-crisis/

  47. Richard Lawrence Says:

    Article 2.1.5

    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 …

    What I clearly see, and haven’t heard anyone talking about, is this:

    The founding fathers were British citizens … standing in two worlds …
    they were British subjects …but also the 1st new American/US citizens – by their own creation.

    They knew that they were NOT ‘natural born citizens’. By their own definition and admission, they were British citizens/subjects of the Crown AND “Citizens of the United States” …

    So they added, this exception/exculpatory phrase, “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution” … to allow them – the founding fathers – to be eligible to be POTUS.

    They were among the first, dual-allegiance, citizens … British by birth and American by declaration … quill to parchment.

    Here’s the irony > Barack Obama, is a dual-allegiance citizen at birth, a British citizen/subject and an American citizen, just like our founding fathers.

    One exception, tho … he wasn’t born at the time of the writing of the U.S. Constitution, so he CANNOT claim the exemption and is, in fact, INELIGIBLE to be POTUS … just like our founding father’s would have been ineligible, without their personal exclusion in the ‘natural born citizen’ clause.

    As always, your friend and fellow Patriot,
    Richard Lawrence in Florida

  48. My name is Brian Donohue, host and producer of the Ledger Live webcast in New Jersey. I have been trying to locate Mr. Donofrio for an interview, but his phone is unlisted in any public records and he has only a PO Box, as far as I can tell. If anyone on this board has contact with Mr. Donofrio, please let him know we would like to arrange an interview about the case. Please contact me at bdonohue@starledger.com or 973-392+1543. Thanks.

  49. Gerard N. Magliocca, Law Professor at Indiana University School of Law wrote a paper in March 2008 titled “Indians and Invaders: The Citizenship Clause and Illegal Aliens” that is right on point and provides a good history.

    A. Birthright Citizenship and the Common Law

    One fundamental premise of Anglo-American jurisprudence is that any child born within the dominion and under the authority of [*504] the sovereign is a citizen. 20 In the seventeenth century, Lord Coke held, “Every man is either alienigena, an alien born, or subditus, a subject born. Every alien is either a friend that is in league, &c. or an enemy that is in open war … .” 21 With respect to enemy aliens, Coke said that if they “surprise any castle or fort, and possess the same by hostility, and have issue there, that issue is no subject to the King, though he be born within his dominions, for that he was not born under the King’s ligeance or obedience.” 22 By contrast, allied or friendly aliens “owed to the King local obedience, that is, so long as he was within the King’s protection; which local obedience, being but momentary and uncertain, is yet strong enough to make a natural subject; for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural born subject … .” 23 The only exception to this rule was an ambassador, who was an official representative of a foreign prince and thus owed him allegiance even when abroad. 24

    Although Coke’s reasoning relied on a feudal premise about the indissoluble tie between lord and subject, his formulation was adopted by the United States. 25 The Supreme Court observed that [*505] the birth citizenship rule for aliens “does not appear to have been contested or doubted until more than fifty years after the adoption of the Constitution.” 26 And when a challenge was made in Lynch v. Clarke, 27 a New York court reaffirmed the common law approach and rejected a reciprocal consent theory of citizenship. 28 Indeed, Lynch held that “every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”

    B. The Fourteenth Amendment and Wong Kim Ark

    When the Thirty-Ninth Congress got down to work, the conventional view is that they sought to affirm the common law approach to birthright citizenship and extend the rule to the newly freed slaves. 39 The Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was the direct antecedent of the Fourteenth Amendment, held that “all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.” 40 During the debate on the Act, common law precedents such as Lynch were cited to illustrate the meaning of birthright citizenship. 41 While the language on “Indians not taxed” was taken from the Constitution to indicate that the exclusion of the Tribes would continue, 42 the phrase “subject to any foreign power” referred to the traditional exceptions for children of ambassadors and enemy aliens in hostile occupation.

    When Republicans decided to secure and broaden the Civil Rights Act through the Fourteenth Amendment, the relevant text was changed to say that all Americans “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States were birthright citizens. Once again, the common law [*508] was invoked to define this language, but the debate centered on whether this substitute applied to the Tribes. 44 Some contended that federal statutes already regulated aspects of tribal life and subjected Native Americans to national jurisdiction. 45 Nonetheless, the phrase was retained because the floor managers could not agree on a better alternative. 46 Furthermore, they countered that the Tribes were not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States because they had their own recognized governments.

    In United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 48 the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment adopted the common law view of birthright citizenship. 49 Ruling that children born in the United States to Chinese [*509] immigrants were citizens, the Justices “detailed at some length the history of the Citizenship Clause, and the predominantly geographic sense in which the term “jurisdiction’ was used.” 50 They concluded that the purpose of the “subject to the jurisdiction” language:

    Would appear to have been to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words, (besides children of members of the Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National Government, unknown to the common law,) the two classes of cases–children born of alien enemies in hostile occupation, and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign State–both of which, as has already been shown, … had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country.

    The emphasis on territoriality was an integral part of the common law approach dating back to Coke, which held that citizenship was directly tied to the government’s legal and practical authority.

  50. The case was Tuan v. INS which was decided a few years ago is also informative on this issue.

    Before considering the important governmental interests advanced by the statute, two observations concerning the operation of the provision are in order. First, a citizen mother expecting a child and living abroad has the right to re-enter the United States so the child can be born here and be a 14th Amendment citizen. From one perspective, then, the statute simply ensures equivalence between two expectant mothers who are citizens abroad if one chooses to reenter for the child’s birth and the other chooses not to return, or does not have the means to do so. This equivalence is not a factor if the single citizen parent living abroad is the father. For, unlike the unmarried mother, the unmarried father as a general rule cannot control where the child will be born.

    Second, although §1409(a)(4) requires certain conduct to occur before the child of a citizen father, born out of wedlock and abroad, reaches 18 years of age, it imposes no limitations on when an individual who qualifies under the statute can claim citizenship. The statutory treatment of citizenship is identical in this respect whether the citizen parent is the mother or the father. A person born to a citizen parent of either gender may assert citizenship, assuming compliance with statutory preconditions, regardless of his or her age. And while the conditions necessary for a citizen mother to transmit citizenship under §1409(c) exist at birth, citizen fathers and/or their children have 18 years to satisfy the requirements of §1409(a)(4). See Miller, supra, at 435 (opinion of Stevens, J.).

    Section 1421(d) refers to naturalization, which in turn is defined as “conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth.” 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(23). Citizenship under section §1409(a) is retroactive to the date of birth, but it is a naturalization under section §1421(d) nevertheless.

  51. dmlovinglife6 Says:

    Thank You Leo.

    I’m very grateful for all of your hard work. There is a total lack of truth in the mainstream media and we need a whole lot more independent resources for truthful information like yours and End The Illuminati Conspiracy to get the word out to the masses. It’s time to wake them up.

  52. I’m doing all I can do from my corner of the U.S.

  53. Mr. Donofrio:

    Like many others here, I’ve also been hard at work EVERY DAY finding news on Obama’s birth eligibility issue and e-mailing what I find to others. I’ve also signed petitions & urged others to do likewise.

    I wish I lived on the East coast & can be at SCOTUS on Friday. Alas, I’m in Berkeley, Ca, the Belly of the Beast. But my prayers are with you, Leo! May St. Michael and God’s good angels be with you in this battle.

  54. sliderblaze Says:

    well said Dennis, if there was an ad run in a local Penny Saver about Bush, they woulda asked the question, it’s regoddamndiculous. RIP media “08

  55. KatLawson Says:

    I just signed up for WND’s FedEx the Supremes about Obama’s eligibility
    WND

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82449

    “WASHINGTON – You can make sure the Supreme Court justices have a piece of your mind when they review a case Friday challenging the eligibility of Barack Obama under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, which stipulates the position can only be filled by “a natural born citizen.”

    Because the Supreme Court justices do not accept faxes, e-mails or telephone calls, there is only one way to make your voice heard in time for Friday’s preliminary hearing – overnight delivery of your letter. ”

    —–

    I sent my own this past Sat + we both signed up (individually) for the WND’s letters to all Supremes for $9.95!

    GO DO IT! PASS AROUND!

  56. worldnetdaily.com has a letter and an offer to send a personalized letter to each of the 9 Justices by Fedex for just $9.95
    Do it today so the letters reach them by Thursday.
    http://worldnetdaily.net

  57. mtngoat61 Says:

    Leo,

    Did you see your letter dated 22 Nov 08 regarding your case was finally docketed today but docketed with yesterday’s date, i.e., 1 Dec 08?

    “http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a407.htm”

    Also, see the full page open letter to Obama published in the Chicago Tribune on 1 Dec 08.

    “http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=780″

    Mountain Publius Goat
    “http://www.obamacitizenshipfacts.org”

  58. Loe, We are with you all the way and can’t thank you enough for your love of our country and Constitution. We hope you received our Thanksgiving message to you by mail.

    God Bless you and all Americans who seek the truth and continue to help all our fellow Americans to see the light and the truth. I have loved ones who are just now beginning to realize the truth and it will take them some time to realize that they have been so cleverly led away from the truth. But they will soon be joining all of us who know the truth.

    We must trust in our honorable Justices to do the right thing and uphold our Constitution. God Bless you! Jeannie & James

  59. richardsh Says:

    Go Leo go!

  60. [...] Natural Born Citizen A REPORTER’S GUIDE TO APPLICATIONS Pending Before The Supreme Court of the United [...]

  61. Wordwaryor Says:

    Today, I sent another overnight letter to Justice Scalia regarding the Wrotnowski and the Donofrio case. All of America desperately needs a lesson in the Constitution. And that lesson would be that the Constitution rules. If Obama is found not qualified, then he cannot hold the office.

    We need this lesson delivered by the Supreme Court (if they will) because the Political parties did not select qualified candidates, the FEC did not insure secure elections, the SOS’s of many states did not uphold their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution, the NEWS media did not do their jobs, and the Voters need to know to ask questions and become more informed before voting for any candidate.

    ALL of us, from the President of the US down to the youngest school studen, righteously need to learn this lesson !!

    And I hope and pray that the Supreme Court will use this opportunity to teach us those words written by those men in 1789 on parchment. And that those words still stand resolute today !.

  62. To Richard Lawrence and all, many of the founding fathers were born on British soil. Couldn’t it be said that the way the qualification clause was written was so that a founder like Alexander Hamilton (born in the West Indes) could serve as President? As opposed to the other founders who WERE born here and WERE natural-born citizens! Reading the clause that way allows us to square the clause with the Supreme Court cases saying that you don’t need ANY US parents to be a US Citizen natural born – even those that say you don’t need any US parents and can be taken out of the country for nearly your entire life and STILL be a natural-born US Citizen as long as you were born here and return to claim your citizenship.

    What I don’t get about this argument, that because Britain said that Obama was a British citizen at birth means he is not eligible because he had divided loyalties, is that it gives GREAT power to BRITAIN to determine who can be President in the UNITED STATES! They could as easily say that anyone named “Lawrence” is automatically a British citizen. Would you be ineligible to be President then, Richard? Wong Kim Ark stands for the proposition that any sovereign nation has an inalienable right to determine for ITSELF who is and is not a citizen. Why would you want to cede any of that right to Britain?

  63. Leo:

    Hopefully you received this in your email. I feel it has significance to the case. Here’s what I’ve discovered…

    According to fightthesmears.com, Obama claims to have had his Kenyan Citizenship renounced automatically by his 21st birthday:

    “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

    Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

    There’s only one problem with this. In 1967 and 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that any expiration requirement of expatriation mandated by Congress was Unconstitutional. Refer to Afroyim v. Rusk (1967), and Vance v. Terrazas (1980) for more information. They basically note that dual citizenship is acceptable, and it confirms that he has ability to retain dual citizenship mandated in INA § 301, 8 USC § 1401 indefinitely.

    Looking at British citizenship statutes in effect in 1982 (you must renounce your citizenship voluntarily by age 18), and the fact that Obama could not have become a Kenyan citizen in 1964 because he did not live in Kenya or was old enough to renounce his British citizenship, it is quite possible Obama still is a British National.

  64. Leo di Congradulations e Cort!!!!
    I have been following your case from the beginning and you have done a wonderful job with your continued dedication. I have learned so much and filled my files with much research that I will pass on to my friends and family….~GOD BLESS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ~
    Maggio dio la benedice entrambi su quest’esaurire ed il viaggio meraviglioso
    ..(may god bless you both on this exhausting and wonderful journey)
    Il suo amico, RINGRAZIARLA thank you from TEXAS !!!!!

  65. [...] Confirmed by Scotus: Donofrio V. Wells Was Distributed for Conference of December 5, 2008 by the Fu… [UPDATE] Leo Donofrio and Cort Wrotnowski will be on Plains Radio tonight at 7:00 PM EST CONFIRMED BY SCOTUS: DONOFRIO [...] [...]

  66. Every effort must be made to bring to attention these alleged illegal activities by Obama and his political advocates. If these allegations are true, every legal avenue must be taken to prevent the newly elected president from taking office. The truth must be exposed.
    The damage that Obama, secretary of states and others have done is tremendous.
    It would be fair to say that he won by deception. How can we trust this person to lead our great nation.
    It is a shame that these new developments are not well known through out the US.
    The truth must prevail, our honorable justices must take the constitution for face value. It is not a living and breathing document. It is the foundation of a country that stands as an example to all others.
    I am also very proud that you are pursuing this issue. Please do not relent or falter. The security of our great country is at risk.

  67. E Howard Bailey Says:

    God bless you, Leo. You have thousands of us behind you.
    If you can bring this fraud down, you’ll go down in the history books as a true American hero.

  68. Just heard on regular FOX NEWS about “a Supreme Court suit about Obama’s eligiblility. ”
    “A similar suit has already been throw out”

    Question…..What ’similar suit ‘ are they talking about?

    This is the first time I have heard any mention of it on a regular news station.

  69. Thanks for the good info and I linked to your post on the Liberty4USA blog

  70. John Nada Says:

    If you’ve never seen the 1988 movie “They Live”, you might enjoy watching it if you ever again find any free time. You’ll see a lot of similarity, at least symbolically, to this current ordeal. In the meantime, just continue to kick ass and take names!

  71. Elizabeth Pike Says:

    United States v Rhodes year 1866 case no 16,151 Circuit Court, D. Kentucky
    27F Cas.785:1866 U.S. app.Lexis 330;1 Abb.28; 1Am.Law T. Rep.U.S.CTs 22 1861 Circuit Justice Swayne

    “citizens” under our constitution mean free inhabitants born within the United States or naturalized under the laws of Congress.”
    “natural born” citizens” All persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together.

    Congress naturalizes. It removes the the disabilities of alienage. Belongs to the government of the U.S.

    All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural born subjects.

    There are two exceptions – children of ambassadors are in theory born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent.
    The second exception, slaves, does not apply.

    Citizen- born within the United States.
    natural born- born in allegiance of the United States.
    birth and allegiance go together.
    born within the United States and born in allegiance of the United States.

    United States – persons called citizens
    England -British – persons called subjects.

    Attention LEO. Circuit Court year 1866 Case / Justice Swayne 1861. “natural born” citizen” defined.
    This information appeared on a blog and I wrote down the case but I did not write who or where and don’t remember.

  72. About a week a go I wrote to around 40 SOS and asked if they vetted Obama and McCain as was required in their job description. So far only three wrote back…

    SOS New Mexico. “He is a US Citizen! And more than you llike he is our next President.” That is after clearly explaining the meaning of “NATURAL BORN U.S. Citizen” In fact she sent two emails the first was, “Your wrong he is a US Ci”
    (she was so angry I was questioning her CHOICE she sent before she finished and had to resend).

    SOS Georgia….long email sighting law that says it is up to the DNC not her to vet.

    SOS Minnesota….bascially replied that it is the responsibility of the Congress and I should contact them.

    I remember reading one poster’s post at Free Republic who called the DNC and asked who checked to see if Obama qualified…was put on hold….and when the person came back to the phone the caller was told, “It was not necessary as Obama was vetted when he ran for the senate.” Problem is you only have to be a U.S. citizen to run for the senate….not “Natural Born”.

    If nothing else comes of these lawsuits I sure hope someone in charge tells us who is suppose to be making sure candidates are qualified and how that process is to be done in an official way!!!

  73. Elizabeth Pike Says:

    adding to my prior blog about” natural born “citizen”: ” a freeman of a city”,”not a foreigner”…

    Foreigners are naturalized by U.S.Congress and then their children may be born “natural born citizen” . Naturalization removes the disabilities of alienage. Then belongs to the government of the United States. If the father is not naturalized, and belongs to another government, and has not gone through the steps to remove the disabilities of alienage,(takes years), the the father can only convey to the newborn what country allegiance he has at that time.

    DUAL ALLEGIANCE DISQUALIFIES FOR POSITION OF PRESIDENT.

    SELECTIVE SERVICE REGISTRATION must be confirmed ,and ,existing valid . Penalties for failure to register.

    Federal jobs (U.S. President included)-men born after December 31, 1959 must be selective service registered, forensic valid, to be ELIGIBLE for jobs , such as senator and president, in the Executive Branch of the Federal government, and the U.S. Postal Service.

    I saw this elsewhere and am posting for exposure because its important to be exposed to many.

  74. Elizabeth Says:

    It’s apparent that the certification of eligibility for all Select Exempt Positions needs to have the additional cerification by Federal Career Service Human Resources as they have the staff and professional expertise and willingness., and Immigration needs to certify candidates for eligibility for Select Exempt positions as they have the staff, professional expertise, and willingness. and the Military needs to certify candidates for their future Commander in Chief, and Vice President , for eligibility. The Secretary of States obviously are having a problem as they believe certification is a notary stanp.OK Let them keep on notary stamping AFTER three other qualified entitys do the background investigation and issue their letter of certification and the public is notified of the results by public posting on a website and news who is found eligible Since most if not all sos took the same route, CHANGE is indicated. Gone are the days when a person asking to be hired for a Honerable position was fearful of knowlingly commiting perjury. This is sad. Your name is your Honor. Most people go out of their way to keep their honorable name. But some persons never experience the joy and pride of Honor. Non-compliance works for them….. A member said that asking for his birth certificate is garbage..GARBAGE?..OK. We hear you.. We quit asking. America patriots will never forget how low esteem the office of President is held by a member trying to achieve it. We the people are the boss and the candidate has not met job minimum position standard. Next…….

  75. BE THERE: DEC 5th 8AM**SUPREME COURT STEPS**SIT IN – MARCH – DEC. 5th **8AM **

    For more info. go to: http://wemustbeheard.com

  76. [...] College certifies Obama’s victory on December 15th. He’s excited because, this Friday, all nine justices will read his certiorari petition (request for appellate review). Big deal. Call me if they take cert, but I won’t be [...]

  77. Hang in there Lee.

  78. We are all forever greatful to both Mr. Berg, Leo Donofrio and all those fighting the assualt on the US Constitution.

    Thank you

  79. LEO, IF YOU WANT TO SEE WHERE TEAM OBAMA MAY BE COMING FROM RE COUNTERING ‘LEGAL’ ARGUMENTS, TAKE A LOOK (ESPECIALLY MY COMMENTS IN REPLY):

    http://slantedright.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-citizenship-and-constitution.html

  80. [...] C. Donofrio has an appeal before the US Supreme Court. (DONOFRIO V. WELLS) His case is scheduled for conference before the full court this Friday. So I have a few questions. [...]

  81. Leo, was wondering if you could submit a subpoeon duces tecum, or i suppose it is too early, would actually be in court. I do hope this gets the action it deserves. If we don’t have our Constituion, what can be next for this country.

  82. subpoena (sp)

  83. Thought this might interest all of you:

    Wednesday, 03 December 2008 10:37
    Sher Zieve

    President-elect Barack Obama’s refusal to produce an original and viable birth certificate indicating that he truly and indisputably is a natural born US citizen—as is required by the US Constitution—is continuing to take unusual tacks and turns. In fact, as it is appearing more and more that Barack Obama is not qualified for the US presidency, his and his minions’ machinations may just take the country off course entirely. Now, not only is Mr. Obama refusing to provide proof that he is even eligible to be the President of the United States but, he has decided to thumb his nose at members of our highest court in the land.

    With regards to Donofrio v Wells—one of a growing number of lawsuits filed nationwide that question the eligibility of Barack Obama to be POTUS—the full US Supreme Court has agreed to conference on the suit 5 December 2008. Obama and the DNC (also named in the suit) were advised by the high court to respond to Donofrio v Wells by 1 December. To date, neither Mr. Obama nor the DNC have responded. With this lack of response, the president-elect has now flatly stated that he is above—if not beyond and outside of—the law and reports and is responsible only to himself. This is what—not who—was elected to the presidency of the United States.

    The primary qualification for any US President is articulated in the US Constitution’s Article II and reads: “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.” Obama’s paternal grandmother still maintains that her grandson—Barack Hussein Obama (AKA Barry Sotero)—was born in Kenya and that she attended his birth. Obama’s half-brother and half-sister have confirmed the grandmother’s statement. Kenyan officials have worked tirelessly in their attempts to cover up Mr. Obama’s true birthplace and even held Obama-critic Jerome Corsi, PhD in custody (jail) for visiting that country and working to elicit the truth. Still, Obama was allowed and apparently continues to be allowed to refuse to produce a number of documents, including the one which would qualify or disqualify him to hold the office of President of the United States—his true and official birth certificate.

    Note: The copy of the Hawaiian document (now sealed away from US citizens by the Governor of Hawaii) that appeared for a time on Obama’s website was not a certified birth certificate. Instead, it was a “certificate of live birth” stating that Obama was born alive. Even that document’s authenticity has been debunked by multiple sources. Obama’s rise to fame—with no vetting from the media or the Democrat Party—is nothing less than phenomenal. It causes any thinking person—apparently not too many of those left—to wonder what forces are behind him.

    In an outstanding column from Joan Swirsky, “Obama the Trojan Horse”, she cites legal Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr. as stating “America is facing potentially the gravest constitutional crisis in her history” and “If Obama fails to prove his citizenship but the voters, the Electors, or the Members of the House purport to “elect” him. He will be nothing but a usurper, because the Constitution defines him as such. And he can never become anything else, because a usurper cannot gain legitimacy if even all of the country aid, abets, accedes to, or acquiesces in his usurpation.”

    This may be the toughest test that our US Constitution has ever faced. If the qualifications for POTUS are suspended for Obama, the entire document will be null and void—as will, inevitably, our country. And now, Mr. Obama has essentially told the United States Supreme Court to “go pound sand”—or worse. If allowed to assume the presidency and he is NOT a natural born US citizen he will be emboldened to no longer respect—let alone follow—any law that he doesn’t like. And his National Civilian Police Force (AKA “The American Gestapo”) will—along with other democracy-busting programs—be quickly put into place. With all of these insanities being fomented by Democrats—including the worldwide economic crisis—I have to wonder how many actually realize how much jeopardy we and the country are in. The fact is that this current pending Constitutional crisis places all of us in the gravest of positions.

  84. Thank you John Jay.

    Mr. Donofrio your case does have merit and I see no reason for it not to be granted.

    John Jay to George Washington

    John Jay
    July 25, 1787

    New York 25 July 1787

    Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.

  85. [...] the Supreme Court was actually referred to conference by the full Court, not just Justice Clarence Thomas. Bob Vernon, from the Plains Radio Network, spoke with Patricia McCabe Estrada, Deputy Director of Pulic Information at the SCOTUS. She [...]

  86. Jeff Mach Says:

    To all of you I personally have written letter to Fox, MSNBC, & CNN in hopes to wake them up and get them to do their job. Here is one of the letters that I wrote. Possibly if they start receiving more of these it will get them moving.

    To whom this may concern,

    The consensus from hundreds of thousands of citizens that are wondering why you our media are not reporting a case with a high enough profile that it is being heard by all nine Supreme Court Judges Dec. 5th is starting to look like a media cover up. Yes, the Obama cover up. On your home page you have a section for our president elect but you have failed to show an extremely important issue that he is being challenged on being a “Natural Born Citizen”. He has admitted to the public in person and states in his book that his father is a UK citizen. I’m sure you all know that the constitution defines that both parents must be citizens of the US and you must be born on US soil to declare “Natural Born Citizen”.

    Why is it that Palins clothes are be reported on prime time news and a potential constitution crisis be silenced by the media. People all over the world are reading and listening to talk radio all about the Obama court cases and it appears that for some reason it has been silenced by the main stream media not excluding the Obama tapes that we were told about and have not seen on your broad cast. Is CNN news hiding something? Can I get a response at least why this is going on? In the past my self and others relied on your company to bring the truth to us.

    The Leo Donofrio docket 08A407 at the US Supreme Court will be on Friday and possibly one other case will be heard docket # 08A469 which we pray that our Supreme Court Judges up hold our Constitution. There will be a peaceful support demonstration on the steps which the people will be looking for your presents.

    Here is a link that will direct you to info that might help with a future broad cast.

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

    In closing of this letter I’m going to send this across the internet and let it be known that you have been contacted in hopes that we will be seeing the truth and you using your power through the media in telling our citizens of our potential Constitutional crisis. People will be contacting your sponsors too in regards to this blatant media black out. And just for your information there is at least 50 cases either pending or in process of filing meaning this matter is not going away.

    Sincerely,

    Jeff Mach

  87. Just passing on some info for you Leo. And again thank-you for all you are doing.

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=82640

  88. Republican dog Says:

    Dear Jeff Mach:

    What a sensational truly compelling letter you wrote to the media. Kudos to a fine effort. Let us pray that they read it and learn from it. Your effort was lucid, well thought out, and beautifully written. Good luck.

    The Republican dog

  89. Elizabeth Says:

    IT IS NOT UP TO US, THE EMPLOYER , TO BEG THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE. No Birth certificate , Barry aka Obama has defaulted. This election is therefore illegal, null and void, as commanded by our CONSTITUTION . Treason to anyone who manipulates.. The door to the whitehouse is locked. Barry aka Obama is removed. EVERYTHING he signed as A SENATOR IS ILLEGAL, NULL AND VOID. Obama is currently an unemployed worker. He is out. He cannot push his way in the position by illEGALLY AND PREMATURELY naming jucy positions as he is doing.This is a travesty and an insult to the rightful Presidential candidates, bestowing Secretary of State on Hillary , when good chance she would now be President if Obama was not wrongly on the ballot. The votes by the people were cast under the misled conception that he was eligible. This calls for a do over by the voters. Go back to the drawing board, set up a election sheet with the same eligible candidates re-listed on the ballot, and do over election in February, and install the winning candidate in April. That is the only fair way to set it right. Until then, we can find some one to perform the duties of the office of President, until the rightfully chosen candidate is seated to continue the term.

  90. southerncross Says:

    Mr Donofrio,
    Today, the true hope of the nation rides on your back. If you serve the people well today, then indeed, you will have done them far greater service than those who would allow the opposition of the law could ever have done them, or do them in the future.

    I wish you, and all those who will support you on this day, and in the future, the very best of days, and the very best of luck.

    My respect and prayers to you,
    x

  91. Something to break the animosity.

    I live in Norman Oklahoma home of the #2 Oklahoma Sooners. On saturday during the OU VS OSU Game, Texas Fans paid to have a Banner flown over the OSU stadium saying: “45-35” — the score of Texas’ victory over Oklahoma on Oct. 11

    Well we responded with a banner of our own yesterday flying over UT saying: “HEY MACK, QUIT WHINING YOU KNEW THE RULES!”

    [img]http://photos.newsok.com/2/showimage/523455/lead620/[/img]

    GO SOONERS GO DONOFRIO!!!

  92. [...] Jersey Secretary of State. This suit was received by Justice Thomas and by the determination of the entire court, it is scheduled for conference, Friday December 5. This conference is held to decide what, if any, [...]

  93. Richardson revelation-Obama is an immigrant

  94. Re: McCain – The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” includes conquered lands, territory over which the U.S. has military (physical) control.

  95. Any News? I can’t seem to find much on this anywhere. I’d like to know why this isn’t all over National News, as it should be.

  96. By the way, nice letter to the media Jeff Mach!

  97. Friday, December 05, 2008

    The Bulletin Vol. V No. 233

    Inside Today’s Bulletin

    Home : News : Columnists & Commentary : Archive
    Archive
    Obama Fomenting A Constitutional Crisis: Constitutional Lawyer Discusses Ramifications Of Controversy
    By John P. Connolly, The Bulletin
    12/01/2008
    Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
    Controversy continues to surround President-elect Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president, and a case involving his birth certificate waits for its day before the U.S. Supreme Court. A constitutional lawyer said were it to be discovered that Mr. Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen, it would have grave consequences for the nation.

    Advertisement

    According to the Constitution, a president must be a natural born citizen of the U.S. Mr. Obama’s critics have failed to force him legally to produce his original birth certificate, and Mr. Obama has resisted any attempt to make him do so. Currently, only Hawaii Department of Health officials have access to Mr. Obama’s original records.

    Some of Mr. Obama’s critics have said he was born in Kenya and have claimed he is a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia, or even a British subject.

    Edwin Vieira, a constitutional lawyer who has practiced for 30 years and holds four degrees from Harvard, said if it were to be discovered Mr. Obama were not eligible for the presidency, it would cause many problems. They would be compounded if his ineligibility were discovered after he had been in office for a period of time.

    “Let’s assume he wasn’t born in the U.S.,” Mr. Vieira told The Bulletin. “What’s the consequence? He will not be eligible. That means he cannot be elected validly. The people and the Electoral College cannot overcome this and the House of Representatives can’t make him president. So what’s the next step? He takes the oath of office, and assuming he’s aware he’s not a citizen, then it’s a perjured oath.”

    Any appointments made by an ineligible president would have to be recalled, and their decisions would be invalidated.

    “He may have nominated people to different positions; he may have nominated people to the judicial branch, who may have been confirmed, they may have gone out on xecutive duty and done various things,” said Mr. Vieira. “The people that he’s put into the judicial branch may have decided cases, and all of that needs to be unzipped.”

    Mr. Vieira said Obama supporters should be the ones concerned about the case, because Mr. Obama’s platform would be discredited it he were forced to step down from the presidency later due to his ineligibility, were it to be discovered.

    “Let’s say we go a year into this process, and it all turns out to be a flim-flam,” said Mr. Vieira. “What’s the nation’s reaction to that? What’s going to be the reaction in the next U.S. election? God knows. It has almost revolutionary consequences, if you think about it.”

    Mr. Vieira said Mr. Obama’s continued silence and avoidance in the release of his birth certificate is an ethical issue because of the dire consequences that could be caused by a possible constitutional crisis.

    “If he were my client and this question came up in civil litigation, if there was some reason that his birth status was relevant and the other side wanted him to produce the thing and he said ‘no,’ I would tell him, ‘you have about 15 minutes to produce it or sign the papers necessary to produce the document, or I’m resigning as your attorney,” said Mr. Vieira. “I don’t think any ethical attorney would go ahead on the basis that his client could produce an objective document in civil litigation [and refused to do so].”

    Further, Mr. Vieira cited a fraud ruling in a 1977 case called U.S. v. Prudden, which he feels applies in this case.

    “Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading,” the ruling reads. “We cannot condone this shocking conduct … If that is the case we hope our message is clear. This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately.”

    Mr. Vieira said such an ethical question of representing a client who refused to produce such a basic document is important, even in a small civil case. The current question is concerning the man who potentially could have his finger next to the nuclear button.

    “[The birth certificate], in theory, should be there,” said Mr. Vieira. “What if it isn’t? Who knows, aside from Mr. Obama? Does Russian intelligence know it isn’t there? Does Chinese intelligence know it isn’t there? Does the CIA know that it isn’t there? Who is in a position to blackmail this fellow?”

    Mr. Vieira explained all laws have to be submitted to the president. In the event that there is no valid president, then no laws passed by Congress in that administration would be legally null and void. Because of that, this case will probably not go away, even after Mr. Obama takes the oath of office.

    “If you don’t produce it, you think it’s going to go away,” he said. “There are all these cases challenging Mr. Obama, and some challenging secretaries of state, and they run into this doctrine called standing.”

    Mr. Vieira explained although legal standing is difficult to get around in Federal courts, the document could be produced in any criminal cases stemming from legislation passed in the Obama administration.

    “Let’s assume that an Obama administration passes some of these controversial pieces of legislation he has been promising to go for, like the FOCA (Freedom of Choice) Act,” said Mr. Vieira. “I would assume that some of those surely will have some severe civil or criminal penalties attached to them for violation. You are now the criminal defendant under this statute, which was passed by an Obama Congress and signed by President Obama. Your defense is that is not a statute because Mr. Obama is not the president. You now have a right and I have never heard this challenged, to subpoena in a criminal case, anyone who has relevant evidence relating to your defenses. And you can subpoena them duces tecum, meaning ‘you shall bring with you the documents.’ ”

    Such a criminal defense would enable the defendant to subpoena any person to testify in court and any person to bring evidence in their possession to the court.

    Further, records could be subpoenaed directly, in the case of a birth certificate. Once the record could be subpoenaed, the birth certificate could be examined by forensic experts, who would then be able to testify to the document’s veracity as expert witnesses. Any movement by the judges to make a special exception to the president in a criminal case would hurt the legitimacy of that presidential administration.

    “I can’t believe I’m the only lawyer who would think of this,” said Mr. Vieira. “I think any criminal lawyer defending against one of these politically charged statutes is going to come up with this. That means it will never go away until that document is laid down on the table and people say, ‘yes, there it is.’ And therefore they’re caught. If people keep challenging this and the judges out of fear keep saying ‘no, go to jail, go to jail, go to jail’ then that’s the end of the Obama administration’s legitimacy. On the other hand if they open the file and it’s not there, then that’s really the end of the administration’s legitimacy.”

    Several court cases in the birth certificate controversy are waiting admission to the Supreme Court.

    A gathering of judges will meet on Dec. 5 to decide whether or not to hear a case from New Jersey, and a decision is still pending on a case from a lawyer in Pennsylvania. Should four of the judges vote to hear the case in the Dec. 5 meeting, then it will be scheduled for hearings. Court cases from Connecticut and New York have also applied for hearings at the U.S. Supreme Court.

    John P. Connolly can be reached at jconnolly@thebulletin.us

    ©The Bulletin 2008

  98. Leo, when o’s mom left the us,she was on the news; my mom said at the time that she was going overseas to marry her black prince. then my mom said: that is one kid that will never be president of the us! meaning o. I am 62 years old. i was 15 at that time. point being, it would be in news archives somewhere. we only had 4,6.and 10 tv channels DJ

  99. For right now (8:30pm CST), Leo is on the Plains Radio Network and says that he has NO answer from the SC on this. It’s expected that on Monday something will be released via the SC : whether it’s a rejection or not, he does not know.

    There are those on the net saying they called into the SC’s clerks office and were told it was dismissed. But other MSM networks have called in and they were told that no information was being given out. You decide WHOM you want to believe. I’ll believe Leo and say that we have to wait til Monday for a confirmation as to what the SC is deciding.

  100. Leo, although I agree that the Supreme Court Justices are brilliant constitutional scholars, remember, they came from the same population caldron, that you and I come from.
    I am unwilling to believe that if there was another definition for “natural-born citizen” , other than the one you have defined, some other brilliant scholar wouldn’t have already posted it all over the web.

    YOU ARE RIGHT —– BELIEVE THAT

  101. Emphasis being on “prince” not Black

  102. We the People of the United States of America
    Urgent Appeal

    Attention: Governors of States, Secretaries of States, Attorney Generals, FBI Officials, Homeland Security Officials, State Department Officials, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officials, Federal Elections Committee, Electors and Electoral College, Congressmen, Senators, State, Federal and Supreme Court Judges, Election Officials:

    This letter is to put you on notice in regards to the following troubling facts:

    1) From August 21 until now some 17 legal actions were filed all over this nation and at least 16 more are about to be filed shortly: those were individual or class actions, in different State and Federal courts. The plaintiffs: US citizens, voters, electors, different Party officials and candidates for office are alleging that Mr. Obama’s eligibility for Presidency was never verified by any governmental agency and mounting evidence suggests that he does not qualify as a Natural Born citizen and therefore cannot be sworn as the President of the United States. These actions were not heard on merits yet. The first action, filed by the former Deputy Attorney general of the State of Pennsylvania, Phillip J Berg against Mr. Obama and DNC, titled Berg v Obama el all is currently in the Supreme Court, awaiting resolution of question, whether a voter has standing to bring an issue of eligibility to court. Regardless of the Court decision on this matter, other parties with superior standing have filed similar actions. A second case has reached the Supreme Court recently. This case was filed by New Jersey attorney, Leo C Donofrio against the Secretary of State of New Jersey Nina Mitchell Wells. Mr. Donofrio states in his legal action that Ms. Wells did not fulfill her duties and did not verify the eligibility of the candidates. For example, she allowed on the ballot not only Mr. Obama, but another candidate, representing Labor party, that admitted that he is not a Natural Born citizen, but was rather born in Nicaragua. The very State and Federal officials that took the oath of office to uphold the Constitution, are trampling all over the Constitution and our rights as citizens to elect a candidate that is eligible to be the President according to the Constitution.

    2) Numerous voters, concerned citizens have turned to the offices of the Secretaries of States and found out that none of the Secretaries of States verified Mr. Obama’s eligibility. Routinely the Secretaries of States simply allowed Mr. Obama to sign a form, stating that he is able to perform the function of the President without any independent verification that his statement is truthful and correct.

    3) Numerous voters and concerned citizens have contacted the Federal Elections Committee (FEC) and found out that FEC did not do any verification of Mr. Obama’s eligibility either. FEC representatives have stated that they are dealing with financial aspects of the campaign, and even that was not done by the FEC, since for roughly half of the 650 million raised by Mr. Obama, there was no documentation, no names of the donors and there were numerous reports that there is a high probability that at least 65 million came from non US citizens.

    4) There was no investigative reporting in the Press, since predominantly liberal media was pushing for Obama for president and was unwilling to show journalistic integrity and investigate or report anything negative in regards to Mr. Obama.

    5) Most of the States in the Union contain statues in the election codes, that characterize election fraud or aiding and abetting election fraud, as a felony, punishable by lengthy jail terms. For example, California election statue 18500 states: “ Any person, who commits fraud and any person who aids and abets fraud or attempts to abet fraud, in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for 16 months or two years or three years”

    6) We, the people, the citizens of this country demand that all of you do not aid or abet commission of fraud, do not subject yourselves and others to the possible charges of aiding and abetting fraud and investigate the following facts:

    a. according to affidavits presented in the Berg v. Obama to the Supreme Court, Sarah Obama, Mr.Obama’s paternal grandmother has repeatedly stated that Barack Obama was born in Kenya and she was present at the hospital, when he was born, which means that Mr. Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and not qualified for Presidency. (based on 1952 code)

    b. Mr. Obama has responded by posting on his web site “Fight the Smears” a “short version” form of Certification of Live Birth’, but categorically refused to provide a copy of a vault or (long version birth certificate), that would provide for a name of a hospital and a name and signature of the doctor. This is crucial, since the State of Hawaii allows residents of Hawaii to register in the state of Hawaii the birth of their children, born in another state or another country, such as Kenya. Please see in attachment a sample Certificate of Live Birth, Box 7C, asks for the County or State or other country of birth.(this provision exists due to the fact that numerous Hawaiians historically worked outside of the state, mostly on Solomon islands and Guadalcanal). This document also has provisions for the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor. Additionally, Hawaii became a State in 1959, only two years before Mr. Obama’s birth. At a time numerous residents of Hawaii did not have birth certificates, therefore the state of Hawaii allowed residents born from 1902 until 1971 to obtain a different document called Certification of Hawaiian birth, that could be obtained simply by the statement made by a relative without any corroborating evidence. Therefore the short version birth certificate, posted by Mr. Obama on his web site, could’ve been based on an affidavit made by his mother or most probably by one of his grandparents, that he was born in Hawaii, even if he actually was born in Kenya. This could’ve been done not because Mr. Obama’s relatives thought that he would run for president one day, but simply to avoid the hustle and expense of going through some eight years of immigration procedures.

    c. As of now no one was able to locate any hospital in Hawaii, any nurse, any doctor that would provide any evidence that Mr. Obama indeed was born on Hawaii.

    d. Mr. Obama refused to provide any documents in Berg v Obama case.

    e. Mr. Obama refused to consent to release of his vault or long version birth certificate.

    f. Mr. Obama refused to consent to release of any records by any hospitals.
    g. Madelyn Dunham, his maternal grandmother remained silent and never refuted the statements that Mr. Obama was not born in Hawaii and no access was ever allowed to any reporters to ask Mrs. Madelyne Dunham one single question: “in what hospital on Hawaii was Mr. Obama born?’

    h. Even if Mr. Obama would’ve been born in Hawaii (all the evidence states otherwise), he would’ve lost his citizenship by virtue of moving to Indonesia and obtaining Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship and Ms. Ann Dunham- Obama-Soetoro had to relinquish her son’s US citizenship in order to gain Indonesian citizenship.

    i . In 1981, during the ban on travel to Pakistan for US citizens, Mr. Obama by his own admission had travelled to Pakistan. The only reasonable explanation, is that he did it using his Indonesian passport and using his prior name Barry Soetoro or his Kenyan passport, since he was entitled to the Kenyan citizenship, due to his father’s Kenyan citizenship (in 1963 Mombasa area became a part of Kenya), or he could’ve had a passport of British protected person, since at the time of his birth, in 1961, the area of Mombasa (his fathers homeland) was not independent yet (not until 1963) and was called Omani Sultanate of Zanzibar, British Protected Area. (it was ruled at the time by the Royal family from Oman and was part of British Protected areas).

    Based on all of the above Mr. Obama was never a Natural born citizen, and he would’ve lost his natural born status, even if he had it by virtue of getting an Indonesian Citizenship, and he has divided allegiance and cannot become the President of the US.
    We the People, citizens of the United States of America, demand that you investigate these acts and refrain from certifying the vote or signing the Certificate of Ascertainment (to be signed by the Governors and Secretaries of States before the December 15 vote by the electors.) We demand that the Electors of the Electoral College refrain from signing the Certificate of Vote until there is verification of eligibility of Mr. Obama by properly authenticated documents, such as vault (long version) birth certificate, that shows the name of the hospital and the name and the signature of the doctor in Hawaii, birthing records from the hospital in Hawaii, certified copies of all and any passports held with immigration stamps, particularly immigration stamps from Pakistan from 1981, school enrollment records from Indonesia, Occidental college, Columbia University and Harvard college, that would show citizenship listed at the time of application. We demand that proper investigation would be done and, if the above facts and allegations are found to be true and correct, Mr. Obama be de-certified of the ballot.

    We, the People of the United States of America, the land of law and order, the land of Constitution

  103. old glory Says:

    LEO-that MIND your talking about must be Obama and Others. That Mind is going to Hawaii. I don’t trust anybody. Birth Cert. = different father or SR. was naturalized before JR was born. State Legislatures should be sued for not checking. Push Legislatures to APPOINT the Electors. US SUP will order Sec State to investigate-bug Legislatures to investigate.

  104. harold sorensen Says:

    [Ed. note - the comments below are not correct. Obama and McCain are NOT electors who will vote in the Electoral College.]

    PRESS RELEASE

    BARACK OBAMA, JOSEPH BIDEN AND JOHN MCCAIN CAN NOT BE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 15, 2008. THEY WERE SITTING SENATORS ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008 AND WERE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROHIBITED FROM BEING VOTED FOR “ELECTOR IN CHIEF”. IT IS THE CONSTITUTION!

    A media reminder that Bob Dole resigned his Senator Office prior to the Election because he knew the Constitution prohibited him as a Sitting Senator to be elected an ELECTOR in November, 12 years ago. Al Gore and John Kerry would have had the same problem. This is the first time in the 232 years of History of the United States of America that we have had three sitting Senators from two major Parties blatantly defy the Constitution. They can NEVER hold the Office of President in 2008. The Constitution absolutely prohibits sitting Senators from being elected “ELECTORS” on November 4, 2008. If the Constitution is NOT upheld then we no longer are a Republic under the Rule of Law.

    Article II. Section 1, Clause 4, “The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the ELECTORS, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.” Congress chose November 4, 2008 as the Day for chusing ELECTORS and December 15, 2008 as the Day the ELECTORS shall give their Votes. That is the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Article II. Section 1, Clause 2, “…….but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an ELECTOR. The ELECTORS IN CHIEF’S, Senator John McCain, Senator Barack Obama and Senator Joseph Biden were Sitting Senators are November 4, 2008 and are Constitutionally Prohibited from being ELECTORS. Therefore, Senator Barack Obama, Senator John McCain and Senator Joseph Biden have no choice but to comply with the Constitution of the United States of America and step down. Their Oath of Office requires it.

    Now the MEDIA has a choice to make: (1) They can continue to bend over and kiss their “Freedom of Press” goodbye and keep America in the Dark or (2) Let the Light Shine forth on America again to Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Respectively,

    Harold Sorensen
    P.O. Box 44
    Luverne, State of Alabama 36049

  105. Leo, thank you for putting your life on hold to help us protect and defend our constitution. If we lose, can I move away with you and play poker too?

  106. Leo, just a tidbit of info. Has anyone thought about the fact that Janet Napolitano named as Head of Homeland Security (doesn’t that make you feel fuzzy warm inside) by Obama is the attorney that represented Anita Hill in the Clarence Thomas hearings in 1991. I am sure Thomas has not forgotten this fact. I personally think your case is going for a full hearing before the court. If not, our constitution may as well be burned on the Supreme Court steps. If Obama goes into the White House, I fully intend to put an American flag outside my house flying up side down. America is in distress!!!!!

  107. Patriotgreg Says:

    Leo, I believe you might want to take a listen to this recording of one of Lan Lamphere’s programs:

    http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=E95738268F9CC9C7

    Respectfully,

    patriotgreg

  108. Slow Poke Says:

    Thanks for the update. This is great news. At least they didn’t say no to a review. Too many folks take this issue very nonchalantly. Not being a “natural born citizen” running for POTUS is not only a violation of our Constitution, but a treasonous act as well. We haven’t heard anything about that. Regardless of all the assumptions, attempts to soft pedal the issue, and proof he should be shut down NOW before any more security briefings, etc. He shouldn’t mind showing any necessary documents proving his eligiblility as many times as need be. Why does he have several law firms trying to make sure no one sees the BC? Folks, it simply doesn’t compute. The media and those that voted for him simply want to let it pass because it is a “historic event”. He, as well as every Secretary of State, the DNC, the FEC, and others that should have vetted him, should be arrested and charged with treason. It is not up to the individual voter to vet a candidate. If a name appears on a ballot, it is assumed the person has been properly vetted. If the SCOTUS decides he can proceed, he will only trample more of our Constitution. Those folks that approve of BHO care nothing about the rules of the land? It is either all or nothing when it comes to the Constitution. There will be problems if found ineligible, but would you rather have them now or or a much worse situation later? We will find out what the SCOTUS is made of. Food for thought; who will swear him in?

  109. The Chicago Machine…….Peculiar or Coincidence? Coming out of Chicago, 2 years 9 months ago, a 26 page report on the importance of getting rid of the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution by Atty. Sarah Herlihy.

    Interesting that this was brought about just prior to Obamas annoucement to run for President. I would think that the above 26-page report &/or proposal would be of interest to the 9 Supreme Court Justices. It is a known broadcasted fact that Obama will remove Justice Clarence Thomas; along with (named) other controversial Justices. The ones in Obamas eyes will get in his way.

    Quote:
    Sarah P. Herlihy is employed by Kirkland & Ellis LLP http://www.kirkland.com . Note: this law firm is based in Chicago.

    Bruce I. Ettelson, P.C. (aka PARTNER), is a Member of the finance committees for both U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin.

    Not the only partner with ties to their Harvard Senator. Chicago law firm… US Senators for Illinois.

    Now, we can get into the new affidavits, or testimonies of ambassadors, or forensic experts that go under the psuedonym Dr Ron Polarik, but really, why bother? No one wants to send a guy guilty of forging a US birth certificate to jail for 15 years. Instead, lets focus on how in 2006, Obama’s buddies felt it necessary to put together a 26 page dissertation why the “natural born” clause is the “stupidest provision.”
    Kirkland’s specialty?

    Quote:
    Kirkland & Ellis has a 100-year history of providing exceptional service to clients around the world in complex litigation, corporate and tax, intellectual property, restructuring and counseling matters. The groundwork has been established for another century of superior legal work and client service.

  110. Leo.
    You are a true patriot. Thank you for your courage and fortitude to stand up for the American people.

    God Bless You and God Bless America.

  111. harold sorensen Says:

    Leo and Cort a sitting Senator can NOT be elected “ELECTOR” as was done on November 4, 2008.

    Dec 4, 08 I filed a Court Case in Alabama Circuit Cour to stop the Governor from allowing Electoral votes on Dec 15.

    This is the first time in our Nations’ History 232 year history that two major parties put up canidates that are sitting Senators and are NOT natural born. On Tuesday November 4, 2008 the voters elected ‘ELECTORS”. The President is NOT elected until December 15, 2008. Stop them in their tracks! Read on. These are two Constitutional issues.

    Harold Sorensen
    (334) 335-3214

    PRESS RELEASE

    BARACK OBAMA, JOSEPH BIDEN AND JOHN MCCAIN CAN NOT BE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON DECEMBER 15, 2008. THEY WERE SITTING SENATORS ON NOVEMBER 4, 2008 AND WERE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROHIBITED FROM BEING VOTED FOR “ELECTOR IN CHIEF”. IT IS THE CONSTITUTION!

    A media reminder that Bob Dole resigned his Senator Office prior to the Election because he knew the Constitution prohibited him as a Sitting Senator to be elected an ELECTOR in November, 12 years ago. Al Gore and John Kerry would have had the same problem. This is the first time in the 232 years of History of the United States of America that we have had three sitting Senators from two major Parties blatantly defy the Constitution. They can NEVER hold the Office of President in 2008. The Constitution absolutely prohibits sitting Senators from being elected “ELECTORS” on November 4, 2008. If the Constitution is NOT upheld then we no longer are a Republic under the Rule of Law.

    Article II. Section 1, Clause 4, “The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the ELECTORS, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.” Congress chose November 4, 2008 as the Day for chusing ELECTORS and December 15, 2008 as the Day the ELECTORS shall give their Votes. That is the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Article II. Section 1, Clause 2, “…….but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an ELECTOR. The ELECTORS IN CHIEF’S, Senator John McCain, Senator Barack Obama and Senator Joseph Biden were Sitting Senators are November 4, 2008 and are Constitutionally Prohibited from being ELECTORS. Therefore, Senator Barack Obama, Senator John McCain and Senator Joseph Biden have no choice but to comply with the Constitution of the United States of America and step down. Their Oath of Office requires it.

    Now the MEDIA has a choice to make: (1) They can continue to bend over and kiss their “Freedom of Press” goodbye and keep America in the Dark or (2) Let the Light Shine forth on America again to Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Respectively,

    Harold Sorensen

    P.O. Box 44

    Luverne, State of Alabama 36049

    NOTE:

    It is not what people think that matters. It is what the law says that
    matters. It is true the Constitution does not mention Elector in Chief but
    what else would you call the issue on November 4, 2008? It was not an election of President. It was an election of Electors. The only names on the ballot were those running for President. Seems like Obama and McCain were elected for something on November 4, 2008 and if it was not President, what was it?

    Title 3, United States Code, Section 1 clearly says:

    Time of appointing electors

    1. The electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed, in each State, on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President.

    for the purpose of this discussion, Section 1’s Tuesday was November 4, 2008. Section 2 directs:

    Failure to make choice on prescribed day

    § 2. Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct.

    This then would make the “election for the purpose of choosing electors” is the only “election” that took place on November 4, 2008. Congress directs at Section 7 that:

    Meeting and vote of electors

    § 7. The electors of President and Vice President of each State shall meet and give their votes on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December next following their appointment at such place in each State as the legislature of such State shall direct.

    This means the “electors” “appointed” on November 4, 2008’s “election for the purpose of choosing electors” (the term “choose” in Article II is spelled “chuse”) are to meet on the second Wednesday in December and:

    Manner of voting

    § 8. The electors shall vote for President and Vice President, respectively, in the manner directed by the Constitution.

    There are two in form and in substance elections at issue. The election “for the appointment of electors” and the election “in the manner directed by the Constitution” for the election by ballot for President and Vice President.

    On November 4, 2008, the only names that appeared on the State election ballots for the “appointment of electors” included three sitting United States Senators. John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden.

    If they were not being elected President and Vice President according to Federal Law, and as the Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore held that no State Citizen has any Constitutionally protected right to vote for President or Vice President:

    BUSH v. GORE 531 U.S. 98. 104 (2000)

    “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College. U.S. Const., Art. II, § 1. This is the source for the statement in McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892), that the state legislature’s power to select the manner for appointing electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself, which indeed was the manner used by state legislatures in several States for many years after the framing of our Constitution. Id., at 28-33. History has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors. When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors.”

    Because States choose to hold elections for elector appointment McCain, Obama or Biden, after November 3, 2008, were eligible to hold both offices. Currently they each hold offices for President and Vice President. It can be seen no other way. The iden a election for President took place on November 4, 2008 is simply ridiculous in light of Title 3, United States Code, Section 1,2,7 and 8.

  112. LEO I JUST READ AN ARTICLE ON YAHOO BY AP ABOUT YOUR CASE BEING DENIED HOWEVER THEY MENTION THAT THERE IS AT LEAST ONE OTHER CASE BEFORE THE SCOTUS AND THEN THEY MENTION PHIL BERGS CASE. NOTHING ABOUT CORTS CONFERENCE ON FRIDAY. SO I CALLED AP IN WASHINGTON AND WAS GIVEN TO THE LEGAL EDITOR HE WAS NOT IN SO I SPOKE WITH THE SECY. AND SHE REFERRED ME BACK TO THE NEWS DESK. I TOLD HER ABOUT CORTS CONFERENCE DATE AND SHE STATED YES WE KNOW. I THEN ASKED WELL WHY DOESNT IT STATE ANYTHING IN THE STORY SHE SAID EMAIL THE LEGAL EDITOR FOR THE WASHINGTON BUREAU OF AP. WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS? SHOULD WE TRY TO GET MORE PEOPLE TO EMAIL THE EDITOR AND PUT SOME PRESSURE ON THIS TO GET IT IN THE EYE OF THE PUBLIC BEFORE FRIDAY?

Leave a Reply