Interviews with Van Irion and Mark Hatfield after Obama Eligibility Trial

2 Comments

1. [...] Interviews with Van Irion and Mark Hatfield after Obama Eligibility Trial!-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By Pamela Barnett-On February 1, 2012: [...]

   The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History! « A Nation ADrift-Why?, 3 months ago Reply
2. 
   STATES WITH THE NEW
   NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE LAW
   SHOULD BE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT
   THE PRESIDENT OBAMA ELIGIBILITY CASE
   JANUARY 26, 2012.

   Vermont, is a state which is violating
   the U.S. Constitutional rights of its voters by “giving away”
   our Electoral College votes to whomever gets the highest
   number of votes nationwide,
   rather than the highest number
   of votes in Vermont.

   The new Vermont law is called
   National Popular Vote.No. 10. An act relating to the Agreement Among the States to Elect the
   President by National Popular Vote.
   (S.31)
   It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:
   Sec. 1. 17 V.S.A. chapter 58 is added to read:
   CHAPTER 58. AGREEMENT AMONG THE STATES TO ELECT THE
   PRESIDENT BY NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE
   § 2751. ARTICLE I–MEMBERSHIP
   Any state of the United States and the District of Columbia may become a
   member of this agreement by enacting this agreement.
   § 2752. ARTICLE II–RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE IN MEMBER STATES TO
   VOTE FOR PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT
   Each member state shall conduct a statewide popular election for President
   and Vice President of the United States.
   etc.

   Doesn’t that give every Vermont voter
   legal standing to be concerned about WHO gets on the ballot
   for President in every other state for the primary and general
   elections?

   President Barack Hussein Obama presented his first birth certificate
   to the American public on factcheck.org,
   and on it, in the lower right hand corner,
   in tiny print, are H.R.S. codes,
   which are Hawaii Revised Statutes
   that prove the certificate was altered and/or amended.

   What was it altered and/or amended from?

   Why are the ultra super rich 1% treated differently under the law, as compared
   to how disrespectfully, and sometimes even hatefully, the lower 99% are treated?

   PROPOSED CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST PRESIDENT
   BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA FOR FRAUDULENT
   CONCEALMENT OF FACTS
   PROPOSED:
   |
   CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT
   |
   AGAINST
   |
   PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
   |
   FOR
   |
   FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS THAT HE ALLEGEDLY HAS A DUTY TO PROVIDE
   VOTERS BECAUSE HIS “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH” SHOWS THIS LEGAL NOTICE IN TINY
   PRINT IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER:
   |
   “[HRS 338-13(b), 338-19].
   |
   l DUTY is required by the legal notice on his
   “Certification of Live Birth” which, in the lower right hand corner, in tiny
   fine print, states: [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19].
   ||
   Was it fraud in a fiduciary capacity against taxpayers and voters for each and
   every member of the United States Congress on January 8, 2009 to vote without
   first issuing a subpoena for Barack Hussein Obama’s original long form birth
   certificate? Isn’t it true that Federal Rules of Evidence prohibit the members
   of the United States Congress, both House and Senate, from relying on
   non-admissible hearsay?
   |
   Was the Congressional certification of Electoral College Votes on January 8,
   2009 an act of conspiracy to defraud voters and taxpayers
   because former Vice President Dick Cheney asked for members of Congress to vote
   without informed consent, and this resulted in an alleged possible conspiracy to
   issue forth certified votes as fraudulent conveyances?
   |
   28 USCS Section 1491 Claims against the United States.
   http://ucfc.uscourts.gov/
   Federal Claims Court
   http://uscode.house.gov/
   Online law library
   28 USCS
   |
   Chapter 91. United States Court of Federal Claims
   |
   Section 1491. Claims against United States generally
   |
   (a)(1) The United States Court of Federal Claims shall have jurisdiction to
   render judgment upon any claim against the United States founded either upon the
   Constitution [USCS, Constitution], or any Act of Congress or any regulation of
   an executive department, or upon any express or implied contract with the United
   States.
   |
   (2) To provide an entire remedy and to complete the relief afforded by the
   judgment, the court may, as an incident of and collateral to any such judgment,
   issue orders directing restoration to office or position, placement in
   appropriate duty or retirement status, and correction of applicable records, and
   such orders may be issued to any appropriate official of the United States. In
   any case within its jurisdiction, the Court shall have the power to remand
   appropriate matters to any administrative or executive body or official with
   such direction as it may deem proper and just.
   |
   “Court of Federal Claims is Article I Court of limited jurisdiction created by
   Congress as forum where private parties could sue government for non-tort money
   claims, where claims would otherwise be barred by sovereign immunity.” Slovacek
   v United States (1998) 40 Fed Cl 828, 98-1 USTC 50397, 81 AFTR 2d 98-1859.
   |
   “Congress created Court of Federal Claims to afford individuals forum to bring
   specific claims against government; while placing jurisdictional limits upon
   Court, Congress did not intend those jurisdictional limits to be manipulated to
   prevent claimant from recovering compensation against government.” Davis v
   United States (1996) 35 Fed Cl 392.
   |
   “Jurisdiction under 28 USCS Section 1491 applies only to contracts either
   express or implied in fact, not implied in law, where (1) agreement implied in
   fact is founded upon meeting of minds, which, although not embodied in express
   contract, is inferred from conduct of parties showing their tacit understanding,
   while (2) by contrast, agreement implied in law is fiction of law where promise
   is imputed to perform legal duty.” Hercules Inc. v United States (1996, US) 134
   L Ed 2d 47, 116 S Ct 981, 96 CDOS 1403, 96 Daily Journal DAR 2395, 40 CCF 76894,
   9 FLW Fed S 442.
   |

   “HRS 338-19″, on President Obama’s Certification of Live Birth, in tiny fine
   print in the lower right hand corner [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19] is a legal notice
   of Hawaii Revised Statute 338-19 which means that this Certificate of Live Birth
   is based on documents that were too old or otherwise in such condition that they
   could not be used to certify. This statute is contradictory because if the
   documents were too old or in too poor a condition to be used to certify, then
   why did the State of Hawaii issue a “copy” that was based on possibly
   non-legible material? It makes no common sense. The Statute is contradictory,
   overly vague, overly broad and therefore unconstitutional.
   |
   HRS 338-13(b) is subject to the requirements of HRS 338-16, HRS 338-17 and HRS
   338-18. These are for birth certificates that are issued one year or more after
   birth, and for certificates that have been altered, and/or both. This set of
   statutes also gives a party legal standing to request a judicial determination
   of the validity of the birth certificate because it was issued one year or more
   after birth and/or altered.
   |
   “Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction to hear claims against States or
   their Agencies except where States or their Agencies acted as agents of United
   States.” Hassan v United States (1998) 41 Fed CL 149.
   |
   Clearly, the State of Hawaii and the Agency of the Department of Health of
   Hawaii, have acted as agents of former Vice President Dick Cheney, Speaker of
   the House of Representatives in the United States Congress, Nancy Pelosi, and
   each and every member of the United States Congress, House and Senate, and
   President Barack Hussein Obama.

   |
   28 USCS Section 2680. “Plaintiff’s federal tort claim against government is not
   dismissed prior to discovery on grounds that discretionary function exception of
   28 USCS Section 2680(a) applied, because factual issues and evidence to support
   those issues are not presently known to plaintiff, and dismissal of action prior
   to discovery would be premature and unduly harsh.” Fanoele v United States
   (1995, DC Kan) 898 F Supp 822.
   |
   (1) The United States Congress failed to do their duty to obtain any long form
   birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama before certifying the Electoral
   College Votes.
   (2) Former Vice President Dick Cheney failed to do his duty to ask for
   objections to the Electoral College vote.
   (3) President Barack Hussein Obama has failed to do his duty to release the
   information upon which statutes HRS 338-13(b) {which is subject to the
   requirements of 338-16, 338-17, 338-18} and 338-19 were legally required to be
   noticed on his “Certification of Live Birth”.
   (4) The United States Court of Federal Claims now has legal jurisdiction to hear
   complaints seeking President Barack Hussein Obama’s status as a natural born
   citizen because all of the Judges and Justices in State and Federal Courts,
   including the Supreme Court of the United States, dismissed and/or denied
   complaints where previous plaintiffs have tried various motions to compel Barack
   Hussein Obama’s original long form birth certificate and all other underlying
   documents supporting the legal notice on his short form Certification of Live
   Birth, including three legal notices on that form: (1) Date of Birth August 4,
   1961, Date filed with Registrar August 8, 1961; (2) [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]; (3)
   (Rev. 11/01) LASER
   |
   The third legal notice on President Barack Hussein Obama’s Certification of Live
   Birth states (Rev. 11/01) LASER.
   |
   Barack Hussein Obama received this “Certification of Live Birth” after he was
   already 40 years old.
   |
   What took him so long?
   |
   Why did he receive this “Certification of Live Birth” which was issued when he
   was 40 years old, or older, after September 11, 2001, the Terrorist Attack on
   the United States of America? Where was he living during the Terrorist Attack on
   the United States of America and why did he need to get a “Certification of Live
   Birth” after the attack, and how much was it altered from the original long form
   birth certificate?
   |
   WE, the PEOPLE, NEED TO KNOW!
   |
   President Barack Hussein Obama holds the Office of the President of the United
   States of America, and his “Certification of Live Birth” should now be required
   to be determined if it can, or can not, withstand federal scrutiny. 28 USCS Appx
   Rule 803, n 119. United States Code Service, Lawyers Edition, Issued in May
   1998, Rules of Evidence for United States Courts and Magistrates, page 216,
   “District Court did not abuse its discretion in applying Federal Rules of
   Evidence rather than Hawaii Health Department rules and in finding results of
   intoxilizer test admissible under public records and reports exception to
   hearsay rule of Rule 803(6)(8), United States v De Water (1988, CA9 Hawaii) 846
   F2d 528, 25 Fed Rules Evid Serv 748.”
   |
   THIS PROPOSED
   Class Action Lawsuit to subpoena the material facts, the original material
   upon which the legal notice on the long form
   birth certificate of Barack Hussein Obama was based,
   in the United States Court of Federal
   Claims,
   needs
   a Pro Bono attorney.

   President Obama should be treated with Equal
   Respect, the same as any other possible
   illegal alien.

   In other words, shall we give
   every alleged illegal
   alien Equal Treatment Under the Law, the
   same as if they were sitting in the White House?

   Ms. Cris Ericson, 3 months ago Reply

Post Your Comment