Voeltz v Obama Election Challenge Final Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
Posted by By GeorgeM at 14 December, at 02 : 55 AM Print
If they can get past the motion to dismiss, then the fireworks begin.
Plaintiff Mike Voeltz
Plaintiff Michael Voeltz, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby submits the
following memorandum of law in opposition to Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss for Failure to
State a Cause of Action.
INTRODUCTION
On November 6, 2012 the state of Florida held its 2012 General Election. On November
10, 2012 Defendant Barack Hussein Obama was declared the official winner of the Florida
General Election. Yet Defendant Obama has never established his eligibility for the presidency
of the United States. Indeed, neither Defendant Obama, nor the Democratic Party of Florida has
even stated that Defendant Obama is a “natural born citizen.” The only evidence of Defendant
Obama’s alleged birth within the United States has come in the form of an electronic version
posted on the internet. However, there has been evidence to show that this “birth certificate” has
either been altered or is entirely fraudulent. No physical, paper copy has ever been presented to
firmly establish that Defendant Obama was indeed born within the United States.
read more:
For an interview, or to arrange case donations with plaintiff’s attorney Mr. Klayman, email leklayman@gmail.com.
I think he should amend his response and put in Mike Zullos November, 2012 affidavit instead of the June, 2012 one he currently has. It goes into much further detail.
omad, 5 months ago
Watch this site.
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
Please let Mr. Voeltz know that it is not Alexander Peter Morse but Alexander Porter Morse. He was a fairly renowned attorney and they should get his name right.
BTW, he also said this in his “treatise”
”In the law of nations, ”citizen” is a term applicable to every member of the civil society, every individual who belongs to the nation.”
“This character is acquired in various ways, according to the laws of each state. In many states birth is sufficient to confer it; so that the child of an alien is a citizen from the fact of having been born within the territorial limits and the jurisdiction.2?
And in footnote 2: ”It is so in England and in the United States [but the births must be "within the jurisdiction"'].”
And later he added,
“The Constitution does not make the citizens (it is, in fact, made by them); it only recognizes such of them as are natural, home-born, and provides for the naturalization of such of them as are alien, foreign-born, making the latter, as far as nature will allow, like the former.”
William Rawle, 5 months ago
Lucky for us he that he didn’t rule on Minor v Happersett.
GeorgeM, 5 months ago
Connecticut murderous distraction by marxists thugs ??
Distract away from voeltz ?. Distract away from UN vote to control our guns.
old school guy osg, 5 months ago