tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post787175916389966980..comments2024-03-02T14:24:03.076-05:00Comments on Natural Born Citizen - A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers: The Florida Courts Say that If Anyone Can Be Santa Claus, Barack Obama Can Be PresidentMario Apuzzo, Esq. http://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-53100391512047704122013-03-04T21:27:18.491-05:002013-03-04T21:27:18.491-05:00Thanks again mario for another good article. I hav...Thanks again mario for another good article. I have zero respect for these judges, they sound like political hacks. I wish more americans knew about these ballot challenge farces and blatant violation of Article 2.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02363239958688449292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-15529890986417368642012-12-29T23:23:34.245-05:002012-12-29T23:23:34.245-05:00@Robert -- I wrote, e-mailed, and faxed 88 congres...@Robert -- I wrote, e-mailed, and faxed 88 congressmen, twice explaining Obama was not a natural born citizen.<br /><br />One congressman wanted more information. Another, Thaddeus McCotter wrote a very long letter supporting Surrick's decision (Berg) and concluded that if Obama was born in Hawaii, he was a natural born citizen.<br /><br />Of course, under both U.S. and British laws, Obama born in the first 100 years of U.S. history would not have even been a citizen!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-34577946864275237452012-12-29T00:24:21.089-05:002012-12-29T00:24:21.089-05:00Every one of them knows beyond a shadow of a doubt...Every one of them knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama is not eligible. <br /><br />Too bad they can't put it off until Good Friday. Then they could at least betray us with a kiss.<br /><br />Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07865649369112264344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-2652145840200872132012-12-27T11:32:22.293-05:002012-12-27T11:32:22.293-05:00The date for Congress in joint session to count th...The date for Congress in joint session to count the electoral votes is fixed by law. Under 3 U.S.C. § 15, that date is January 6. Because January<br />6, 2013 falls on a Sunday, Congress passed a Joint Resolution on December 18, 2012, moving the joint session date to January 4, 2013. See H.J. Res. 122, 112th Cong. (2012).<br /><br />Normally, when a legal deadline date falls on a weekend or legal holiday, the time is extended to the next business day. That would have made the Joint Session meeting date Monday, January 7, 2013. I'm sure that Congress felt that when it comes to Obama's eligibility to be President, sooner was better than later and so made the date Friday, January 4, 2013, rather than Monday, January 7, 2013. Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-51598924144016627842012-12-25T18:41:17.020-05:002012-12-25T18:41:17.020-05:00I'm completely fed up with Congress AND the eq...I'm completely fed up with Congress AND the equally corrupt and inept judiciary. Cornered animals a quarter the size of an adversary will fight to the death to protect themselves and their territory, yet cornered Americans only cower in fear. Not ONE "conservative", such as Congressman Allen West, has EVER stood tall and questioned Obama's qualifications. Anyone who trusts any member of Congress is a fool. In America, trivia is front page news, while nothing of true importance is mentioned. The nation has been looted and brutally murdered before our very eyes. From this instant forward, I absolutely refuse to recognize or abide by any power or authority claimed by the courts or any other branch of government. As far as I am concerned, they no longer operate as legal entities, they have become the largest group of "in your face" organized criminals in the world. Other than their campaign promises, which are never kept, there is no true difference between "conservatives" and "liberals." Both are working hand in hand to enrich themselves while destroying America. Voting third party will not change anything, anyone who believes otherwise has lost their mind. I KNOW first hand that former Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr is a life-long CIA employee and I strongly suspect many other candidates are similarly situated - Get a clue, America, the fix is in! Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12254885881347846017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-29896832086487698752012-12-24T20:58:15.648-05:002012-12-24T20:58:15.648-05:00Thanks again Mario. You are to be admired for you...Thanks again Mario. You are to be admired for you tireless work on this issue. After all that has gone before, I sometimes amaze that you persist, and I look forward to visiting your blog to find a new writing. Here's hoping the new year will bring some sanity from some judge, somewhere.<br /><br />Merry Christmas.Kanbunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03554597626551685635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-29767660247512128092012-12-24T16:52:59.696-05:002012-12-24T16:52:59.696-05:00Kanbun,
Judge John Cooper in Voeltz II found tha...Kanbun, <br /><br />Judge John Cooper in Voeltz II found that the question of Obama's eligibility to be President is nonjusticiable (not a question for the courts to decide) because it is a political question. In my article, I mentioned the political question doctrine as a way for the courts to get out of having to decide a case in which they do not want to be involved. As you can see, it is not my position that the issue is a political question. On the contrary, my position is that it is absurd to find that it is. Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-57797740243548889742012-12-24T16:22:33.566-05:002012-12-24T16:22:33.566-05:00Mario (and Mick),
Thanks for the reply. My confu...Mario (and Mick),<br /><br />Thanks for the reply. My confusion was borne from your parenthetic comment in this writing ...(the Constitution specifically assigns the question of presidential eligibility only to Congress)...<br /><br />Perhaps I missed some context. Thanks again.Kanbunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03554597626551685635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-84792026839548467982012-12-24T13:16:45.794-05:002012-12-24T13:16:45.794-05:00Kanbun,
The question of what is the meaning of an...Kanbun,<br /><br />The question of what is the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen” and whether Obama satisfies that definition is not a political question. On the contrary, only the judicial branch of government in our tripartite federal government has the constitutional power and role to definitively answer these questions. Once it answers these two questions, with the U.S. Supreme Court being the final arbiter, its answers can then be provided to Congress who will be meeting in joint session on Sunday, January 6, 2013, to decide whether or not to confirm his election to the Office of President.<br /><br />This is how Congress will proceed: <br /><br />January 6, 2013<br /><br />The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes on January 6, 2013. Congress may pass a law to change this date.<br /><br />The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.<br /><br />If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.<br /><br />If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.<br /><br />If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.<br /><br />If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.<br /><br />January 20, 2013 at Noon—Inauguration Day<br /><br />The President-elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the President of the United States.<br /><br />http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/key-dates.html Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-28947630008578989212012-12-24T00:05:50.364-05:002012-12-24T00:05:50.364-05:00ATTENTION BIRTHERS!!! It's still not too late...ATTENTION BIRTHERS!!! It's still not too late to get to your Senators and Congressmen and have them file a WRITTEN OBJECTION with the Joint Session of Congress. It only takes 1 senator and 1 Congressman to get a hearing or debate on Obama's Eligibility. The issue MUST be heard and the issue MUST be resolved before Obama can win the 2012 Election. IT'S THE LAW!! Please Contact Your Senators and Congressmen today and tell them to object, object, object.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01793622722554168489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-43578126367766022772012-12-23T13:25:10.401-05:002012-12-23T13:25:10.401-05:00Puzo1:
Altogether a childish and irrelevant "...Puzo1:<br /><br />Altogether a childish and irrelevant "decision" which is really not a real decision at all despite having "pronounced" by a judge from court high enough to know better.<br /><br />A sad self-commentary on the Judicial system showing one of the reasons this country is rapidly decaying.jayjayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09845961766550552240noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-57109429635185753232012-12-23T11:42:08.968-05:002012-12-23T11:42:08.968-05:00Unknown has left a new comment on your post "...Unknown has left a new comment on your post "The Florida Courts Say that If Anyone Can Be Santa...":<br /><br />Case dismissed! That is a very unwise decision Judge Carroll, [editor's deletion] for your ineptitude/unwillingness to bring justice to America and find the "illegal alien" guilty!<br /><br />Maxximus@rocketmail.com Mario Apuzzo, Esq. https://www.blogger.com/profile/12200858207095622181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-58527188898334830602012-12-23T10:29:54.717-05:002012-12-23T10:29:54.717-05:00The Contest of election statutes of Florida (102.1...The Contest of election statutes of Florida (102.168) were totally violated by Carroll. The statutes stipulate that the action CANNOT BE DISMISSED for "want of form".<br /><br />"102.168(5): (5) A statement of the grounds of contest may not be rejected, nor the proceedings dismissed, by the court for any want of form if the grounds of contest provided in the statement are sufficient to clearly inform the defendant of the particular proceeding or cause for which the nomination or election is contested.<br /><br />The statutes also afford the plaintiff and IMMEDIATE HEARING:<br /><br />"(102.168(7):(7) Any candidate, qualified elector, or taxpayer presenting such a contest to a circuit judge is entitled to an immediate hearing. However, the court in its discretion may limit the time to be consumed in taking testimony, with a view therein to the circumstances of the matter and to the proximity of any succeeding election."<br /><br />Carroll violated the law by dismissing my case w/ no hearing.Mickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02864660386925998491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-33276758385441825802012-12-23T09:35:14.779-05:002012-12-23T09:35:14.779-05:00To Kanbun,
Eligibility for the office of POTUS is...To Kanbun,<br /><br />Eligibility for the office of POTUS is NOT the sole purview of Congress. 3 US Code 5 stipulates that ALL election contests in the states be adjudicated by 6 days prior to the meeting of electors. A look at Florida's election contest statute (102.168) reveals that eligibility of the candidate for the offfice sought (102.168(1)(3)(b) is a valid grounds for contesting an election.<br /><br />http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0102/Sections/0102.168.html<br /><br />Therefore I am given standing by the statutes, and need not prove any direct harm, to challenge the ELIGIBILITY of "ANY PERSON" nominated or elected to office. There is no exception made for POTUS. As a matter of fact Gore used these same election contest statutes to challenge the 2000 election. <br />3 US Code 5's specific purpose in fact is to keep election contests out of the Joint Session of Congress, held on January 6, and have them decided beforehand. In fact Ray v. Blair 343 US 214, 223 (1952), SCOTUS agreed with the Alabama Supreme Court that a candidate "may have become disqualified" prior to the meeting of electors. The SCOTUS held that that fact still does not prevent the political parties from making their electors pledge to vote for their party candidate.<br />The vote of the electors is not a political question because electors, by operation of Article 2, and well held by the SCOTUS (Mcpherson v. Blacker, In re Green, Ray v. Blair)are NOT members of the government, and are under control of the states. Therefore the validity of their vote, and the ascertainment of the electors by the governor of the states is not a political question, but a judicial one (So says 3 US Code 5). <br /><br />The "Counting of Votes" by the Joint Congress (3 US Code 15)is meant to be ministerial, and only becomes political and discretionary when an objection is made, and the Joint Congress separates to consider it. Mickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02864660386925998491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-67941621793018440092012-12-23T08:52:01.137-05:002012-12-23T08:52:01.137-05:00Thankyou Mr. Apuzzo. Maybe the judge was threatene...Thankyou Mr. Apuzzo. Maybe the judge was threatened to the point that he purposefully made a nonsense decision. <br />Or is the reference to his friend that was promoted by the Usurper a veilled quid pro quo request?<br />When nonsense like this comes down the pike, based on no law, there can be no doubt that Obama is not eligible--- and the criminals in Congress and the judiciary all know it.<br />I press on. The truth sets me free.Mickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02864660386925998491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-63571051867222938542012-12-23T00:34:06.528-05:002012-12-23T00:34:06.528-05:00Reblogged at kibitzer-truthseeker.blogspot.com. W...Reblogged at kibitzer-truthseeker.blogspot.com. With all due respect.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13685583498340286004noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-57597839846004930402012-12-22T21:54:55.160-05:002012-12-22T21:54:55.160-05:00Mario,
I wonder your feelings on Klayman's ap...Mario,<br /><br />I wonder your feelings on Klayman's approach to challenge the certification of the election based on Florida law. Obama enablers cite that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and that the Constitution specifically assigns the question of presidential eligibility only to Congress. I am confused - if Congress is the sole arbiter of presidential eligibility, how would any of the ballot challenges, or in this instance the certification challenge ever make any sense?<br /><br />Keep up the good work. Merry Christmas.Kanbunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03554597626551685635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-92078727904885934942012-12-22T21:30:22.989-05:002012-12-22T21:30:22.989-05:00This does not give me a whole lot of faith in the ...This does not give me a whole lot of faith in the judicial system, if judges go by popularity laws, will there by no more Rule Of Law? One would think that Judges are there to UPHOLD the law and PROTECT the Constitution. <br /><br />Keep up the good work. We need more lawyers like you!Button Knows Besthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03013307261270002415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-89306912501037922952012-12-22T20:29:20.431-05:002012-12-22T20:29:20.431-05:00It is only getting worse. Next they will be citin...It is only getting worse. Next they will be citing something they saw on some cartoon to render a legal decision. When we got the admission earlier this year in<br /><br />LIBERTY LEGAL FOUNDATION,<br />JOHN DUMMETT,<br />LEONARD VOLODARSKY, and<br />CREG MARONEY,<br /><br />Plaintiffs,<br /><br />v. ) No. 12-2143-STA<br /><br />NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY<br />of the USA, Inc., DEMOCRATIC<br />NATIONAL COMMITTEE,<br />TENNESSEE DEMOCRATIC PARTY,<br />DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ,<br />CHIP FORRESTER,<br />Defendants.<br /><br />http://www.scribd.com/doc/97824831/TN-WDTN-LLF-2012-06-21-Memorandum-ORDER-DISMISSING-CASE<br /><br />that the glaring admission by the attorneys for the Chairperson of the DNC and the Tennessee Democratic Party was that the [Page 3] " Defendants assert that the Tennessee Democratic Party has the right to nominate whoever it chooses to run as a candidate, including someone who is not<br />[Page 4:] qualified for the office"; it appears that it was only bound to get worse. It has. <br /><br />With Florida, a Circuit Judge has dismissed a case with prejudice now using the "Santa Claus" excuse: which goes, "Because Santa Claus is real, therefore Barack Obama is a real President." <br /><br />Excuse me? Because a fictional movie declared a fictional character to be Santa Claus, Judge Carroll says we can use the Law to apply the same to Barack Obama? In the movie, the fictional Judge declared Kris Kringle to be Santa Claus, NOT "President." Judge Carroll, though resorting to FICTION to justify his rulings, could not even get that point of order correct. Good grief! <br /><br />Reid. v. Colvert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957) @ 14 says: ""The concept that...constitutional protections against arbitrary government are inoperative when they become inconvenient...would destroy the benefit of a written Constitution and undermine the basis of our Government. ...we have no authority, or inclination, to read exceptions into it which are not there." <br /><br />With that in mind, in reading any work of fiction he might have a mind to to circumvent the operation of proper jurisprudence, it is my strong opinion that Judge Carroll is a disgrace to the legal profession!Brianroyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06460377944201908161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-85479922248796481732012-12-22T19:29:06.405-05:002012-12-22T19:29:06.405-05:00http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=369219http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=369219vrajavalahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12279723539914847429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7466841558189356289.post-86302555328797255142012-12-22T18:09:35.796-05:002012-12-22T18:09:35.796-05:00Sickening, though I must admit the ruling is profo...Sickening, though I must admit the ruling is profoundly fitting: Barack Hussein Obama and Miracle on 34th St are both equally works of fiction.bdwilcoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03723935463347132039noreply@blogger.com