Friday, June 19, 2009

MommaE Radio Rebels - BlogTalkRadio Network - 8:30 p.m. EDT Friday 19 Jun 2009 - Kerchner et al v. Obama & Congress et al Update & Q&A

The lead plaintiff, Mr. Charles Kerchner, in the 'Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al' case, and I will be on the MommaE Radio Rebels talk radio show Friday evening, 19 June 2009, from 8:30 to 10:00 p.m. EDT. The show is on the network which is broadcast via the internet. I will be providing an update regarding the recent activity in the case, the 2nd extension of time granted to the Defendants to answer, move, or otherwise respond and other activity in our efforts. Mr. Kerchner and I will then take Q&A from the host MommaE and the listening audience. There is also a chat room which the listeners can participate in live while the show is on the air. Feel free to spread this announcement to people interested in this case. I hope to hear from you Friday night on the radio show.

To listen to the show live Friday night or via the archives in the On Demand section after the show is broadcast, use the below link which will take you straight to the show. Listen to the lead in intro music for a few minutes after which the show starts: Momma-E-and-the-Radio-Rebels

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

P.S. Also, please feel free to join the discussions and comments in this forum about the subject of the Natural Born Citizenship clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution by [Clicking Here].


Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...

Moved from prior show announcement.

James said:

Obama Bill Boards Slowly Spreading!
Grassroots sign onto eligibility billboard campaign
Washington state ‘Where’s The Birth Certificate’ sign appears

Come my friends, let’s get more Bill Boards out there.

June 13, 2009 8:46 AM

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...

Moved from prior show announcement post.

James said:

I have ordered my sign. I should be receiving it in a couple of weeks.

When it arrives I plan to go to steps of the Florida Capitol and set up camp with the sign.

The Steps of the Florida Capitol is a key protest spot and people often set up camp with signs of varying issues.

While I would be able to only keep the sign visible for a temporary period of time, many people drivig by will see the sign.

My presence and camp will act as a temporary bill board.

I encourage everyone in all 50 states to order a sign and set similiar camps on the steps of the capitols in all 50 states.

This initiative could act as a grassroots nationwide initiative to place temporary bill board in all of state's capitols.

Such an initative could be just as beneficial as having permanent bill boards set up which has very difficult to do.

June 13, 2009 10:26 AM

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...


I commend you for your creativity, hard work, courage, and tenacity. That is what is needed to win in anything in life. I hope that others will follow your lead. Such a campaign will show the beholden media giants and billboard companies that the people have the intelligence to figure out a way to excercise their inalienable right to express themselves and that we are not enslaved to their political agendas.

It is such hypocricy and cowardice for these media interests to cry under the First Amendment when the government attempts to curb their freedom of expression but then to tell paying people that they can refuse their requests to place a billboard message, clearly also expression, because the First Amendment only restricts government action and not that of a private corporation.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
June 13, 2009 2:08 PM

The Stacker said...


Let's say that what is on record at the Hawaii DoH is a signed affidavit by Stanley Ann Dunham or her mother saying that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii (whether or not that were true). What then? I know he has been hiding things so in a certain sense it makes him look bad, but would the real issue with this be that he has claimed to be born at Kapioliani and a signed affidavit can't possibly have also claimed this?

Thanks. I just envision the suppporters saying that since Hawaii allowed it, it makes it legit and therefore he was born in the US because you can't prove otherwise, etc.

Any thoughts are appreciated. I am following closely and am quite interested. I have been since late last year.

roderick said...

I don't see 'bama winning this. It may take 10 to 15 years but he will be redacted from the presidential rolls, deemed a fraud, deemed constitutionally ineligible and so it goes. I can't believe these congressmen (Posey) are still trying to run interference for this scumbag.

roderick said...

We are all required to follow the constitution. It is only fair to every American citizen that if you or I are required to meet the Constitutional requirements to run for President that each and every individual meets those same requirements to run for President. In other words we all have the right as American citizens to know for sure that the President of the United States of America is abiding by the Constitution that he took an oath to uphold. 'bama has already broken that constitution as soon as he took the oath on January 20th by not being constitutionally eligible to hold said office an impeachable offense.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...

Let us assume that Hawaii DOH has a signed affidavit by Stanley Ann Dunham or her mother saying that Obama was born in Hawaii. We would examine the affidavit to see what underlying facts it provides to substantiate and corroborate its statement that Obama was born in Hawaii. Not referring to a found and unknown baby, when a baby is born, there are corroborating facts that support the birth location. A baby is not born in a vaccum. Somebody (doctor, nurse, midwife, friend, etc.) has to be around to support the contention as to where the baby was born. If the affidavit says he was born in a hospital, then the hospital would be able to confirm that information through its medical records. Also, if Obama was born in a hospital, there probably would not be any need for the mother or grandmother to swear out any affidavits.

The problem with Obama is that no one including any member of Congress, the mainstream media, and his supporters have been able to provide one piece of evidence (other than the computer digital image of a COLB, some unclear and inconclusive statements by the Hawaii Health officials, and the worthless newspaper announcements) that he was born in Hawaii. Not even any hospital has confirmed his birth there or that Stanley Ann Dunham was even a patient there. Not one person has come forward to say that he or she can corroborate Obama's allegation that he was born in Hawaii. This is amazing since Obama was only born in August 1961 and is therefore only 47 years old.

While his sister said he was born in Queens Hospital, his Kenyan grandmother said he was born in Kenya and that she was present as his birth, and the Kenyan Ambassador also said he was born in Kenya, Obama has publicly stated he was born in Kapi'olani Hospital. Why cannot the hospital simply confirm for the benefit of the American people that he was indeed born in that hospital? Is seems absurd and an affront to intelligence for the hospital to say it cannot so confirm because of privacy laws, given that Obama already proclaimed that information to the world and Representative Abercrombie (who is running for Governor) read a January 24, 2009 letter allegedly written by Obama (which I suspect to be a forgery) during the Kapi'olani Medical Center Centennial Celebration in January 2009 in which Obama states that he was born in that hospital. Additionally, the hospital could surely tell us if Stanley Ann Dunham was a patient there in August 1961, for what privacy could she have in such old and innocuous information and in being dead. Are we asking Obama for too much for him to simply give the hospital permission to confirm that information? I do not see any invasion of his privacy in such a simple gesture, given that he wants to be the President of the United States and his already having released to the public that information. Obama has some audacity to put the American people in this predicament. How can he expect to have the respect of those who truly care about America and are not just blind followers of mindless party politics?

Also, it does not matter what Hawaii has allowed. What matters is what a Court decides is conclusive competent evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

The Stacker said...


Thanks for the answer. From a common sense perspective, the whole thing is crazy, undoubtedly. It is indeed the perfect storm of hiding behind legalisms under the opportunity of not having to reveal yourself in a process where no governmental authority checks the eligibility of a prospective president under the highest law in the land.

I guess one could argue that the birth certificate is an extension of the medical record, but due to its application in the public sphere as proof of WHO YOU ARE, I don't really look at it like that, since it really has no true private information (especially if you are running for president). I've always asked the question (since a relative pointed this out) "Forget the location of his birth just for a second, let's make this simple: How do we know he's even 35?" How else can he even prove age unless by an official form?

I found that drove the point home perfectly. The reason I bring this up (and I have eagerly been following your efforts) is that you can't really expect a medical center to go into their records and reveal things about a 3rd party, regardless how common sensical it may be. They have no impetus to do the job of the federal government, or whatever secretary of state or commission is supposed to(obviously we don't know yet, that's what your suit is helping us find out) check on eligibility. Especially when their necks are being breathed down by lawyers to under no circumstances talk about such things. Mario, perhaps you have your answer, however. The refusal of a verification could tacitly recognize the fact that he wasn't born at Kapi'olani.

Many people don't understand that in all probability the Hawai'i DoH was told the same thing. They were told that all they could say was that he had an original on file. THAT DOES NOT MEAN that someone like Fukino could even look at it (which is a perfect allowance by Obama and his lawyers because it makes people who don't really know what's going on believe that Fukino actually looked at it and therefore the COLB image is legit). She can't legally look at it unless he gives her permission or a court orders it. They pulled a wonderful caper in light of the image that most of us think is dubious at best and criminal at worst.

If people follow actions and not words they'll see your points that he doesn't care about the respect of those who love America. Only a person worried about putting himself in the light would resort to tactics that he has done, which for modern presidents is unprecedented. Gore, Bush, McCain all released school and medical records based on integrity and forthrightness.

The thing that clinches it for me is this, because I've thought it over and over: IF Obama only wanted the COLB out there, and it were legit (meaning that he was worried about some other sensitive info in the birth certificate but he truly was born in Hawaii as they state) instead of paying Bob Bauer upwards of a million dollars he could have sent him on a Hawaiian vacation, taken a TV crew and had Bauer, acting on his behalf, petition for a COLB and get an official right there, look at the COLB and say, please certify that this is true, Mr. Onaka (meaning the COLB and all of its referring information from the original vault copy). At that point it is GAME OVER. I would have walked away, because you have a real health official that produces the documents verifying that the information is true.

That scenario would take $5-10k, not $800,000+ and would end this madness once and for all. But he hasn't done it, which cinches it for me: He's a fraud and he knows it. At this point I imagine he just tries to rationalize it by not agreeing with immigration law/citizenship transmission or something to that effect. Given all the changing laws, I hope that you and others finally get these Supreme Court justices to define NBC and end this foolishness. The 14th amendment alone has opened up a pandora's box for interpreting charlatans to run amok over our most important document.



Mr. Puzo

You are right,the letter on the hospital site was not original since it was not an image.
I have e mailed the hospital asking them the same question that you are asking, but no answer.
I'm asking them to place a banner or a sign in front of the building as the birth place like it is the custom in America with presidents and no answer.
Perhaps the State Legislature could proclaim the hospital site as a birth place, but nothing have been done.
They all might know the truth and do not want to be liable later on, or are waiting for Congress or Supreme Court to solve this Constitutional Crisis never faced in America before so obvius.

KitKat said...

Most ethical, open and transparent administration ever!

/end sarcasm

cfkerchner said...

My email 6/19 to Glenn Beck:

I just finished reading your new book, Common Sense. You are correct. There is something very wrong in America. There’s a suppressed under-current of frustration and great distrust in our current government like we've never seen before.

And I know what it is. Both political parties and Congress betrayed the Constitution in the last election. The 800# gorilla in the room is that no one, including you, is willing to openly talk in the national media about the trampling of Article II of our Constitution, that is, the Obama eligibility issue under Article II of our Constitution to constitutional standards.

Obama has totally, cleverly ignored it with progressive changing the meaning of historic legal terms of art in that document. As you wrote they changed the meaning of "public use" to "public benefit". Now Obama wants the legal term of art "natural born citizen" the same meaning as "citizen at birth" or "native born citizen".

People want to talk about this issue. It needs to be discussed and fully aired to a national audience and not with the ridicule it is given on MSNBC. Obama has no respect for our Constitution and wants to destroy it or severely limit its power. He could be a Fascist in grooming.

If you start talking about the eligibility issue, people will rally to you to learn more. Explore the historical intent and meaning of the term "natural born citizen" in Article II of our Constitution. The 2 words "natural born" were put there for a reason. They are not synonymous with today's "native born". Study Vattel. He defined the natural born term in 1758. This issue needs to be openly discussed. Article II "natural born citizenship" is not synonymous with 14th Amendment "born" citizenship. Natural born in not mentioned in the 14th Amendment and the 14th Amendment did not change or modify Article II. Read the 1874 Supreme Court Minor v Happersett decision on the meaning of "natural born citizen" of which there is no doubt. Also read the Perkins v Elg decision of 1939 by the Supreme Court. The progressives have tried to change the meaning of Article II to equal the 14th Amendment but they are not the same.

Tonchen Essay

Print out and review this table and the legal references and check them out:
Citizenship Terms

Read these essays:
Article II Natural Born Citizenship

The Birthers

Add the book, "The Law of Nations", by Emmerich Vattel, published originally in 1758 to your reading list. Especially Book/Vol 1 and the chapter therein on citizenship of a nation. Particular chapter 19. This book was used extensively by the founders and framers of our country for inspiration in writing the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. In fact the quote you cited in the Declaration of Independence, "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" is directly from Vattel. Much of the concepts in our Constitution are derived from Vattel and the need for a written constitution as the supreme law of the land. That all came from Vattel. Add it to your reading list, particularly Chapter 19, Section 212.

I agree with you that violence is not the way to resolve it. The solution is to public air the issue and call for hearings in Congress that should have been held last year, just like they did for McCain last year on his citizenship issues, but never did for Obama. I have taken action in a non-violent way in the legal system. I need public support to discuss this more openly. Will you offer it? Here is a link to my lawsuit.


A one page summary of it is attached (linked) as a PDF file:
Washington Times

Congratulations on your book.

Charles Kerchner
CDR USNR Retired
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...

James said:

It's a good letter Charles. We can only hope Glenn Beck will read your letter even though he receives thousands of letters a day. I really wish you had the means to actually meet with Beck directly. There must someone out there that has the connections to Glenn Beck. I don't want to sound corny, but you remember in the Brady Bunch episode, Bobby Brady wanted to meet Joe Namuth, the football star. Bobby eventually did meet using unusual method. But I do remember that Michael Brady wanted to tell Bobby Brady that finally found someone who knew somone who knew someone who knew Joe Namuth.

Perhaps you can find someone who knows someone who knows Glenn Beck.

There must a supporter among us thousands that has the means to contact Hannity, Rush or Beck directly.

James said...


Just a suggestion....

Perhaps you could post a blog entry encouraging all supporters who visit this site to contact you if they have means of getting in contact with Hannity, Rush and Beck and other big commentators.

There must be someone who knows the private phones or emails of these individuals or who has some close connections with these individuals.

I find it hard to believe as large as the birther movement is, that no one has the direct means or contacting these individuals.

I am not saying you should do it all alone. But supporters can help bring you closer to getting that interview with Hannity, Beck, Rush or Oreilly.

Imagine if you could get that interview.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...


Believe me James, we've been trying to get such an interview. Mr. Kerchner is writing to all of them on a regular basis. With the help of a reader of this blog, we made a break through by getting on a major market morning commute radio show with the Sean and Frank morning show in Baltimore MD. I've been on their show twice now and Sean and Frank are now up to speed on the natural born citizenship issue, and no longer solely talk about the Birth Certificate only, and are starting to talk in subsequent shows about the Kerchner v Obama & Congress lawsuit.

Sean and Frank Show Interview

I of course strongly encourage any readers of this blog who have contacts (or friends with contacts) with Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Rush, etc., to contact them and suggest we get an interview. Mr. Kerchner and I would love to be interviewed by any one of them, or all of them. And I do believe that if we could get such interviews, we could convince them of the merits of our argument and lawsuit.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq. said...

I am aware that many, including my client, Charles Kerchner, have been trying very hard to get through to Glenn Beck for months. I am not aware of any response from him to any of these efforts.

In Chapter VI of his new book, Mr. Beck wants people to stand up and march on Washington. But he will not even allow people to post on his blog about the Obama eligibility issue, let alone appear on his shows.

Glenn Beck should be clearly told that he has to put his actions where his mouth is. He cannot just write fancy, nice sounding words, just to sell himself and his products and then not live what he says. This is hypocrisy and he should be so told. He should also be told that his hypocrisy will be exposed.

This message should be told not only to Glenn Beck but also to all the other so-called "conservative" talk radio hosts, who are also all selling there wares to the American public in the name of saving America.

I would not think anything was fishy if just one of these guys or gals refused to talk about the Obama eligibility issue. But when they all together have sworn to their code of silence, something is wrong. Radio is a key means for Americans to participtate in the democratic process. It is despicable for these guys and gals to pre-screen the callers and block anyone from talking about the eligibility issue. Again, they are all doing the same thing in unison. Knowing how the mainstream media, Congress, and other political institutions failed to take Obama to task before the election, you all know that it is this kind of cowardice that has gotten us into this Constitutional crisis.

I see that there is something brewing regarding the filing of an anti-trust law suit against the billboard companies for refusing to post the "Where's the Birth Certificate" question. I hope that many of you out there join in that lawsuit. See about that. Maybe that anti-trust lawsuit should included our esteemed "conservative" talk radio hosts? Please pass this message on to the folks at

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

mtngoat61 said...

A proposed narrative to explain the various seemingly conflicting statements made about Obama's birth in Kenya and Hawaii:

Underage U.S. teenager gets pregnant via a significantly older married man from Kenya. An unusual event in 1961.

Mother of teenager is in total shock over the event as would have been many mothers of teenage girls getting pregnant in 1961 and says to her daughter you have ruined your life and will make going to college much harder for yourself and convinces the teenage girl to go to Kenya in the last month of her pregnancy and give up the baby to the Kenyan natural family of the natural father of the child to be raised in Kenya by them.

The Kenyan grandmother of the child attends birth in Kenyan hospital in Mombasa Kenya and is ready to take custody of the child and raise the child for the foot loose and fancy free natural father with multiple wives ... and the U.S. teenage mother is supposed return to Hawaii leaving the child with the natural father's family and restart her life back in Hawaii minus the child ... and go to college. In 1961, pregnant teenage girls giving up children to restart their lives anew was not unusual.

But nature throws the plan a curve ball. Maternal instincts kick in and mother cannot leave the baby in Kenya, either due to pure maternal instincts or in seeing the conditions in Kenya that her child would be raised in with a mostly absentee father over there. Thus she changes her mom's plan and she takes the baby and birth certificate issued by the Mombassa Hospital to the American Embassy or consulate in Kenya and shows them the Kenyan Birth Certificate for her child and "explains" the baby was born unexpectedly in Kenya while there visiting her "husband's" family. U.S. officials then stamp her passport as traveling with an infant child.

Mother gets on plane carrying the child and flies back to Hawaii and appears at the airport arrival with the new baby in tow, much to the shock of her mother, the child's U.S. grandmother. Baby easily is passed through U.S. entry officials due to embassy stamp on mother's passport and the supporting Kenyan birth certificate showing a U.S. citizen is the mother.

Child's U.S. grandmother is still besides herself at this change in plans by the mother of the child. The child's grandmother then knowing or learning from legal advisers how lax Hawaiian birth registration laws were in 1961, then cooks up a plan and scheme with the child's mother, to lie to Hawaiian officials and swear and sign affidavits at the birth registry office that the child was born in Hawaii at home with no witnesses but them, in order to get the child U.S. citizenship (a highly desirable status) to make future travel and life easier on the family and new child. They did this lie and cover up simply to gain U.S. citizenship for the child a highly coveted status for any child, not knowing that this child might someday grow up and try to become the President and thus risk having their whole plans and lies exposed.

Birth registration office then issues the announcements to the two newspapers, as was the offices custom at the time to send the papers lists of babies born, of the birth event which at its source was only based on the false sworn testimony of the mother. Thus the birth notices in the newspapers are not independent data, they all came from the same source, ... false sworn statements from the mother and/or grandmother that the child was born in Hawaii.

Thus under this narrative the birth records in the vaults in Hawaii may be simply sworn affidavits of the mother and grandmother saying Obama was born at home with no witnesses, all based on lies and fraud, which seems to be a common occurrence with Mr. O's entire life.

A suggested narrative to explain events and facts as revealed thus far.