Posts Tagged ‘leo donofrio’

Donofrio Explains Vattel: Day 57 – March 18, 2009

March 18, 2009

Attorney Leo C. Donofrio bows out of Obama eligibility struggle once again…. Explains the importance of Vattel’s definition of “Natural Born Citizen” and how Vattel’s theories influenced our framers…Donofrio to be on The Chalice Show radio program this evening…

Donofrio says on his blog today:

The case has been made as to the Constitutional process necessary to challenge President Obama’s qualifications for office. I call him President because he is President – under our Constitution – unless and until the District Court for the District of Columbia finds him ineligible. That is the only venue of review currently available under the law.

The case has also been thoroughly made that Obama is not a natural born citizen with regard to the presumption discussed in Marbury v. Madison by Chief Justice Marshall. That case stands for the nullification of the argument that one becomes eligible to be President through 14th Amendment citizenship (if born in the US). Chief Justice Marshall has spoken from the grave on this issue, and he holds that such a construction is “inadmissible”….

Donofrio can be heard on The Chalice Show radio program this evening and he says this will be the last we’ll be hearing from him for some time! The Chalice Show program notes give the following details:

On Wednesday, March 18 from 8-10 CDT, The Chalice Show will air on Patriot’s Heart Network. The special guest will be Leo Donofrio. He will discuss the technical legal aspects of the quo warranto statute as it applies to the Obama presidential eligibility controversy. He will also discuss breaking updates on the natural born citizen controversy. Please review Mr. Donofrio’s blog for complete background on these important issues.

Please tune in. Mr. Donofrio will be on for the entire 2 hours. To ask a question or discuss the issue with Leo and Chalice, the call-in number is (347) 215-6929.

Donofrio concludes his post with a plea for citizen action; Take a Stand he says:

Unless you make EVERY effort to be heard then you will never know if justice was at your fingertips. How much do you believe in this issue? Back in the 60’s when civil rights were being denied, the people came to Washington… a million man march. The law was changed and history with it. There is power available to you. Stop being so defeated. Stop depending on charlatans. Use your mind. Think for yourself. Don’t believe Leo Donofrio. Do your damn homework. I have provided you with the research materials. Use them.

If you don’t have the support of the people, the Government will not listen. You need to assemble peacefully and be heard. If you don’t have the numbers, you won’t be heard. It’s that simple. Go get the people. Bring them to Washington DC. Be heard.

Stay tuned!

Swiss Political Theorist E. Vattel

Swiss Political Theorist E. Vattel

By What Warrant? (Quo Warranto): Day 45 – March 4, 2009

March 4, 2009

Leo Donofrio: Our Military Need Not Take on Obama Eligibility Challenge Burden. A New Approach Involving Non-Military Plaintiffs Seen as Key. Donofrio to Work with Atty Mario Apuzzo to Cooperate in New Effort. The Problem of Legal Standing has Stymied Earlier Efforts but it is Thought Civilian Plaintiffs Can Meet Test of Standing.

The ancient common law writ of Quo Warranto (Latin: By What Warrant?) at one time… functioned as a court order (or “writ”) to show proof of authority; for example, demanding that someone acting as the sheriff prove that the king had actually appointed him to that office (literally, “By whose warrant are you the sheriff?”). (Source: Wikipedia)

In the United States today..The common law writ of quo warranto has been suppressed at the federal level… and deprecated at the state level, but remains a right under the Ninth Amendment which was understood and presumed by the Founders, and which affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.(Source)

Writing at Natural Born Citizen today, Leo Donofrio announces, in a very public way, his decision to work with New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo to further challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President. Using the above referenced tactic of Quo Warranto they hope to avoid the usually fatal error of lack of standing of various plaintiffs in previous actions. *Standing is described at one source as:

…the legal right to initiate a lawsuit. To do so, a person must be sufficiently affected by the matter at hand, and there must be a case or controversy that can be resolved by legal action.

The establishment of standing has been the stumbling block so far, and with respect to the military plaintiffs, their speaking out has brought the possibility of courts martial. The new approach by Donofrio and Apuzzo is designed to involve civilian plaintiffs who can, one hopes, show the necessary standing. This must sound hopelessly obscure to the layperson, and I am surely one of those. Donofrio lays out his explanation for this new course and one must go to his blog for a fuller explanation. About the situation for military plaintiffs, many of whom are involved with the Orly Tait action, Donofrio says:

If you are an active military person who is thinking of joining an action in Quo Warranto, please refrain form doing so until you have read the pending brief I will publish here.

Attorney Apuzzo and I will be working together on this public awareness campaign. I am very encouraged to have found another attorney who lives near me and who I believe in. I was very impressed by his intellect as to the various nuances of this intricate field of law. I believe we will both learn from each other and together provide a more powerful perspective and education to the public as well as presenting the best possible pro bono legal action on behalf of any potential plaintiffs.

*there are three requirements for Article III standing: (1)injury in fact, which means an invasion of a legally protected interest that is (a)concrete and particularized, and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) a causal relationship between the injury and the challenged conduct, which means that the injury fairly can be traced to the challenged action of the defendant, and has not resulted from the independent action of some third party not before the court; and (3) a likelihood that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision, which means that the prospect of obtaining relief from the injury as a result of a favorable ruling is not too speculative.

A lengthy and informative study of constitutional standing by Stephen L. Winter, titled “The Metaphor of Standing and the Problem of Self-Governance” (1987) may be read here.

[C]onstitutional standing [is] … a word game played by secret rules…. Characterized neither by the private rights model of the seven common law forms of action nor by the “injury-in-fact” paradigm of modern standing doctrine, these matters took forms astonishingly similar to the “standingless” public action or “private attorney general” model that modern standing law is designed to thwart..

New Obama Eligibility Challenge

Eligibility Movement About Love Not Hate: Day 43 – March2, 2009

March 2, 2009

….that’s Love as in Love of Country and Reverence for Our Constitution, NOT Hatred for Barack Obama. The Left is attempting to smear those concerned about Obama’s eligibility as irrational conspiracy theorists. They are So Wrong! The Issue is not going away; Today’s AOL and Politico Headline the story…

AOL News: The Birthers Continue to Hound Obama
The Politico: Culture of Conspiracy. The Birthers

At The Politico Ben Smith writes:

Out of the gaze of the mainstream and even the conservative media is a flourishing culture of advocates, theorists and lawyers, all devoted to proving that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president of the United States…..The challenges to Obama’s eligibility have no grounding in evidence. Courts across the country have summarily rejected the movement’s theory — that Obama can’t be a citizen because his father wasn’t —as a misreading of U.S. law; and Hawaii officials, along with contemporary birth announcements, affirm that Obama was in fact born in Honolulu in 1961.

The issue is hardly out of the gaze of the mainstream…media, it has been in plain sight all along. But the mainstream, and most of the conservative, media have chosen to ignore the most severe constitutional crisis since the Civil War. We must mark 2008 as the year journalism in the United States died. The press has become, in the words of Leo Donofrio, The Propaganda Ponies of the Fourth Estate.

At the time of his birth, Obama was a British/Kenyan citizen by descent of his father. Because I pointed out pesky international laws which governed his citizenship due to the fact that a father has every legal right in the world to have the laws of his nation apply to his son, I have been labeled a conspiracy freakoid of nature.

Never mind that I included demands for Panama John McCain and the Nicaraguan born Roger Calero to also be removed from our ballots. No, they don’t want to talk about that do they – because it would blow the “he’s just another Obama hater” mantra clear out of play. (see Natural Born Citizen)

So much for the mainstream media.Most of the conservative media will not touch the eligibility issue because they fear being smeared as kooks and nut cases. Some Republicans are so desperate to find a suitable candidate to revive the party’s fortunes that they wish the natural born citizen requirement would go away so they can nominate a non natural born citizen; i.e. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal; born of Indian immigrant parents who naturalized after his birth. Governor Schwarzenegger, who would love to be President, at least had the good sense to acknowledge that he is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible unless, and until, a constitutional amendment is passed negating the natural born citizen requirement of our Presidents.

The eligibility issue did come up, albeit briefly, at the past weekend’s CPAC gathering in Washington. Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media:

Judging by the applause, a large portion of the audience was not outraged by the remarks.

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...and the President before taking office swears the following oath…“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” (U.S.Constitution, Article II, Section 2)

Barack Obama taking oath; Michelle Obama holding Lincoln bible..

Barack Obama taking oath; Michelle Obama holding Lincoln bible..

Maj. General Says Proof Needed: Day 39 – Feb 27, 2009

February 27, 2009

Now three United States military members agree to participate in suit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Maj. Gen. Childers joins Lt. Easterling, and an as yet unnamed soldier, in a petition for declaratory judgment….Leo Donofrio warns against placing soldiers in jeopardy..

World Net Daily via Drudge Report:

On the heels of two active duty members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq calling for President Obama to prove his eligibility to be president, a retired major general has agreed to join the case, saying he just wants “the truth.”

Retired Major General Carroll D. Childers… (agrees) …”to be a plaintiff in the legal action to be filed by Orly Taitz, Esq. in a petition for a declaratory judgment (sic) that Barack Hussein Obama is not qualified to be president of the U.S., nor to be commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces, in that I am or was a sworn member of the U.S. military (subject to recall)”…General Childers minces no words here; he declares…

“What I really want is the truth; is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States. If not a natural born citizen, America has been defrauded and then we would be stuck with Joe Biden whose only redeeming attribute is that he is probably not a communist.”

The war of words concerning the Obama eligibility continues; the Childers remarks come after the Alan Keyes accusation (see previous post) that Obama is a “radical communist”.

A cautionary note to members of the U.S. military has been sounded by Attorney Leo C. Donofrio. Late last year Donofrio brought Natural Born Citizen actions before the Supreme Court. At his site Natural Born Citizen Donofrio says today:

The recent events chronicled in this blog pertaining to active military plaintiffs and the unnecessary jeopardy they have now been subjected to ANGERED me greatly. That doesn’t mean I believe the attorney (Orly Taitz) was operating with wrong intentions. Sometimes in ones zeal to fight, emotions cloud judgment and mistakes are made…..I feel a groundswell of opposition coming from the military regarding the well known issues of whether or not Obama is a natural born citizen Constitutionally eligible to be POTUS. And because I feel that the level of legal education being forwarded to our military as to this issue has been less than stellar, I have decided to present two educational legal templates to the military community via this blog…..Please note that I am NOT counseling any military as to whether they should join a law suit to challenge Obama’s Presidential eligibility. I would STRONGLY counsel against their doing so.

Ret. Maj. Gen. Carroll D. Childers

Ret. Maj. Gen. Carroll D. Childers

It’s Not Only Republicans Enraged : DAY 27 – FEBRUARY 15, 2009

February 16, 2009

Reader Ted wrote yesterday:

Obama’s stealing the census from Congress has suddenly awakened and enraged the Republicans. Maybe this will arouse them as well to challenge Obama for stealing the Presidency itself. They surely know he is not an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (which is more than merely being a 14th Amendment “citizen”) by virtue of either Obama’s birth to a dad of Kenyan/British citizenship or birth in Kenya itself — as manifested by his unwillingness to supply his long form birth certificate now under seal.

We’re not all that certain about general Republican outrage but at least in The Congress the resistance to the Porkulus Bill was an indication of something approaching that condition. Certainly, conservatives across American are outraged by the betrayal of our Constitution that the present usurpation represents.The damage to the nation by the actions of this administration and The Congress is incalculable.

If allowed to stand the harm would take decades to undo, if indeed, it could be undone at all. The only solution left to patriotic Americans is to intensify the campaign to expose the fraud which leaves us with a usurper in the White House. Only exposure of the fraud, removal of the usurper, and the consequent nullification of all his actions will repair the damage. Perhaps there is hope, read on...

A new idea put forth yesterday is to convene a National Grand Jury ; its mission would be in part…

…. review and evaluate procedures, methods and systems used by federal governmental agencies to determine whether they comply with the stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended.

The National Grand Jury shall review the officers of the federal government to determine whether they are constitutionally qualified to hold office, and to determine if their actions and behavior are consistent with stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended, and the criminal law as recognized in any of the several states.

In a Jan 22, 2009 article Attorney Leo C. Donofrio discusses the history of the Federal Grand Jury System (The Grand Jury is the Fourth Branch of Government). The wonderful Federal Grand Jury system, created within the Fifth Amendment was a valuable tool for the citizens to exercise a check on their government and its functionaries and officers. However, the system was subverted in 1946 by a little little noticed change in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP) which attempted to “eliminate”,,..(excerpts from Donofrio follow)

The Constitutional power of “we the people” sitting as grand jurors…. Regardless, the power I am going to explain to you still exists in the Constitution, and has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court despite the intention of the legislature and other legal scholars to make our power disappear with a cheap magic trick…..

So, it’s clear that the Constitution intended to give the grand jury power to instigate criminal charges, and this was especially true when it came to government oversight. But something strange happened on the way to the present. That power was eroded by a lie enacted by the legislative branch. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution still contains the same words quoted above, but if you sit on a grand jury and return a “presentment” today, the prosecutor must sign it or it probably won’t be allowed to stand by the judge and the criminal charges you have brought to the court’s attention will be swept away. And the reason for this can be found in a legislative lie of epic proportions…..

The use of presentments had become obsolete because the grand jurors were not aware of their power. So the use of “presentments” became more and more rare, and then in 1946 the legislative branch seized upon the moment to make this power disappear by waving its magic wand over the Constitution…..

I submit to you that this (an Antonin Scalia opinion) sets the stage for a revolutionary new context necessary and Constitutionally mandated to “we the people”, THE FOURTH BRANCH of the Government of the United States. Besides, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches, I submit that there is a fourth branch, THE GRAND JURY, and “we the people” when sitting as grand jurors, are, as Scalia quoted in US v. Williams, ” a constitutional fixture in its own right”. Yes, damn it. That is exactly what the grand jury is, and what it was always intended to be…..

Donofrio concludes with:

The law is on our side. So please spread this knowledge as far and wide as you can. We the people have the right and power under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution to charge this government with crimes by returning presentments regardless of whether the US Attorneys or the federal judges agree with us. As the Supreme Court has so brilliantly stated, we are the “buffer between the Government and the people.”

National Grand Jury?


Obama Not the First Usurper: Day 24 – February 12, 2009

February 12, 2009

The first pretender (usurper) to the U.S. Presidency was the ineligible Chester A. Arthur who occupied the office from September 19, 1881 until March 4, 1885. The history of Arthur’s usurpation is somewhat shrouded in mystery but some very recent research has shed some new light on that usurpation. We republish here “The Liar Who Became President” which originally appeared at Steady Habits December 7, 2008.

The Liar Who Became President…

Once upon a time there was a politically ambitious man who told many lies about himself and his family. We shall call him Mr. X. During one of his early political campaigns a political enemy circulated rumors that Mr. X was born in a foreign country and therefore ineligible for high elective office. Mr. X denied the charge saying his father was a British subject but that he (X) was born here.

Mr. X claimed that his mother had always lived in the U.S. which was untrue as she had lived in another country with her husband and had (a child) there. Mr. X realized early on that he was not a “natural born citizen” because he knew that he was born before his father was naturalized. X told lie upon lie about his father’s age, the year the father came to America, even his own age; and he destroyed most of his papers all in the effort to conceal the fact that he was ineligible for high office. Who is Mr. X?

As strange as this may sound, we are not discussing Barack Obama here. Mr. X is Chester A. Arthur, the 21st President of the United States who succeeded to the Presidency upon the assassination of President James Garfield. Due to the diligent research of Leo C. Donofrio with the assistance of Arthur biographer Greg Dehler we learn that Chester A. Arthur was a usurper, never eligible for POTUS. Talk about an amazing confluence of events: just as we are ready to install the ineligible Barack Obama as POTUS we learn that this has happened before. As Donofrio says in his report on the matter; “… it’s no precedent to follow.”

The political enemy mentioned in the lead paragraph was, in reality, one Arthur P. Hinman (see footnote below)*, who may have been hired by the Democrats to smear Arthur. Interestingly, the charge of ineligibilty for POTUS brought by Hinman against Arthur was true, but for the wrong reason: Chester A. Arthur was a British subject at birth (just as Obama was) but by virtue of his birth prior to his father’s naturalization rather than birth on foreign soil. As in Obama’s case, who acknowledges on his website that he had dual citizenship at birth, we find the evidence in plain sight but too late discern its meaning.

President Chester A. Arthur

President Chester A. Arthur

*More interesting but entirely without foundation was the Hinman myth circulated in 1880 and 1881. This story asserted that Elder Arthur had three sons: William Chester Alan Arthur, born at the home of his mother’s parents in Dunham, Province of Quebec; Chester Abell Arthur, born at Fairfield; and William Arthur, Jr., born at Hinesburgh, Vermont. When William Arthur, Jr., was born, the oldest son dropped the William and retained the names Chester Alan, as he could do because of the death in infancy of his brother, Chester Abell. He later, according to the Hinman story, appropriated the birth record of the second son in order to sustain his American citizenship. No death record existed to prove this substitution because the father had sold the infant’s body to a medical school! On the basis of these allegations, the American public were assured that Arthur was a British subject and in consequence disqualified for the Vice Presidency or Presidency. It was a political maneuver, and, as such, ineffective. (from “Chester A. Arthur-A Quarter-Century of Machine Politics” by George F. Howe)

Obama Not the 1st Usurperd

Donofrio Stands Down, Declares Truce: Day 13 – Feb1, 2009

February 1, 2009

With “Good luck, Obama. If you’re going to change something, then change the cult. You aint “the One”, but try to be a good President. The standard for being a good President isn’t very high”, Leo C. Donofrio leaves the field of usurpation litigation. Others must now renew the struggle to save the Constitution

One hardly knows what to make of Donofrio’s harrowing tale of harassment and deceit by the forces (he calls them “the cult”) aligned against him:

I had previously felt the evil operate against my case in the NJ Appellate Division where I experienced sabotage I never thought possible. I felt the full force and power of the cult as it tried to stop my case from having proper procedural ground to move on to SCOTUS.

…In the days leading up to Nov. 3, 2008… my cell phone and that of a family member were subjected to treachery that only somebody with serious power could have accomplished. Because of the dual attacks upon my sanity, I came to Washington D.C. with fear in my heart, but I was not about to stop. Nothing short of a bullet was going to stop me from filing that application on Nov. 3, 2008…..

He describes his trip to the SCOTUS and his encounter along the way with armed agents:

I had my electronic passport in my sneaker. I walked into Union Station to purchase a $35 trolley ticket and probably set off an RFID tracker.

I waited outside of Union Station for the trolley. At approximately 2:45 PM, just after I had purchased my ticket inside the station, I was sitting next to a white homeless man with a grey beard in his 50’s. He had two shopping carts full of clothes, food, radio etc., apparently his life possessions. We were the only two people sitting on this stone circle just outside the station. Suddenly, the homeless man starts gibbering some kind of weird code. He sounded like this,

“Echo one four two seven, target is in the building, repeat target is in the building…”

Then he paused and I looked up and a big SUV had pulled up right next to us, and two BIG mofos in yellow gold shirts got out of the SUV, opened the back door and started putting on body armor and packing mega heat… all the while they are scouring the area for the “target”…..

There’s much more that I am sure will bring Leo’s detractors out of the woodwork questioning his sanity. He signs off with:

Beware of charlatans.

Much love to all. And I mean all.

Leo Donofrio Stands Down

The Role of the Military (cont.) Day 12 – January 31, 2009

January 31, 2009

More from Leo C. Donofrio at Natural Born Citizen:

EVERY SOLDIER BEING ASKED BY OBAMA TO POSSIBLY LAY DOWN THEIR LIFE FOR THIS COUNTRY HAD TO PROVE IDENTITY TO THE GOVERNMENT.NOT ONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO POST A PHOTOCOPY OF A CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH TO A WEBSITE, HIRE FACTCHECK.ORG TO CHECK IT, AND THEN HAVE BEEN ENTITLED TO TELL THE GOVERNMENT TO BACK OFF.

No chance of that happening for our troops, so why is the commander in chief cut such slack?

Obama owes these men who are willing to die for us the courtesy of proving who he is under at least as stringent proof requirements as they have been ordered to subject themselves to.  Shouldn’t the commander in chief be held to a higher standard of proof, not a lesser one, especially when the commander in chief was a British/Kenyan dual national at birth?….

Day 12

Oath of Office Mangled: Day 2- Jan 21, 2009

January 21, 2009

Chief Justice Roberts Administers Oath of Office

Chief Justice Roberts Administers Oath of Office

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:–

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Isn’t it odd that this most solemn of oaths was administered in a such a casual, haphazard, and cavalier way. A commenter on Natural Born Citizen today says: (transcript and video at Slate.com)

The Oath administered was incorrectly stated by both Chief Justice Roberts and Obama and is no where in the Constitution. What does this mean? Did Chief Justice do this on purpose fully knowing that Obama is the UIC (Usurper in Chief)?

Did he do this to absolve himself of administering a perjured oath so that he can allow this fictitious usurper to get it and then remove him when evidence is shown that he does not qualify as a natural born citizen under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5?

Attorney Leo C. Donofrio, a courageous defender of the Constitution and in the forefront of the Obama eligibility litigation, said today regarding the Inauguration business (Natural Born Citizen):

….As for the inauguration, I couldn’t help but wonder why they didn’t swear Obama in before noon as is required by law. And the butchering of the oath of office was absolutely surreal having listened to it on the radio live in my car.

But all I really want to say at this point in time is that I pray Obama feels a genuine sense of humility for the incredible faith people have put in him. Now that he’s in the office, I hope he does good things with the power and that it humbles him. I’m very happy for the African American community as well. While I will never believe Obama (or McCain) were eligible under the Constitution, I do believe this event will empower and heal some wounds from the blight of slavery.

I fought for the Constitution. I lost. I hope the Constitution wins in the end. Please be a good President Mr. Obama. God knows we need one. Peace to all….

Obama Sworn In

Obama Sworn In