AnyCalculator.com
Over 100 FREE Online Calculators

Friday, January 27, 2012

Leo Donofrio Conclusion About The FRAUD Obama

Amicus Brief Leo Donofrio State Of Georgia

Leo Donofrio Atty

Conclusion:

Since President obama does not qualify as a member of the class of persons identified as natural-born citizens by the US Supreme Court in Minor Vs Happersett, he is not eligible to be President of the United States, and his name, therefore, should not be allowed on Georgia Ballots for the 2012 presidential election.

Any genuine construction of the “natural born Citizen” clause must begin from the starting point that it requires something more than citizenship by virtue of being born on U.S. soil. Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), tells you exactly what that something is; citizen parents.

U.S. Supreme Court MINOR v. HAPPERSETT, 88 U.S. 162 (1874) 1874

(No there is no doubt obama is a FRAUD "president". Yes the US Supreme Court did define what the US Constitution says about a natural born citizen being required to hold the office of president. Obama is an illegitimate president born of parents, (the democrate party) who unlawfully birthed obama into the world as a legitimate candidate. ( Story Reports

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Obama's Attorney Slapped Down By Georgia Secretary of State


Obama's Attorney Kicked In The Butt By Georgia Secretary of State

Georgia Secretary Of State Tells Obama To Put Up Or Shut Up

The Office of Secretary of State

January 25, 2012

Michael Jablonski
260 Brighton Road,NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
michael.jablonski@comcast.com

RE: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings

Dear Mr. Jablonski:I received your letter expressing your concerns with the manner in which the Office of State Administrative Hearings ("OSAH") has handled the candidate challenges involving your client and advising me that you and your client will "suspend" participation in the administrative proceeding. While I regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to an administrative law judge at OSAH was in keeping with Georgia law, and specifically O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5.

As you are aware, OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.17 cited in your letter only applies to parties to a hearing. As the referring agency, the Secretary of State's Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearing sscheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do not believe such a request would be judicious given the hearing is set for tomorrow morning.

In following the procedures set forth in the Georgia Election Code, I expect the administrative law judgeto report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, I will fully and fairly review the entire record and initial decision of the administrative law judge. Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril. I certainly appreciate you contacting me about your concerns, and thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Brian P. Kemp

Michael Jablonski Secretary Of State Georgia

January 25, 2012

*************************************************

The south shall rise again.

(The Georgia secetary of state is telling obama to prove his US citizenship. I hope the fraud obama is not on the Georgia ballot because he can't validate his US citizenship. Thursday is when the hearing is scheduled. Obama must be sweating and smelling like BO as the hearing gets near.) Story Reports

Pay No Attention to The Men Behind the Curtain That Control Elections

Pay No Attention to The Men Behind the Curtain That Control Elections

Pay No Attention to The Men Behind the Curtain
Black Box Voting — Bev Harris Black Box Voting Chap 16

Bev Harris

If you are inclined to let other people fix this problem for you, please remember that “other people” are already hard at work to change your voting system to suit their own agenda and profit margin. These other people may have a different view of democracy from yours.

What are their plans? Let’s look behind the curtain at a secret meeting that took place at 11:30 a.m. August 22, 2003. Invitations were sent out to all the makers of computer voting machines and included the following agenda:

ITAA eVoting Industry Coalition DRAFT Plan, Activities, and Pricing Purpose: Create confidence and trust in the elections industry and promote the adoption of technology-based solutions for the elections industry. Repair short-term damage done by negative reports and media coverage of electronic voting. Over the mid- to long-term, implement strategy that educates key constituencies about the benefits of public investments in electronic voting, voter registration and related applications.

The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) is a lobbying firm that specializes in getting special treatment for technology companies.

In this proposal, the ITAA is trying to get hired to provide assistance to Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S and other voting-machine vendors to get the public to accept their products. Not to correct the flaws in their products, mind you, and not to do any type of “customer survey” to find out what we voters actually want. The idea is for these for-profit companies to define our democratic voting system and then invest in a PR campaign to show us that we like their system.

*********************************************

Using South Carolina’s touchscreen voting machines

Voters securely cast their vote for each race and/or ballot proposition simply through the touch of the screen. Its Audio Ballot feature easily assists those voters who are visually impaired. Weighing only 14.35 pounds, the new voting machine is the most portable system in the industry enabling curbside voting and wheelchair access, and it is powered either by 120-volt AC current or a rechargeable battery cartridge. To ensure voter intent and ballot correctness, the new voting machine prevents the voter from over-voting and alerts the voter of under-voted races.

***********************************************
Read below about the security of SC voting machines. The info about securely casting a vote is BS from you local county office. These voting machines flip flop as much as do the liars that claim to be running for office.

*****************************************8****

ES&S IVotronic Machines Proven Vulnerable to Hacks, Viruses, and Failures

Altering data via the touchscreen interface

This is perhaps the most serious practical threat to the iVotronic firmware. As discussed in Section 4.2, errors in the iVotronic’s PEB input processing code allow anyone with access to the PEB slot on the face of the terminal (including a voter) to load malicious software that takes complete control over the iVotronic’s processor. Once loaded, this software can alter the terminal firmware, change recorded votes, mis-record future votes, and so on throughout the election day and in future elections.

Viral compromise

A compromised iVotronic can modify a PEB such that it carries a malicious payload which infects other iVotronics on which it is subsequently used. This iVotronic to iVotronic propagation can happen, for example, while a master PEB is being used to run Logic-and-Accuracy tests on the iVotronic terminals being used in a particular election.

(Also if the above flaws didn't "fix" the election the company that tabulates the votes in a foreign county can "fix" the election also. Yes I said a company in a foreign country counts your votes and can manipulate the votes.

No I am not saying not to vote. I am making you aware that in countys and precincts your vote cannot be verified. Only a total vote or total vote per candidate posted on the precinct door can be seen coming out of the black box. There is NOTHING coming out of a black box that you can use to verify your individual vote.

Black box voting has a lot in common with barack obama. Obama's "birth certificate" was counted and issued by a black box also. Obama's black box "birth certificate" cannot be verified. Obama will not allow anyone to examine what is on file in Hawaii. This is because Hawaii holds obama's fake birth certificate in a black box. The black box is like a black hole. Nobody can examine what it contains except through electronic examination or "special" permission. The FIX is in for sure.)
Story Reports

*****************************************

(USA) 1/12 - GLOBAL INTERNET VOTING FIRM BUYS U.S. ELECTION RESULTS REPORTING FIRM - By

Bev Harris

Permission to reprint granted, with link to http://www.blackboxvoting.org

In a major step towards global centralization of election processes, the world's dominant Internet voting company has purchased the USA's dominant election results reporting company.

When you view your local or state election results on the Internet, on portals which often appear to be owned by the county elections division, in over 525 US jurisdictions you are actually redirected to a private corporate site controlled by SOE software, which operates under the name ClarityElections.com.

The good news is that this firm promptly reports precinct-level detail in downloadable spreadsheet format. As reported by BlackBoxVoting.org in 2008, the bad news is that this centralizes one middleman access point for over 525 jurisdictions in AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, KY, MI, KS, IL, IN, NC, NM, MN, NY, SC, TX, UT, WA. And growing.

As local election results funnel through SOE's servers (typically before they reach the public elsewhere), those who run the computer servers for SOE essentially get "first look" at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.

In 2004, many Americans were justifiably concerned when, days before the presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell redirected Ohio election night results through the Tennessee-based server for several national Republican Party operations.

This is worse: This redirects results reporting to a centralized privately held server which is not just for Ohio, but national; not just USA-based, but global.

A mitigation against fraud by SOE insiders has been the separation of voting machine systems from the SOE results reports. Because most US jurisdictions require posting evidence of results from each voting machine at the precinct, public citizens can organize to examine these results to compare with SOE results. Black Box Voting spearheaded a national citizen action to videotape / photograph these poll tapes in 2008.

With the merger of SOE and SCYTL, that won't work (if SCYTL's voting system is used). When there are two truly independent sources of information, the public can perform its own "audit" by matching one number against the other.

These two independent sources, however, will now be merged into one single source: an Internet voting system controlled by SCYTL, with a results reporting system also controlled by SCYTL.

With SCYTL internet voting, there will be no ballots. No physical evidence. No chain of custody. No way for the public to authenticate who actually cast the votes, chain of custody, or the count.

SCYTL is moving into or already running elections in: the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, India and Australia.

SCYTL is based in Barcelona; its funding comes from international venture capital funds including Nauta Capital, Balderton Capital and Spinnaker.

Black Box Voting

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Vote And Vote Often

Using South Carolina’s touchscreen voting machines

Voters securely cast their vote for each race and/or ballot proposition simply through the touch of the screen. Its Audio Ballot feature easily assists those voters who are visually impaired. Weighing only 14.35 pounds, the new voting machine is the most portable system in the industry enabling curbside voting and wheelchair access, and it is powered either by 120-volt AC current or a rechargeable battery cartridge. To ensure voter intent and ballot correctness, the new voting machine prevents the voter from over-voting and alerts the voter of under-voted races.

***********************************************
Read below about the security of SC voting machines. The info about securely casting a vote is BS from you local county office. These voting machines flip flop as much as do the liars that claim to be running for office.

*****************************************8****

ES&S IVotronic Machines Proven Vulnerable to Hacks, Viruses, and Failures

Altering data via the touchscreen interface

This is perhaps the most serious practical threat to the iVotronic firmware. As discussed in Section 4.2, errors in the iVotronic’s PEB input processing code allow anyone with access to the PEB slot on the face of the terminal (including a voter) to load malicious software that takes complete control over the iVotronic’s processor. Once loaded, this software can alter the terminal firmware, change recorded votes, mis-record future votes, and so on throughout the election day and in future elections.

Viral compromise

A compromised iVotronic can modify a PEB such that it carries a malicious payload which infects other iVotronics on which it is subsequently used. This iVotronic to iVotronic propagation can happen, for example, while a master PEB is being used to run Logic-and-Accuracy tests on the iVotronic terminals being used in a particular election.

(Also if the above flaws didn't "fix" the election the company that tabulates the votes in a foreign county can "fix" the election also. Yes I said a company in a foreign country counts your votes and can manipulate the votes.) Story Reports

*****************************************

(USA) 1/12 - GLOBAL INTERNET VOTING FIRM BUYS U.S. ELECTION RESULTS REPORTING FIRM - By

Bev Harris

Permission to reprint granted, with link to http://www.blackboxvoting.org

In a major step towards global centralization of election processes, the world's dominant Internet voting company has purchased the USA's dominant election results reporting company.

When you view your local or state election results on the Internet, on portals which often appear to be owned by the county elections division, in over 525 US jurisdictions you are actually redirected to a private corporate site controlled by SOE software, which operates under the name ClarityElections.com.

The good news is that this firm promptly reports precinct-level detail in downloadable spreadsheet format. As reported by BlackBoxVoting.org in 2008, the bad news is that this centralizes one middleman access point for over 525 jurisdictions in AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, KY, MI, KS, IL, IN, NC, NM, MN, NY, SC, TX, UT, WA. And growing.

As local election results funnel through SOE's servers (typically before they reach the public elsewhere), those who run the computer servers for SOE essentially get "first look" at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.

In 2004, many Americans were justifiably concerned when, days before the presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell redirected Ohio election night results through the Tennessee-based server for several national Republican Party operations.

This is worse: This redirects results reporting to a centralized privately held server which is not just for Ohio, but national; not just USA-based, but global.

A mitigation against fraud by SOE insiders has been the separation of voting machine systems from the SOE results reports. Because most US jurisdictions require posting evidence of results from each voting machine at the precinct, public citizens can organize to examine these results to compare with SOE results. Black Box Voting spearheaded a national citizen action to videotape / photograph these poll tapes in 2008.

With the merger of SOE and SCYTL, that won't work (if SCYTL's voting system is used). When there are two truly independent sources of information, the public can perform its own "audit" by matching one number against the other.

These two independent sources, however, will now be merged into one single source: an Internet voting system controlled by SCYTL, with a results reporting system also controlled by SCYTL.

With SCYTL internet voting, there will be no ballots. No physical evidence. No chain of custody. No way for the public to authenticate who actually cast the votes, chain of custody, or the count.

SCYTL is moving into or already running elections in: the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, India and Australia.

SCYTL is based in Barcelona; its funding comes from international venture capital funds including Nauta Capital, Balderton Capital and Spinnaker.

Black Box Voting

Obama says that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.

Obama says that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.

Judge Michael M. Malihi Order for Obama To Come To Georgia

“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant,” the lawyer said.

Obama’s lawyer argued this in a motion to quash a subpoena for him to appear at the hearings in Atlanta Jan. 26.

Georgia administrative court Judge Michael M. Malihi took a different view about obama's defense of why he didn'y need to prove he is a valid US citizen.

“Defendant argues that ‘if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as president of the United States’ to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend,” he wrote in his order.

“Defendant’s motion suggests that no president should be compelled to attend a court hearing. This may be correct. But defendant has failed to enlighten the court with any legal authority,” the judge continued.

“Specifically, defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is ‘unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony … [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party’s preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced.’”

Hearings have been scheduled for three separate complaints raised against Obama’s candidacy. They all are raised by Georgia residents who are challenging Obama’s name on the 2012 ballot for various reasons, which they are allowed to do under state law.

*************************************************

Obama says that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.

(That makes as much sense as saying obama is not responsible for the US economy or it depends on what "is" means.

Obama is a fruad who has displayed a "birth certificate" that was manipulated to look like it was his. He will not and cannot produce the original birth certificate in Hawaii. What the public has seen is a total fabrication of a birth certificate and the truth. Obama is a liar and illegal "president".

To this date obama has not produced any document that can validate his birth in Hawaii.)
Story Reports