Bad enough this neo-Nazi front called Canada Free Press stole my work; now they could have undermined my whole campaign of filing complaints of election fraud with state A’sG in those states with laws requiring that in order to get on the ballot in that state, candidates must be eligible for the job. Let me explain.
Canada Free Press is a front for Douglas Hagmann, Founder of Northeast Intelligence Network, or “NEIN,” for “no” in
German. CFP stole work produced on my blog and are reaping the notoriety for this usurpation. Initially, my ire vested not in the theft of my intellectual property but in knowing that this unscrupulous group will unjustly benefit from the caliber of my work. People will credit other tripe that comes out of this group, assuming it has intrinsic value, which it does not. But now it seems, their theft could be undermining my whole campaign to expose BO’s ineligibility by filing complaints of election fraud with state A’sG.
In December 2008, Justin Riggs was contacting state elections officials all over the country to obtain Certifications of Nominations. HI sent back both the DNC and RNC Certifications, which he posted, along with the cover letter from elections officials. Thinking I would be interested in his work, a fellow blogger who had helped me carry out other projects, emailed the link. Already familiar with the SC Certification, when I saw the HI Certification, I noticed the extra line regarding BO’s Constitutional qualification. Then, I looked at the cover letter from HI elections officials; this contained a cite to Hawaiian Revised Statutes. I checked with Justin; no, he hadn’t cited this law to obtain the Certifications. So, I looked up the law. Sure enough, this was the requirement that party officials must Certify the candidate for POTUS is Constitutionally eligible for the job. (I also noticed there was no “Received” stamp on the Certification from HI, and the signature anomaly. But none of these details was material to creating a cause of action that could halt Congressional ratification of the EC vote; or, after such ratification, that could prompt Congress to initiate Impeachment proceedings.
All of these documents are posted and/or referenced throughout my blog, beginning last December, and recently highlighted in an article I posted on August 13, “IF DROWNING OUT OPPOSING FACTS IS un-AMERICAN THEN, IGNORING UNPLEASANT FACTS IS un-AMERICAN, TOO.” The distinction is again pointed out in the just published “MODEL COMPLAINT OF ELECTION FRAUD TO STATE A’sG.” Not surprisingly, CFP did not reveal the provenance of information they just ‘published’ about the Certifications, or provide an explanation as to why it took them so long to ‘find’ this information and realize its significance.
CFP copied my blog, making a big deal about the ‘newly’ discovered difference in signatures on Certifications of Nomination, concluding these differences in Certifications meant, the party had committed fraud. They failed to mention, state law dictates what goes on each Certification; and whether the Certification must originate with the DNC or the state D party Chair. Of course, all of this information is on my blog. No; for CFP, the fraud was proven merely by the different versions of the Certification. Then, WND copied my work wholesale, and credited Mr. Williams from CFP but not me. Just like CFP, WND also omitted the fact, HI law required the extra line in the Certification. (This makes sense, since in the same way that CFP is the front for Douglas Hagmann; Center for Western Journalism is the front for WND and Farah. They can label their propaganda however they want; but essentially, they are in the business of shaping opinions and not investigating and analyzing hard ‘news.’)
Now, a state Rep. in NH – he is a Plaintiff in one of Orly Taitz’s cases – was given the information from CFP. He contacted the SoS in NH to look into fraud; evidently, she agreed. But no fraud occurred in NH. As I have been saying since last summer, no provision of any law, federal or state, requires any state official to check whether the nominee for POTUS from the major political party is Constitutionally eligible for the job. This is the reason that any lawsuit predicated on Mandamus was doomed to fail. That is, the court - judicial branch - will not order the SoS - executive branch - to perform a specific job function unless such function is spelled out in the law - legislative branch. Most state laws also fail to require the nominee to be Constitutionally eligible for the job. In fact, most laws entitle the name of the nominee to appear on the ballot. All the party is required to do is to Certify the name of its nominee, to appropriate state officials. And since NH law does not require the nominee to be a NBC, having legally Certified he is the nominee, no fraud occurred.
We have begun filing election fraud complaints with A’sG in those states with laws requiring the candidate must be eligible for office to appear on the ballot. The complaints make clear, the D party submitted the Certifications that were required for the SoS to place BO’s name on the ballot. And the SoS did exactly what she was supposed to do, by placing his name on the ballot. In fact, by law, the party nominee is entitled to be on the ballot. However, the law in this state also requires the candidate to be eligible for the job. Now, we have no idea whether BO is eligible for the job; but we have a pretty good idea that based on the documentation in the public domain, as well as admissions by both the candidate and the party, the person signing the Certification on behalf of the party could not have ascertained whether BO is a NBC before signing the Certification submitted to the state.
It is this false meaning underlying the true Certification that is the election fraud; and the job of the AG is to investigate that fraud.
But let’s say, the SoS of NH reports, no fraud occurred. A’sG in other states will hear this and figure, no fraud occurred. So, what are these people filing these 4-page complaints of election fraud talking about?
Does this mean, the D’s did not commit election fraud in states other than NH? Absolutely not. But, tragically, because of the malfeasance of people associated with CFP and WND, and Leo and the NH state Rep., only readers of my blog will ‘get’ that distinction.
Could you somehow add a note to your post, directing people to this comment or, directly to my blog?
Thank you.
Oh, good grief. The noob smokescreen campaign continues apace.
Get this straight: nobody cares about giving you credit, whoever you are.
Nobody cares what sort of pejorative label you apply to a source, if the information provided is accurate.
Now, go away.
Wow, good work!
Thanks for the post. It will take some time to read through all the posts on your blog, but thanks for the heads up!
Just to clarify, are you saying that a) Hawaii is the only state that requires the party officials to certify eligibility b) other states require the candidate to be eligible according to the Constitution before being put on the ballot - to be checked by State officials c) some States do not in fact require the candidates to be eligible - because there are no provisions for anyone to check the candidate?
If I’ve understood this correctly, how many states belong to category “b”?
1. Thanks for the link to your blog. Good detail.
2. I am confident,that if anything develops as a result of your work that you will receive fair credit.
3. Yes, the NH investigation could spoil things. Maybe. However, there is a legitimate reason for the Sec. of State in Hawaii to proceed with an investigation of fraud.
Thanks for your OUTSTANDING work and explanation. BUMP-TO-THE-TRUTH!