“THERE WERE NO THREATS MADE”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Nov. 22, 2011) — On November 18, 2011, the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission held a hearing to discuss four ballot challenges to various 2012 election candidates, including an objection filed by Atty. Orly Taitz of California against Barack Hussein Obama.
Taitz had stated in her complaint that Obama is using a stolen social security number and has presented forged documents to the American public. Taitz has called the image released on April 27, 2011 by the White House a “computer generated forgery.”
The Ballot Law Commission ruled that Obama’s name would remain on the ballot because he had completed the necessary forms and paid the $1,000 filing fee.
On November 21, 2011, the Speaker of the House of the New Hampshire House of Representatives canceled a meeting which had been scheduled, purportedly to discuss the outcome of the Ballot Law Commission’s decision. Additionally, Speaker William O’Brien stated that he would be cooperating with an “investigation” to be launched by the New Hampshire Attorney General, Michael Delaney, who allegedly claimed that the safety of a member of his staff present at Friday’s meeting had been threatened. O’Brien sent an email to three of the House members who had attended the hearing that day asking them for their cooperation with the State Police and “Protective Services.”
The Speaker of the House has the authority to sign subpoenas.
Delaney has been hailed as a “rising star” in the area of “criminal prosecution.”
There remain serious questions about whether or not Obama meets the constitutional eligibility requirements to serve as president; specifically, the “natural born Citizen” requirement in Article II, Section 1, clause 5.
Local news reports used the term “birther” to describe those who have identified and made public discrepancies in Obama’s birth story, background, social security number, and eligibility for the office he currently holds. A presidential candidate from Obama’s political party has also questioned Obama’s eligibility to run.
New Hampshire Rep. Laurence Rappaport, who represents the Coos-1 District in the northern part of the state, supplied a different version of the events at the Commission’s hearing on November 18:
There are a several facts that need to be presented.
1. Attorney General Michael Delaney was NOT present at the Ballot Law Commission meeting last Thursday at 2 pm in LOB 307.
2. To my knowledge (and I was there) there were no threats made against anybody by members of the House or anyone else. There were some opinions expressed, but I believe people have the right under the Constitution to express them regardless of what Attorney General Delaney alleges.
3. I did not receive a copy of the Speaker’s letter in which he asks Randy Joiner for an investigation, although I was present at the meeting and am a State Representative. I know of the letter only because it was published in “The Post and Email”.
4. There were two members of the Attorney General’s staff present at the meeting: whoever is assigned to the Ballot Law Commission and whoever is assigned to the Secretary of State’s office. Any allegation by the Attorney General has to be based on hearsay. Both of them apparently disregarded the provision that filings have to meet requirements of the State and Federal Constitutions.
5. I emphasize that Representative DeLemus made a strong request of the member of the AG staff, but she did NOT threaten him. I will swear to that.
Enabling legislation for the Ballot Law Commission includes 665:7 : Filing Disputes. The ballot law commission shall hear and determine disputes arising over whether nomination papers or declarations of candidacy filed with the secretary of state conform with the law. I refer you to Bush v. Gore 531 US Code 98. While I am not an attorney, I believe it applies here and supercedes State law. I believe the Board and the AG ignored 655:45.
The email from O’Neill announcing the investigation of several House members and cancellation of the meeting to be held today was received by this editor from Rep. Harry Accornero, who was also present at Friday’s hearing.
Rappaport and Rep. Carol Vita had approached Delaney and New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner three years ago in regard to questions he had about Obama’s eligibility, but neither public servant took any action, claiming that presidential elections are “a federal matter.” However, in September 2009, Rappaport had been told by Gardner that “an investigation will commence.” The Post & Email has interviewed Rappaport here.
Atty. Taitz has requested an emergency rehearing of the Ballot Law Commission’s decision of November 18, having claimed that Gardner is guilty of “committing the most egregious fraud” in his claim that all candidates’ names are placed on New Hampshire ballots after paying the requisite fee. Taitz claims that both Gardner and the Ballot Law Commission have removed the names of individuals who were found to be ineligible for the positions they sought, including a candidate for president in 2008 for his failure to meet the “natural born Citizen” requirement.
Taitz has stated that she requested a copy of Obama’s Declaration of Candidacy from Gardner’s office but has not yet received it.