New Hampshire Representative Recaps Press Conference of January 3

WILL MEET WITH SPEAKER ON JANUARY 6

by Sharon Rondeau

Rep. Harry Accornero was one of approximately 12 New Hampshire legislators who attended a press conference in Concord on January 3, 2012, to object to the decisions of the Ballot Law Commission and the New Hampshire Supreme Court in denying reconsideration of placing Obama's name on the 2012 ballot

(Jan. 5, 2011) —The following is an interview conducted with New Hampshire Rep. Harry Accornero (R-Laconia), who helped to organize a press conference in Concord with the purpose of informing the public that Barack Hussein Obama might not be constitutionally eligible to serve as president.  The presser was held following the decision of the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission on November 18, 2011, to leave Obama’s name on the ballot.  The group of representatives present at the Ballot Law Commission hearing on November 18, 2011 was joined by several other state representatives at the state Capitol in Concord.

MRS. RONDEAU:  How did it go?

REP. ACCORNERO:  It went pretty well.  Larry and the Vitas gave the papers to one of the subordinates of the Attorney General, who supposedly wasn’t in.  We had to give them to someone authorized to receive them.  Then we went over to the Legislative Office Building, where we were asked to leave because supposedly there was another press conference; of course, it wasn’t for two hours.

So we went outside to have it there anyway, and the press were there, so they said, “Come into the conference room in the Capitol.”

MRS. RONDEAU:  So you didn’t have to be out in single-digit temperatures?

REP. ACCORNERO:  Yes, that was a blessing.  So we went in there, and Rep. Rappaport read his statement of which you had a copy.  We took questions.  It went well. People promised that there were going to be all kinds of people there, but only a handful of people were there.  That’s what’s very discouraging to me, and I shouldn’t be, but I just give it to the Lord.  We had it in the press room, so it was a little crowded in there, but of the legislators, there were probably about 8 or 12 of us.  There again, it’s very discouraging.  They took the same oath that we took.  They try to spin it as a “birther” issue; it is not.  It’s not a Republican issue; it’s not a Democrat issue; it’s a constitutional issue.  I don’t care where he was born; this man’s father was born in Kenya, which was a British colony at that time.  He cannot be a natural born Citizen.

People bring up the 14th Amendment; that addresses citizenship.  The President of the United States is the only one who has to be a “natural born Citizen” because he controls the Army and the Navy.

Rep. Laurie Pettengill did a great job.  She had a packet made up for everybody there and highlighted all the RSAs that pertain to the Ballot Law Commission and where they did not do their job.  We brought up the two who were disqualified:  Sal Mohamed and Abdul Hassan.  I said, “The Ballot Law Commission said it was not in their purview.”  But there were two of them who were denied for that reason by the Secretary of State.  This was stated under oath that they didn’t have the authority, not only by the Secretary of State, but also by the counsel for the Ballot Law Commission.

So I said, “This is not a big thing.  You recall that in 2008, John McCain was questioned about his birthplace.  He was born in Panama, but both of his parents were citizens of the United States.  It didn’t make any difference where he was born.  Therein lies the difference.  Either the Constitution works for everyone, or it doesn’t work for anyone.

I’m going to meet with the Speaker of the House on the 6th, and I’ve asked Larry Rappaport to come with me.  If we’re the only ones who are going to stand by our oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the New Hampshire Constitution, then why have an oath?  Because every legislator, Democrat and Republican, should have been there because it’s a constitutional issue, and I said this at the press conference.  They took the same oath I did to the and should be devoted to the people of New Hampshire.

A citizen video was made of the conference, and someone from WorldNetDaily was there.  There were a couple of local TV stations as well. We took questions and answered them.

MRS. RONDEAU:  Who asked the questions?

REP. ACCORNERO:  The media asked all of the questions, including what we expected the outcome to be.  We’re going to wait to hear from the Attorney General, although I don’t expect him to act.  Sometimes you get to the point where you do what you can.  It was very disheartening to me personally that the turnout was not there.  I had somebody say to me, “As far as I concerned, the only ones who represent us in New Hampshire are you reps who are here.”  That’s very sad when you consider that I am one of 400.  This is not a partisan issue.  Either we stand by the Constitution or we don’t.

MRS. RONDEAU:  Either someone is eligible or he’s not.

REP. ACCORNERO:  That’s right.  You just can’t use it where you see fit.

MRS. RONDEAU:  I think people do not realize that if we don’t have a working Constitution, someone could be grabbed off the street, thrown into a police car, and imprisoned without due process, which is happening now to Walter Fitzpatrick and others.

REP. ACCORNERO:  Like that NDAA.  He originally said he’d veto it.  But he said, “Well, I’ll sign it, but I won’t use it.”  Yeah, OK; his nose just grew another inch.

In 2010, conservatives and Christians put in office congressmen and women from the Tea Party who swore to uphold the Constitution, who said they stood for something, but I had to be the lone legislator from New Hampshire, a state representative, to be the only one to accuse Obama of treason. There was not a sound from any congressman.  Even this usurper, with what he’s doing to our country…they have stayed mute.  I don’t know what’s in the water there.

MRS. RONDEAU:  Did you ever get a response to your request to bring a treason charge against Obama?

REP. ACCORNERO:  No.  Not one.  I sent it the first time to my congressman, Frank Guinta, and got nothing.  I also sent an open letter to Congress and still never received anything.  So it’s just really sad.  I mentioned at the conference that even our own Congress throws our Constitution down the drain.  When they brought up Obama, I pulled out my pocket Constitution and said, “Do you see this Constitution here?  Nowhere does it address racism or partisanship; it just states what this country was founded on and what we are supposed to do with it.  This supersedes anything else.  The Constitution is the law of the land.”

It was written by godly men.  It had to be inspired, because every time I read it I find something new.  To read the words of Jefferson, Washington, Adams and Webster…it’s just amazing how they refer to the Creator, they refer to God without shame, and here we are cowering down to these people who are trying to tear it apart.

MRS. RONDEAU:  How long did the press conference last?

REP. ACCORNERO:  About 40-45 minutes.

MRS. RONDEAU:  Did you detect any kind of ridicule in the questions you got from the press, or were they asking serious questions?

REP. ACCORNERO:  They were asking some serious questions, but I wouldn’t trust anyone from the local press to print anything we said in a positive light.  Some of them just rolled their eyes when Larry brought up Orly.  There’s nothing we can do about that.  We just hope that it gets out through media such as WorldNetDaily and you, which is where the truth is.  What they’re getting on TV isn’t history anymore; it hasn’t been for over 20 years.

———————-

Editor’s Note:  The Post & Email contacted the office of the New Hampshire Attorney General on January 5, 2012 and spoke with Mr. Richard Head, who stated that “There was no request behind” the affidavit delivered to the Attorney General’s office on Tuesday following the press conference.  “It was a description of events which made no request of the Attorney General,” he said.

In 2003, the New Hampshire Supreme Court heard a case involving the interpretation of voters’ intent in 2003 involving the Ballot Law Commission.

An AP article covering the press conference is here.  A video of the delivery of the signed affidavit to the Attorney General’s office, Rappaport’s review of his actions taken in late 2008 with the Attorney General and Secretary of State, and the press conference itself in which Rappaport read the prepared press release was produced by www.adventuresinthefreestate.com.

Citizen Mark Rossetti stated during the conference that New Hampshire, having the first state primary in the nation, has the responsibility to inform the nation of “the largest crime that has ever been pulled over on the American people.”

3 Responses to "New Hampshire Representative Recaps Press Conference of January 3"

  1. KenyanBornObama   Friday, January 6, 2012 at 2:04 PM

    It could set precedent for Jindal or Rubio? That’s not the half of it!
    It also sets precedent for an anchor baby to become President and even worse, suppose Ahmadinajad comes over during a UN meeting and hooks up with a prostitute in NY and she has a child! Meet your next President Mohammad Ahmadinajad, son of Mahmoud!

    WE ARE IN TROUBLE PEOPLE!

  2. dude911   Friday, January 6, 2012 at 11:12 AM

    the fact that this was reported to the AG without any requests should not preclude the AG from investigation…but it appears as if this is going to be what they use to justify thier failure to act….

    reporting a violation of law…a violation of state statutes…and/or a violation of the US Constitution…to the AG…opens the AG’s sworn duty to protect those same statutes…he doesnt need the members of the legislature to request action…the simple act of making him/her aware that possible crimes have occured…that the possibility that ineligible persons were in fact committing fraud upon the public during an election…should force the AG into action…in a serious investigation…once again…misfeasance or malfeasance..either or both…apply here…

  3. "Zeb"   Friday, January 6, 2012 at 4:24 AM

    What Accornero says kind of makes you refocus. It really isn’t about Obama. Obama is just a symptom of a larger problem; that being transgressions against the Constitution. If Obama is allowed to stay on the ballot for another election it could set precedent for Jindal or Rubio and more breaks with the law of the Constitution. The situation in NH is a good example of how Constitutional law is established, i.e., bad precedent based on bad precedent, etc. until what comes out in the end no longer resembles the Constitution or even its intent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.