If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

SECRETARY OF STATE HAD INDICATED HE WOULD SEEK MORE INFORMATION ON OBAMA’S DOCUMENTATION

by Sharon Rondeau

The AP is reporting that a Manhattan, KS man who filed an objection to Obama’s name being placed on the ballot because of eligibility problems has withdrawn his complaint

(Sep. 14, 2012) — The Associated Press has reported that a challenger to the eligibility of Barack Obama to have his name placed on the Kansas ballot in November has withdrawn his objection.

A hearing was held on September 13, with another scheduled for Monday.  Objections to other candidates’ eligibility have also been filed with the Kansas State Objections Board.

The Kansas Secretary of State had planned to ask for a certified copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate after receiving a letter from an Obama campaign attorney stating that the U.S. Supreme Court had held that one did not have to be “born in the United States to parents who are citizens,” which was Mr. Montgomery’s stated objection to Obama’s placement on the ballot.

Secretary of State Kobach had sought more information which he had “hoped to obtain over the weekend,” reported The New York Times.

The Post & Email contacted the Kansas Secretary of State’s office to inquire if they were aware that the objection had been withdrawn.  We were transferred to the Elections Division, where the phone rang 12 times and then a woman picked up.  When we asked if she heard that Mr. Joe Montgomery had withdrawn his challenge to Obama’s eligibility, she said she had “heard rumors” but not seen anything definitive.

She took our contact information and said she would relay the message to Mr. Brad Bryant, whom she said would know if a withdrawal had been submitted.

The Post & Email also sent the following email to Mr. Bryant:

Sharon Rondeau
Sent: Fri 9/14/12 5:13 PM
To: brad.bryant@sos.ks.gov
RE:  MEDIA INQUIRY – OBAMA BALLOT CHALLENGE‏

Is it true that Mr. Joe Montgomery has withdrawn his ballot challenge to Barack Hussein Obama’s placement on your state ballot?  AP story here:  http://www.kansascity.com/2012/09/14/3815393/manhattan-man-drops-challenge.html

Thank you.

Sharon Rondeau, Editor
The Post & Email
www.thepostemail.com
203-987-7948
P.O. Box 195
Stafford Springs, CT  06076

When we asked the woman in the Elections office if anyone else had filed an objection to Obama, she said, “No, he was the only one, and we allowed him three extra days” past the stated deadline for objections to be filed.

Montgomery reportedly told The Manhattan Mercury that he had felt “intimidated” after filing his complaint despite “compelling evidence” which he said he possessed indicating that Obama’s name should be removed from the Kansas ballot. Montgomery had cited “forgery” of Obama’s “alleged birth certificates.”

Those investigating Obama’s background have been the subject of ridicule, copyright infringement, marginalization, website hacking, email breaches, and death threats.

Montgomery said he had wanted to “start a dialogue” about Obama’s eligibility” but had been unsuccessful.  “Dialogue” has been ongoing since before the 2008 presidential election, including questions about Obama’s Social Security number, short-form and long-form birth certificates, identity, and Selective Service registration form.

At 5:41 p.m., the following email was received from the Kansas Elections Office:

We received an email today from Mr. Montgomery stating his wish to withdraw the objection.

 
BRAD BRYANT| State Election Director
Kansas Secretary of State| 785-296-4559 P | 785-291-3051 F | www.sos.ks.gov
Memorial Hall, 1st Floor | 120 S.W. 10th Avenue | Topeka, KS 66612-1594
 
Learn all about the new election law at www.gotVoterID.com.

Join the Conversation

4 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  1. Sharon, please forward Tennessee case to Sec’0’State Kobach where it was stated’

    “Furthermore, it is clear that the stated federal issue of President Obama’s qualifications for the office are “actually disputed and substantial.” There is a sharp dispute in this case over Plaintiff’s main contention that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and is otherwise disqualified from the office under the United States Constitution. It is also clear that there will be a legal dispute over the Constitution’s definition of “natural born citizen” and the Supreme Court’s decision in Minor. The federal issue presented is obviously contested in this case.

    Likewise, the Court holds that the federal issue is substantial. With respect to the substantiality of the federal interest, the Supreme Court has considered four factors: “(1) whether the
    case includes a federal agency, and particularly, whether that agency’s compliance with the federal statute is in dispute; (2) whether the federal question is important (i.e., not trivial); (3) whether a decision on the federal question will resolve the case (i.e., the federal question is not merely incidental to the outcome); and (4) whether a decision as to the federal question will control numerous other cases (i.e., the issue is not anomalous or isolated).”16 The Sixth Circuit has stated that no one factor is dispositive on the issue of substantiality and that some factors may be more relevant than others in a given set of circumstances.17

    Here, there is no federal agency involved in the dispute.18 Because the federal issue raised in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint is a question of constitutional law, the Court finds that this factor is not entirely relevant to the case at bar….”

    12-2143-STA {pgs 7 & 8] WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

  2. Question to all the Jayhawks out there;
    What, pray tell, prevents the Secretary of State’s office from vetting Obama themselves?
    Oh, sorry, I guess that would mean that a government employee would actually be required to fulfill their job description. If I overstepped the acceptable boundary of decorum, I most sincerely apologize, or is it asking too much for an government employee to actually DO THEIR JOB?
    My wife just said I made a joke. Is it? Is the Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, nothing but a joke? Can’t even vet a dog catcher? Is that true, that Kobach is an embarrassment to his fellow Jayhawks?
    Well, is it?
    You people from Kansas, please comment.
    OPOVV

    1. Apparently the Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, has decided to take the reins and move forward with the vetting process, although perusing the rabbit through his office may be easier accomplished than in our obviously tainted court system.
      Nevertheless, each of us has a “standing” in the outcome, which we are waiting for with baited breath.