This is an update on a civil complaint/emergency injunction brought by Paul Guthrie against Obama, Biden, Dempsey, Hillary Clinton, Kagan, Sotomayor, and the U. S. Senate and House of Representatives.  We are a nation of laws.  Obama went to law school and studied the Constitution from the standpoint of circumventing it, not supporting it.  If everyone from the President to the Supreme Court considers the Constitution irrelevant, then even if this case is won, my question is, what will it change? 

This is reblogged from Sam Sewell’s Steady Drip Blog


Dear Patriots Friends and Supporters
I have had a day or two to let things sink in since filing the reply to Judge Barker’s order to show cause.  I am now realizing some things, looking ahead in the process, that I thought I might share with everyone, which will also teach people about the legal system and process we are involved in.
The reply filed is now probably being read and contemplated this weekend by Judge Barker.  If she agrees that I have met all of the elements of standing, and thus this is not a recycling of claims, which we all know it is not, and I have met all the elements and illustrated all the elements of standing in the brief just filed, then that will mean that the yoke of responsibility to remove Obama from Office will transfer from We the People (you and me) to the judge and other branches of the government, which is where we want it to be and off of my shoulders and off of your shoulders.
This unique and historic situation causes all kinds of wonderful jurisdictional authorities for our side.  Let’s suppose for a minute that Judge Barker determines that our case is not frivolous and not a recycling of claims and has standing to go forward.  That is identical to ruling in favor of Guthrie on the three motions that she just denied.  The effect will be the same as if she granted the previous three motions or granted a summary judgement in favor of Guthrie.  The effect of granting standing will be to declare Obama ineligible before there is even discovery, let alone the actual trial.  We will move right to the conclusion of the case decided for Guthrie and now we will be in the recovery of the damages phase by implementing the remedy and the other side can’t even appeal the decision as they have no right to appeal!  Let me explain.
If Judge Barker grants standing, then she cannot let the case go forward without first having Obama removed and replaced, because by granting standing, Judge Barker assumes the responsibility to fix the serious defect in the civil process that will prevent Guthrie’s due process rights in the civil case.  This is because if Judge Barker grants standing, then that means she has declared the U.S. government to be a foreign jurisdiction to the Constitution and that Obama is not eligible.  Therefore, the defendants and their attorneys cannot answer Guthrie’s suit or make an appearance without committing treason or at least misprision of felony, and misprision of treason, and fraud upon the court.  The only way to cure this defect is to first remove and replace Obama, then the defendants and attorneys can respond and reply without committing a criminal offence.  By granting standing, it is the same as a Summary Judgment in favor of the plaintiff Guthrie before she has even heard from the defendants!  If Judge Barker does not cure this defect before the time clock runs out at 60 days, then we will be right back with default judgment, because the defendants are going to realize that they cannot reply without committing a criminal offence, so they will just not reply and will default, or even if they do reply, it will not count because they will be the wrong jurisdiction replying and so they still will default.  Checkmate.  I don’t see that they have any options left.
The way I see it, if Judge Barker grants standing and assumes her proper duty and responsibility that is obviously her duty and obligation that she has at this point, then she will have to keep the suit temporarily stayed and the clock stopped in order to give her and the other two branches of government the time opportunity to cure this defect by removing Obama.  Once he is gone and replaced with a legitimate nbC President, then she can lift the stay and let the case go forward and the civil process will be intact and the defendants and their attorneys can reply in the remaining time left on the clock and respond without committing a criminal act.  Of course, by that time, they will not be able to dispute our claim because they will have already admitted, by removing Obama, and now it will just be time to negotiate the financial settlement part.  Who needs a trial?  We are almost done.  So if Judge Barker grants standing then she will immediately begin giving us the asked-for remedies, because the most important remedy that we are seeking is the exposure of Obama for his crimes of fraud, and not being a nbC, and his removal from Office, and nullification of everything he has done, which will all naturally follow from granting standing and must be addressed immediately by Barker before we even go forward.  For all I know, if she has already read the reply and has decided to grant standing, she may already be moving her chess pieces into place this weekend in order to begin getting prepared.  She could be speaking with DOJ, FBI and others already.
Now suppose for a minute that Judge Barker grants standing.  The knee-jerk reaction of Obama and his cronies would probably be to force the situation into interlocutory appeal to slow and bog the process down or perhaps get the standing order overturned .  But it won’t work.  What are they going to appeal and what remedy are they going to seek from an appeals court that an appeals court could possibly provide?
Once Barker grants standing, Obama and the bogus foreign government cannot appeal anything because they will have been declared a foreign unconstitutional jurisdiction to that of the United States of America, so they will not have any standing in a U.S. court for a claim of injury!  It would be like the foreign government of Kenya secretly invaded and took over part of the government and kept the secret from most of the judicial branch, and then once Paul Guthrie exposed the secret to the Judicial branch, they rule that we have been invaded by the foreign government of Kenya.  So if Obama or the U.S. or any defendant appeals if Obama is still occupying the Office, it would be like the foreign government of Kenya is claiming an injury in their political rights within the United State to invade, rights which they don’t even have, but they are going to appeal to a United States appeals court and ask a United Sates appeals court to overthrow the lower court and Constitution and reinstate a foreign jurisdictional government invasion in place of the United States?  I don’t think so, no subject matter jurisdiction because the court cannot provide a remedy and has no personal jurisdiction over Obama as a President even if he appears because he has been declared to not be one!  The only way he could secure a right of appeal is if he could bring forward forensic evidence of a State citizen father.  Or are they going to ask the appeals court to exercise authority that they do not have to define natural born Citizen without the father, contrary to the political Law of Nature so they can reinstate their foreign jurisdiction that has no right to be here in the first place?  I don’t think so.  If they even attempt to appeal at all while Obama is still in Office, it will be a criminal act not a civil act, because they are not the government of the United Sates of America as it is defined by the Constitution and that will have already been declared by Judge Barker to be a foreign jurisdiction, thus denying any appeal to Obama or his bogus government.  Therefore, as far as I can see, Obama and company have no right of appeal due to their own criminal actions and this is the end of the road for Obama and the false government, as far as I can see.
As far as I can tell, I have managed to hog-tie and checkmate all the players and I have declared in court what the law is.  Now we see if Judge Barker is a true human being or not.  If she grants standing, then we can claim victory for the People and the rule of law and Justice will be in the process of being restored.  It just might take a little time to extract Obama, as I doubt he is going to go peacefully.
Now that I finally have a very clear and comprehensive understanding of this entire situation and the point that we have all brought this to, we can go back and examine what happened in the election process in 2008 and was repeated in 2012, in order to discover what went wrong.  Here is what appears to have happened.  It turns out that the duty and responsibility to know what a natural born Citizen is, and how it is defined, is the personal civic duty and responsibility of each and every citizen.  It is an obligatory civic duty that every American who calls himself a U.S. citizen has.  This duty is a self-imposed Patriotic duty and responsibility.  How can you even know if you are injured by King George III or de facto king Obama, or have a right to declare your Independence from England or the bogus current foreign jurisdiction government of Obama, if you do not understand natural political rights and natural sovereign political authority and where it comes from?  How can Guthrie even know if he is injured, if he is not aware of nbC and how it is defined?  How can you even call yourself a Patriot, the word derived from the Latin or Greek word for father, if you do not realize that natural sovereign political authority is naturally vested in males to be passed on equally to the male and female offspring just as a function of the sexual biological reproduction process and that the natural political laws regarding consent and permission to create offspring govern reality, such that permission must be obtained by both males and females in order to produce offspring?  For the male, he does not need permission which is why rape is a crime to provide a barrier and attempt to make things politically equal between males and females.  For the females, rape does not even apply because she cannot rape a man without his permission and if he gives it then it is not rape.  This natural political governance determines that the male is solely responsible for the creating of natural born Citizens.  Let’s apply these concepts to history and use some more Natural Law scientific reasoning like we did for the primitive hunter-gatherer society, to see if we can think to discover for ourselves what has happened.
OK, we now know that natural born Citizen is defined by the citizen father and his offspring as a Natural political Law or natural order, that naturally vests the state political authority to be derived from the natural sovereign political authority of males, because they must give their political permission and do the deed to create natural born Citizens but this is not an inequity for females.  And we now realize that awareness of this knowledge is an obligatory civic duty, as one cannot even function properly in U.S. society if one does not realize the source of their own natural political rights and how and why females must be treated with respect and equality.  If you don’t know the source of your own natural political rights and authority, then you must be dependant upon the government to tell you what political rights you have or don’t have, just like running to the monarch for a grant of political rights, which is exactly the behavior of all those who believe Obama is legitimate and that the government is serving them.  And also the behavior of all other previous plaintiffs, because they run to court with the wrong definition that can’t even establish a factual basis for injury or fact in Nature, thus the plaintiff and attorney for the plaintiff is asking the government to be the source of political rights and authority and to determine what natural political rights the citizen has, and to grant the political right, as if the citizen is not suppose to be able or required to determine this for themselves and does not already possess the political right from Nature.  It is an illusion.  You are the source of the superior sovereign authority over the three branches because you inherit that right from your State citizen father.  By running to court with the wrong definition, you are asking the judge to act as an attorney and admitting that you don’t know what a natural born Citizen is and thus you can’t even tell if you have an injury, and would you please advise me judge, what the definition of natural born Citizen is so I can figure out if I have a political injury and then make a claim?  That is asking for an advisory opinion on something that should have been properly predetermined and is required for you as the plaintiff and attorney to know before you even file.  The judge is not supposed to give you legal advice and be your attorney and tell you what a Patriot is and why.  This is what it amounts to when you file a case with the wrong definition of nbC. 
Naturally, the state is going to vest themselves with all the sovereign political authority that they can grab, just like the King in England in 1776.  They aren’t going to recognize Nature as a superior source of political rights than the court and government, and tell you about it, and thus step in for the People.  If the citizen is so stupid that he does not even know the source of his own natural sovereign political authority and must extract that knowledge from the artificial sovereign authority that was owes its existance to be derived from the natural sovereign authority, but now that natural authority source has lost its knowledge of the relationship between the source (People) and that which was created (three branches), then why should the state tell him?  This turns the entire organization and structure upside down and makes the state the source of authority for the determination of natural political rights, just like a King in a monarchy!  Did our Founding Fathers run to king George for an answer regarding what political natural rights they had (like he is going to admit and tell them), or did they just figure it out on their own when the King kept abusing their natural political rights (like Guthrie did), and so they just discovered their own natural rights that Nature endows to everyone equally, and thus realized that the King had no lawful authority over them, and they were living under tyranny, and had a natural political right to use force to repel that tyranny?  How is our situation with Obama and the courts any different?  You first have to realize the source before you can see how to take on Obama and a court is not going to provide that information to you because they already expect you to know that because it is your civic duty and not their duty to act as your attorney and give advisory opinions that are necessary for you to determine if you have an injury or standing after you come into court.  If you go to court and challenge Obama with the wrong definition of nbC, it is like going to a judge and asking him to determine if you are a Patriot or not before you can establish if you have an injury and what the injury is.  And people wonder why these cases are thrown out as frivolous and attorneys sanctioned.  It is your own responsibility and duty to know the answer to that and you cannot determine that until you discover and accept the male father as the source.  Then you can define nbC and determine if Obama is one or not and if you have an injury and what it is and can you meet all the necessary and required elements of standing then you file, not before.
The average American citizen’s subconscious mentality is that they are all living under a monarchy and behaving like serfs, perfectly content to let the government or monarch tell them what political rights they have or don’t have.  The American People are just fine with being told or dictated to and they are used to believing that all their rights come from the ‘government’, so it is very easy to accept that they just run to the government and ask it what rights they have, and if the government says Obama is qualified then ‘that is good enough for me’.  They are way too lazy to take up their own personal civic duty and responsibility to learn and discover what the source of their own natural sovereign political authority is and claim it and exercise it.  Isn’t that why we granted artificial sovereignty to the government, so we don’t have to exercise our own natural sovereign political authority, so we don’t have to think and do anything and the government can do all that for us, so we can sit on our asses and watch football and get drunk, right?
Imagine you are one of the Colonists in 1776.  There was no television, nor electricity, nor news wire service.  Not everyone could read.  The population was a mixture of well-educated and mostly not-so well-educated, but everyone was aware of what was going on in the Colonies and the tensions with England.  Everyone in those days knew what a general noun natural born citizen was and how it was defined via the father because that was the burning news story that was shaping everyone’s lives at that time.  Those who fought in the Revolution had a pretty good idea where their natural political rights came from (their Creator) and it was common knowledge that the males were the source of natural sovereign political authority to be passed on to the male and female offspring, because everyone knew that females had to obtain political permission from a male in order to get pregnant and create an offspring.  As non-technically-advanced as they were in those days, they still were smart enough to figure out that females cannot get themselves pregnant or rape a man, so she is dependant upon a man for his permission and to do the deed if she wants to create a natural born citizen of some country and how this is the basis of the Revolution and what distinguishes a monarchy from of government that they all hate, from a sovereign Republic of politically free natural sovereign citizens, the opposite of Royalty who are artificial political sovereign authorities, not natural one’s, equal and same as everybody else all with the equal right to be the chief or head political leader of the country and not ruler over everyone. 
They were fighting to secure recognition and protection of their natural sovereign political authority in order to obtain Equality and Liberty and Justice that was being denied to them by an artificial sovereign political authority (King George III) who had no natural right claim over the People in the Colonies.  Everyone knew what a natural born Citizen was and how it was defined.  It was a defining point in people’s lives and history in those days and anyone who did not know this was not a Patriot or responsible to doing their basic civic duty.
The above historic perspective can explain why there is no specific compulsion written into a statute anyplace that requires Obama, as a candidate, or any candidate to provide a birth certificate.  This also explains why there is no statute requiring a State Secretary of State to check vital records and verify that the candidate is the offspring of a State citizen father, and then order the Secretary of State to not put a non-nbC on the ballot.  It is supposed to be understood and just part of the job description of what it means to be a State Secretary of State.  It is the job of a Secretary of State to defend and protect the natural sovereign political authority of the State citizens.  How is he or she supposed to do that job if they don’t know what a natural born Citizen is or how it is defined and why, a necessity in order to be able to protect both the State sovereignty from federal tyranny and the natural political sovereignty of the People within the State from both State and federal tyranny?
What is supposed to happen, is that the duty and responsibility is supposed to be on each and every U.S. citizen, such that when a citizen candidate comes forward, they just certify that they are qualified which is a certification that they are the male or female U.S. citizen offspring of a U.S. State citizen father who was a U.S. citizen.  Since Nguyen v. INS tells us that the male must claim and report in order to secure nbC status for their offspring, then there must be a vital record someplace in the United States that can verify the birth father to be from a State of the union and not a foreign state, or country, or federal territory, or possession. 
The compulsion upon the State Secretary of State to check this out and prevent anyone who is not the offspring of a State citizen father, comes from the compulsory duty that a Secretary of State has to ensure that they don’t violate Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 (Title of Nobility prohibition upon the States), and by his own civic duty to know what a natural born Citizen is and how it is defined, in order to comprehend and be able to protect the sovereign political authority of the State citizens in his or her State, which maintains the relationship between the people of the State, and their State and federal government, so that the People will remain the controlling superior authority in the relationship and not be enslaved by the States to be under the yoke of both federal and State tyranny, which is the situation now.
It is just part of his or her job description of what it means to be a State Secretary of State.  Never in their wildest imagination could our Founding Fathers have realized that in the future, people would become so removed from Nature and Her political laws, and so removed from the natural order of things, and would be so removed from history and natural science, that they would forget their roots and civic duties and where their natural sovereign political rights come from, or what they are, or that this knowledge places a civic duty and responsibility upon free American citizens if they wish to remain free. 
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, but you cannot be vigilant if you don’t know how nbC is defined and why.  Back then, they would have believed that the authority in the Constitution and the personal knowledge and civic duty upon everyone to know what a natural born Citizen is, and how it is defined and why it is important to maintain this distinction in society, which is to secure freedom, liberty, justice and equality, would be more than sufficient.  They would have believed that no statutory authorities besides Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, of the Constitution and the Title of Nobility prohibitions and the civic duty regarding the definition of nbC known by all, is all that is required. 
A candidate is either the offspring of a State citizen father or not.  If he is, then to qualify as a nbC candidate his father must have claimed his offspring and reported that fact to the government within 18 years of the birth, so there must be a record in vital statistics someplace.  Then the Secretary of State is supposed to have a personal civic duty, even before the duty as Secretary of State, to know what a natural born Citizen is and how it is defined from the male State father, and that those who are the offspring of foreign fathers are naturalized adopted citizens by definition and thus do not qualify as it is spelled out in black and white in Article II qualifications. The Secretary has an absolute legal duty and responsibility as a State Secretary of State under Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, and a duty to the State and the People in the State to know and not subject them to federal dictatorship monarchy from of government, which places the requirement that the Secretary of State check vital records to confirm the birth father’s citizenship.  If not a U.S. citizen from a State, then the candidate cannot be put on the ballot.  That is the job of a State Secretary of State and it is already mandatory and obligatory and a duty.  Another statute compelling this behavior would have been redundant and insulting.  Now we can understand why no such statutes exist to compel these Secretary of States to prevent them from putting someone like an Obama on the ballot.  Apparently the situation worked well for approx. 220 years and then something happened.  Now I guess we must insult the State Secretaries of State and make them look like they are so ignorantly irresponsible and derelict that they cannot be trusted to do their civic Patriotic duty or even comprehend what that duty is, so they must now be instructed with a statute how to do their job and be forced by statutory authority to be a Patriot of the country.
The observation is as if all the State Secretary of States have all at once lost their knowledge and awareness of what their civic duties and responsibilities are.  It is like they have lost the knowledge of Patriotism and civic duty, and when someone raised the issue early on, the State Secretaries acted like they just did not know what to do because they had lost the knowledge of what nbC means.  Whether genuinely ignorant or out of duplicity, they then, in typical bureaucratic fashion, scrambled around looking for a statute to instruct them on how to do their job.  Of course they were bemused and puzzled to discover that there does not exist any statutory authorities to instruct them in any of the 50 States or in federal codes, which instructed them to check vital statistics for a State citizen father, and if not one, prevent the candidate from being on the ballot.  Imagine their puzzlement, no statutes?  They are already supposed to know this and do this without one.  That is what the minimum knowledge requirement is to be qualified to hold the office of a Secretary of State.  Just like it is required to know nbC and its definition and why it is defined the way it is.  This is essential in order to be a Judge, Congressman, or President or full Patriotic American citizen so that when you take your hat off and hold your hand over your heart when the star spangled banner is playing you will actually know what it is all about and not just behaving like an emotional ignorant fool.  If a Secretary of State is without this knowledge and awareness, then who or what are they representing or Representatives of, since it cannot be the natural born Citizens of their State, because they do not even have knowledge of what one is, what creates them?
Because they could not find any instructions, they assumed that it was totally up to them and their immunity protects them so they could do what they want.  They can put Mickey Mouse on the ballot and then hide behind their 11th Amendment State immunity protections that are supposed to protect the State from suit if someone screws up by making an innocent mistake.  That is what happened to Orly and Allen Keyes in Keyes v. Bowen.  All the State Secretaries are acting like there is no authority that compels them and they are shielded.  That is their big mistake, because the authority is the Constitution and their obligatory required civic duty to know the definition of nbC.  That is why there is no statutory authority that compels and instructs them.  It is not supposed to be necessary and would be redundant and insulting.
In this light, we can see that what has probably happened, at least one angle of this, is that the insurance, banking, and medical industry wanted Obamacare but they knew it would never fly.  But that was not going to stop them.  They somehow convinced the States that Obamacare was going to be good for the State treasuries, so it is in the interests of the States and all the Secretary of States to overlook Obama’s eligibility so they could get Obamacare and the States could force their citizens into compliance.  They have to cram this through without the people’s approval and get the States to shove it down our throats because the federal government cannot force you into it unless through voluntary taxation.  That is what the Supreme Court ruled but before the 2008 election they would not have know because that ruling was way off into the future and they knew that the federal government has no jurisdiction over ordinary State citizens without voluntary consent of the State citizen, so they needed the Sates on board who do have jurisdiction over their own citizens.  They said that the individual mandate was unconstitutional but it could be constitutional upon taxpayers.  The federal government has no jurisdiction over the individual State citizen so there cannot be a federal mandate and there is not one.  The mandate is only upon taxpayers.  Taxpayers are those creatures who have voluntarily invited federal jurisdiction onto themselves by their privileged commercial conduct, otherwise there is no authority given in the Constitution that grants power to the federal government to require anything of a State citizen except to register for the draft if you are a male age 18.  Naturally you must pay State income taxes if you are required to pay federal income taxes and thus we have the connection between the State and federal government that will force everyone into compliance by leaving a paper trail with the State government that you are a federal taxpayer and that is how they will get their statistics for their money to be handed out to the State and insurance companies so the State will enforce the federal mandate or you will be punished by the federal government when you file your federal taxes if you don’t have health or medical insurance.
The effect has been that the 50 States have abandoned their duty to protect the political liberty and freedom of their own State citizens and have decided to join with the federal government to become an arbitrary absolute power and dictatorship over the State citizens.  The States are in league with the federal government to usher in total federal tyranny and dictatorship and promulgate false laws that are not laws that have been signed by a bogus President and passed by a bogus non-Representative Congress.  If this precedent stands then you will be having a lot of false laws in the future forced upon you by your own State who is now just a local branch of the federal tyranny.  This is the current political reality in the United States that will not have any chance of changing, now or 100’s of years into the future, unless Judge Barker grants standing.  If she grants standing others need to coordinate with me and bring suits in federal court against the States.
Your Servant,
Paul Guthrie
Full Complaint:
You might also be interested in reading this on the National Security Fiasco of the Boston Bombings:  (Warning: Graphic images)

from Major General Paul Vallely. an article points at Obama, Holder, Napolitano, Mueller, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and their policies in creating a perfect storm in National security

Posted on | April 21, 2013