OPEN LETTER to GREG ABBOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL of TEXAS

Attorney General Abbott has indicated he will file a civil suit to challenge the Constitutionality of the just signed ‘Mandatory Purchase of Private Health Insurance’ bill, arguing it encroaches on states’ rights by violating  the Commerce Clause.  But for several months now, he has had at his disposal a tool that is both much quicker and cheaper to combat this law, as well as any other legislation originating up Mr. Obama’s sinister sleeve.  That is, he could investigate the dozens of charges of election fraud the citizens of the great state of Texas have already filed with his office.

And he can start just by submitting this request to Boyd Richie, Chair of the Texas Democratic Party:

“Please produce all documents which were the basis for the Official TDP Certification of Nomination you signed and then submitted to Texas election officials attesting that Presidential candidate Barack Obama was Constitutionally qualified for the job.”

Then, when Mr. Richie refuses to produce such documentation, AG Abbott can charge him with criminal election fraud.  Simple as that.

I have no doubt that, on learning the Attorney General in the great state of Texas has filed criminal charges of election fraud against Mr. Richie, Congress will do the rest.

The telephone number for the Office of the AG 512.463.2100.

View this document on Scribd
View this document on Scribd
View this document on Scribd

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Freedom costs.

About these ads

18 Responses to OPEN LETTER to GREG ABBOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL of TEXAS

  1. Jacqlyn Smith says:

    jbjd……do we need to call the number above and encourage this or is this going to get done??? I do not live in Texas but will be happy to make any phone calls you deem we need to in order to put the pressure on these people to get this done!!!! Please let me know what I can do from Nevada!

    Jacqlyn Smith: Thank you for the offer of help. I hope that only Texans call AG Abbott. See, if we are serious about keeping the federal government out of state issues then, we need to let the citizens in the states petition their own officials to enforce local laws. However, there is something you can do to let these citizens know, they have options.

    Post the link to this article on other blogs. Register to post on Texas newspapers. However you can get out the word, do that. Can you imagine what would be AG Abbott’s response, if his office received 100,000 citizen complaints of election fraud against Boyd Richie? Do you think for one minute, he would ignore them then?

    So far, I have posted open letters to AG Cuccinelli, R-VA, and AG Abbott, R-TX, both of whom received citizen complaints of election fraud, which have been ignored. If we cannot get our local officials to enforce locally enacted laws, what chance do we have to get our state-elected federal officials, safely ensconced in Washington, D.C., to do our bidding? ADMINISTRATOR

  2. Jacqlyn Smith says:

    Okay…..I will post this everywhere I can…..I will call too and see what they say to me! Right now I have to get my daughter to school so I will be on this later this morning!

    Jacqlyn Smith: Thank you for spreading the word. (I thought you were from a state other than Texas. If this is true, please, don’t call the TX AG. This is a state issue; the citizens of Texas are entitled to the services of the AG – remember, they are paying for these services, too – inasmuch as they are citizens of Texas. ADMINISTRATOR

  3. Jacqlyn Smith says:

    okay then….I won’t call but just know that I am not afraid to make the calls!

    Jacqlyn Smith: I know you are not afraid! I just want to ensure as much as possible, citizens become empowered to take control of the government in their states. On the flip side, I do not want my state officials to act on the misguided belief, the citizens of this state seek the action undertaken, when the impetus came from citizens from outside of the state. Know what I mean? ADMINISTRATOR

  4. Ace says:

    Why do you imagine that a Congress that just spit in the faces of the American People would introduce Articles of Impeachment?

    Ludicrous.

    Ace: Long time no hear. I predict Congress will introduce Articles of Impeachment for two reasons. 1) The only way to get BO out of office is through the Articles of Impeachment. Once these are introduced, Congress can begin to investigate. (Of course, they don’t need a state charge of election fraud to begin such investigation; but maybe they need the ‘cover’ such charge would provide.) 2) Several members of Congress explicitly told constituents they – Congress – would ratify the vote of the Electors notwithstanding concerns BO wasn’t a NBC, based on assurances from Annenberg Political Fact Check, he is legit. These citizen complaints of election fraud detail APFC’s complicity in establishing the meme, BO is eligible, and refute their allegations in support of that meme. Thus, filing the criminal complaint of election fraud, by extension, undermines the credibility of APFC, too. Then, with APFC no longer a credible source, no other basis exists for ratifying the vote of the Electors, ACCORDING TO THOSE CONGRESSPEOPLE WHOSE ONLY EXPRESSED BASIS FOR SUCH RATIFICATION WAS THE WORD OF APFC! ADMINISTRATOR

    P.S. Are you saying that none of the people who voted against this ‘mandatory purchase of private health insurance’ bill, R’s and D’s, would introduce Articles of Impeachment?

  5. Michelle says:

    jbjd-just an FYI I sent this over to hillbuzz guys and breitbart tv. in case you get any inquires. Back to painting before it rains. Can’t wait for your new articles, but knowing you, you will take the time to do it right. Go Texans, go jbjd, go WE THE PEOPLE.

    Michelle: Thank you; I was thinking of you earlier today. I began getting several hits from Breitbart and backtracked; sure enough, this resulted from your post. (Were you aware, yesterday, I posted an open letter to VA AG Cuccinelli, who also will join the suit against Obamacare?) ADMINISTRATOR

  6. Michelle says:

    jbjd-I didn’t want you to get surprises like you did last time-I’m so glad folks at Breitbart responded. YEAH. Yes, I was aware of the open letter to VA AG Cuccinelli, also I previously sent a couple of your postings to our FL AG (2)different postings that you had done and I made sure that your web-site was credited, I still don’t like that stuff some people “stole” from you. You said FL was not an applicable state for voter fraud, but I thought at that time let him be aware of this situation-I hope it is in the back of his head-hopefully other AG’s have your material (labor intensive-I know). Just as an FYI Florida has strict SUNSHINE LAWS,just in case you need to know that for any reason.
    Finished my painting for today. 3 awnings down, 2 to go-you tend to forget up and down ladders will wear you out. God Bless the honest American people who are just fighting for the truth and our Constitution.

    Michelle: I appreciate your concern about the theft of my product. I had a commenter on another blog tell me that, I was mistaken about the TX Certification, which was only signed by Boyd Richie; he insisted Nancy Pelosi had signed all 50 Certifications. When I pointed to his mistake, he now insisted, HI was the only state in which the D Corporation specifically said BO was Constitutionally qualified for the job. He didn’t know about SC. But the funniest thing was, he referred me to the site he said contained all of the Certifications; he warned me, it would take me a couple of hours to go through all of the material there. Ha; I pointed out to him, people who steal my work without doing their homework are bound to ‘get it wrong.’ I invited him to come here to study.

    “[L]abor intensive” is an understatement. I stayed home the last few days putting these posts together. (The open letter to SC will go up tomorrow; and I have a big surprise in store for Texas after that.) But the chance for success of this ‘push’ is improved when the petition to act on the citizen complaints of election fraud can be leveraged against the burden of bringing the federal complaint to overturn the ‘mandatory purchase of private insurance’ law on the grounds it violates the Commerce Clause. ADMINISTRATOR

    P.S. I will have to hold a one-woman on-line fundraiser!

  7. bill says:

    Well I am a citizen of Texas and I believe this is a brilliant idea.I have posted this on the American Grand Jury blog which had volunteer jurors all over these United States.If this might be good for Texas then why wouldn’t it be good with their AGs as well.Thanks for the brain trust. cheers

    bill: Welcome! These citizen complaints of election fraud could only be filed in those states with laws saying, only the names of eligible candidates may be printed on state ballots. Citizens looked up the laws in their states to determine whether these ballot eligibility laws were there – they brought back their findings for my review – and then, I had them contact their election officials – usually S’s oS – to obtain the documents submitted to get the name of BO printed on the ballot. (No provision of any law, state or federal, requires any public official to check the eligibility of the nominee from the major political party.) In this way, we identified 6 (six) states so far, which were applicable states for the purpose of filing charges of election fraud. (AL would be another state but I cannot find anyone from Alabama to finish the leg work…) (There are probably more such states, but…)

    Citizens in each of the applicable states have filed complaints with their A’sG, charging the appropriate person in the D party with election fraud. To the best of our knowledge, none of these A’sG has investigated these complaints.

    The only states ‘eligible’ for these open letters to the A’sG are those states which satisfy both of these conditions: 1) they are applicable states for citizen complaints of election fraud AND citizens have already filed complaints; and 2) the state AG is filing suit to defeat Obamacare. In other words, not every AG can be swayed to pursue the citizen complaints of election fraud with the argument, this would be faster and cheaper than going to court to pursue a federal claim that Congress has violated the Commerce Clause.

    This brief explanation is no shortcut to ‘getting up to speed.’ Take some time to read through the materials on this blog. Come back with questions. The more you know about how our political system works, the less power can be taken away from you by those who know more. ADMINISTRATOR

    P.S. In the meantime, read the TX complaint and follow the links; and when you ‘get it,’ download a complaint, fill in your real name and TX address; and sent it!

  8. I’m Texan, and I faxed Abbott on Tuesday, 3/23/10.

    Erica Thunderpaws: Great! (I wonder how many other faxes and calls he has received. I have cautioned non-Texans to please not call his office!) ADMINISTRATOR

  9. DBH says:

    I know all Republicans in Congress are scared to death of Obama. My two Senators and My Congressman are all Republicans and they are all covering up for Obama.I have written many letters to them concerning Obama and that they took the Constitutional oath. They read from a “Script” and say “They believe Obama is a citizen and therefor legal” They will no longer reply to me. I doubt they will touch it, they have evidently been threatend.

    DBH: Welcome. Your comment points to a common misconception. That is, the legislators (or news commentators and others) mistakenly believe that, by challenging the documentary evidence available in the public record, you are asking them to weigh their belief this evidence means something; against yours. This is not what you are doing; nor is their job to substitute their judgment, for yours, anyway.

    Here is a comment I posted today on another blog.
    #

    jbjd // March 24, 2010 at 12:03 pm

    GORDO // March 24, 2010 at 11:48 am

    Posted March 23:

    “A new national Louis Harris poll …

    The poll found that 45 percent of Republicans, and 25 percent in the overall survey, agree with Birthers that Obama was “not born in the United States and so is not eligible to be president.”

    Even Fox News pundits, notably Bill O’Reilly, have dismissed the Birthers’ claims. The state of Hawaii produced Obama’s birth certificate during the 2008 campaign.”
    ******************************************************
    GORDO, don’t let these people get away with this. It doesn’t matter what FOX, or Gallup, or anyone else THINKS is the proof BO was born in the U.S.A. (which fact would only make him a native citizen, anyway). It matters what HE said proves he was born in the U.S.A. And not just on a web site, Fight the Smears, which he owned until becoming the nominee. And not just through his surrogate Annenberg Political Fact Check, which organization has no privity with the American people, anyway. No; what matters is what BO said to federal district court Judge Robertson, through his attorney, Bob Bauer, in the Hollister case, in January 2009. In fact, he said, ‘I have no ACTUAL documentation to show the court at this time that would prove I was born in the U.S.A., not even the Certification of Nomination Nancy Pelosi signed and submitted to state election officials to get my name printed on state ballots. Nope; all I have is my word, there is such proof, in the form of a Certification of Live Birth, a copy of which I posted on the internet and which APFC said, is a real copy of a real document they saw. Please, sir, will you take judicial notice of this?’

    Thank goodness, the court was not as ‘gullible’ as Bill O’Reilly.
    (This scenario is documented in every citizen complaint of election fraud on my blog.)

    http://jbjd.wordpress.com

    ADMINISTRATOR

  10. DeWayne says:

    There is a reason no elected official wants to touch this; it’s a waste of time that goes nowhere. It’s conspicary theory kookery, and nets nothing but wasted time, energy, and money.

    Concentrate on something that has some teeth, and that is the unconstitutional mandate to buy health care, and the unconstitutional tax for providing it to others

    DeWayne: Welcome. Your comment is disingenuous. On the one hand, you urge a protracted legal court battle – legal research and writing, filing fees, etc. – with uncertain results: on the other hand, you call asking one question “a waste of time that goes nowhere: and “nets nothing but wasted time, energy, and money.” A letter (and stamp) or a lawsuit. A letter or a lawsuit. ADMINISTRATOR

  11. Jon Roland says:

    It is important to recognize that while the AG may file a criminal complaint just like any citizen, the State Constitution reserves the power to prosecute criminal cases to district attorneys, so he would need to find one willing to conduct such a prosecution.

    What the AG could do is take such cases to grand juries, and if enough indicted, perhaps incite the DA of at least one of the counties to step forward and prosecute. The problem, of course, is that the DA himself may have been elected in such a corrupt election.

    One of the problems I continually encounter in my own race for AG is that voters expect the AG to be able to do things that are beyond his legal authority. There are clever workarounds to do some things, but those are sometimes difficult to explain.

    You might want to consider electing an AG who will be a creative crusader and not just a reactor.

    Jon Roland: Welcome. For the purpose of effecting notice to Congress that doing nothing about constituent complaints of election fraud they began receiving even before the 2008 general election, it is immaterial whether one actually prosecutes a case of election fraud or merely causes such a case to be prosecuted; or whether, given the evidence, a particular DA (from among all of the DA’s in all of the counties in TX or any other state) exercises discretion to prosecute such a charge. The ‘end game’ of these efforts to expose the fraud is to propel Congress to act to determine the lawful status of the man in the WH, given the fraud underlying his election. (If Congress can be inspired to do the right thing without such prosecution, that would be fine, too.) Given that BO was lawfully elected President whether he is Constitutionally qualified for the job, the only way to remove him from office, on whatever lawful basis, is through Articles of Impeachment. The purpose of these citizen complaints of election fraud is to provide sufficient cover for Congress to do the right thing; that is, introduce Articles of Impeachment and get to the bottom of this mess. See THE END GAME, http://jbjd.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/the-end-game/ ADMINISTRATOR

  12. Carl says:

    Very nicely presented. I live in East Texas and will be faxing the AG’s office, followed by a call, on Monday.

    Carl: Thank you, and welcome. Make sure you read the citizen complaint and, when you understand the charges, download and file a complaint, too, filling in your real name and Texas address. (Read the request for documents to Boyd Richie under the Texas open records law, linked to in the roadmap of election fraud re-posted below this open letter to AG Abbott.) ADMINISTRATOR

  13. uniteas1 says:

    I too will post this article on web sites for more public viewing and I also call my Senators in North Carolina about concerns I have with this administration

    uniteas1: Welcome; and thank you. When we know more about our political system than those people who would take advantage of their superior knowledge to steal our power; they can no longer steal our power. (Do you know whether your election laws in North Carolina require the candidates whose names appear on the ballot, must be eligible for the job? If they do, I will draft a citizen complaint of election fraud for NC, too.) ADMINISTRATOR

  14. ADMINISTRATOR wrote:
    “Given that BO was lawfully elected President whether he is Constitutionally qualified for the job, the only way to remove him from office, on whatever lawful basis, is through Articles of Impeachment.”

    Mr. Obama was NOT lawfully elected President, inasmuch as the U.S. Constitution, Art. II § 1 ¶ 5, states,
    “No person except a natural born citizen… shall be eligible to the office of President;”
    Mr. Obama was not Constitutionally eligible, and therefore he was not duly or lawfully elected.

    Not being duly elected, he is a usurper unlawfully “squatting” in the White House, and as such, he must be removed from the property by the appropriate office of law enforcement.

    That is exactly what would happen if we were to wake up tomorrow and find Osama in the White House in place of Obama. No one would suggest Articles of Impeachment for Osama bin Laden; he would simply be escorted out in handcuffs.

    In any case, discovery of Mr. Obama’s documents of eligibility, ordered by a federal judge, is all that is necessary to set in motion Mr. Obama’s removal from office by whatever appropriate agency.

    MinutemanCDC_SC and “jbjd” Readers: I printed your comment, notwithstanding it is outside of the scope of civil discourse normally associated with this blog. As I have said, given that Electors elected Mr. Obama in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, which provisions do not include vetting as to Constitutional eligibility; given that Congress Certified the vote of the Electors under those same provisions, which do not including vetting; and given that the SCOTUS swore him in, again, in accordance with the Constitution, I (and the federal courts) maintain, his election presents a political question. That is, do we agree with the political Constitutional choice of the Electors? Just because the answer is no, does not mean, the courts are corrupt; the President is not the President; and we are justified in calling names, or making ‘slanderous’ comparisons to well known terrorists, just because their names are similar.

    I believe the judges in all of these ‘eligibility’ cases have thus far ruled appropriately. None of these cases was based on the law but rather, on emotion. Each case was infirm from the beginning; and notwithstanding how impassioned the masses found their pleadings; or how much money they contributed to this cottage industry of filing eligibility lawsuits; none of these cases presented a plausible cause of action.

    Barack Obama did not elect himself. Your screen moniker indicates, you hail from SC. Have you (and your fellow Minutemen and Minutewomen) downloaded and filed the free complaint of election fraud I posted for your state, which complaint names the people from the D party who Certified his eligibility for office, the predicate act which under your state law entitled his name to be printed on the ballot? Have you visited AG McMaster, asking him to request documentation from either SC state D Party Chair Carol Fowler; or former Treasurer Kathy Hensley, which was the basis for their Certification to state election officials, Presidential candidate Mr. Obama was eligible for the job?

    Millions of your fellow citizens elected this man as our President, even without these documents. This was their choice; and they are no less worthy of exercising their choice, than you. However, many citizens fail to realize, laws regarding whose name appears on the ballot are enacted in the states. And laws in your state, SC, appear intended to ensure, the state will not print the name of an ineligible candidate on the ballot. If you believe the state was defrauded into printing the name of Barack Obama on your Presidential primary and general election ballots – did you know, in SC, the party has to Certify the eligibility of candidates in the primary, too? – pursue redress on your state level as vigorously as you call for removal of the President on the federal level.

    All politics is local. ADMINISTRATOR

  15. […] Yet despite knowing he’d been ‘had,’ 3 (three) months later, after Mr. Obama was handed the nomination, Attorney Richie, a member in good standing of the Texas state bar, again swore to state election officials the nominee was Constitutionally qualified for the job in order to get Mr. Obama’s name printed on the general (Electors) election ballot.  And for almost the next year, he managed to get away with this lie.  Until the fall of 2009, when citizens began contacting AG Abbott with complaints charging that Mr. Richie had committed election fraud in order to get the state to print Mr. Obama’s name on its ballot and then, that he had violated the Texas Open Records law by refusing to provide requested documentation that was the basis for that eligibility certification.  http://jbjd.wordpress.com/2010/03/24/open-letter-ag-abbott-tx/ […]

  16. […] of citizens of TX – R’s and D’s and I’s – filed well-documented complaints with AG Greg Abbot (R-TX) charging Mr. Richie had committed election fraud.  So far, Mr. Abbott […]

  17. […] of ME; JOKERS to the RIGHT (1 of 2);  CLOWNS to the LEFT of ME; JOKERS to the RIGHT (2 of 2) ;  OPEN LETTER to GREG ABBOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL of TEXAS , JUDGE ABBOTT WOULD ORDER TDP CHAIR BOYD RICHIE TO DECLARE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA IS […]

  18. […] of ME; JOKERS to the RIGHT (1 of 2); CLOWNS to the LEFT of ME; JOKERS to the RIGHT (2 of 2); OPEN LETTER to GREG ABBOTT, ATTORNEY GENERAL of TEXAS; A ROADMAP to ELECTION FRAUD in TEXAS in the 2008 PRESIDENTIAL (ELECTORS) ELECTION; […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 57 other followers

%d bloggers like this: