noonan v bowen, obama first amended prerogative writ

8/2/2019 Noonan v Bowen, Obama First Amended Prerogative Writ

1/171

123456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

Pamela Barnett, pro se, Petitionerof the Ad Hoc California registered voterswith service at 1713 11th Avenue Olivehurst, CA 95961Telephone: 530-845-5186 I2HAR22 PH h 13LEGAL PROCESS

S U P E R I O R C O U R T O F C A L I F O R N I AC O U N T Y O F S A C R A M E N T O

Edward C . Noonan, Pamela Barnett,Sharon Chickering, George Miller,Tony Dolz, Neil Turner, Gary WilmottPetitioners,

Debra Bowen individually and officiallyas The C a i i fo mia Secretary o f Stateat 1500 l l t h Street, 5th 18 FloorSacramento, CA, 95814;Barack Hussein Obama I I ; O B A M AFOR AM ERICA (CALIFORNLV) atNORTHERN CALIFORNLA HQ 3225AdelineStreet, Berkeley, CA 94703; Johnand Jane Does and XYZ Entities.Respondents.

Case No.34-20i2-8oooi048

FIRSTAMENDED PREROGATIVEWRIT OF MANDATE and RESTRAINTOF FUND RAISINGDate: TBDTime: TBDDept: 31Judge: Hon. Michael P. KennyAction Filed: January 6, 2012

Petitioners submit Amended Petition in response to new highly credible evidencetha t will dram atically affect this petitio n. It is of great public interest to ensure tha t thiscourt allows discovery to ensure that our public servants at the highest levels are heldaccountable in regard to potential election fraud that is now currently underway In the2012 Caiifornia presid entia l election cycle. Also, an imp ort an t Appeals cou rt ruling on CEC13314 was issued March 1 which affects this p etition . Petitioner adds the followingarguments and information to writ fi led January 6, 2011 in this First Amended PrerogativeWrit of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising. Parties and jurisd iction remain the same .

First Amended Prerogative Writ of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 1 of 22


2/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

On S e p te m b e r 3 1 , 2 0 1 1 , t h e C A S OS , D e b o ra h B o w e n i ss u e d in s t r u c t io n s ( s e e E x h ib i t1 ) a ls o a v a i la b le a t h t t p : / /w w w .s o s . c a .g o v /e l e c t i o n s /2 0 1 2 -e le c t i o n s / j u n e -p r ima ry /p d f / d e m-p re s id e n t - 2 0 1 2 .p d f t o a n y p ro s p e c t i v e c a n d id a te ( s ) f o r t h e O f f i c e o fPOTUS f rom th e Dem ocra t i c pa r ty in p repara t ion fo r the June 5 , 2012 Dem ocra t i c P r imary .And tha t the CA SOS Ins t ru c t ion s a t Pa r t 1 Qua l i f i ca t ion ma nda ted th a t any cand ida te fo rPOTUS be e l ig ib le fo r that o f f ice accord ing to U.S. Const i tu t ion Ar t ic le 2 Sect ion 1 andspec i f i ca l l y mee ts the quo te :

" I . QUALIFICATIONS E very cand idate sha l l be a na tur a l - bo rn c i t izen o f the Uni tedStates, a t least 35 years o f age, and be a res ident o f the Uni ted Sta tes for a t least14 yea rs . U .S. Con st . , a r t . I I , 1 c l . 5 "1. That accord ing to the Cal i fo rn ia Sta te Const i tu t ion a t Ar t ic le 20 the Oath o f o f f ice

take n as a du ly e lec ted pub l ic o f f icer , in wh ich the re is a im pl ic i t du ty on the par t o f the

^ A R T I C L E 20 M I S C E L L A N E O U S S U B J E C T S [ Required Oath of Office ][ Source: http:/ /www .leqinfo.ca.qov /.const/ .art ic le 20 ]SEC. 3. Members ofthe Legislature, and all public officers and employees, executive, legislative,and judicial, except such inferior officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, beforethey enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath ora f f i rmat ion:

" I , , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I wil l support anddefend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California againstall enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will b e a r true faith and al legiance to theConsti tution of the United S t a t e s and the Consti tution of the State of Cal i fornia; that Itake this obl igation freely, without anv mental reservat ion or purpose of evasion; a ndthat I will wel l and faithfullv discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.(emphasis added)"And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of anv partyor organization, pol i t ical or other- w i s e , that now adv oca tes the overthrow of theGovernment of the Uni ted S t a t e s or of the State of Cal i fornia by force or violence or otherunlawful means: that with in the f ive years immediately preceding the taking of th is oath (oraffirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, polit ical or other-wise, thatadvocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California byforce or violence or other unlawful means except as follows: (emphasis added)(If no affi l iations, write in the words "No Exceptions") and that during such time as I hold theoffice of

I will not advocate nor become fnameof office) a member of any partv or organization, pol i t ical or otherwise, that a d v o c a te s

First Ame nded Prerogative W rit of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 2 of 22


3/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

Secre ta ry o f S ta te to de te rmine whe the r P res iden t Obama o r any o the r p res iden t ia lcand ida te me e ts the e l ig ib i l i t y requ i re me n ts o f th e U .S . Co ns t i tu t io n ; and

2. As fa r as Pe t it ione r can su rmise by read ing the code and ins t ruc t ions o f t h e S ta teLeg is la ture and Congress as wel l as the CA SOS Not ice prov ided to each cand idate , shownas Exh ib i t 1 fo r the De m oc rats , is tha t on ly Re sponde nt Bow en has the d uty as CA SOSunder CEC 6041^^^ to se lec t the dem ocra t i c pa r ty cand ida tes fo r the pa r ty in the p r im aryas there appears there is no express author i ty de legated by the CA Sta te Leg is la ture tothe Democrat ic Par ty per se or any o ther par ty fo r that mat ter ; so i t 's a l l o f the CA SOSrespons ib i l i ty to c reate and cer t i fy the " the l is t " o f cand idates.

3 . Pet i t ioner con tend s th at som e s ta tu to ry dut ies o f the Cal i fo rn ia secre tary o f s ta teare in conf l ic t w i th regards to ver i fy ing e l ig ib i l i ty o f nat iona l pres ident ia l cand idates as theCal i fo rn ia Const i tu t ion mandates that the Secre tary o f S ta te upho ld her dut ies which isove rseen by the Leg is la to rs and Execu t ive to en fo rce w i th imp eac hm ent .

4 . T he C a l i f o r n i a C o n s t i t u t i o n - A r t i c l e I I s t a te s :

the ove r th row o f the Governmen t o f the Un i ted S ta tes o r o f the S ta te o f Ca l i fo rn ia bvfo rce o r v io lence o r o the r un law fu l means . " (emphas is added)And no other oa th, declaration , or test, shall be required as a qualif ication for any public office oremployment."Public officer and employee" includes every officer and employee of the State, including theUniversity of California, every county, city, city and county, district, and authority, including anydepartment, d iv is ion, bureau, board, commission, agency, or instrumen tal i ty of any o fth eforegoing.^ CAEC 6041. The Secre ta ry o f S ta te sha l l p lace the name o f a cand ida te upon thep re s id e n t i a l p r im a ry b a l l o t w h e n h e o r s h e h a s d e te rm in e d t h a t t h e c a n d id a te i sgenerally advocated for or recognized throughout the United States or California as activelyseeking the nomination of the Democratic Party for President of the UnitedStates. The Secretary of State shall include as criteria for selecting candidates the fact of qualifyingfor funding under the Federal Elections Campaign Act of 1974, as amended.Between the 150th day and the 68th day preceding a presidential primary election, the Secretaryof State shall publicly announce and distribute to the news media for publication a list of theselected candidates that he or she intends to place on the ballot at the following presidentialprimary election, (emphasis added)

First Am ended Preroga tive Writ of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 3 of 22


4/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

SECTION 5. The Legislature shal l provide for prim ary e lect ions fo rpart isan off ices, including an open presidential primary whereby thecandidates on the bal lot are those found by the Secretary of State to berecognized candidates throughout the nation or throughout Cal i fornia forthe off ice o f President of the Un ited States, and those whose names areplaced on the bal lot by peti t ion, but excluding any candidate who haswithdrawn by f i l ing an aff idavit of noncandidacy. (emphasis added)5. To be a " recognized candidate" the U.S. C o n st i t u t io n , A rt I I mandates that :"A/o person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at thetime of the Adoption of this Con stitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;neither shall any Person be eligible to that O ffice who shall not have attained to theAge of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident w ithin the UnitedStates."

6. It is a constitutional man dated duty for the Sec retary of State to make adeterm ination to place on the ballot "on// recogn ized cand idates."

7. Petitioner con tend s th a t RESPONDENT OBAMA des pite the n otice provid ed toRespondent Obama and his agents to comply with California Election Code and the USConstitution as shown as Exhibit 1, Respondent Obama nevertheless admits he is merelyon the hono r system of self checking his eligibil i ty states in the De mu rrer MOL th at q uo te:

"ei ther President Obama nor his campaign committee have any legal obl igation toprovide proo f o ft h e President 's qual i f icat ions as a "natural born ci t izen" to theSecretary of State in order to establish his eligibil i ty to appear on the ballot as apresidential candidate, much less for him to be able to engage in fundraisingactivities in California."

Candidate Obama fails to state which of the duties that the Secretary of State fails toapply to him as would apply to any other candidate in the state running for office forballot access per the C alifornia Elections Code and the U.S. Con stitutio n. CandidateObama accused of frau d contends there is no check require d. Petitioner and Am ericanIndependent Candidate Ed Noonan stands ready to prove he was born in the UnitedStates to two American ci t izen pa rents. In a matter of fair compe ti t ion Candidate Obamaand all other Presidential candidates that seek California ballot access should also provethat he is a Natural Born Citizen as required by Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.



5/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

8. That according to California Law tha t also dictates the duties the S ecretary ofState, including the duty as chief elections officer of California, to ensure election laws arefol lowed (Cal i fornia Government Code [hereinafter referred to as "CGC] 12172.5), theduty to investigate elect ion fraud (CGC 12172.5), and the duty to advise candidates andlocal elections officials on the qualif ications and requirements for running for office.

a. 12172.5. The Secretary of State is the chief elections officer of thestate, and shall administer the provisions of the Elections Code.i. The Secretary of State shall see that elections are efficientlyconducted and that state election laws are enforced. The Secretaryof State may reguire elections officers to make reports concerningelections in their jurisdictions.ii. If, at any time , the Secretary o f State concludes that state electionlaws are not being enforced, the Secretary of State shall call theviolation to the attention of the district attorney of the county or tothe Attorney Gen eral. In these instances, the Secre tary of Statemay assist the county elections officer in discharging his or herduties.lil. In order to determ ine whe ther an elections law violation hasoccurred the Secretary of State may examine voted, unvoted,spoiled and canceled ballots, vote-counting computer programs,vote by mail ballot envelopes and applications, and suppliesreferred to in Section 14432 ofthe Elections Code. The Secretaryof State may also examine any other records of elections officialsas he or she finds necessary in making h is or her determination,subject to the restrictions set forth in Section 6253 .5.iv. The Secretary o f State may adopt regulat ions to assure theuniform appl icat ion and administrat ion of state elect ion laws.(emphasis added)

9. Petitioner conte nds tha t CA SOS in order to fulfi l l her duty to a dvise candida tes,there are several documents on the California Secretary of State website informing allwho are seeking elected office as to the qualif ications and requirements for each electedposition including President ofthe United States.

10. The Secretary of State has a ministerial duty to verify the eligibil i ty of those whoare running for the off ice of President ofthe United States in a t imely manner under therequirements of CEC 6041 before the party primary; as election of Federal officers is



6/171

1234

l :56789

10111213141516l?17181913

20212223241-:25262728

done at the state level on a state by state basis under the plenary authority oftherespective state legislature as a matter of compelling state interest - no Federal electionsare Federal other than by related law.However, regarding the general election. Petitioner contends that CEC 6901 is at oddswith remainder ofthe CA SOS's duties specified in California law before the generalelection, because this statute directs that the CA SOS must place on the ballot the namesofthe several political parties' candidates. The effect ofthis statute is that the SOS's dutyto ensure compliance with election law is suspended in favor of some other entity that hasno statuto ry duty to ensure the party's candidate meets constitutiona l qualifications. Thislaw is unconstitutional under the California and U.S. Constitutions as California ismandated to control elections for presidential candidates, not political parties. ElectionCode Section 6 901 Is An Attem pt to Avoid Compliance with Artic le I I , Section 1 o ft h eU.S. Constitution.

The California Constitution provides; "The State of California is an inseparable part ofthe United States of America, and the United States Constitution is the supreme law oftheland." (Cali fornia Con sti tution, Artic le I I I , 1.

Unlike the Petition Keyes v. Bowen brought in 2009, the Petition herein is both timelyand laches does not apply; and therefore does not suffer from the same fatal defects of acase filed after the general election as was done in Keyes v. Bowen. This petition also usesCEC 13314 as standing to bring this action.Petitioner contends that in the matter of this Petition it is fi led on January 6, 2012 before

the primary to prevent ballot access, and even were the responsibil ity of the CA SOS in atime -fram e held in suspended anim ation , such is a contrad iction to public officer dutiesunder the oath of office, notwithstanding express direction from the Legislature, records



7/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

tha t Pet i t ioners /Pet i t ioners s tand ing has proper ly accrued as i t was he ld by the Cour t inthe rece nt He id i Fu l le r v . Debra Bow en, As Sec re tary o f S ta te , E tc . , e t a l . No. C0 652 37( C al .A p p . D i st .3 0 3 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 ) [ 4 1 ]

"W e agree w i th Fu l le r th a t i t is the jud ic ia ry 's ro le to in t erp re t the law , inc lud ing theCo nst i tu t io n . But as we w i l l exp la in , our in ter pre ta t io n leads us to the n arrowconc lus ion that i t is not the jud ic iary 's ro le to judge the qua l i f ica t ions and e lec t ionso f cand ida tes fo r me mb ersh ip in the Leg is la tu re . Th is in te rp re ta t ion does no tinva l ida te sec t ion 13314 , however , because the app l i ca t ion o f tha t sec t ion i s no tl im i ted to cha l leng ing the qua l i f i ca t ions and e lec t ions o f cand ida tes fo r membersh ipin the Le g is la tu re . Mo reove r , because our in te rpre ta t i on reso lves th is case, i t isunnecessa ry to reach any o the r cons t i tu t iona l ques t ions , even i f we migh t haveju r i sd ic t ion to do so . "AND

"Several California courts have held that the California Constitution deprives courtsof jurisdiction to inquire into the qual i f ications of a candidate-nominee after aprimary election. (In re McGee (1951) 36 Cal .2d 592; Al len v. Lelande (1912) 164Cal . 5 6 . ) B u t n o C a l i f o r n i a c o u r t h a s i s s u e d a n o p i n i o n o n w h e t h e r c o u r t sh a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n t o j u d g e t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of o n e w h o s e e k s to be ac a n d i d a t e a t a p r i m a r y e l e c t i o n .AND

Courts in o ther s ta tes have conc luded that s imi la r prov is ions are not broad enoughto p reven t the de te rmina t ion by cou r ts o f whe the r one who seeks to be a cand ida teat a pr imary e lec t ion possesses the requ is i te qua l i f ica t ions. (See Comber v . Ashe(Tenn . 1974 ) 514 S.W .2d 7 30 ; S ta te ex re l . Gra l ike v . Wa lsh (Mo. 1972) 48 3S .W.2d 70 ; S ta te ex re l . McGra th v . E r ickson (M inn . 1938) 203 Minn . 390 . ) Th isC o u r t a g r e e s . " ( e m p h a s is a d d e d )15. Sta tu te (Sec t ion ) 13314 fu l l y suppor ts Pe t i t ione rs ' s tand ing to have th is

pe t i t ion heard on the mer i t s and g ives th is cou r t the fu l l power to g ran t pe t i t i one rs 'prayers for re l ie f even w i th ou t the Sta te hav ing a m in is te r ia l du ty u nf i l led as th at is nots ta ted as a req u i re m en t fo r re l ie f to the Pe t i t ioners . Th at pr io r to March 1 , 20 12 ,Pet i t ioners d id proper ly a l lege in ter a l ia that Pres ident Barack Obama is not a "natura lborn c i t izen" (NBC) e l ig ib le to be Pres ident o f the Uni ted Sta tes (POTUS) - not because hewas not born in the Uni ted Sta tes , but because h is fa ther was not a U.S. c i t izen andsough t a w r i t o f ma nda te to compe l Sec re ta ry o f S ta te Bowen to "ba r Responden t Obam abal lo t access in Ca l i fo rn ia a long w i th those s imi la r ly s i tua ted f rom the 2012 E lect ion cyc le

First Amen ded Prerogative W rit of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 7 of 22


8/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

from forming an elector slate for 'the office of POTUS for California." (Petition forPrerogative Writ of Mandate and Restraint of Fund Raising ("Petition"), @P18,); andfurther,

16. The Petition does also seek a "permanent restraining order" barring BarackObama or his campaign committee from fundraising in this election cycle, becauseRespondent Obama is not NBC eligible for the Office of POTUS, spoliates evidence andcommitted fraud in conspiracy to avoid detection from investigation of allegiances.

17. That Petitioner contends that Respondent Obama by counsel in the Demurrerhas improperly concluded that Barack Obama "is, of course, a 'natural born citizen,' bornin the United States to a mother who was an American citizen, and is thus fully qualifiedto be President under the U.S. Constitution."

18. The allegation proffered by Respondent Obama's counsel in the Demurrerdirectly contradicts every historical basis with related law to consider Respondent eligiblefor Office of POTUS when his minor aged U.S. Citizen mother who was married to amajority aged British subject ineligible for U.S. Citizenship would at best be merelyconsidered "Born a Citizen " as the assumption required by the 1 4 * Am end m ent; and

19. That moreover, subsequent to the January 6, 2012 Petition fi l ing, that onMarch 1, 2012, the Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff 's Press Release (see Exhibit 2) andPress Conference established tha t the re is the Prelim inary Rep ort by the Sh eriff's COLDCASE POS SE, as an autho rity w ith comp etent jurisdiction form ed to investigate fraud andcrimes committed by the campaign of Barack Obama in the fi l ing of an affirmation in 2008tha t Respondent Obama affirm ed compliance with the U.S. Co nstitution Article 2 Section1 Paragraph 5 requiremen t for el igibi li ty for "Natural-born cit izen" with a picture o ft h eSheriff 's webpage appended (see Exhibit 3) and currently before the Arizona primary



9/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

now in 2012; and that the attached Preliminary Report ofthe Sheriff 's COLD CASE POSSE(see Exhibit 4^ supports the suspicion with sufficient evidence that Respondent BarackObama was not even born in Hawaii between August 1 1961 through August 7 1961 andacts to spoliate evidence of a crime - Quote:

"Investigators advised Sheriff Arpaio that the forgers committed two cr imes:first, in creating a fraudulent document which the White House characterized,knowingly or unknowingly, as an officially produced governmental birth record; andsecond, in fraudulently presenting that document to the residents of MaricopaCounty and to the American public at large as "proof positive" of President Obama'sauthentic 1961 Hawaii long-form birth certificate.During the six-month-long investigation and after having developed probablecause to believe the long-form birth certificate is a computer-generated forgery,investigators began examining other evidence of President Obama's l ife historyincluding:.

President Ob am a's Selective Service card is mo st likely also a forg ery , revealedby an examination of the postal date stamp on the document; To quell the popular idea tha t Obama was actually born outside the UnitedStates, we examined the Records of Immigration and Naturalization Servicecards routinely fi l led out by airplane passengers arriving on international fl ightstha t originated o utside the United States in the m onth of August 19 61 . Thoserecords are housed at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Interestingly,

records from the days surrounding Obama's birth, August 1, 1961 to August 7,1961 are missing. This is the only week in 1961 w[h]ere these immigrationcards cannot be found. "20. Further, that according to the Preliminary Report of the COLD CASE POSSE

shown as Exhibit 4, the purported Certificate of Live Birth (CoLB) long form (see Exhibit5) is a forged document as submitted to the entire nation by Respondent Barack Obamaand attorneys at his April 27, 2011 at the Washington DC Press Conference according tothe transcr ipt (see Exhib i t 6) : and

21. The Forged document shown as Exhibit 5 also now joins the previously 2008proffered CoLB short form document that is a forgery as well based upon the admissionsofthe Respondent Obama and his attorneys there at the White House at the April 27,2011 press conference . In the transcript shown as Exhibit 6, that at the April 27, 2011



10/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

press conference the White House attorney repeatedly said that Respondent Obama hadrequested the short form CoLB in 2008 from the State of Hawaii to be released. However,examination by Petitioner ofthe supposed document Hawaii supposedly released in 2008is in fact is stamped June 6, 2007 (see Exhibit 7) as shown by the FactCheck.org reporton August 2 1 , 20 08 ; and the later as the November 21 , 2008 report appended shows theso-called Factcheck.org investigators, depended on by members of Congress and Media,were partisan amateurs according to ' 'Eligibil ity Update: FactCheck.org Doesn't DoForensics; NH SOS and Certificates; British Policeman on Eligibil ity", and thereby all theforegoing provides sufficient suspicion of fraud and or statements made as admissionagainst interest as a bar under clean hands doctrine of irrefutable presumption of wrongdoing by Respondent Obama and his agents in 2008 and continuing currently.

22. That Petitioner in her January 2, 2009 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)request ofthe U.S. Department of State (US DOS) and related agency for the passportand travel records of Respondent Obama's mother Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama)(Soetoro) for the pe riod before and after August 4, 1 96 1 , received on December 10, 2010a transmittal of documents certified from the attorney for the U.S. DOS; and on the FS-299 Application for renewal dated August 13, 1968 Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro removed"Barack Hussein Obama Soebarkah" from her subsequent Passport (see Exhibit 8)^therein proving that Respondent Obama had been renamed by his adoptive father LoloSoetoro, the Indonesian Army Lt. Colonel having married Stanley Ann Dunhamsubsequent to her divorce from Barack Hussein Obama Sr. in 1963; and

23. Further, Petitioner contends that the additional evidence of forgery of theSelective Service record before the 2008 election along with the theft and tampering ofthe US DOS Passport records by US DOS private contractor entity under the control of



11/171

123456789

10111213141516172$1819202122232425262728

John Brennan currently Respondent Obama's White House Counter Terrorismadvisorhaving previously been assistant to Central Intelligence Director George Tenant, and assuch underlines the suspicion why the microfilm records from the National Archives aremissing now as well, as both agencies are under the direct authority and control ofRespondent Obama, the apparent usurper in the office of POTUS, and by his refusal tomake such microfilm and the missing U.S. DOS records referenced in the cover lettershown in Exhibit 8 provide the Court herein with substantial direct available proof thatRespondent Obama is now directly acting in a continuing pattern to spoliate evidence.

24. As Further evidence. Petitioner provides additional proof that RespondentObama, in a continuing pattern acted to spoliate evidence of his adoptive status as anIndonesian citizen and the ramifications that would have on his law license in Illinois andplans to seek the office of US Senator in 2005 and POTUS in 2008, perjured himself onthe applicationfor entry to the Illinois bar affirmed he had no other name (see Exhibit9).Petitioner contends that the SOS is the only entity with the statutory authority and legalobligation to vet presidential candidate qualifications and opposes RESPONDENTObama'scontention that members ofthe U.S. Congress are responsible in vetting Constitutionalqualifications for Presidents elect. The is no law that mandates that thishappens.Respondent Obama should know as the U.S. Congress never vetted hisConstitutionalqualifications, in fact letters from Congressmen prove that they were waiting for thejudiciary to act, and a video of Clarence Thomas during Congressional testimony has theJustice stating the court is avoiding the constitutional eligibility issue.(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmX4F3gW_vY) Respondent Obama then stated thatonly the Electors of his party can decide if he is qualified. Respondent Obama quotes

FirstAmended Prerogative Writ of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 11 of 22


12/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

Robinson v. Bowen. (189 Cal. App. 4'" at p.661 [supra, 567 F. Supp. 2d at p. 1147])' 'Therefore, any challenge to President Obama's eligibil ity to serve as President "iscommitted under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in thefirst instance. - - not to the Secretary of State or this co urt. " fails to address the fact th atPetitioner's timely fi l ing before the primary ballot is created renders the contentioninapplicable and shoulders the determination for ballot access upon the CA SOS and or theCourt herein and that the Congress is not compelled by express law to require proof ofeligibility othe r than imp licit in each m emb er's oath of office like that of the CA SOS.

26. Petitioner contends that Respondent Obama's contention of authority todetermine eligibil ity rests with the electoral college Is in conflict with the Instructions ofthe California State legislature that such body has no individual elector discretion otherthan to merely be a vessel to carry a mandatory vote and as such presupposes otherpowers tha t do not e xist un der the U.S. Co nstitutio n A rticle 2 Se ction 1 paragraph 1 ' ^ asthe President and Vice President are chosen by Electors at the state level independentlyunder a constitutional grant of authority delegated to the legislatures ofthe several statesand the District of Columbia (see Bush v. Gore). The constitution reserves the choice ofthe precise manner for creating Electors to the will of the state legislatures. It does notdefine or delimit what process a state legislature may use to create its state college ofElectors. In practice, the state legislatures have generally chosen to create Electorsthrough an indirect popular vote, since the 1820s.

^ The US Co nstitu tion A rticle 2 Section 1 Clause 2: Method of choo sing e lectorsEach State shall appoint, in such Man ner as th e Le gisla ture th er eo f ma y d ire ct, a Number ofElectors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may beentitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office ofTrust orProfit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector, (emphasis added)



13/171

123456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

27. In an indirect popular vote, it is the names of the electors who are on theballot to be elected. Typically, their names are aligned under the name of the candidatefor President and Vice President, that they, the Elector, have pledged they will support. Itis fully understood by the voters and the Electors themselves that they are therepresentative "stand-ins" for the individuals to whom they have pledged to cast theirelectoral college ballots to be President and Vice President. In some states, in past years,this pledge was informal, and an Elector could still legally cast their electoral ballot forwhomever they chose. More recently, some state legislatures and the California Statelegislature (exercising their constitutional authority to do so) of 26 or so have mandatedin law that Electors shall cast their electoral college ballot for the Presidential Candidate towhom they are pledged.

28. Petitioner contends as such the State legislature of California has the plenaryauthority and duty with which it may delegate responsibil ity to electors by express law,and Is limited as the SCOTUS expressed in McPherson v. Blacker. 146 U.S. 1 (1892), theCourt cited Article I I , Section 1 , Clause 2 which states th at a state's electors are selected"in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct" and wrote that these words"operat[e] as a l imitation upon the state in respect of any attempt to circumscribe thelegislative power." and that based upon information belief does not grant delegation ofresponsibil ity as such and may not grant authority to any quasi political party apart fromstate control and oversight and may not grant such authority without an amendment tothe US Co nstitutio n; h owe ver, at point the legislature does not have autho rity torelinquish its authority per se in regards to the legislature's election of a candidate forPresident / Vice President; and a such the legislature shares its authority to determine byassertion of law the responsibil ity to determine the eligibil ity to meet the qualifications of



14/171

123

456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

its candidate be in conformance with precedent and historical practice informing the dutiesof the Executive along with the Secretary of State as artificial person publicofficers asdefined under State Public Officer law; and therefore, such express or implied instructionalong with the actions of public officers as well as the implied powers supposedly grantedto the electors are subject to judicial review herein.

29. That Petitioner contends that the Legislature, Judiciary, and Executive arewithout authority to write legislation redefining the term Natural Born Citizen as thatwould require an amendment to the USConstitution Article 2 Section 1 Paragraph 5 asrelated law , and is absent to date as shown by the Letters in Exhibit 10.

30. Petitioner also contends that an elector who is bound by law in California (asin 26 others states) to vote only for the person elected in the advisory vote of the electorsat the general election is relieved of any discretion in that the candidate must be eligibleprior to ballot access; and where the other states the electors may vote for anyone he/shechooses, as such may afford some discretion to determine eligibility. However, there is nobinding requirement as a result of the "advisory vote" of the electors at the primary orgeneral election as in California that has to be followed - unless there is a criminal

^ US Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5: Qualifications for officeNo Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of theAdoption ofthis Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person beeligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteenYears a Resident within the United States.By the time of their inauguration, the President and Vice President must be:

natural born citizens - person born in the USA of US Citizen parents. Minor v. Happersett 88U.S. 162. at least thirty-five years old inhabitants of the United States for at least fourteen years.Eligibility for holding the office of President and Vice-President were modified by subsequentamendments: The Twelfth Amendment (1804) requires the Vice-President must meet all ofthequalifications of being a President; and The Twenty-second Amendment (1951) prevents aPresident from being elected more than twice.



15/171

123

456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

conspiracy to usurp the office of POTUS by design and even as evidence over the last 4years remains under investigation only in Arizona by one Sheriff with authority Joe Arpaio,

31. Petitioner in light of the evidence herewith contends that forRESPONDENTObama to suggest that there Is somehow a waiver ofthe requirements for eligibility justbecause someone doesn't verify such, still does not change the requirements of eligibilityor overcome the requirement to qualify for office, and remains a jackpot situation thatautomatically vacates the office on its face that then falls back to the individualcommitting the fraud as a criminal matter to be prosecuted in the respective state,perhaps Arizona; and that the failure to meet the qualification for office of POTUS wouldautomatically incapacitate the attempt of usurpation as void ab initio, and therebyrequiring according to Article 2 Section 6 the next person in line with eligibility to meetthe qualification

^ US Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 6: Vacancy and disabilityIn Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or

Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on theVicePresident, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation orInability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring whatOfficer shall then act asPresident, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a Presidentshall be elected.The wording of this clause caused much controversy at the time it was first used. WhenWilliam HenryHarrison died in office, a debate arose over whether the Vice President wouldbecome President, or if he would just inherit the powers, thus becoming an Acting President.Harrison's Vice President, John Tyler, believed that he had the right to become President. However,many Senators argued that he only had the right to assume the powers of the presidency longenough to call for a new election. Because the wording of the clause is so vague, it was impossiblefor either side to prove its point. Tyler ended up taking the Oath of Office and became President,setting a precedent that is followed to this day. Tyler's precedent made it possible for VicePresidents Millard Fillmore. Andrew Johnson. Chester Arthur, Theodore Roosevelt. Calvin Coolidqe,HarryTruman, and Lyndon Johnson to ascend to the presidency (Gerald Ford took office after thepassage of the Twenty-fifth Amendment).Tyler's precedent established that if the President's office becomes vacant due to death,resignation or disqualification, the Vice President becomes President. The Congress may provide fora line of succession beyond the Vice President. The Presidential Succession Act establishes theorder as: the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senateand then the fifteenCabinet Secretaries in order of that Department's establishment.The Twentv-fifth Amendment explicitly states that when the Presidency is vacant, then theVice President becomes President. Thisprovision applied at the time Gerald Ford succeeded to the



16/171

1234'56789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

32 . That as par t o f the CA SOS dut ies to make a determinat ion o f e l ig ib i l i tyResponden t SOS Bowen ve t ted the p res iden t ia l Cons t i tu t iona l qua l i f i ca t ions fo r ba l lo taccess o f Peace and F reedom cand ida tes , as shown by copy o f the campa ign f l ye r , p ressre lease and no ta r ized co r respondence rega rd ing den ia l o f ba l lo t access (see Exh ib i t 11 ) .Th is is fu r the r ev ide nce o f arb i t rar y and capr ic ious ac t ion by the CA SOS Bowen in her useof d iscre t ion to vet and s ing le out POTUS cand idates when they are honest and for thcom ing w i th the i r qua l i f ica t ions a ccord ing to the CA SOS Not ice shown as Exh ib i t 1 usesthe c r i te r ia o f e l ig ib i l i t y aga ins t eve ryone excep t the democra ts and Responden t Obama inpa r t i cu la r . Responde n t Bowen 's ac t ions p rove tha t the Sec re ta ry o f S ta te has theau tho r i t y , ob l iga t ion and min is te r ia l du ty to en fo rce the U .S . and Ca l i fo rn ia Cons t i tu t ionsand re la ted e lec t ion law tha t requ i res the SOS to enforce e lec t ion law and preve nt f ra udon Cal i fo rn ia e lec t ions.

33 . Pet i t ione r con tends tha t Responden t Obama has improper ly used the fa lseconc lus ion d raw n by the Ind iana Cour t in An ken y v . Govern o r o f S ta te o f Ind ian a ( I nd .App . 2009) 91 6 N.E.2d 67 8 th at was aga in used by Judge Mal lh i dec is ion a f ter the 26January 2012 hear ing in Georg ia a t wh ich sworn tes t imony on the mer i t s was en te red onthe reco rd o f any cou r t p roceed ing fo r the f i r s t t ime s ince 2008 when the cou r t p roceed ings ta r ted and were sys temat ica l l y b locked fo r va r ious reasons inc lud ing lack o f s tand ing andbeing un t im ely . Pet i t ion er prov ides the learned lega l ana lys is o f Mar io Apuzzo Esq. , wh ich

Presidency. In case of a Vice Presidential vacancy, the Amendment permits the President toappoint, with the approval of both Houses of Congress, a new Vice President. Furthermore, theAmendment provides that the President, or the Vice President and Cabinet, can declare thePresident unable to discharge his duties, in which case the Vice President becomes ActingPresident. If the declaration is done by the Vice President and Cabinet, the Amendment permits thePresident to take control back, unless the Vice President and Cabinet challenge the President andtwo-thirds of both Houses vote to sustain the findings of the Vice President and Cabinet. If thedeclaration is done by the President, he may take control back without risk of being overridden bythe Congress.

First Amen ded Prerogative W rit of Mandate and Restraint of Fundraising Page 16 of 22


17/171

123

456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

proves Ankeny as well as the 14" Amendment and Wong Kim Ark do not make Obama aNATURAL Born citizen as Respondent Candidate Obama contends. They only support thathe is a born citizen naturalized by the 14" Amendment. Also, Ankeny did not rule thatCandidate Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. In dicta, the Indiana Appeals court put wordsin the mouths of U.S. Supreme Court justices. This absolutely has no control overCalifornia or federal rulings, (see Exhibit 12) dissecting the Mallhi Decision, appendedthereafter (see Exhibit 13). that relies upon the Indiana decision.

34. That to the best of Petitioners knowledge based upon a recorded message ( ) byJanuary 30, 2012 the CA SOS had accepted the candidacy of Barack Obama notwithstandinganything else that has been complained of by Petitioners and others and the CASOS is actingindividually as a partisan Democrat who has instructed her agents to announce the CA SOSacceptance of the Respondent Candidacy and instructed employees to make the followingstatement by "Maxine" of the CASOS calling f r om: [email protected] to: CharlesMallon (16197413139) received Mon, 30 Jan 2012 16:53:05 the recording of the message left Jan30 2012 08:50:25 AM From: ST OF CASECRET (19166537635) to: Charles Mallon (16197413139)as follows quote:

"Hi Mr. Mallon, my name is Maxine and I'm returning your call to Secretary of State'soffice in Sacramento; and you wanted to find out what, ahh what if any actionCalifornia might take regarding Georgia's ahh, the state of Georgia's challenge, toBarack Obama's eligibility ahh as a presidential candidate; and ahh as far as Iunderstand our office and the state of California has no plans absent to date to takeahh , I believe the state recognizes him as a legitimate citizen, ahh I mean a candidatewhere that needs to qualifications and that is based on the Democratic party's ahhacceptance of his meeting those qualifications. The Party itself is to accept thecandidate prior to nominating him so ahh our officeaccepts what the party ahh putsforth and has no further involvement, thank you for calling our officeand have a greatday ,bye bye.."

* Vonage message for Charles Mallonfron"Maxine of the CASOSoffice on Janaury 30,2012:http://www.vonage.com/vvv/index.php7messaae id=MTYxOTcOMTMxMzktMTMyNzkxMzQyNSOxMzI30T0yMiI3OTMv3GtsZ2ExJD0D



18/171

123456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

35. That the Georgia hearing that "Maxine" speaks of was held on January 26,2012 before Judge Malihi in Atlanta Georgia who on February 3, 2102 rendered a decisionshown as Exhibit 13 now on appeal, and with the entire proceeding video of sworntestimony at ht tp: / /www.you tube.com /watch?feature= player deta i lpaqe& v=Uu xql i CX-w

36. The Sworn Witness John Sampson as an expert witness, retired INS FalseDocument Special Investigator at the January 26, 2012 hearing when asked if he wouldhave issued an arrest warrant of Barack Obama as a person having filed falsifieddocuments to the government based upon what the witness has seen said "YES!"

37. Tha t on February 28, 201 2, R espondent Obam a was added to the list of"Generally Recognized Presidential Candidates" in Ca lifornia, notwithstanding his fraudspoliation and concealm ent activities now under investigation in A rizona (see E xhi bi t14) .

38. That to the extent that CA SOS has not investigated the charges ofspol iat ion, concealment, false swearing, fraud that are all matters required as a dutyunder California Election Code the Petition does not fail to State a Cause of Action againstthe Secretary of State who has acted individually ultra vires in a partisan manner inviolation of her oath of office and charge given to her by the state of California.

39. There is no basis in law without sworn affidavits and substantive proof that acandidate being submitted by the respective party that the candidate has been dulyvetted and meets the criteria ofthe eligibil ity requirements under the State and Federalconstitution and related law. Including prior precedents ofthe SCOTUS that must beconsidered by the court, in that the Secretary of State has done the minimum duediligence to protect both the interest ofthe state and people who are to vote.



19/171

123456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

40. The SOS has failed to vet the Constitutional qualifications of CandidateObama in 2008 and curre ntly. Two of th e P etitioners (Turne r and Ba rnett) sued SOSBowen in 2009 in Lightfoot v. Bowen after the election but were denied a hearing on themerits.

Petitioner, based upon the foregoing evidence and law underlying therequirement for a prospective candidate, state agents are culpable for misdirectionand concealment associated with the ong oing fraud to usurp the office of POTUSagain, is a compelling state interest in each state ofthe several states and Districtof Columbia that conduct the respective individual elections for their respectivestate representative to the Federal Executive and Congress accordingly. Presidentialballot access has been relegated by Congress to be resolved in each state and theJudiciary when timely as herein notwithstanding the mirage of remedy purported tobe available at the federal level is an arbitrary matter without force of law excepttha t found in the respective state . This is i l lustrated by the Suprem e Court'sreluctance in the past, because no state until Georgia has ever had a hearing on theme rits of Candidate Obama's eligibil ity. There are questions of Rick Santorum andMit Romney's eligibil ity, but petitioners do not have the same admission againstinterest that Candidate Obama has made regarding his foreign birth father.In summary;

a. That Petitioners having fi led January 6, 2012 are as timely as any ofthe respectivecandidates and therefore are properly accrued for heanng on the merits andremedy fashioned based upon the authority granted to this court and that lachesdoes not apply and relief is available.

b. Petitione rs' claims are not barred by the do ctrine of laches whe n in fact the Decision



20/171

123456789

10111213141516

171819202122232425262728

to place the Democratic Candidate on the Primary ballot was only reached onFebruary 28, 2012 and arbitrarily contrary to the duty to hear complaints andconduct investigation of crimes being conducted and having been conducted thatRespondent Obama and his agents including the California entity of Obama forAmerica were properly served and named, have unclean hands and have madeadmissions against interest regarding the so-called birth place and both the 2007stamped and 2011 stamped alleged birth certificates are false and forgeries. Basedupon evidence the CA SOS and it employees ignored administrative electioncomplaints by petitioners as a matter of partisan basis in violation the their oath ofoffice as public officers to served and protect the sanctity of the ballot, and that thereferences made by Respondent Obama that the California Democratic Party mustbe added as a nunc pro tunc Respondent Defendant herein as a m atter of recordcompelling state interest for this court to hear as a matter of the evidencepresented on an exped ited discovery and hearing schedule. Althou gh theDemocratic primary is moot as there is only one candidate, nevertheless it must beresolved so as to provide the Democratic Party opportunity to fi l l the vacancy with alegitimate eligible candidate or otherwise would be un assigned at the Nationalconvention from the state of California in August 2012.41 . That Petitioner has not requested this relief previously as the new evidence

has just become available, and as such must be considered by the this court ascompelling reason for there to be a expedited hearing on the merits of the forgeddocument, false fi l ing by the agents of Respondent Obama and the Partisan activities of apublic officer(s) to assist in fraud and continued spoliation ofthe public record find that



21/171

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

Respondent Obama is not eligible to appear on the Democratic Primary ballot starting nolater than March 29, 2012 for the schedule June 5, 2012 California primary elections.

C O N C L U S I O NFor the foregoing reasons based upon new evidence submitted herein, and because

there is no express provision of law that directs U.S. Congress and/or electors oftheelectoral college for California and/or a political party the duty to determine POTUScandidate Constitutional eligibil ity, the issue of Presidential eligibil ity remains a plenarymatter to be determined by the State Legislature under the U.S. Constitution Article 2Section 1 paragraph 2. Therefore, the State may not relinquish the authority andresponsibil ity it has to determine ballot configuration and candidate access. TheRespondent SOS has exercised this duty with the Peace and Freedom Candidate PetaLindsay by barring her from the ballot because she does not meet the Constitutionalqualification of age as required under Article II, Section 1 as she is only 27 and needs tobe 35. If Responden t SOS fails to act in this inhe rent Sta te duty regard ing Obama andthose similarly situated, the Court is empowered, otherwise with original jurisdiction underCEC 13314 to make a determination of qualification when there is sufficient evidence andproof of a fra ud . The PETITIONERS' have established th at th e Se cretary o f State has aministerial duty to verify a candidates eligibil ity.

This Amended petition is required because on January 6, 2012 Petitioner's evidencethat Barack Obama was at least "Born a Citizen" under the 14th Amendment definitionrather than a "na tura l-bo rn Citizen", with a British subject father already established, andon March 1, 2012 is proven wrong by the COLD CASE POSSE Preliminary Report that thesame 2012 CoLB is forged that raises suspicion that Barack Obama is not even "Born aCitizen" in the USA per se; and furth er, sup ported by evidence of falsification, spoliation.



22/171

123

45

910111213141516171819202122232425262728

concealment of records, admissions against interest under POTUS control thatsubstantiates need for ordering expedited interim discovery for expedited evidentiaryhearing on the merits as California is within the primary calendar time for the Presidentialelection of 2012.

WHEREFORE, PETITIONERS respectfully pray that this Court:1. Issue a Peremptory Writ for Stay of BOWEN ballot printing until further order;2. Enjoin BOWEN from placing the names of candidates who have failed to so prove their eligibility on the

2012 Caiifomia Presidential primary election ballot;

3. Bar Barack Obama from the California Primary Ballot until he release the August 1, 1961 through August7, 1961 travel microfilm;

4'. Mandate that BOWEN require all candidates for the office of President o f the United States providesufficient proof of eligibility prior to approving their names for the ballot;

5. Bar Barack Obama from the California PrimaryBallot until he provides evidence which proves that he isa "naturaUbom Citizen" bom in the U.S.A. of U.S. Citizen parents;

6. Find CaiifomiaElections Code 6901 to be unconstitutional and unenforceable;7. For attomey's fees under CCP 1021.5, and;8. Grant PETITIONERSsuch other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper

DiSte /Sacramento, CA



23/171

CASE #34-2012-80001048EXHIBIT 1


24/171

DEBRA B O W E N | SECRETARY OF STATES T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A J E L E C T I O N S1500 nth Street, 5th Floor | Sacramento, CA 95814ITCI {916) 657-2i66|Fax C916) 653-3214lwww.sos.ca.gov

Summary ofQualifications and Requirements fo r the Office of

U N I T E D S T A T E S P R E S ID E N TDEiviocRATic PARTY

June 5, 2012, Presidential Primary Election

I . OUALIFICATIONSEvery candidate shall be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least 35 years of age, and be aresident of the United States fo r at least 14 years. U.S. Const., art. I I , 1 cl . 5

I I . REQUIREMENTSThere are two methods bywhich a person mayhave his or her name placed on the ballot as apresidential candidate in the June 5, 2012, Presidential Primary Election:

by the Secretary of Stateas a generally-recognized candidate, or bycirculating nomination petitions.A. GENERALLY-RECOGNIZED CANDIDATES

1. The Secretary of State announces the names of individuals she has determined to begenerally advocated fo r or recognized throughout the United States or Caiifomiaas activelyseeking the nomination of the Democratic Party fo r President. 6041'Other criteria the Secretary of Statemay use to determine who is a "generally-recognized"candidate includes, but is not limited to:a. Qualilying for federal matching funds,b. Appearing in presidential publicopinion polls, candidates' forums, or debates,c. Being on other states' primary ballots as a presidential candidate,d. Actively campaigning in California for the presidency,e. Having a campaign office in California, andf. Advice and input from the chairs of the respective stateparties.

2. Between January 7, 2012* (E-150) and March 29, 2012 (E-68), the Secretary of State willpublicly announce this determination. 6041

Al l code references are to theCaiifomia Elections Code unlessotherwise stated.09/30/2011


25/171

Qualifications and RequirementsPresidential NominationDemocratic Party Page 2June 5, 2012, Presidential Primary Election

3. The last day a candidate may withdraw from the list of candidates to be certified by theSecretary ofState is March 29, 2012 (E-68). 6042, 6043

B. CIRCULATION OF NOMINATION PETITIONS FORCANDIDATES NO T SELECTED BY TH E SECRETARYOF STATE ORUNCOMMITTED DELEGATIONS1. Any candidatenot selected by the Secretary of State or any uncommitted delegation desiring

to be placed on the presidential primary election ballot shall have nomination paperscirculated on behalf of the candidacy. 6061

2. Toqualify for placement on the Presidential Primaiy Election ballot, the nominationpapersof the candidateor uncommitted delegation must be signed by voters who have selected apreference with the Democratic Party equal in number to not less than one percent or 500,whichever is fewer, in each congressional district of the number of persons who haveselected a preference with the Democratic Party in the Report of Registration issued by theSecretary ofState on January 22, 2012* (E-135). 6061

3. Each signer ofa nomination papermay sign only one paper. The signer shall print his or hername, indicate his or her place of residence, and declarehis or her intention to support thecandidate or delegation named on the nomination paper. 61044. Each section of the nomination paper shall be delivered to the elections official of the county

where the petition was circulated. 61015. The period for circulating the nominating petitions is January27, 2012 (E-130) through

March 24, 2012* (E-73). 6101,61226. The last day to file nomination papers with the county elections official is March 24, 2012*

(E-73). 61227. No later than March 29, 2012 (E-68), the Secretary ofState shall preparea certified list

containing the name of each candidate who is entitled to be voted for on the ballot at thePresidential Primary Election, and the name of each chairperson ofa steering committee ofan uncommitted delegation who is to be voted for on the same ballot. 6180

Asterisked dates indicate that the date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday; i f the date is also a deadline, inmost cases,it vvill move forward to the next business day. 1509/30/2011


26/171

Qualifications and RequirementsPresidential NominationDemocratic Party Page 3June 5, 2012, Presidential Primary ElectionIJI. APPOINTMENTOF STEERING COMMITTEES

A. Each unselected candidate and each group proposing an uncommitted delegation is required toappoint a seven-member steering committee and shall appoint one ofthe members to serve aschairperson. 6080B. The chairperson ofthe steering committee, no later than March 15, 2012 (E-82), shall file with

the Secretary of Statea statement containing the names and addresses of the members of thecommittee. 6081

C. Each steering committee shall be responsible for the circulation of nomination papers ofunselected candidatesand groups proposing uncommitted delegations. 6082

IV. GENERAL INFORMATIONA. TheCaliforniaElections Code contains various requirements that must be met by anyone

planning to run as a presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. Prospective candidates anddelegates should review these laws well in advance of the June 5, 2012, Presidential PrimaryElection. For further information, the candidate is advised to consult CaiifomiaElections Codesection 6000, et seq. This code is available on the Intemet at the Legislative Counsel'swebsite atwww.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html.

B. Prospective candidates and delegatesshould contact the California Democratic Party at1401 2r' St., #200, Sacramento, Caiifomia, 95811, for additional duties and responsibilities notspecified in the Elections Code or items not filed with either the Secretary of Stateor countyelections officials.

C. The Elections Division of the Secretary of State's office does not provide forms for presidentialcandidates.

D. Because of the requirements of the Federal Election Campaign Act, As Amended, a presidentialcandidate should contact the Federal Election Commission at 999 EStreet, NW, Washington,D.C. 20463, or call toll-free (800) 424-9530 fora copy of the Act, related regulations giving thefiling requirements for reporting campaign contributions, and the forms on which to file.

E. No filing fee shall be required from any person in order to file nomination papers. 6146IMPORTANT NOTICE

This informationsheet of presidential candidate qualifications and requirements is for general infonnation onlyand does not have the force and effect of law, regulation, or rule. In case of conflict, the law, regulation, or rulewill apply. The candidate should obtain the most up-to-date information available because of possible changes inlaw.

09/30/20! I


27/171

CASE #34-2012-80001048EXHIBIT 2


28/171

Maricopa County Sheriffs OfficeJ oe Arpaio, Sheriff

S H E R I F F A R P A I O R E L E A S E S P R E L I M I N A R YFINDINGS ONO B A M A B I R T H C E R T I F I C A T EArpaio suspects forsery

March 1,2012(Phoenix, AZ) Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in apress conference today toldreporters, "A six month long investigation conducted by my cold case posse has leadme to believe there is probable cause to believe that President Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate released by the White House on April 27, 2011, is a computer-generated forgery. I do not believe that it is a scan o f an original 1961 paperdocument, as represented by the WhiteHouse when the long-formbirth certificatewas made public."This is the principle preliminary findingof a six-month on-going Sheriffs Cold CasePosse law enforcement investigation into the authenticity of Obama's birth certificateand his eligibility to be president.Investigators advised Sheriff Arpaio that the forgers committed two crimes: first, increating a fraudulent document which the White House characterized, knowingly orunknowingly, as an officially produced govemmental birth record; and second, infraudulently presenting that document to the residents of Maricopa County and to theAmerican public at large as "proof positive" o f President Obama's authentic 1961Hawaii long-form birth certificate.During the six-month-long investigation and after having developed probable cause tobelieve the long-formbirth certificate is a computer-generated forgery, investigatorsbegan examining other evidence of President Obama's life history including:.

100 West Washington, Suite 1900, Plioenix, Arizona 85003Phone: (602) $76-1801 Fax: (602) 258-2081Media Contact: [email protected] '


29/171

President Obama's Selective Service card is most likely also a forgery, revealedby an examination o f the postal date stamp on the document;

To quell the popular idea that Obama was actually born outside the UnitedStates, we examined the Records of Immigration and Naturalization Servicecards routinely filled out by airplane passengers arriving on international flightsthat originated outside the United States in the month o f August 1961. Thoserecords are housed at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Interestingly,records f rom the days surrounding Obama's birth, August 1, 1961 to August 7,1961 are missing. This is the only week in 1961 were these immigration cardscarmot be found.

WJten and Wliy SherifTs investisators became involvedIn August 2011, 250 members ofthe Surprise Arizona Tea Party, residents ofMaricopa County, presented a signed petition asking Sheriff Arpaio to undertake thisinvestigation.The Tea Party members petitioned under the premise that i f a forged birth certificatewas utilized to obtain a position for Barack Obama on the 2012 Arizona presidentialballot, their rights as Maricopa County voters could be compromised.Sheriff Arpaio agreed to accept the investigation and assigned it to his "Cold CasePosse"at no expense to the tax payers for a thorough examination. The Sheriffs ColdCase Posse, consisting of former law enforcement officers and lawyers with lawenforcement experienced, spoke to dozens of witness and examined hundreds ofdocuments, and took numerous sworn statements from witnesses around the world.

Additional findings by investisators100 West Washington, Suite 1900, Phoenix, Arizona 85003Phone:(602)876-1801 Fax:(602)258-2081

Media Contact: [email protected]


30/171

Suspecting that the long form birth certificate is a computer generated forgery, theynow say they have identified persons of interest in thecase.Sheriffs Investigator M ike Zullo says, "We have also determined during the course ofour investigation that the Hawaii Department of Health engaged in what we believe isa systematic effort to hide any original 1961 birth records that they may have in theirpossession."Sheriff Arpaio added, " A continuing investigation is needed to not only understandmore about the creation o f the alleged birth certificate forgery, but also to determinewho, i f anyone, in the White House or the state o f Hawaii may have authorized it."The Matter of the Selective Service Registration CardSheriffs Investigators were then led to investigate President's Obama selectiveservice registration card allegedly filled out in Hawaii in 1980.Investigators compared Obama's card to others filled out in same year and to at leasttwo cards filled out in the same local.The year stamp that is used on selective service registration cards should include allfour digits o f the year, for example 1980, the year Obama may have registered withselective service. However, investigators note that Obama's registration card is highlyunusual having a year stamp including only two digits, "80" which appears to be aninverted number. Additionally, those numbers are offset by a significant amountsuggesting that the stamp was somehow manually manipulated.

Investigators use video presentations toback up the evidenceTheCold Case Posse produced six technical videos to demonstrate why the Obamalong-formbirth certificate is suspected to be a computer-generated forgery. Thevideos were designed to display the testing used by the investigators to examine

100 West Washington, Suite 1900, Phoenix, Arizona 85003Phone: (602) 876-1801 Fax: (602) 258-2081Media Contact: [email protected]


31/171

various claims made when the April 27 document was posted on the White Housewebsite for public dissemination. The videos consisted o f step-by-step computerdemonstrations using a control document.

They also illustrate point-by-point the investigators conclusion that the features andanomalies observed on the Obama long-form birth certificate were inconsistent withfeatures produced when a paper document is scanned, even i f the scan o f the paperdocument had been enhanced by Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and optimized.Additionally, the videos demonstrated that the Hawaii Department o f HealthRegistrar's name stamp and the Registrar's date stamp were computer-generatedimages imported from an unknown source into an electronic document, as opposed toactual rubber stamp imprints inked by hand or machine onto a paper document."The fact that we were able to cast reasonable suspicion on the authenticity of theRegistrar stamps is especially disturbing, since these stamp imprints are designed toprovide govemment authentication to the document itself,"Zullo said." I f theRegistrar stamps are forgeries, then the document itself is a forgery.""As I said at the beginning of the investigation,"Arpaio said, "the President can easilyput al l o f this to rest. A ll he has to do is demand the Hawaii Department of Healthrelease to the American public and to a panel o f certified court-authorized forensicexaminers al l original 1961 paper, microfilm, and computer birth records the HawaiiDepartment of Health has."Arpaio fiirther stressed the Hawaii Department of Health needs toprovide, as part o fthe fiall disclosure, evidence regarding the chain o f custody o f al l Obama birth records,including paper, microf i lm, and electronic records, in order to eliminate the possibilitythat a forger or forgers may have tampered with the birth records."Absent the authentic Hawaii Department of Health 1961 birth records for BarackObama, there is no other credibleproof supporting the idea or belief that this Presidentwas bom in Hawaii, or in theUnited States for that matter, as he and the White Househave consistently asserted," Arpaio said.

100 West Washington, Suite 1900, Phoenix, Arizona 85003Phone: (602) 876-1801 Fax: (602) 258-2081Media Contact: [email protected]


32/171

Conclusive remarksSheriff Arpaio stresses that these are preliminary findings and concluded bysuggesting a Congressional investigation might be warranted. Arpaio asked that anyother law enforcement agency with information referencing this investigationbeforwarded to his office." I want to make this perfectlyclear. I am not accusing the sitting President o f theUnited States of committing a crime. But there remain a lot of questions which beg foranswers and we intend to move forward with this investigation in pursuit o f thoseanswers, hopefully with the cooperafion of all parties involved," Arpaio said.

Links to the Videos Used during thepress conference are below.

1. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=ID KfcmG9gs2. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=S40WKxKSIHc3. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=izDWmXNBvto4. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=vQ0Wvp91JXR5. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=3S60 AjllnS6. http://www.voutube.com/watch?feature=plaver embedded&v=CHAM3hRI8 Y

100 West Washington, Suite 1900, Phoenix, Arizona 85003Phone:(602)876-1801 Fax:(602)258-2081Media Contact: [email protected]


33/171

I ^ ' M C S O T P ^ R a i e a i e s - Moz3ta rir e^m f^ ^Pi' file drt V ew Histeiy goctimarks Toos Help -j ^^ p ( 5 ^ 2 upre! j7\Jpam^ |".jMCSO:P._ x [ jMARAZEB j ^ " Sheri f frdee i -10 ' ^^ ""^ [O ^" "- ^^ ^^ '^ p ^ CA Codes {. | 3 ^'' ' l^?-" ' '^ - i ' ^ ' - ^ ' ^ I ^ ^ ' ^ ^ ^ ^ } " - P "' " I ^ j ^g ' ^ ^y ^ j - j , ? ) O -g-

> v/.mcso.org'p^ij;?. a [ 2012 caiiiamii dcmccfjlic party ctndideteMost Visted Q Video | Temptatk ^> Getting Started Q (51663 unread) - pa_re. latest Hesdline* The Attorney Registrat, O Havfaii gir.-suddenl/'... Df, Ort/Taiti Eiquire Q Inbox 5., Obanw StateBaflot Ch...

@ 9? IV t> m 9 9 S, ^ ^ n 4


34/171

CASE #34-2012-80001048EXHIBITS


35/171

K E N B E N N E T TS E C R E T A F Y OF S T A T E

OF A R I Z O N A

The foregoing document is acopy of the document filed witijicomplete, true and correctthe Secretary of State.

Ken Bennett, Arizona Secretary of State

Date H- 11'

State Gapitol: 1700 W Wasll)ingtori. Street, 7-'' FloorPhoenix, AZ 815007-2888 .Telephone (602) 542-8683 Fax (602) 542-6172


36/171

STATE OF ARI ZONARECEIVED

SECREmRY OF STATE2007D(

PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE ELECTIONCANDIDATE NOMINATION PAPER(A.R.S.16.:!42)

You arehereby notified that I, Barack Obamaam seeking nomination as a candidate for the offico of President of the United States from the

13 PM35 0 I

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Democraticto be held on the Sth day of February 2008.

Pprty, at the Presidential Preference Election

I am a natural bom citizen of the United States, am at least thirty-five years of age, andhave been a resident within the United States for at l< os t fourteen years.

50lf6 South Greenwood Avenue, Chicdgo, IL 60615Candidate's actual residence address or description of pta:;eof residence (city or town)Obama for America, 233 North IMichCandidate's Post Office Address

(zip)gan Avenue, l l th Floor, Chicagg^^IL.

(city or town) (zip)

Candidate's Arizona committee information:Ghainnan'sName

AddressTelephone

Don Bivens2910 North Centra l Avenue, Phoenix AZ 85012

(number and street)6 0 2 - 2 9 8 - ^ 1 2 0 0

{city or town) (zip)


37/171

Qlam )Q i a m n o t )EJlam )Q I am not )

a registered voter In the

RECEIVEDSEGRETARY OF STATEstate in which I resii 13 PH 30I

a member ofthe political party from which I am mnning as acandidate for the offtee of President of the United States.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that all the infojrmation in this Nomination Paper is true, thatas to these and all other qualifications, I am qualified to hold the oflice that I seek, having fulfilledthe United States constitutional requirements for hoWng said office. I further swear (or affirni) thatI have fulfilled Arizona's statutory requirement for plajcing my name on its P resi^nt ia l PreferenceElection ballot ' > /

Subscnljed AND SWORN to (or afflmned) before me thisRMTANMSSON

ComnwmMM ot Miglnia

CANDIDATE SIGNATURE.day of N W t ^ A ^ f i i f / ? jO

Public 3My Commission Expires: '3'" / "2-0 W

(Seal)

File with:Arizona Secretary of StateElection Services Division1700 West Washington Street, 7* FloorPhoenix, Arizona 85007

Office Revision 8/212007


38/171

CASE #34-2012-80001048EXHIBIT 4


39/171

REPORT BARACK O B A M A : LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATEOpening Statement:

of 10

CUT1FICATE OFLIVE DIRTH ,5, Gl 10611

HonoLolu Othu

r i C a a f i S i V M ^ V Q ; ; ; T - i ; ^ # = k " ^ n r ' L U J " " - ^ T . - Citonolula f OidiQ1 WSi'UJ^ ' "{J,6085 KalAnliuiiols Slgtiua^ |

Konololt], H t v i i l" " - i ' l f i U i i T

BJUUCK 125 tear*! Kaat iXrioa

i r - f r f i b u - *


40/171

REPORT BARACK O B A M A : LONG F O R M B IR T H CERTIFICATE

4 ^ 4|*--v^rtr-*'* ^ ' - i . - * . ' i ^ ' jm:* - lV l r^^ ; --

eOiZl snClSS CStrA

F ig ur e 4: Search for text is not recognizedNo OCR applied

Document Font Propertiesof original PDF file

^1^ :

Fig uir e 5: Font Properties of Obama's PDF file

Document Font Propertiesafter OCRText Recognition

F ig u re 6: Font Properties dialog after OCR Text Recognition

The OCR Argument Not a Factor!OCRwhich stands for Optical Character Recognidonwill scan adocum ent for text and con vert any images of text to live (editable)text.After OCR is applied to a PDF in Adobe Acrobat Pro, the textresponds as if it is in a Word docu ment. The OCR text can beselected, changed, copied and pasted. The Obama PDF documentas downloaded cannot be edited in the aforementioned manner.Note: Adobe Acrobat Prohas PDF ed iting functions, but/Adobe/Icrobof Reader does n ot.Additionally, if th e PDF had been scanned using OCR software; onewould be able to search the docum ent w ith keywords and i fth etext exists in the docum ent, then those keywords wou ld be found .Figure 4 shows the keyword "Live" typed in the FIND box, and eventhough the word "Live" exists In the Certificate of Live Birth title, adialog box responds that "no matches were found."When viewing th e font properties dialog box in Figure 5, no fontsare listed. If OCR was used, the image area wou ld be converted torecognized fonts in the do cum ent and the fonts wo uld be listed.The dialog box is emp ty, indicating that Obama's PDF file doesnot recognize any text. This dialog box can be viewed by goin gto the Fi le menu > Prope rties, then cl ick on the Font tab in theDocument Prope/'f/'es dialog box.Font-based text can be created offer a file has been processedthrough the OCR Text R ecog nit ion feature in Adobe Acrobat. Torun the OCR feature, go to the D ocu me nt menu and select OCRText R ecog nit ion, and then click Recognize Text Using OCR.Acrobat will then perfo rm a scan on the doc ume nt and convert anytext foun d in the image to e ditable text. Note that applying OCRText Recognition w ill alter the appearance of the characters in theconversion from image to text.Figure 6 shows that all the fonts recognized during th e process arenow listed in the Font Properties dialog box.Figure 7 shows another search (after OCR is applied) on th ekeyword "t/Ve" type d in the FIND box. The wor d "/./Ve" is found andhighl ighted within the Certi f icate of Live Birth t i t le.

t


41/171


42/171

REPORT BARACK O B A M A : LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATECool blue color at the upper edges j

Figure 11: Scanned text and Chromatic Aberration

( T y p e o r p r iNoise, anti-aliasing, bitm ap inconsistencyin textand no chromatic aberration

Scanner Chromatic A berra t ionWhat is chromatic aberration?This occurs when d ifferentwavelengths o f light are refracted d ifferently as it goes througha lens or prism during the scanning process. Light is refracteddifferently as the scanner encounters one side of a contrastingcolor (particularly with text) compared to the opposite side ofthecontrasting color.In simpler terms, Figure 11 is an example of Chromatic Aberrationin which the scanner produce d w arm red-ish color values atthe b otto m and left edges of the text, and similarly the scannerproduced cool blue-ish color values around the top and rig htedges of text transitions. Chromatic Ab erration can be seen at ahigh z oom level in color scans such as the AP version of Obama'sBCbut this chromatic aberration is NOT present in Obama's PDFreleased by the White House.Because the AP version displays chro ma tic ab erratio n, this is anindicator that the AP did receive a printed hard copy oft he BC fromthe White House and scanned whatever was presented to the m. APdid not do anything wrong. They simply scanned what was ha ndedto them.It's importa nt to note tha t the AP version does NOT have a securitysafety paper background pattern , but rather a baby blue coloredbackgroun d. This sudden difference in background color/p atternis another inconsistency that could NOT happen ifthe documentwas simply scanned wit h no further man ipulation and released bythe White Housebut this inconsistency would only happen If theWhite House docum ent is a manu factured file.

Fig ure 12 : Obama PDF viewed in Acrobat at 1600% zo om level A p p l y i n g t h e T e r m s R e v i e w e d

Color variation evidence of ma nipu latio nj

Alvin's signature suddenlydevelops a smiley face( Spelling error on stamp ( Green text color values ]

t CERTlFYTHlS i'slA TRUE COPY OR /ABSTRiACT d^^TSE RECORD ON.FILE INTHE HAWAII,STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH -

STATE REGISTRARF ig u re 13 : Examples of text inconsistencies

No spelling error

Alvm's signaturewithou t smiley face?

Figure 14: http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

A key problem wit h the docu men t, as presented, is that it is riddledwith inconsistencies. Scanning a docu me nt withou t m anipulationproduces an image with q ualities that are consisten t glo ba lly(throu ghou t the entire Image). Amateurish image m anipulationwill reveal local (specific areas) of inconsistencies or odd artifacts.Another example of anti-aliased text contain ing noise for the letter"R" mixed with surrounding bitmap text in Figure 12. The whitehalo effect surround ing the text w ith no chrom atic aberration isalso a strong indicator that the document was manipulated (moreon the w hite halo later).Figure 13 displays text color inconsistencies in dates, along with amisspelling in the official stamp text "TXE" instead of "THE." Whileit may be argued that th e m isspelling is merely a funct ion of thestamp ink ap plied unevenly, the odds significantly decrease thatthis would occur on bo th vertical bars that affect both sides of th e"H"character. Both sides pull in substantially displaying an"X."Thestamp also sports suspicious markings in the "Alvin" signature thathas been referred to as a "hap py face."Figure 14 offers a contrast image of Alvin Onaka's stamp in w hichthe words are spelled correctly and no "happy face" markings inthe "Alvin" signature. The "Ph." spacing between the "P" and " h" isdifferent in b oth signature Images (the period spacing as well).Also, the stamp version displayed in F igure 13 is a solid bitma playerno signs of texture (ink stamp on paper) can be detected .Some semblance of texture wou ld be reflected in an imagescan (even with o ptim ization applied), but this overall quality oftexturethe ink stamp on paper as seen in Figure 14is absentfrom the Obama PDF.


43/171

REPORT BARACK O B A M A : LONG F O R M B IR T H CERTIFICATELayers: Flat, Man-made, and O ptimized

( Layer 1 inc ludes the fo l lo win g sub- layers : i i ^Vl' crricT.UT mn iinii' i- 'T O j^ i'

( One f la t image

.f ' j^ .- ^ .-J Outs ide border edge boundary path"[ One f la t image layei

r-:;;;;;.:.:.-! .&'k:{2.i^U:.l. ]fJ:J.Ll One Link j

( Outs ide border Path J >

F i g u r e H 5: Normal one-layer scan doc um ent behavior

Outs ide bo r de r pa th }

S; [ Cl ipp ing Path j v j . mSz^Xli-A^ - -^SJJI .

[ Cl ipp in g Path layeT~]

( M u l t ip le sub - laye rs ^ 5Er:.

il - ; ( IVIultiple links ] |

. ftmttflie

Fi gu re 16 : Multiple layers and links in Obama's PDF

S i S S ^ m i i S ^ ^ i S i S i O ne b itm ap sub-layer a t t o p ^

I C

m.

innr:

No log ic to layerobject dec is ions

Huge amount of l inks ][ Insane num ber of co lor sub- layers ] >

J

: i( Scroll box

: d k

Fi gu re 17 : AP layers and links after optim ization is applied

Attemp ts to suggest op timiz ation explains the presence of layers inthe Obama PDF is simply n ot true. While it is true that optim izationcan cause layers, it is not true that optimization explains the layersdisplayed in Obama's PDF. The layers in Obama's PDF clearly displaya decision-making process that w ould be present with im agemanipulat ion.A simple definit io n for opti mi za tio n is a process that appliessuitable compression settings to reduce file size.As stated optim ization can cause layersbut in the caseof optim ization ; the process of how the document is layeredis completely comp uter-generated based on programmingalgorithms. Thus, there are certain pred ictable patterns.Before examining th e Figures, it mig ht help to explain tha t there aretwo types of graphic programs: Roster-bosedand Vector-based.Raster-based is a fancy word for p/xe/-based which is the stren gthof a progra m like /Adobe Photoshop. Whereas Adobe IllustratorIs a vector-based progra m mea ning it relies on mathem aticalinterpretations. I llustrator operates differently than Photoshop inthat lines or shapes drawn in Illustrator are referred to as pat / isthemathem atical equations tha t define the line, line segment, or shape.With this in mi nd, when a pixel-based image is opened in Illustrator,a path is generated to define the outer bound ary border of thatobject.This is why y ou w ill see sub-layers in the screen captureFigures with a Patli t it le th at corresponds to the visible blue (defaultcolor) rectangle-shaped border edges of an object (in the displayedimage).The AP file version of Obama's PDF in Figu re 15 will serve torepresent a scanned document and when opened in Illustrator,there is only one link, and one layer; the layer breaks dow n todisplay the follo win g sub-layers:3 A boundary edge Paththe blue border surrounding the image3 And the flattened ImageFigu re 16 shows a crucial difference in th e nu mber of layersdisplayed in Obama's PDF file (compared to the AP file): Obama'sPDF has nine links and nine s ub-layers (NOTE:The paths are activelydisplayed in the image). In add ition to the nine sub-layer objects,a clipping path is at the top o f the sub-layer list. The clipping pathgroups all the remaining sub-layers below. Note the location of th eclipping path in the image, which wil l be explained further on thenext page. It 's presence wi thin the file and a pplied in a manner tohide portions ofthe image also reflects image manipulation.Another crucial difference in the num ber o f layers occurs w henoptimiz ation is applied to th e AP scanned image in Figure 17.There is an unreasonable am oun t o f layers generated. Note d espiteresizing the Links and Layers panels, there is still a sc rol l box wh ichscrolls the len gth o ft he em pty sc rollin g bar area (to offer a sense ofhow m any layers extend be yond th e current view).Examine ho w th e layers divide the image into pieces. It is analogousto taking a scissor and cuttin g the image into random rectangles.Finally, notice that Fig ure 17 calls out the t op layer as a bitmap layer(which means it contains one color value on ly), wh ile all remaininglayers are color layers (contains multiple color values). One bitmaplayer and multiple color layers are typical o ptimiza tion behavior;but the reverse is true in Obama's PDF in which it contains multiplebitmap layers and only one co lor layer.


44/171

REPORT BARACK O B A M A : LONG F O R M B IR T H CERTIFICATE

I E ? IS .

( Cl ipp in g Path ^

( Vis ib i l i ty icon ^

( C ollapsed icon J

Fig uire 1 8: Obama PDF open ed in Illustrator wi th clippin g mask( Release Clipp ing Mask Grou p

( Cl ipp ing Path ^( Expand icon J

F ig y re 1 9 : Clipping Mask group released and sub-layers displayed( F irs t l ink act ive ly se lected ] - ( Layer v is ib i l i ty on )

( Layer object path . ( Top layer selected ]( wh i te p ixe ls d isp lay

Fi gu re 2 0: Zoom view of top layer reveals white pixelsr First link deselect ed J

[ Layer v is ib i l i ty o ff j

[ Layer object path turned off ]

White p ixe ls d isappear :Pattern p ixe ls uninter rupted

F ig u r e 2 1 : Layer turne d off reveals unin terrup ted pattern below

The C lipping M ask PathLet's return to the previously mentioned Clipping Mask Path. Jheterm mask refers to definin g parts of an image to be hidden fromview (rather than have to delete u nwa nted parts). Any vector shapecan be used

noonan v bowen, obama first amended prerogative writ

Documents