Rebuttal to Assistant U.S. Attorney s Response to Petitioner s Objection and Removal

Transcription

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA Gordon Warren Epperly P.O. Box Juneau, Alaska Tel: ( Gordon Warren Epperly, Petitioner, Case No. 1:12-CV-0011-TMB. vs. Judge Timothy M. Burgess Barack Hussein Obama II, Nancy Pelosi, Mead Treadwell, Rebuttal Gail Fenumiai, Respondents. ============================================================== Rebuttal to Assistant U.S. Attorney s Response to Petitioner s Objection and Removal COMES NOW Gordon Warren Epperly, the Petitioner of the above entitled proceeding does hereby gives the following Rebuttal to Assistant U.S. Attorney s RESPONDENT PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER S OBJECTION AND REMOVAL that was dated August 3, 2010 and received by the Petitioner on August 9, Within the Assistant U.S. Attorney, E. Bryan Wilson s Response to Petitioner s Objection and Removal, Attorney Wilson exposes his intent in having the Petitioner s Petition for an Order in the Nature of Mandamus to be moved from the Alaska Superior Court into the United States District Court. According to Attorney Wilson, Page 1 of 5

2 the purpose of removing Petitioner s Petition from the Alaska Superior Court was to establish a Quo Warranto proceeding before the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska to address the Merits of what he perceives to be Allegations of a Want of Office Qualifications of a sitting President of the United States. This is evident in Attorney Bryan s references to Petitioner s Petition for an Order in Nature of Mandamus wherein I made personal observations, observations that were not Allegations of wrong doing to be considered by any Court of Law. These observations were submitted into and documented within the Administrative Record of the Alaska Division of Elections which shows Reasonable Doubt that Barack Hussein Obama II is not a qualified year 2012 Presidential Candidate for the Office of President of the United States. Any rebuttal of such Allegations would have to be made within the Administrative Record of the Alaska Division of Elections, not within a Court of Law. If Attorney Bryan believes that I was trying to question the qualifications of a sitting President ( which is an issue of Quo Warranto, why did he not make an appearance into the Alaska Superior Court and challenge my Standing to present such a Case and why did he not challenge the Subject Matter jurisdiction of the Alaska Superior Court to entertain such a Proceeding? The answer is simple, there were no Quo Warranto proceedings before the Alaska Superior Court, only a restatement of questions of qualifications of a Presidential Candidate that were presented to the Director of the Alaska Division of Elections to address; which under the Election Laws of the State of Alaska, the Alaska Director of Elections is the only Officer of the State that has the authority to address such questions of Office Eligibility of Candidates. / 1 Please keep in mind that it is not the Petitioner, Gordon Warren Epperly, that is trying to establish jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court, but it is the U.S. Attorney, ( in and through her Assistant U.S. Attorney. If jurisdiction is established, for what jurisdiction 1 / A.S Eligibility of a Candidate (a If the director receives a complaint regarding the eligibility of a candidate for a particular office, the director shall determine eligibility under regulations adopted by the director. The director shall determine the eligibility of the candidate within 30 days of the receipt of the complaint. Page 2 of 5

3 is the U.S. District Court to exercise if it is not a Quo Warranto proceeding to address the Merits of the Allegations of Qualifications of Office of a sitting President as claimed by the U.S. Attorney. It would be an absurdity in law to say that the U.S. Attorney is trying to establish jurisdiction of the Court only to challenge the jurisdiction of that Court after it had been established. The Petitioner concedes that a Civil Action may be removed from a Court of a State and moved into a U.S. District Court under 28 USC 1442(a(1, but when we are talking about the Qualifications of Office of a sitting President ( Quo Warranto, the only Officers of the United States government that may remove such Civil Actions is the United States Attorney General or the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, and then it must be presented into the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States. / 2 The United States Attorney for the Judicial District of Alaska has no Standing to remove such Proceedings from a State Court nor does the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska have Subject Matter jurisdiction to entertain such Proceedings ( for it is not the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia. If we are talking about what the Assistant U.S. Attorney, E. Bryan Wilson may perceive to be an Inquiry into Allegations of Criminal Acts, there is a very important word that is overlooked, and that word is If as it appears under Prayer for Relief at Item IV. As we are talking about Office Qualifications of Barack Hussein Obama II as 2 / Section of the District of Columbia Code states: A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action. D.C. Code (emphasis added. Under , only the Attorney General of the United States or the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia can initiate a proceeding for issuance of a writ of quo warranto on his own motion or on the relation of a third person, and if the writ is brought on behalf of a third person, it may only issue by leave of the District Court for the District of Columbia. D.C. Code Page 3 of 5

4 a [perspective] Candidate for the Office of President of the United States, the word If would not come into effect until such time that the Democrat Political Party nominates Barack Obama as their Party Presidential Candidate and only if Barack Obama comes before the Director of the Alaska Division of Elections and establishes a tainted Administrative Record of Office Qualifications with False Documents or Incriminating Statements shall the Judge of the Alaska Superior Court submit the name of Barack Hussein Obama II to the Federal Grand Jury for a Criminal Investigation. Of course, if no Office Qualifications may be established by Presidential Candidate hopeful, Barack Hussein Obama II, such want of Office Qualifications would also establish Probable Cause to believe that Barack Hussein Obama II did exercise Criminal Acts to have his name placed upon the year 2008 Presidential Election Ballots. Furthermore, we should note that any Inquiries made into Criminal Acts are to be convened only upon application of the Alaska State Department of Law, Criminal Division, not by any member the General Public. But if the Assistant U.S. Attorney, E. Bryan Wilson, believes otherwise, the asking of the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska to take jurisdiction of Petitioner s Petition, the jurisdiction would still be an issue of Quo Warranto for which the Court would be in want of jurisdiction to address. As stated in my Objection to Court Jurisdiction, the Petitioner, Gordon Warren Epperly has no Standing to present a Quo Warranto proceeding before any Court of Law, including the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska. As the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska is in want of jurisdictional authority to remove the Petition of the Petitioner from the Alaska State Superior Court for the purpose of entertaining a Quo Warranto proceeding, the Petitioner respectfully request that the Petitioner s Petition be re-established back into the Alaska State Superior Court, First Judicial District at Juneau, Alaska for further proceedings. Page 4 of 5

5 Dated this Tenth day of the month of August in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ, Two-Thousand and Twelve. Page 5 of 5

6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA Gordon Warren Epperly P.O. Box Juneau, Alaska Tel: ( Gordon Warren Epperly, Petitioner, Case No. 1:12-CV-0011-TMB. vs. Judge Timothy M. Burgess Barack Hussein Obama II, Nancy Pelosi, Mead Treadwell, Gail Fenumiai, Certificate of Mailing Respondents. ============================================================== Certificate of Mailing COMES NOW Petitioner, Gordon Warren Epperly, hereby certifies under penalties of perjury that true and correct copies of Petitioner s Rebuttal to Assistant U.S. Attorney s Response to Petitioner s Objection and Removal has been mailed to: Philip Pallenberg Judge Alaska Superior Court P.O. Box Juneau, Alaska Elizabeth M. Bakalar Department of Law State of Alaska P.O. Box Juneau, Alaska Certificate of Mailing - Page 1 of 2

7 Thomas M. Daniel Perkins Cole, LLP 1023 W. 3rd Avenue Anchorage, Alaska E. Bryan Wilson Assistant U.S. Attorney Federal Building & U.S. Courthouse 222 West 7 th Avenue, #9, Room 253 Anchorage, Alaska by depositing said Rebuttal to Assistant U.S. Attorney s Response to Petitioner s Objection and Removal with the U.S. Postal Service, Mendenhall Station, at Juneau, Alaska. Dated this Tenth day of the month of August of the year of our Lord Jesus Christ, Two-Thousand and Twelve. Certificate of Mailing - Page 2 of 2