Pennsylvanian Jim Schneller Files Motion For Injunction to Keep Nominee Barack Obama off the Pennsylvania Ballot

Pennsylvanian Jim Schneller Files Motion For Injunction to Keep Nominee Barack Obama off the Pennsylvania Ballot

Saturday, November 3, 2012 5:00 PM
Contact : Jim | 610-688-9471 ballotnow@aol.com

HARRISBURG, PA. -- Jim Schneller of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who sought in 2008 to stop Pennsylvania’s Governor from certifying the 2008 vote and electoral vote to Congress, is pursuing an action that now seeks an injunction to the Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth, and Governor, to remove Barack Obama from the ballot or postpone the election, pending appeal of a suit filed by Schneller earlier this year that seeks resolution of the question of qualification of Barack Obama as a natural born citizen, and other issues. The Attorney General’s office filed an answer to the request for injunction last week.

The action, now an appeal to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, also demands formation of a Committee made up of the Governor of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Secretary of State, and the Pennsylvania Attorney General, as provided by § 2936 of the Penna. election code, whenever a party or parties seeking nomination, have shown intent to errantly control, establish, or overthrow the constitutional form of government. The Committee is directly authorized by law to refuse nomination papers of such people or parties. Schneller alleges that this statute supports rejection of nomination petitions and all such requested action.

The suit also seeks a quo warranto testing or revocation of Barack Obama’s title to office, based on lack of status as a natural born citizen, improper oath at time of inauguration, fraud in stating “qualified for office” in his 2012 certificate of nomination presented to Pennsylvania officials, and (borrowing from Commander Charles F. Kerchner’s petition,) Obama’s using of an unregistered, unchanged name, rather than his true name Barry Soetero.
The case also claims unconstitutional, the fact that section 2870 of the Pennsylvania election code waives the requirement, required for all other candidates, to swear an oath to not violate the law, and that they are eligible for office, for any candidate who is running for president.


Jim litigates this suit against the odds, but optimistic that, with God’s favor, and perseverence by all parties pursuing this effort, Barack Obama will be required to adhere to law, or admit his error and step down, or any other solution to the illegal usurpation of office of President that the electorate is currently subjected to.
The defense has claimed that Jim lacks standing, and laughably asserts that no conspiracy exists that is seeking to overthrow the constitutional of government. They also claim, despite abundant reasons to the contrary, that only federal courts can decide a challenge to qualifications for federal office.


Mr. Schneller explains that this is why he has filed a quo warranto action and challenges to nomination, including because a) the candidate is now once again seeking to gain election by way of the Pennsylvania ballot, and a sovereign right and duty exists to prevent fraud and violation of the laws by incumbents, and this (despite the legal arguments to the contrary) is not prevented by any federal law, and b) the incumbency includes the fact that Congress has refused to address these potentially cataclysmic questions, causing Pennsylvania’s heightened authority over the issue, where Pennsylvania citizens clearly suffer at the hands of the incumbent.

As to standing, the case presents abundant reason, starting with a request for finding that the Pennsylvania requirement that only party members may challenge a major-party candidate’s nominating petition, but that any party may challenge third- or non-party candidates, is unconstitutional. Schneller, who experienced affronts to his candidacy in 2010 by two different major-party affiliations, claims that because independent candidates, under Pennsylvania law, can be challenged by any party, they are, unfairly, three times as likely to be challenged, so that independents should have the right to challenge nominations of either major party, if either major party may challenge independents.

Schneller, alleging that Barack Obama inflicts fraud and failure of duty by misrepresenting and occluding his birth status and records, notes that the Pennsylvania statutes expressly forbid election code violators from holding office, and it is a violation of two or more sections, to use fraud, or corrupt practices, or to detract from the integrity of the election process, or to misuse a candidate’s affidavit or a certificate of nomination.

Jim has also filed a similar claim against Pat Meehan, incumbent candidate for the PA-7 Congressional District, claiming violations of election law that occurred beginning when Meehan presented selected pages of his 2010 nominating petition to the District Attorney, who shifted investigation to Attorney General Corbett, with a result of inaction constituting fraud and failure of official duty, and also because the Pat Meehan 2012 nominating petition has an erroneous notarization on the candidate’s affidavit. Schneller requested also an appeal of the redistricting of the 7^th Congressional District.