You are on page 1of 314

UNtTED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR OISTRlCT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT


JAN- 2 20
RECEIVED
-OP

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR DISTRICT OF COWMBIA CIRCUIT
FILED[ 02 2013
UNIT URT OF APPEALS FOR
THE DISTRI.CT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
JJ
a private U.S. Citizen secured beneficiary
y/
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Christopher-Earl:- Strunk in esse private U.S. Citizen secured beneficiary with
injury i.n re the criminal usurpation of the office of POTUS by Barack Obama's
ineligibility under U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 and law in
Petitioner's Original Proceeding for writ of mandamus FRAP Rule 21 Order of:
A. Stay New York State Justices in the matter of their denial of Petitioner due process
and equal treatment due under the 14th Amt. of the U.S. Constitution and NYS
Constitution and related as to denial of trial of the facts as compelling public
interest as to forgery crime aided and abetted by Electors- a Quo Warranto matter;.
B. The Governor of New York for a NEW U.S. Senate Election in New York to comply
with the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
C. The Clerk and Speaker of the U.S. House with Majority I Minority Leaders and
President of the U.S. Senate respond to the incompatibility of any serving
as an electoral college member while holding. ali office of trust or profit under the .
14th Amt United States and Constitution Article Section 1Clause 2 (A2S1C2);
D. Congress to show c"ause why under the 12th, 20th, 25th amendments and U.S.
Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 (A2S1C5) Barack Hussein Obama II
should be eligible to take the oath of office ofPOTUS January 20, 2013;
E. Congress barring the New York Electoral College vote for Barack Obama.
F. Congress to show cause why it should not hold the $43 Trillion Pollar theft by
Barack Obama et al. since 2003null and void under the 14th Amendment Section 4;
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281 J .. Hn i
Brooklyn, New York 11238
:[ tid I 330 llOl
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in ess.eu . . . u JHJ HO..:l
:; 1v 1 .1o 1w1o:J

USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 1 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 2 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
-
PETITIONER
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Cell-845-901-6 7 6 7; chris@ strunk. ws
RESPONDENTS
The Honorable Irvin B. Nathan
Attorney General for the Washington
District of Columbia
441 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
The Honorable Karen L; Haas
Clerk of the U ~ S . House of
Representatives
U.S. Capitol, Room H154,
. Washington, DC 20515-6601
Joh:t;1 A. Boehner
Speaker of the U.S. House of
Representatives
1011 Longworth H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515
Senator Mitch McConnell
United States Senate
317 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-1702
Senator Harry_Reid
United States Senate
522 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2803
Senator Charle-s E. Schumer
United States Senate
322 Hart Senate.Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-3201
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. Office:
478 Russell Senate Office Building,
District of Columbia 20510-3204
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.
President of the U.S. Senate
c/o the White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500;
Barack Obama
c/o the White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500;
Andrew Cuomo
Governor of New York State
The New York State Capitol
Albany, New York 12224
Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.
New York State Supreme Courtfor the
County of Kings I.A.S. Part 1
360 Adams Street
Brooklyn New York 11207
Hon. Arthur M ~ Schack J.S.C.
New York State Supreme Court for the
County of Kings I.A.S. Part 27.
360 Adams Street
Brooklyn New York 11207
Steven C. Farkas, Esq. of
COLLERAN, O'HARA & MILLS, L.L.P.
Representing Mario Cilento
1225 Franklin Avenue, Suite 450
Garden City, New York 11530
Joshua Pepper NYS Assist. A. G.
Office of the NYS Attorney General
120 Broadway 24th Floor
New York, New York 10171
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 3 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT: In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse a private U.S.
Citizen secured beneficiary PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
A. Stay New York State Justices in the matter of their denial of Petitioner
due process and equal treatment due under the 14th Amt. of the U.S.
Constitution and NYS Constitution and related law as to denial of trial of
the facts as compelling public interest as to forgery crime aided and
abetted by Electors- a Quo Warranto matter;
B. The Governor of New York for a NEW U.S. Senate Election in New York
to comply with the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
C. The Clerk and Speaker of the U.S. House with Majority I Minority
Leaders and President oftthe U.S. Senate respond to the incorppatibility of
any Person serving as anlelectoral college member while holding an office
of trust or profit under the 14th Amt United States and Constitution
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 2 (A2S1C2);
D. Congress to show cause why under the 12th, 20th, 25th amendments and
U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 (A2S1C5) Barack Hussein
Obama II should be eligible to take the oath of office of POTUS January
20, 2013; .
. E. Congress barring the New York Electoral College vote for Barack Obama.
F. Congress to show cause why it should not hold the $43 Trillion Dollar
theft by Barack Obama al. since 2003 null and void under the 14th
Amendment Section 4;
Exhibit A: "Public" U.S. Citizen on January 23, 2009 duly fired Barack
Hussein Obama II for being ineligible for POTUS under A2S1C5
Exhibit B: non-surety "Private" natural-born U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary filing with notice to US Treasury
Exhibit C: Notice of Petition with Petition filied in NYS Supreme Court
County of Kings with Index No.: 21948-2012
Exhibit D: Note of Issue with Certificate of Readiness for Trial
Exhibit E: Notice ofMotionto Dismiss the Petition- Index No.: 21948-2012
ExhibitF: Decision and to dismiss Complaint- Index No.:t6500-2011
Exhibit G: Proposed OSC the Petition- Index 21948-201:2 .
Exhibit H: official Court docket for the Petition - Index No.: 21948-2012
Exhibit I: June 9, 2012 Affidavit of Sheriff Arpaio of Maricopa County AZ.
Exhiblt J: November 12, 2012 Mfidavit of Michael Zullo Investigator
Exhibit K: Decision and Orders in the USDC DC case no.: 2010-cv-00486
Exhibit L: February 2012 report by Jerome Corsi on HSBC $$Laundering
Exhibit M: December 2012 report by Reuters on HSBC $1.9 Bil. Fine
Exhibit N: Press Release regarding Spire Group RICO case filing in EDNY
Exhibit 0: List of Obama Executive Orders
PDF available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 4 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Table of Authorities (abbreviated)
U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 2, i.e. A2S1C2 states
"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may
direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and
. Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no
Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit
under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector."
United Sfates Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5: "No Person
except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time
of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of
President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not
have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a
Resident within the United States."
U.S. Constitution Article 4 full faith and credit provisions
U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment Section 4. The validity of the public
debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for
payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing
insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United
States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred
in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim
for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations
and claims shall be held illegal and void.
US Constitution Amendments; 12th, 20th, 25th as to POTUS
the' Declaration of Independence of 1776 that adopted as the foundation
for the respective States' constitutions, including that of New York on
April 20, 1777,
Federal Authorities
FRAP Rule 21
18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390
Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 92 S. Ct. 2646, 33 L. Ed. 2d 626
[1972], quoting WILLIAM BLACKSTONE
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 5 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
. McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), .
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995).
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162 (1875)
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 289 (1814)
Inglis v. Sailors' Snug Harbor, 28 U.S. 99 (1830) and
Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 242, 245 (1830)
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857).
Ex parte Reynolds, 20 F.Cas. 582, 5 Dill. 394, No. 11,719 (C.C.W.D.Ark 1879)
United States v. Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D.Cal. 1890).
Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1872),
Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884),
Perkins v. Elg, 307 u ~ s . 325 (1939)
Schneider v. Rusk, 377 U.S. 163 (1964).
New York State Authorities
N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and
N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105
Matter of Smith v Dillon, 267 App. Div. 39, 43 [1943]).
People ex rel. Ryan v Green, 58 NY 295,304-05 [1874];
O'Malley v Macejka, 44 NY2d 530,535 [ 19781;
Matter of Dupras v County of Clinton, 213 AD2d 952,953 [1995];
Matter of Dykeman v Symonds, 54 AD2d 159, 162 [1976];
Fauci v Lee, 38 Misc. 2d 564,567 [1963], affd. 19 AD2d 777 [1963]).
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 6 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.:
COUNTY OF KINGS )
I, Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say:
1. Petitioner Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse self represented without an
attorney, is a. duly registered voter of the 64th Election District of the 57th
Assembly District (AD) and within the New York 8th U.S. House District at 593
Vanderbilt Avenue - 281 Brooklyn New York 11238 for ten years with email:
and cell phone 845-901-6767, and is an enrolled member of
the Republican Party who participated at the November 6, 2012 General
Election there voted entirely for the Republican Party line of candidates,
electors of Mitt Romney for President of the United States (POTUS) and Wendy
Long for US Senate from New York ..
2. As a matter of Judicial Notice there is controlling history and law
regarding construction of the Declaration of Independence of 1776 that was
adopted as the foundation for the respective States' constitutions, including
that of New York on April 20, 1777, that the Revolution expressly eliminated
the feudal doctrine of perpetual allegiance, or that condition based upon a
person's soil birthright subjugation as property of an absolute sovereign, and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 1 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 7 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
3 .. That the Founders replaced perpetual allegiance with the human natural
law doctrine of Natural Born Citizen inheritance of allegiance from his parents
and or that of the father; and tJ:lat the Usurper's Courts in which Petitioner
petitions revert to the prior perpetual allegiance as if the 14th Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution were to amend the A2S 1 CS (1) "natural-born Citizen"
clause by conflating the term person born on soil as if a U.S. Citizen without
regard to the status of the parents, and as if "subject to the jurisdiction" were
needless repetition.., there is no "birthright citizenship" per se; and with this in
mind, by admission Barack Hussein Obama II at the time of his birth, his
father was a British subject married to Stanley Ann Dunham a minor aged
U.S. Citizen in February 1961.
4. That Petitioner when as "Public" U.S. Citizen on January 23, 2009 duly
fired Barack Hussein Obama II (hereinafter known as the "Usurper" and or
"SOEBARKAH") when Obama offered his oath on January 20, 2009 as if
eligible under A2S 1 CS for the office of the POTUS executive with power of
attorney over accounts with theU.S. Treasury and other executive duties (see
Exhibit A), when in fact Obama is ineligible and his eve;fact is void in ab initio; ~
and notwithstanding all his acts being void ab initio the office of POTUS is
again about to be.usurped to Petitioner's detriment and injury; and
5. That Petitioner, by special appearance of Christopher- Earl: Strunk in
1
United States Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5: ''No Person except a natural
born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be
eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and
been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 2 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 8 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
esse, now is a non-surety "Private" natural-born U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary, who on October 15, 2012 duly filed a Notice of Release without
Consideration that under U.S. Constitution Article 4 full faith and credit
provisions is binding upon the State of New York and its New York County sub-
division within the city of New York to it of further obligation as the
trustee-owner of the Usufruct debtor organized on January 24, 194 7; and that
as of December 12; 2012 Petitioner subsequent to filing his "Uniform
Commercial Code" form UCC-1 Initial Financial Statement is the secured
beneficiary of the Usufruct as had been previously noticed in November 2009 to
Timothy Franz Geithner of the U.S. Treasury with pending filings to the
Treasury and IRS (see Exhibit B);
6 .. _That as background to this petition original proceeding petition for a writ
of mandamus of the State and Federal respondents, in January 1999 Petitioner
started a series of court cases challenging the obvious corruption of persons
with the Democratic and Republican Party who colluded to among other things
fixed the 2008 election of POTUS along with a very long list of persons and
organizations, that constitute by formal definition "the enterprise" that now act
with the Usurper to suspend the U.S. Constitution in order to limit individual
freedom and liberty and coordinate a $43 Trillion Dollars theft.
Petitioner USDC EDNY case Strunk v Congress B
Challenged the "Capping" of the numbers of seats in Congress that
diminishes voter suffrage;
Petitioner USDC EDNY case Strunk v US HUD 99-cv-68xx (1999)
Challenged the taking of his property by conversion and .
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 3 of 50
9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 9 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Petitioner USDC EDNY case Strunk v Congress 00-cv-71 77 (2000)
the New York Legislature arbitrary basis for the 2000

Electoral College under A2 S 1 C2
ol ev tt1l
Petitioner EDNY Case Thomas et al. v Federa: Reserve Bank,_ of
(2007) Challenged the pump and dump convers1on of real property 1n
Bed Stuy. Brooklyn . by HUD . connected speculators using sub-prime
instruments D9 c,.V 1 J q
Petitioner USDC EDNY case Strunk v CIA-1\(2008) Challenge the CIA
under FOIA to produce documents for deceased Jesuit, Fr. Pierre
Teilhard de Chardin S.J.- father of the new age movement and the PRC; f
. . o 8 cv' rk'l/f'1
Petitioner case USDC EDNY Strunk v. NY SOS (2008) Challenged the
2008 NY Electoral College as Public Officers holdlng two jobs for pay.
Petitioner NYS case Strunk v Paterson 29641 (2008) Article 78 State
. Petition challenging the 2008 NYS Electoral College members holding two
jobs for pay contrary to the State. Constitution;
Petitioner NYS case Strunk v Paterson 29642 (2008) State Complaint
depending upon the law of the case from 29641-08 challenging their
right to vote for an ineligible person for POTUS (active);
Petitioner USDC DC Case Strunk v US DOS and DHS OB-cv-2234 (2008)
FOIA request for the passport. and travel records for Stanley Ann
Dunham (Obama, Soetoro) arid Barack Hussein Obama II - on appeal; . ,o>
. oq
Petitioner USDC EDNY Case Strunk (intervener) v ACORN/\ (2010)
Intervener as a prior HUD contractor on the side of the US Government
challenging the "friendly" nature of the suit as a fraud upon the court;
7. That there has been. steady growth of an "Enterprise" as defined by civil
RICO standards since 1986 that has served as a vehicle to forward a huge theft
of U.S. Taxpayer backed securities and obligations in use by the Federal
Reserve Banking system that is backed by public and private U.S. Citizen
property as if tacit moral obligation contract existed; however, the clueless US
Citizen sureties were not afforded due process and equal protection when the
enterprise began in earnest after the 1999 Clinton Administration elimination
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 4 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 10 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
I
of the 1999 Glass-Steagle Act protection to comingle risky investment and
commercial banking activities; and
8. That in 1999 then HUD Secretary_Andrew Cuomo as the single fiduciary
. devised rules and policy to increase and conceal non performing loans for use
by the Freddie Mac FDR era quasi public entity that has also assumed control
over a huge number of real property mortgages as a result of the 1986 collapse
of the Saving and Loan Industry then absorbed using the Resolution Trust
Corporation and large commercial banking industry that in short was devised
among Pritzker, Dworman, Annenberg, Ayers, Geithner, and other powerful
families to further efforts of the enterprise to convert property and launder the
-proceeds with questionable securities and general accounting practices
coordinated by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with members; and
9. In addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon information and belief
contends that the Enterprise's present pawn, Barack Obama, when fully
understood that Karl Marx's spiritual mentor is Fr. Luigi Taparelli S.J. whose
''Social Justice Doctrine" of 1832 is now the Usurper's ideology of Utopian
Islamic dualism, underlies his outrageously sinister acts since entering public
office in Illinois; and of the acts, the Usurper is now clearly guilty of forgery,
spoliation, concealment, intimidation of witnesses and racketeering; and
10. That the controversy swirling around the Usurper's eligibility for the
office of POTUS since 2008 is the matter of his alleged Common Law citizen
status as if a Native-born Citizen, somehow notwithstanding the allegiance
status of his parents, rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on
h!tp:/ /www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 5 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 11 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
soil to married U.S. Citizen parents; and that nevertheless Barack Hussein
~ Cft,ama II is a British Subject with dual allegiance at birth alleged August 4,
1961 (we do not actually know the real date) wherever that birth happened,
because in February 1961 according to Hawaii Court records the . British
Subject father was married to the minor U.S. Citizen mother in wedlock to a
majority aged British subject foreign alien student who then were duly divorced
on March 20, 1964; and
.11. That then when in the mother's custody during her 2nd marriage Barack
Obama was adopted in Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo
Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State
Department record affirmed August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and
12. Then thereafter, as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barry
Soetoro) reentered the USA in 1971 alone without a U.S. Passport to live with
his grandmother who: (i) obtained foreign student funding, (ii) illegally obtained
a stolen Social Security Number no later than 1980, (iii) forged a Selective
Service filing dated 1980, and now after the death of the mischievous
grandmother, inter alia SOEBARKAH in furtherance of usurpation of the office
of POTUS no later than April 25, 2011, according to more than three experts,
forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as if of Hawaii and. is the simple matter
before this court for a trial offacts.
13. That inter alia Petitioner further contends based upon information and
belief that notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama, that
Barack Obama has multiple allegiances maybe as many as five (5) British,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 6 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 12 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Kenyan, Indonesian, Canadian, United States by oath of office, and despite
taking an oath owing exclusive --allegiance to the United States, the Usurper
levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies al-
Qaida, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GULEN Movement and Iran
against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand
through Morocco to replace the Ottoman Caliphate dismantled by Winston
Churchill and T. E. Lawrence in 1921, and giving the enemies f Enterprise aid
and comfort within the United. States or elsewhere; is guilty of treason; and
that any candidate elector and or public officer who would. aid and abet Barack
. . .
Obama in usurpation of office of POTUS is no less than guilty of misprision of
felony, sedition and treason.
14. That based upon information and belief Barack Obama is the asset of the
Pilgrim Society (2), Le Cercle (3), 1001 Club (4), Commercial Club of Chicago (5),
Sovereign Military Order of Malta (6), Council for National Policy (7), whose
powerful membership overlaps with the directorships in various think tanks,
2
http://www. bibliotecapleyades.net/ sociopolitical sociopol pilgrimsocietyO 1.htm
3
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol lecercle07.htm#The Vatican
-Paneuropa network
4 http:/ /www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol 1001club01.htm
5 http: I I commercialclubchicago.org/
6 http: I /www.orderofmalta.int/?lang=en
7
http: I /www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council for National Policy
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 7 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 13 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
mainstream media, financial institutions, law firms, corporations, and far
more secret societies hardly worth mentioning; that all covertly support the
Usurper to complete the European Union -EU (Fourth Reich), as directed by Fr.
Peter-Hans Kovenbach, S.J. to dissolve all Eurasian national secular borders,
and form the Mediterranean Union, as King Juan Carlos of Jerusalem's crown
jewel, at the hilt of the neo Babylonian Caliphate scimitar Arc of Crisis swath
from Thailand to Morocco, hewn by their crown prince SOEBARKAH .:. Obama
fealty "There is no other God than Allahf' (B) allegiance to the Opus Dei- Muslim
Brotherhood - GULEN I EU Utopian Islamic Fascist Alliance (UIFA) to
transform United States national sovereignty by plundering our youth by war
and U.S. Taxpayer $43 trillion Dollars wealth by theft.
15. Petitioner contends based upon information and belief, that the UIFA
overthrow of the enemy of the Bedouin and al Qaeda, the U.S. ally was Berber
Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi (June 1942-20 October 2011)
since surrendering to George W. Bush in 2003, renders Libyan assets to UIFA
with IMF control over the African Union by assassination of its financier-leader
and now underlies the Crown Prince SOEBARKAH and Hapsburg I Pallavicini
(9) family asset Hillary Clinton (like with the Rothschild - "Red Shield") deal
with UIFA Muslim Brotherhood associate President Mohamed Morsi and
Mohamed al-Zawahiri of Egypt, sought with the younger brother of Al Qaeda
leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to have Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, commonly
8
http: //www.wnd.com/2012/10/obamas-ring-there-is-no-god-but-allah/
9 http: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pallavicini
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 8 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 14 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
known in the United States as "The Blind Sheikh", released from Federal prison
by using al Qaida to kidnap the "Ambassador" Christopher Stevens from the
Benghazi CIA "mission" or CIA (Georgetown's Patraeus contracted) safe house
(a residential rental property), where the Libyan munitions magic mystery tour
still is underway for arms transfer to UIF A assets in Syria; and that the
kidnapping scheme was easy to devise for the exchange of CIA agent Stevens
for the Blind Sheikh, since the actual "U.S. Consulate" was safely guarded in
Tripoli by the State Department Service far away from the CIA rouge
arms deal mission agents protected by U.S. National secrecy in Benghazi; and
16. However on September 11, 2012, the best made plans for the attack I
kidnapping by al Qaida went sideways due to the fact that two Navy Seals
disobeyed CIA orders to stand-down and joined the defenders to kill more than
100 al Qaida attackers during the five hour fire fight that ended by their death,
the Ambassador rape j death, the continued incarceration of The Blind Sheikh,
the slaughter of Egyptian Coptics, Israelis blamed for the movie trailer, and the
media coordinated support of the badly managed false flag cover-up by
Ambassador Susan Rice, Secretary Clinton, Secretary Patraeus, Secretary Leon
Panetta, and the Usurper UIFA Crown Prince speech at the United Nations.
17. That the Usurper on the September 19, 2012 appeared on the Letterman
Show to reinforce the false flag Muslim protest of a supposed movie "Trailer"
cover story, and . that had somehow the unfortunate misunderstanding in
Benghazi was merely a spontaneous reaction that got out of control by
outraged Muslims to a anti-Muslim movie trailer produced in Hollywood that
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 9 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 15 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
had defamed Islam (10); a bold manufactured lie to cover the false flag attack 1
kidnapping on the "trailer" that in fact was produced by a Palestinian National,
a Federal probationer from a 1999 bank fraud conviction, for the Muslim
Brotherhood and Hamas along with the Palestinian terrorist cousin of W alid
Shoebat (11) that thereby involves Attorney General Eric Holder and the FBI in
support of the false flag abduction of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Christopher
Stevens, gun running, deaths and treason, and perhaps World War III due to
events spinning out of control in Syria!
18. That the Usurper's actions with the enterprise are outrageously ignored
by the State and Federal Courts, and that include the overthrown of legitimate
allies of the U.S., the commission of illegal wars, assassinations of foreign and
U.S. Citizens, and institutional tyrannical dictatorship by the executive by
unconstitutional executive orders theft with impunity of the Executive,
Congress, Courts and NGOs.
19. Undaunted by the enormity of ongoing crimes and obvious flx that is in,
Petitioner after the General Election of November 6, 2012, filed a new Petition
in New York State Court in Kings County with Index No: 21948-2012 on
November 14, 2012 for a mandamus of the New York Electoral College before it
would consider voting for th.e Usurper by December 17, 2012 (see Exhibit C) ;
and therein Petitioner requests a trial of the facts associated with the forged
10
http: //www.washingtonpost.com/obama-us-consulate-attack-in-libya-not-
an-act-of-wari2012I091 19 l8e5b47ba-021f-11e2-bbf0-
e33b4ee2f0e8 video .h tml?tid =pm vid&reload =true
0
/o29.
11
http: I I shoe bat. com I shoe bat-foundation linnocence-of-muslims I
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 10 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 16 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
instrument issued by the Usurper on 27 April 2011 at a White House Press
Conference with the intent that the forgery be used by the Usurper to again
Usurp the office of POTUS for a second term as a matter that would each vote
make the member an accessory after the fact to a felony sedition and treason
as defined with 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law,
20. That as shown in Exhibit C, Petitioner duly served a complaint upon 14
respective District Attorneys in New York, and therein each complaint
Petitioner affirms that
"there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 25, 2011
forged public document is for the purpose of usurping the POTUS, and
that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding
abetting each crirrie the civil servant would be an accessory after the fact
to. a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides
due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by the U.S.
Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C .. 2381 through 2390 and
related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N . Y . S ~ CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any
public officer misapplication and administration of laws ... "
21. That on December 7, 2012. Petitioner filed a Note of Issue with
Certificate of Readiness for Trial (see Exhibit D) after the Petition shown as
Exhibit C was joined on November 19, 2012 before New York State Supreme
Court Justice David I. Schmidt by application for order to show cause (OSC)
that was there rejected; and
22. That inter alia Petitioner contends that by casting a vote for Barack
Obama each such Respondent listed therein and herein may be charged with
the crime of accessory after the fact of a felony committed on or about 25 April
2011 by persons as yet named, aided and abetted by White House Press
Secretary Jay Carney, the President's Director of Communications Dan Pfeiffer,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 11 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 17 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
White House Counsel Bob Bauer, and Barack Obama who during the 27 April
2011 White House Press Conference, see the tra.rlscript evidence herein (see
Exhibit D-1), all expressly presented a forged instrument to the People of the
United States, a crime compounded by spoliation, concealment, perjury,
tampering with the public record, intimidation of witnesses & other crimes; and
23. That a trial of the facts in the matter of a felony forgery with
expert testimony of Paul Edward Irey is affirmed December 4, 2012 (see
Exhibit D-2) as an urgent matter of public interest with time of the essence
and imminent irreparable harm; and
24. That the Petition with Notice of Intent to file an application for
OSC was served upon the members of the New York State legislature's Electoral
. College body by certified mail with a return receipt request on November 14,
2012 and then by follow-up regular mail on November 30, 2012 (see Exhibit D-
3); and that the issues were joined by the purchase of an RJI on November 16,
2012 (see Exhibit D-4) and appearance of Petitioner and the New York state
attorney general office's Assistant Attorney General Joshua Pepper of the
Litigation Bureau before the Hon. David I. Schmidt who for reasons explained
in his order (see Exhibit D-5) thereafter declined to sign the order to show
cause application, and that Petitioner then requested reconsideration by
Justice Schmidt on November 30, 2012 with due notice also given to the Hon.
Arthur M. Schack J.S.C. for reconsideration pending see
http://www.scribd.com/doc/112747771/.
25. The Petition affidavit in support of his note of issue and certificate
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 12 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 18 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
of readiness by CPLR 3402 shown as Exhibit D was filed in good faith for a
trial of issues by December 14, 2012 with partial severance for the benefit of
captioned Respondent electors of the New York State Legislature's Electoral
College and members of Congress before the deadline to vote by December 17,
2012 -now passed; and is now to be tallied in Congressional joint chamber
after January 3, 2013 for candidates for the office of POTUS when the next
Congress convenes.
26. So what does Petitioner reasonably expect from this humble
Court? A remedy for each of the following matters within the jurisdiction and
authority of this Court to resolve: for Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, a
private U.S. Citizen secured beneficiary with injury in re the criminal
usurpation of the office of POTUS by Barack Obama's ineligibility under U.S.
Constitution A2S1CS and related law, Petitions by this Original Proceeding for
writ of mandamus FRAP Rule 21 Order of:
A.
Stay of New York State Justices in the matter of their denial of Petitioner
due process and equal treatment due under the 14th Amt. of the U.S.
Constitution and NYS Constitution and related law as to denial of trial of
the facts as compelling public interest as to forgery crime aided and
abetted by Electors- a Quo Warranto matter;
27. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in this
Original Proceeding for a Mandamus before the Court Panel with paragraphs 1
through 26 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length.
28. That Petitioner wishes Stay equity relief of New York State Justices
in the matter of their denial of Petitioner due process and equal treatment due
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 13 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 19 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
under the 14th Amendment. of the U.S. Constitution and NYS Constitution and
related law as to denial of trial of the facts as compelling public interest as to
forgery crime aided and abetted by Electors- in what amounts to a Quo
Warranto matter.
29. That on December 21, 2012 in response to service of the Petition
shown as C and the Note of Issue shown as Exhibit D in the Petition Strnnk v
Jeffries et al. in New York State Supreme Court in the County Of Kings with
Index No.: 21948-2012, Developer Andrew Farkas' relative Steven C. Farkas,
Esq. of COLLERAN, O'HARA & MILLS, L.L.P. representing Mario Cilento the
New York Electoral College member from Nassau County made an appearance
with memorandum and a motion to. dismiss the Petition with sanctions with a
January 22, 2013 return date (see Exhibit E annexed without sub-exhibits A
& B: the Petition shown as Exhibit C, and order shown as exhibit F); and
30. That the return date for the Motion shown as Exhibit E is long
after the beginning of the next Executive term of Office of POTUS when he is to
take his oath January 20, 2013 begins, were Petitioner to not seek this forum
for relief would render all Petitioners efforts moot; and would interfere as
intertwined with Petitioner's appeal in with Appeal case 12-5515 filing due by
February 22, 2013 in the New York State Supreme Court Second Department
Appellate Division in that Petitioner on March 22, 2011 had filed the complaint
based on common law fraud injury case Stronk v. NYS Board ofElections et al.
in Kings County with Index No.: 2011-6500 that subsequently on April 11
2012 was then dismissed with sanctions and prejudice (see Exhibit F);
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 14 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 20 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
I
31. The Order shown as Exhibit F bars Petitioner from further suing
the named parties in the case with Index No.: 2011-6500 in their Official and
or individual capacity without seeking permission of New York State Supreme
Court Justice Arthur M. Schack as follows:
NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
JAMES A. WALSH I Co-Chair,
DOUGLAS A. KELLNER I Co-Chair,
EVELYN J. AQUILA I Commissioner,
GREGORY P. PETERSON I Commissioner,
Deputy Director TODD D. VALENTINE,
Deputy Director STANLEY ZALEN;
ANQREW CUOMO,
ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN,
THOMAS P. DINAPOLI,
RUTH NOEMf COLON,
Fr. JOSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J.;
Fr. JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J.;
FREDERICK A.O. SCHWARZ, JR.;
(the city of New York's Campaign Finance Board)
PETER G. PETERSEN,
ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI;
MARK BRZEZINSKI;
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.;
SOEBARKAH (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama II, Steve Dunham);
NANCY PELOSI;
DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK;
STATE COMMITIEE OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE;
ROGER CALERO;
THE SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY;
IAN J. BRZEZINSKI;
JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III;
JOHN A. BOEHNER;
THE NEW YORK STATE REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE;
THE NEW YORK STATE COMMITTEE OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY;
STATE COMMITTEE OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE;
. PENNY S. PRITZKER;
GEORGE SOROS;
OBAMA FOR AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND;
MCCAIN VICTORY 2008;
MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008;
John and Jane Does; and XYZ Entities.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 15 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 21 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
32. T h c ~ . t the _Petition shown as Exhibit C does not name any of the above
parties nor did Petitioner act in bad faith with the Order shown as Exhibit F.
33. That on November 30, 2012, Petitioner after Justice Schmidt issued the
Order shown as Exhibit D-5 denying to sign the OSC application, submitted a
Second Affidavit in support of reconsideration of signing the OSC application
and delivered a copy to both Justices Schmidt and Schack (see Exhibit G), and
for the information of this Court Panel Petitioner annexes the entire OSC
application with the Exhibits 1 through 16, of which 14 thru 16 accompanied
the 2nd Affidavit ; and
34 .. That Petitioner contends in the Petitioner's 2nd Affidavit in support of an
OSC that the Court erred in its Order shown as Exhibit D-5, quote:
6. That any person elected at the November 6, 2012 general election,
including Respondents, are now certified as elected by the NYS BOE, and
because Petitioner was unable to challenge the election in the pre-
certification first stage that then would include the NYS BOE and not
conform with the wishes of Judge Schack; but now during the post
certification phase in which any congressman elect during the lame duck
session of congress before those certified would appear to be sworn into
office on or after January 3,. 2013 not only does not require the
appearance of the NYS BOE, but as with any challenge of first
impressiort regarding a Constitutional issue only requires Petitioner
provide proper notification of the Office of the NYS Attorney General
which Petitioner did by notifying Lisa Dell, Esq. by email on Friday.
November16, 2012 (see Exhibit 15).; and
7. That when Joshua Pepper, Esq. NYS Assistant Attorney General from
the litigation bureau, under the supervision of Lisa Dell of His Office,
appeared voluntarily as an intervener at the preliminary intake hearing
of this application before the Court at Courtroom 541; and thereat, Mr ~
Pepper disclosed that he represents the Executive including the
Governor, Comptroller, Attorney General and Mr. Silver the Speaker of
the Assembly;
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 16 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 22 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
8. Therefore how would Petitioner be held liable, and under what legal
theory for another's voluntary action applies, whether that be for an
intervener as petitioner or respondent?
9. It is Petitioner's understanding that he is unable to amend a petition
per se, this is not a complaint, and even were a legal theory to require .
such duplication of effort, Petitioner doesn't have sufficient funds to file a
companion petition that for all intents is unnecessary, because Mr.
Pepper did not appear by special appearance per se but announced to
the Court he actually represents the Executive and the Speaker by name.
10. Why shouldn't Mr. Pepper's voluntary appearance representing those
named be deemed as such without imposing further injury upon
Petitioner for the acts of others whose job it is to appear without any
further 14th amendment invidious deprivation of Petitioner fundamental
rights too?
35. Furthermore, that by December 7, 2012, Petitioner received no response
from either chambers and or the clerk's office until Petitioner obtained an
official copy of the Court docket caption has been modified to read
Strnnk v. "Board of Elections" rather than ((Strunk v Jeffries" that Petitioner did
not name the NYS BOE (see Exhibit H), and as such has already been
established by Petitioner at paragraph 6 quote above from his 2nd Affidavit in
Support of an OSC, that the Court erred in its Order shown as Exhibit D-5.
36. That the New York State Justices in the matter duly filed before
have without just cause denied Petitioner fundamental due process and equal
treatment protections due, under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
and NYS Constitution and related law, when they have unreasonably denied a
trial of the facts as compelling public interest as to forgery crime aided and
abetted by Electors- as a Quo Warranto matter; and
37. Petitioner contends that according to tradition that remains true, it was
and is a citizen's duty to "raise the hue and cry" by reporting crimes, especially
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 17 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 23 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
felonies, to law enforcement authorities (Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 92
S. Ct. 2646, 33 L. Ed. 2d 626 (1972], quoting WILLIAM BLACKSTONE).
38. That Petitioner is an aggrieved private U.S. Citizen who has suffered
property loss associated with injury to the Usufruct organization
"CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK" that by grant of personal jurisdiction in the
case 2011-6500 is affected by the enormity of Arthur M. Schack's actions in
the proceedings associated with the April 11, 2012 Order shown as Exhibit F;
and as such Petitioner is entitled to seek redress of grievances expressly
available under N.Y. Civil Practice Law Rules (CPLR) 7202 entitled "Action by
person aggrieved" Where a penalty or forfeiture is given by a statute to a person
aggrieved. by the act or omission of another, the person aggrieved may
con1mence an action to recover it.
39. That Petitioner has suffered unreasonable denial of due process
requiring a trial of the newly discovered facts proven as shown in Exhibit D-2
that would clear him of any wrong doing or bad faith in that the matter of
common law civil fraud complained of as it is inextricably intertwined with
criminal matters that under both state and the federal statute, a legitimate
effort of any prosecution or civil inquiry must prove the following elements to
obtain a misprision of felony conviction: ( 1) another person actually committed
a felony; (2) the defendant knew that the felony was committed; (3) the
defendant did not notify any law enforcement or judicial officer; and (4) the
defendant took affirmative steps to conceal the felony.
40. That Petitioner relies on the fifty year experience and judgment of law
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 18 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 24 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
enforcement officer, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County Arizona, when on
June 9, 2012 he affirmed (see Exhibit I) that a crime has been committed that
requires to determine at a civil trial what precisely constitutes active
concealment as a Question of Fact with circumstance essential for both civil
and criminal cases quote:
7. Upon close examination of the evidence, it is my belief that forgery and
fraud was likely committed in key identity documents including
President Obama's long form birth certificate, his Selective Service
Registrationcard, and his Social Security number.
8. My investigators and I believe that President Obama's long-form birth
certificate is a computer-generated document, was manufactured
electronically, and that it did not originate in a paper format, as claimed
by the White House. M ~ s t importantly, the "registrar's stamp" in the
computer generated document released by the White House and posted
on the White House website, may have been .imported from another
unknown source document. The effect of the stamp not being placed on
the document pursuant to state and federal laws means that there is
probable cause that the document is a forgery, and therefore, it cannot
be used as verification, legal or otherwise, o( the date, place or
circumstances of Barack Obama's birth.
41. Further evidence that Petitioner relies on is that collected by Sheriff
Arpaio's chief Investigator Michael Zullo affirmed by affidavit on November 12,
2012 (see Exhibit J) in search of an actual perpetrator of crime affirms quote:
44. Most importantly, the "registrar's stamp" in the computer:...generated
dC?cument released by the White House and posted on the White House
website may have been imported from another unknown source
document. The fact that the stamp cannot have been placed on the
document pursuant to state and federal laws is one of many indications
that the document is a forgery and, therefore, that it cannot be relied
upon as verification, legal or otherwise, of the date, place or
circumstances of Mr. Obama's birth.
45. The Registrar's date-stamp exhibited a similar grave anomaly,
allowing it to be moved about electronically within the document - which
would have been impossible if the document were the scanned and
certified copy that official statements profess it to be. The Registrar's
http:/ /www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 19 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 25 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
signature-stamp and date-stamp were computer-generated images that
were imported into the document. They were not electronic images of
actual rubber-stamp imprints inked by hand or machine on to a paper
document. Accordingly, the document on the White House website is, at
a minimum, misleading to the public in that it has no legal import and
cannot be relied upon as a legal document carrying the full faith and
credit of the State of Hawaii and verifying the date, place and other
circumstances of Mr. Obama's birth. A photograph of the Registrar's
is exhibited and marked "MZa".
46. These and numerous other errors and anomalies observed after
extensive forensic scrutiny of the electronic image downloaded from the
White House website were inconsistent with features to be expected
when a paper documentis placed on the glass plate of a scanner so that
it can be captured as an electrophotographic image, or when it is
scanned and then processed either to enhance the clarity of the image by
optical character recognition or to reduce file-size by file-compression or
optimization.
4 7. Furthering the investigation, I returned to Hawaii for a second time. I
met Mr. Duncan Sunahara, the brother of Virginia Sunahara, an infant
born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961, the alleged date of Mr. Obama's birth
there. Ms Sunahara died the following day, August 5, after breathing
difficulties. When I met Mr. Sunahara he had recently applied to the
Department of Health in Hawaii for a copy of his deceased sister's birth
certificate. He told me the Department had gone to great lengths to deny
him a copy of the original long-form birth certificate that a close relative
is entitled by law to request and the Department is obliged by law to
supply. The Cold Case Posse is compelled to consider the question why
this little girl's 1961 long-form birth certificate was so disconcerting to
the Hawaii Department of Health that it did not wish to issue a copy to
Mr. Suriahara upon request.
63. Notwithstanding this affidavit, it is plausible that an original birth
record for Mr. Obama exists in Hawaii. Our investigation has discovered
that" at that time Hawaiian law contained a specific provision that
permitted a Hawaiian parent ofa child born anywhere in the world or
any adult purporting to represent that parent, the right to register the
child as Hawaiian-born. It is for this reason that two entries in the
"Births" column ofthelocal newspapers at the time do not constitute
evidence that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii. They are merely evidence
suggesting that a birth certificate was issued for him in Hawaii, and they
tell us nothing about whether or not he was born there. In particular
they do not- as the White House document purports to do- identify the
hospital of birth.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 20 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 26 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
64. If Mr. Obama had not in fact been born in Hawaii, the long-form
original birth certificate would not have stated that he had been born in
a particular hospital at a particular time, and would not have borne the
signatures of the attending physician and registrar. The newspaper
entries would have been identical whether he had been born in Hawaii or
elsewhere in the world; but the birth records would not have been
identical.
65. The existence of this law permitting out-of-country births to be
registered as though they were Hawaiian births is a further reason why
the Sheriff wishes his forensic investigators to be given access to the
original bound volumes of birth certificates for 1961, and to be permitted
to carry out forensic scrutiny of the volumes and of certain individual
certificates, including that of Mr. Obama.
66. For these reasons, it is necessary for the investigators to bear in
mind the possibility that the intention of the Hawaii Department of
Health in refusing to allow Mr. Sunahara to have a certified copy of the
original birth certificate of his deceased sister is to conceal forgery and
fraud within the Department itself.
42. That the expert testimony by Paul Edward Irey is based upon the
Affidavit with Exhibits A. through D affirmed December 4, 2012, shown as
Exhibit D-2 that is res ipsa loquitur; and
43. That Petitioner contends in order to clear himself of any wrong doing as
a 6th Amendment matter denied him by Judge Schack, that the body of the
crime complained of has been brought to the attention of Respondents, the
Courts and various district attorneys with authority and jurisdiction to further
investigate to no avail, and that the testimony deals with the fact that in 1961,
well before computers or such other technologies that may be in use today,
that ANY .birth certificate paperwork was done either by hand and or on forms
designed for use with the mechanical typewriter technology that was then
widely used, rendering a forgery detectible; and that testimony presents the
proof of forgery in the context of then mechanical technology in use, and also
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 21 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 27 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
to prove the forged instrument is of current manufacturer, that the forgers use
of the U n s ~ a r p Mask software by Adobe to create a Halo around lettering thus
also sets the chain of custody of the forgery along with where it was
manufactured.
44. That the urgency of a trial on the facts of a crime having been committed
is essential to clear Petitioner, and is notwithstanding whether the actual
perpetrator(s) or accessories before the fact of the forgery are before this Court
as a criminal matter afforded jurisdiction elsewhere; and nevertheless
Petitioner is entitled a forum under this petition for a trial of the fact of a
forgery per se that the electoral college body as necessary public policy and law
would become actual accessories by their vote, notwithstanding any matter
related to the legal issues referenced above; and therefore, mandates that this
trial must deal exclusively with the proof of the actual forgery now after
December 17, 2012 and before January 7, 2013, and at which trial Petitioner
will present expert testimony by Typographer Graphics Expert Paul Edward
lrey who has his latest work published by the Washington Times on November
19, 2012 and then updated and published again on December 5, 2012 shown
as Exhibit D-2A and therein Mr. Irey states quote:
The important section of the Obama long form birth certificate is
displayed below and enlarged to fit this page. We have found 24 proofs
of forgery on this document so far and are showing 5 areas of our
easiest to understand evidence here. We are 2 typographers with a
combined experience of 70 years creating and examining our own
documents along with expertise in scanning, graphic arts, photography,
reproduction, printing, and also including the use of the old manual
typewriters along with computer created documentation while starting
. and owning our own successful business' employing over 70 people.
Allegedly in 1961, a typewriter produced this document on a form, but
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 22 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 28 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
the evidence shows us this birth certificate was created last year on a
Macintosh computer, sending two copies of that form to the White
House. The White house then posted a copy online and gave zerox copies
to the media that the source for our exam... We have found this birth
certificate to be a badly done forgery.
1. Mismatched Typed Letters Compare these typewritten letters
enlarged from the birth certificate. We have marked the ones chosen with
a blue dot under the original letter. Of the 15 pair's. choices, one set is
from the word "Student" that exhibits two different type styles of the "t"
within the same word. These support our contention that the typed
letters were copied and assembled from different documents. Note the
size and shape differences. These letters could not have come from the
. $arne typewriter. This is proof of forgery.
2. The Bent Cap "H" in "Hussein" ...
3. The Stolen Birth Certificate Number If someone decided last year to
forge a birth certificate for a person, they would need a birth certificate
number that was issued in the 1961 era. A baby born the same day in
Hawaii as Barack Obama ... died the next day. We believe that babies
number was 61 10641. The family requested her birth certificate and got
the short form with a number way out of sequence. They then requested
the long form and were refused. They brought a lawsuit before the
Hawaiian courts. Its was denied, with the court explaining that the
Honolulu Dept. of Health could decide if they wanted to provide the birth
certificate of the deceased baby or not. But that is not the law in the
state of Hawaii.
4. The Start of Line Error The word "Kapiolani" should be exactly under
the word "Male", not a half space indented. This is proof of forgery.
Also the fact that not all the lines are flush to the left is suspicious. No
other birth certificate exhibits this peculiar style.
5. Irregular Line Spacing - This birth certificate form was designed for
typewriters, so that every time the typist pulled a carriage return, it
would advance down exactly 2 picas to match the form line for line. This
was common for all forms made for typewriters. We were unable to find
another birth certificate from Hawaii with uneven line spacing like this
one. Typewriters do not do this. This is proof of forgery.
6. Irregular Letter Spacing - The original locations of the two-letter
combinations below are marked with a blue outline. These are just some
of the combinations that vary in the space between the letters. These
spaces should be equal, not different, since the old mono-spaced
typewriters always moved a specific amount after each letter was typed.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 23 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 29 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
We feel that the forger, assembling these letters manually on a computer
could not replicate the exact spacing that the old style mechanical
typewriters produced. This is proof of forgery.
7. The White Halo- The white halo, seen on the online White House
release is a white outline around everything on the birth certificate. No
other birth certificate has this. See it on Exhibit "A" below & Exhibit "B"
showing how it should look. This was caused by the Adobe Photoshop
fiiter used to sharpen edges. It does this by choking back the edge
leaving a white halo. We show in Exhibit "C" how we did the same thing
to our specimen example. The Hawaiian. Dept. of Health is supposed to
have put the original birth certificate on a copier and printed to a special
. green security paper instead of white paper. The only result possible from
that is Exhibit "B", NOT exhibit "A". The halo proves that the forger
combined a scan of the security paper on a computer ... flattened all of
the elements in the file and then applied the Unsharp Mask. It is even
on the birth certificate above ... see upper left corner. Since this is a
direct copy of the birth certificate sent from Hawaii, that proves the white
halo was on what they copied, so we must assume the Hawaiian original
has it also. This is proof of forgery.
45. The Chain of custody of the documents from Hawaii to the White House
is frozen with use of the Halo created by the Unsharp Mask program for Adobe .
46. That Respondent public officers as if Elector Public Officers and even
when private U.S. Citizens act Publicly as the Electoral College from New York
as an extension of State Legislative prerogative only, and have a duty as to
matters of law and facts and when in violation of law must be held accountable
or would infringe the trust due the People of New York as similarly to
Petitioner's right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom and
Liberty.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 24 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 30 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
4 7. To allow a trial of the facts and issues herein is a matter of public
interest is brought by the NYS CPLR Article 78 petition filed November 14,
2012, shown as Exhibit C, that was served upon the members of the New York
State legislature's Electoral College body by certified mail with a return receipt
request on November 14, 2012 and then by follow-up regular mail on
November 30, 2012; and that the issues were joined by the purchase of an RJI
November 16, 2012, shown as Exhibit D-4.2. and the beside a letter to the
Clerk of the Court the New York state attorney general office shown as Exhibit
G-2; and
48. Thereafter, the appearance of Petitioner and Assistant Attorney General
Joshua Pepper of the Litigation Bureau before the David I. Schmidt who
for reasons explains in his order, shown as Exhibit thereafter declined to
sign the order to show cause application, and that Petitioner then requested
reconsideration on November 30, 2012 with due notice given to the Hon.
Arthur M. Schack J.S.C. for reconsideration pending see.
http:t/www. scribd. com/doc/112 74 7771/.
B.
The Governor of New York for a NEW U.S. Senate Election in New York to
comply with the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
49. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the "A"
Issues of this Original Proceeding for a Mandamus before the Court Panel with
paragraphs 1 through 48 with the same force and effect as though herein set
forth at length.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 25 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 31 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
50. That Petitioner wishes an order of the Governor of New York for a NEW
U.S. Senate Election in New York to comply with the 17th Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution.
51. That Justice Schmidt in his Order declining to sign the OSC annexed to
Exhibit G sub-exhibit 5 requires both the New York Governor Andrew Cuomo,
and NYS Board of Elections to be joined as necessary parties.
52. A declaratory judgment as to the now certified U.S. Senate Election in
New York as to the 17th Amendment challenge with jurisdiction afforded the
Court by EL 16-100, in that the election held on November 6, 2012 is void ab
initio and requires a new election by order of the Governor as to elector
qualifications are not equal to that of the New York Assembly; and therefore,
.Petitioner seeks to overturn New York's U.S. Senate election with U.S. Const.
Amendment 17 :
"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from
each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator
shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch
ofthe State legislatures . .. "(Emphasis added by Petitioner)
as the November 6, 2012 election for U.S. Senator from New York between
Democrat Candidate Kirsten Gillibrand and Republican Candidate Wendy Long
among others was conducted for electors not meeting the qualifications of a
member of the Assembly with State Constitution Article 3 Section 7:
". No person shall serve as a member of the legislature unless he or
she is a citizen of the United States and has been a resident of the
state of New York for five years, and, except as hereinafter otherwise
prescribed, of the assembly ... district for the twelve months
immediately preceding his or her election; ... or member of assembly
at the first election next ensuing after a readjustment or alteration of the
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 26 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 32 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
... assembly districts becomes effective, a person, to be eligible to serve
as such, must have been a resident of the county in which the
senate or assembly district is contained for the twelve months
immediately preceding his or her election. " (Emphasis added by
Petitioner)
53. That as for Ellector Respondents Jeffries, Meng, Ortiz, Wright and
Morelle in the Petition shown in Exhibit C are prime examples of the electors
of most numerous branch of the State Legislature that before the 17th
Amendment were to elect the respective U.S. Senator of two senators from the
state of New York, as the Assembly had a margin of elector control over the
State Senate with a ratio of 3 assemblymen to 1 senator.
54. And as such Petitioner wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election
and ask the Governor to set a special election, because a significant number of
the electors casting their respective vote were domiciled in New York for less
than fives years and had not lived in their respective county of domicile for at
least twelve months and there is no way to determine from the votes cast on
Novemebr 6, 2012 of those qualified what candidate was voted for.
c.
The Clerk and Speaker of the U.S. House with Majority I Minority Leaders
and President of the U.S. Senate respond to the incompatibility of any
Person serving as an electoral college member while holding an office of
trust or profit under. the 14th Amendment United States and Constitution
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 2 (A2SlC2);
55. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the "A"
through "B" Issues of this Original Proceeding for a Mandamus before the
Court Panel with paragraphs 1 through 54 with the same force and effect.as
though herein set forth at length.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ . ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 27 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 33 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
56. That Petitioner wishes The Clerk and Speaker of the U.S. House with
Majority I Minority Leaders and President of the U.S. Senate respond to the
incompatibility of any Person serving as an electoral college member while
holding an office of trust or profit under the 14th Amendment United States and
Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 2 (A2S1C2) (12).
57. Petitioner has unsuccessfully expended efforts to obtained equity relief
with Temporary Restraining Order of those State and local Officer electors with
authority to act independent of: the New York State electoral college who vote by
December 17, 2012, and who are incompatible with the office held, be stayed
from voting pending a trial on the facts of a forgery and permanent injunction
with a declaratory judgment as to U.S. Constitution Article 2 1 Clause. 2 by
say January 7, 2013 now that the New York Electoral College Vote is
transmitted to Congress.
58. Petitioner needs a declaratory judgment as to the incompatibility of any
Person holding an. office of trust or profit under the 14th Amendment United
States who are also electors that are to be barred from reviewing the elector
votes as present in Congress after January 2, 2013 in keeping to law mandates
59. Petitioner as to the Petition shown as Exhibit C wishes a declaratory
judgment as to the incompatibility of any Person holding an office of trust or
12
U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 2, i.e. A2S1C2 states "Each
State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a
Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or
Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the
United States, shall be appointed an Elector."
'
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 28 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 34 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
profit under the 14th Amendment United States who are also electors .that are
to be barred from changing the eligibility of a person seeking the office of
President of the United States qualifications are in conflict with A2SlC2 and
A2S1C5 and are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the
People of the State of New York according to the SCOTUS must be in keeping
with the exclusive power, McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), of the New
York State. Legislature in its plenary formation of the New York electoral college
may notchange A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514
u.s. 779 (1995).
60. That an Elector as a Public US Citizen and or Public Officer has a duty
to law and facts, and that when in violation of law must be held accountable or
would infringe the trust due the People of New York as similarly to Petitioner's
right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom and Liberty.
61. That it is a well-settled common law rule that a public officer cannot hold
two incompatible offices simultaneously (Matter of Smith v Dillon, 267 App. Div.
39, 43 [1943]). This rule. seeks to prevent offices of public trust from
accumulating in a single individual. Two offices are incompatible if one is
subordinate to the other or there is an inherent inconsistency between the two
offices (see People ex rel. Ryan v Green, 58 NY 295,304-05 [1874]; O'Malley v
Macejka, 44 NY2d 530,535 [19781; Matter of Dupras v County of Clinton, 213
AD2d 952,953 [1995]; Matter of Dykeman v Symonds, 54 AD2d 159, 162
[1976]; Fauci v Lee, 38 Misc. 2d 564,567 [1963], affd. 19 AD2d 777 [1963]).
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 29 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 35 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
62. Those dual office holders that have an incompatibility "has been said to
exist when there is a built-in right of the holder of one position to interfere with
that of the other ... " (O'Malley, 44 NY2d at 535). Where one person holds both
such posts then "the design that one act as a check on the other would be
frustrated" (id.)."
63. That upon a close examination by this Court Panel of each member of
the New York State Executive branch acting also as an Elelctoral College
Elector has a conflict of interest as each possesses the authority and power to
prevent cronyism incompatibility of electors in the electoral"college, but have
failed to act; and apparently act along with the Bosses who hold the public and
private U.S. Citizen enrolled party members or otherwise in distain, with the
exception of two persons listed herein, refuse to allow private U.$. Citizens to
take part in the mandates of the State Legislature delegated to the Electoral
College responsibilities,
64. The New York Executive Branch Elelctors practice cronyism that grant
political favors that are incompatable with the position of a member of the
electoral college; and that Executive Branch Electors hold an office of trust or
profit are barred from the body that has allowed lawyers, lobbyists, union
leaders, licensed professionals, party leaders and other persons holding an
office of trust or profit under the 14th Amendment United States, and includes
State and Local officers too.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 30 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 36 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
D.
Congress to show cause why under the 12th, 20th, 25thamendments and U.S.
Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 (A2SlC5) Barack Hussein Obama II
should be eligible to take the oath of office of POTUS January 20, 2013;
65. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in t h ~ "A"
Issue through "C" of this Original Proceeding for a M?lldamus before the Court
Panel with paragraphs 1 through 64 with the same force and effect as though
herein set forth at length.
66. That Petitioner wishes Congress to show cause why under the 12th, 20th,
25th amendments and U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 (A2S1CS)
Barack Hussein Obama II should be eligible to take the oath of POTUS January
20, 2013;
E.
Congress barring the New York Electoral College votes for Barack Obama.
67. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the "A"
through "D" Issues of this Original Proceeding for a Mandamus before the
Court Panel with paragraphs 1 through 66 with the same force and effect as
though herein set forth at length.
68. That Petitioner wishes Congress barring the New York Electoral College
vote for Barack Obama.
F.
Congress to show cause why it should not hold the $43 Trillion Dollar
theft by Barack Obama et al. since 2003 null and void under
the 14th Amendment Section 4 .
69. That Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the "A"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 31 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 37 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
through "E" Issues in this Original Proceeding for a Mandamus before the
Court Panel with paragraphs 1 through 68 with the same force and effect as
though herein set forth at length.
70. That Petitioner wishes Congress to show cause why it should not hold
the $43 Trillion Dollar theft by Barack Obama et al. since 2003 null and void
available under the 14th Amendment Section 4.
U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment Section 4. The validity :of the public
_debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for
payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection
or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any
State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of
insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or
emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations. and claims shall be
held illegal 0:nd _void. (Emphasis by Petitioner)
71. That as further background amazing as it may seem for the Honorable
Court Panel herein, Petitioner has provided Judicial Notice of fourteen years of
Court Cases listed above that pertain herein that support a better
understanding _of the above allegations and controversy here presented for
relief; and that
72. That Petitioner since October 2008 has filed three (3) State and no less
than three (3) Federal cases seeking relief from the injuries caused by the
Usurper, and each of which would have been sufficient to divert the Enterprise
Argonauts to no avail, and that one such case USDC in the DC 10-cv-00486
was filed under seal before Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth who on January 11,
2011 dismissed the case without prejudice that since August 16, 2012 now
unsealed dismissed with prejudice and as of December 12, 2012 deemed
frivolous (see Exhibit K); and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 32 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 38 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
73. As further judicial notice, on January 25, 2012 Petitioner as a historic
bondholder of gold backed obligations ignored by the People's Republic of
China (PRC) for repayment, a Petition to intervene in the case Kennan v
Dal Bosco et al. SDNY 11-cv-8500 that involves the 2009 theft of $1.2 Trillion
of New York Federal Reserve Bank and United States denominated securities
(see: http://www.scribd.com/doc/791117281); and that since, then the PRC
has nevertheless been afforded membership in the New York Federal Reserve
Bank for Red Army Banking investments by the Usurper and his agents, and
alleged inter alia in the subject case the Usurper induced retirement of USDJ
Richard J. Holwell and replaced him with newly appointed USDJ Jessie M.
Furman, brother of the Usurper's White House Council of Economic Advisors
member Jason Furman; and
74. That Petitioner regarding the case Kennan v Dal Bosco et al. SDNY 11-
cv-8500 is directly acquainted with Leo Lyon Zagami, the documented
facilitator in the 2009 theft of $1.2 Trillion of Federal Reserve and United
States denominated- securities, as well as his 2008 involvement in his role in

facilitation of the usurpation of the office of POTUS with transferred to Europe,
.
Asia and Africa; and so done in conspiracy notwithstanding any :resolution of
eligibility questions posed to any court rendering the U.S. Constitution be
damned. All of the Usurper's cohort share in the largest theft in history as
applies herein as a partial background to Petitioner's involvement starting at
page 518 of the record of the unsealed case 201 0-cv-00486 posted at
http: II www. scribd.com I doc /10 1963433/ DCD-RCL-20 1 0-cv-00486-EX-:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 33 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 39 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
RELATOR-STRUNK-v-OBAMA-et-al-Quo-Warranto-Qui-Tam-Conspiracy-to-
violate-civil-rights as follows:
8. In the spring of 2008 Declarant became directly involved with the -
multi-month trip to the USA by Leo Lyon Zagami, a high level Rex
Templars member of the Ordo Illuminatorum Universalis (OTO) related to
Queen Elizabeth's Mother and the next King Prince William,. then the
acting Grand Master of Propaganda Due (P2) Monte Carlo Lodge serving
after the death [sic banishment]of Licio Gelli and for the Jesuits (for
whom Mr. Zagami had been trained in the Vatican Library from the age
of 12 years) using esoteric Freemasonry to influence fund raising for the
Barack Hussein Obama Campaign to ensure the vote for their asset in
November 2008.
9. Mr. Zagami's trip was in part financed by what he refers to on the Troy
-Space April 30, 2008 internet broadcast as "the Russian Broadcasting
Corporation", which is the unitary enterprise (13) All-Russian State .
Television and Radio Broadcasting Company (Russian: Bcepocci-IiicKru:r
rocy,n;apCTBeHHrui TeAeBH3I10HHrui I1 pa.,n;HOBeiii.aTeAbHaH KOMIIaHIIH,
v serossiyskaya gosudarstvennaya televizionnaya i radioveshchatelnaya
kompaniya, abbr. VGTRK) is a state-owned Russian television and radio
company which owns several television and radio stations. It was
founded in 1990 in an effort to give the president of Russia, Boris Yeltsin,
and its own voice, independent of the soviet channels.
13
2 A Unitary enterprise is a form of a business in Russia and some other post-
Soviet states. Unitary enterprises are business entities that have no ownership rights
to the assets they use in their operations. This form is only possible for state and
municipal enterprises, which operate state or municipal property, respectively. The
owners of the property of a unitary enterprise have no responsibility for its operation
and vice versa.
The legal status of unitary enterprises in Russia is defined in Federal Law No. 161-FZ
"On State and Municipal Unitary Enterprises", which was approved by the State
Duma ort October 11, 2002 and signed by President Putin on November 14, 2002.
The assets of unitary enterprises belong to the federal government, a Russian region,
or a municipality. A unitary enterprise holds assets under economic management (for
both state and municipal unitary enterprises) or management (for state
unitary enterprises only), and such assets may not be distributed among the
participants, nor otherwise divided. A unitary enterprise is independent in economic
issues and obliged only to give its profits to the state. Unitary enterprises have no
right to set up subsidiaries, but, with the owner's consent, can open branches and
representation offices.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 34 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 40 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10. That in June 2008 Declarant has spoken with Leslie A. Lewis the
Grand Master of the Prince Hall Masons Lodge 459 in the USA through a
former Cistercian Nun of St. Josephs Abbey in Massachusetts who
introduced me in conjunction with the work she and I were doing with
Mr. Zagami; and as to the chartering of a New Masonic Lodges, in which
The Prince Hall Grand Master was willing to assist and did (see Exhibit D).
11. Mr. Zagami recorded his description on Troy Space in April and June
2008 regarding his attendance at Democratic Party events in his Grand
Master capacity of the P-2 Lodge, OTO and VGTRKto influence attendees
of various State level Democratic Party Conventions including that of
Texas in preparation for the Democratic Party convention of BHO in
August of 2008.
12. That Mr. Zagami stated on the Troy Space recordings (14) as done with
Declarant in telephone conversations that his USA trip was protected
. and operating with full support of the Central Intelligence Agency, State
Department and FBI for working with the militias at a high level, in
which militias have given support meeting with commanders, that
contacts at such high level were working with FBI; and that there are a .
large group of members, about 12000 militia members, in more than that
36 militias so- far. That cooperation is coming into place in that the
bunch of "corporates" and families not caring for the USA ... The Plan is
to establish a clear link to security contractors in various states and
militias and deal with the gangs ~ d especially those with weapons who
now are following the wrong path to target the real enemies .
. 13. In June 2008 Declarant spoke by telephone with Clinton Torrez (15)
who had provided security for Leo Lyon Zagami while in the USA and
especially regarding Mr. Zagami's security detail in the Midwest event
that resulted in multiple casualties to the security staff including Mr.
Torrez.
14. I spoke at length with Mr. Zagami in multiple telephone
conversations including one exceeding three hours in length involving
International freemasonry, the Jesuits and occult (hidden) matters
involving the 2008 election.
14
3 http: I lleozagami. wordpress.coml category lleo-zagami-exclusive-interview-by-
troy-2008-06-0507 I
15
Clinton Torrez is formerly of the U.S. Army involved in securing nuclear weapons
facilities and discharged with a service-connected disability. Mr. Torrez's uncle is a
very wealthy Mexican oligarch who owns a large Marina in Mexico on the Gulf of
Mexico and involved in the Iran-Contra special operations of.Oliver North.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 35 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 41 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
15. Mr. Zagami is involved with Fethullah GULEN (16) a Turkish
expatriate in self- exile in Pennsylvania with an organization here in
16
The Gillen movement is a transnational civic society movement inspired by the
teachings of Turkish Islamic theologian Fethullah GilLen. His teachings about hizmet
(altruistic service to the "common good") have attracted a large number of supporters
in Turkey and Central Asia and increasingly in other parts of the world. The Nature
and participation by exact number of supporters of the Gillen movement is not known,
as there i& no membership system, but estimates vary from hundreds of thousands to
4 million. The movement consists primarily of students, teachers, businessman,
joumalists and other educated professionals, arranged in a flexible organizational
network. It has founded schools, universities, an employers' association, as well as
charities, real estate trusts, lobby groups, student bodies, radio and television
stations, and newspapers. The schools and businesses organize locally, and link into
networks on an informal rather than legal basis. After an inquiry into the effects of
movement's activities in Holland, Dutch Integration Minister Eberhard.Van der Laan
described it as "an alliance of loosely affiliated independent institutions rather than a
movement." The Economist magazine described the Gillen movement as a Turkish
based movement which sounds more reasonable than most of its rivals, and which is
vying to be recognized as the world's leading Muslim network. It stated that Gillen has
won praise from. non-Muslim quarters with his belief in science, inter-faith dialog and
multi-party democracy. Niliifer Gole, professor of sociology at the Ecole des Hautes
Etudes in Paris, who is known for her studies on modernization and conservatism, has
described the Giilen movement as the world's most global movement. One of the main
characteristics of the movement is that it is faith-based but not faith-limited. In
several countries, there are Christians, even at the community leadership level, who
feel close to or inspired by the movement. In London, October, 2007 a conference
examining the nature and activities of the movement was sponsored by the University
of Birmingham, the Dictlogue Society, the Irish School of Ecumenics, Leeds
Metropolitan University, the London Middle East Institute, the Middle East Institute
and the Schoot of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. There was a
reception at the House of Lords.
Mr. Zagami explains, "Abdullah Aymaz is the second in command of the Gulen
movement worldwide and probably the second most powerful person in Turkey after
Fethullah Gulen. He is the European editor of Zaman, the leading newspaper in
Turkey, [which is] obviously in the hands of the Gulen movement." He then states,
"Abdullah Aymaz is not just a journalist, or an editor or somebody important for his
political role. He is a religious leader. People respect him very much in Turkey." Leo
says that on behalf of Gulen (who resides in the US) Aymaz "controls basically the
prime- minister of Turkey Erdogan and the president of Turkey [Abdullah Giil] who
are these so-called moderate Muslims in the hands of the Gulen movement. This is
the biggest threat that modern secular Turkey had since its establishment made
possible by the great freemason called Kemal Ataturk." He says that, at the time of
Ataturk, the Ottoman Empire was still quite strong and that "he [Ataturk] had to get
rid of all t h ~ s e religious fundamentalists including the family of Fatma (Leo's wife), the
Suslu family [who are Sayyids] which was. part of the Ottoman Empire Establishment.
So Ataturk had to fight these people in order to secularize the state. Now after almost
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 36 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 42 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Brooklyn, and whose Jesuit handler of Fethullah GULEN is Fr. Thomas
Michel S.J. who Mr. Zagarni speaks of to Troy in the TroySpace internet
interview recordings from April through September 2008 at length for
about 100 plus hrs and manuscripts (17).
16. In one particular SKYPE transmission Declarant asked Mr. Zagami
about the U.S. State Department's journalist Christian Lovatelli
Ravarino, a Member of the SMOM:
[2/24/2010 2:33:22 PM] Christopher-Earl Strunk: Is Christian Lovatelli
Ravarino the SMOM member who screwed you in Norway?
[2/24/2010 3:40:48 PM] Leo Lyon Zagami: yep and also initaly
[2/24/2010 3:41:54 PM] Christopher-Earl Strunk: I am listening to your
Late Night interview. It is very Good!! I like it. I never understood the
snatch that put you in the hospital.
[2/24/2010 4:03:38 PM] Leo Lyon Zagarni: I hope you understand it now
[2/24/2010 4:03:53 PM] Christopher-Earl Strunk: Yes
[2/24/2010 4:03:59 PM] Leo Lyon Zagami: is quite clear in the last
episodeofthe Night Watch
a hundred years they have managed to regain power. The situation in Turkey is still
under control because obviously the Military are still in control of people who know
the danger of religious fanatics who hide themselves in the disguise of moderate
Islam."
Leo goes on to explain that the people of the Gulen movement, under the guise of
interreligious dialogue, are in close but secret collaboration with the Vatican and the
Jesuits. It is known that Abdullah Aymaz together with Fethullah Gulen was received
by Pope John Paul II in 1998. The secret plan is for the Muslim system to stealthily
substitute the faltering Roman Catholic Christian system as a means to keep subdued
the people and maintain control over its lower level leadership. Leo states that "forty
Cardinals have already secretly converted to Islam and have submitted to Fethullah
Gulen." Gulen is the present head of the Illuminati Chain of Forty of Islam (also called
the "Golden Chain"), "a chain that goes on since the time of Prophet Mohammed." A
secret organization secretly in charge of people in the metaphysical realm and the
geopolitical establishment.
Leo explains that the planned secret takeover of the Roman Catholic power structure
by the Muslim Illuminati, headed by the Gulen Movement while working hand-in-glove
with the Jesuits will only apply to people in positions of power who are to secretly
convert to Islam while outwardly still professing traditional Christian creeds. The
masses of people will be allowed to carry on professing their traditional religious
creeds all the ~ h i l e being impervious to the notion that their leaders are really crypto-
Muslims doing the bidding of the all powerful Islamic-Jesuitical hierarchy.
17 . .
http: I fleozagami. wordpress.comf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 37 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 43 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
[2/24/2010 4:04:28 PM] Christopher-Earl Strunk: You know I am fighting
the State Department and CIA in my court suits in Washington now.
[2/24/2010 4:06:00 PM] Christopher-Earl Strunk: I am rushing out to
mail some court papers maybe we may speak on SKYPE sometime?
[2/24/2010 4:10:33 PM] Leo Lyon Zagami: k
17. That the Court at this point must admit that Declarant has a unique
view and experience in regards to the role of the Jesuits in the present
chain of events ongoing in the world today, and that the history of the
Jesuit Order's ongoing and unbroken mission as militia to the Pope is to
totally and forever eliminate remnants of the Protestant reformation to
reinstall the Pope as the single infallible world absolute monarch over all
matters spiritual and temporal bar none and are actively set to eliminate
the USA that claims to have national sovereignty or alliance as a self-
subsisting singularity, similarly as with any sect, tribe or movement like
the Shiite, Tibetans, Jews who believe in the coming of a single absolute
monarch or messiah other than the Pope pose a threat to be suppressed.
18. That the history, hidden knowledge and occult matters of the Society
of Jesus is a matter of national security for survival of the individual
against the Jesuits' communist collective here in New York and the
several States and involvement in the .FCA matter.
19. That in the context of what follows in regards to t;tnderstanding As
such Declarant asked Eric Jon Phelps to make the attached Affidavit
regarding the Power of the Society of Jesus in Russia From Czar
Alexander I to the Present to summarize the Jesuits' manufacture of the
USSR I Third Rome and Cold War now being revisited to destroy the USA
today (see Exhibit E).
20. In the context of what is stated below in regards to Zbigniew
Brzezinski and the campaign fund raising for BHO, the hoax of the Cold
War is being replayed now with the BHO presidency, I subscribe to what
Mr. Phelps states at paragraph 44 of Exhibit E:
"That during the Cold War Hoax, Moscow served as a training base for
the Jesuit Order's world revolutionary socialist communists, including
Fidel Castro, Michael ("Martin Luther") King, Yasser Arafat, Jesuit-
trained Bill Clinton and indeed, president-elect Barry Davis Obama;"
21. Declarant also contends based upon my conversations with my friend
Robert K. Dornan the list includes the KGB handling of John McCain
while a prisoner of War in Hanoi, when He was sent inside the Soviet
Union for medical treatment and programming isa KGB asset.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 38 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 44 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
22. That Zbigniew Brzezinski is both a blood member of the Sovereign
Military Order of Malta (SMOM) on "the right" and of the Scottish Rite
Freemason Grand Lodge of Philadelphia on "the left" working for the
Jesuits against the sovereign interest ofthe USA; Mr. Brzezinski world
outlook and agenda for the Jesuits that eclipses all other influences
upon BHO.
23. In the context of the cooperation between the KGBIFSB, CIA, MI-6
and the Jesuits, Declarant in May 2010 attended the Obama /Columbia
University Trial sponsored by Pastor James Manning's Church in
Harlem, and became more familiar with how Zbigniew Brzezinski used
Columbia University as a cover while BHO was deployed from 1981
through 1983 to Pakistan and Afghanistan for the CIA accompanied by
three CIA operatives.
24. While there in Pakistan and Afghanistan it is clear that as Zbigniew
Brzezinski and his agents included both Tim Osman (a.k.a. Osama Bin
Laden) and Muslim BHO who were all in contact with the KGB agents in
the context of the Northern Alliance in relation to the Caspian Sea Oil
pipeline development and other global intrigue.
25. That Zbigniew Brzezinski intentionally in February 1979 brought the
Ayatollah Khomeini (Williamson) to power in Iran, in July 1979 entered
into operations in Afghanistan prompting the Soviet invasion in October
and is responsible for the deaths of 241 in Beirut Lebanon in 1983, now
bririgs Islam to America through the Freemason Muslim BHO where here
in Manhattan a 13 story mosque to be built at the site of the 9-11 World
Trade Center by the sanctuary city mayor I usurper Michael Bloomberg.
26. Like Mr. Bloomberg, SMOM member Rudolf Giuliani worked with the
Soviet I KGB I FSB mafia here in New York City that in one generation
_since leaving the Soviet Union jumped the.line when M ~ . Giuliani
received a phone call after John Gatti went on TV and boasted he was
"the Teflon Don" closed him down and gave the KGB full reign here to
impose payback for Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1979 flanking operations.
27. That Declarant's contention is that Russia, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia,
Lebanon, Nigeria, Libya, Egypt, Dubai among other sovereign foreign
entities and persons have illegally contributed to the campaign of BHO
that spent $738,812,857 to get into the White House and 46%> of the
total money raised for all candidates in the 2008 Presidential Election
that compares to three hundred and ten million spend by John McCain;
and that the Vatican Bank was used as an intermediary for transfer of
funds into its USA landing Banks that with the release of the banking
records of the BHO campaign committee will show substantial illegal
foreign involvement to buy the presidency as previously in the instance of
James Riady of the Indonesian Lippo Group for Bill Clinton in 1992 was
not convicted by the DOJ until January 11, 2001.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 39 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 45 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
75. As further judicial notice, in light of Petitioners discovery of the
laundering activities of JP Morgan Bank as the landing bank for the Vatican
Bank (lB)(now as of last spring assumed by Wells Fargo Bank), in February
2012 Petitioner called to warn Jerome Corsi in regards to an article he
pUblished in World Net Daily (WND) reporting money laundering activities of
the New York Branch of the Hong Kong Shanghi Bank Corporation (HSBC) in
which he e;xposed evidence (see Exhibit L); and in which a short time later he
was injured when HSBC lodged a complaint that blocked Internet access to one
of the WND stories, and as a senior reporter Jerome Corsi was fired by the New
York City investment firm he had worked with for two years as a senior
18 There_are three direct Vatican Banking used to channel
money into the United States:
(i) The Vatican Bank number UID# 014780 BIC/SWIFT: IOPRVAVX a.k.a
ISTITUTO PERLE OPERE DI RELIGIONE of VATICAN CITY in the VATICAN CITY
STATE and for which there are seven (7) banking participants as the landing banks
for international wire transfers into the USA and who directly benefited by putting
Obama into office: 0001 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON; 0002 JPMORGAN
CHASE BANK, N.A.; 0008 CITIBANK, N_.A.; 0103 DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST CO
AMERICAS; 0108 HSBC BANK USA; 0256 STANDARD CHARTERED BANK; 0509
WELLS FARGO NY INTL FKA WACHOVIA; needless to say the Vatican Bank and the
participating banks are generally owned by the. Vatican through the Rothschild who
have managed the Vatican asset since 1824 and keep that control tightly within the
family circle even as far back as Alexander Hamilton who having married a Rothschild
cousin setup the Bank of New York in 1784 that only after great effort became
chartered after 1791 when he became the US Treasurer; and
(ii) further, the International Catholic Union of the Press (UCIP) is used for the
World Forum of Professionals and Institutions in Secular and Religious Media with the
Address: UCIP, CP 197, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland and the Vatican name of the
account holder: UCIP with the name of the Bank: lOR, Vatican Swiftcode: IOPRVAVX
Account number in Europe: 16586001 http: I /www. ucip.ch/une /ib.htm and in which
the Vatican Interbank clearing account in the US is with JPM CHASE MANHATTAN
BANK NEW YORK Account no.: 001-1-97500; and
(iii) further yet, The Vatican Bank: ISTITUTO PERLE OPERE DI RELIGIONE =
INSTITUTE FOR THE RELIGION WORKS in which the Institute for Works of Religion
(Italian: Istituto perle Opere di Religione - lOR) commonly known as Vatican Bank
was formed during World War 2 and is located inside the Vatican City.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 40 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 46 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
manag1ng director, Gilford Securities. (http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/calls-
from -3-continents-to-criminally-prosecute-hsbc I #3dEjW szl 1 PQsEvHj. 99); and
76. Thereafter, In June, WND reported evidence Eric Holder's Justice
Department has not investigated charges .in deference to
bank clients of his Washington-based law firm, where _Holder was a partner
prior to joining the Obama administration; and then WND reported in October
HSBC was engaged in a systematic scheme to defraud citizens of India who live
abroad out of billion of dollars in investment accounts, according to an Indian
source who provided evidence. (http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/calls-from-3-
continents-to-criminally-prosecute-hsbc/#3dEjWszi1PQsEvHj.99 ); and despite
a civil conviction for money laundering secured by US Attorney Loretta Lynch
of $1.92 Billion in civil fines; the Justice department under Eric Holder has
blocked criminal indictments (see Exhibit M).
77. That Petitioner warned on January 23, 2009 shown as Exhibit A of
further civil action, Petitioner's standing herein is established by his private
U.S. Citizen secured beneficiary status for accounts that are deliberately
wasting under the Usurper's control with his agents Eric Holder of the U.S.
Department of Justice. Hillary Clinton of the U.S. State Department among
others especially Timothy Franz Geithner of the U.S. Treasury as a key player
of a racketeering enterprise, had previously assumed his position as the ninth
president and chief executive officer of the New York Federal Reserve Bank on
November 17th, 2003, also served as the vice chairman and permanent
member of the Federal Open Market Committee, the group responsible for
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 41 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 47 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
formulating the nation's monetary policy and determining the national interest
rate and using his position from. 2003 through the present facilitated the
ongoing theft and money .laundering of $43 Trillions of U.S. taxpayer dollars
unauthorized by Congress with impunity according to the RICO Statement of
the class action I civil RICO case 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML in EDNY now before
Senior Judge Jack B. Weinstein USDJ and his Magistrate Levy (see
http: I /www.kcandassociates.org/pdfs/111307429-Spire-Law-Federal-
Complaint-in-New-York.pdf ), in re that complaint see the Press Release see
Exhibit N; and that
78. What is remarkable 1s that Jack B. Weinstein upon assignment
immediately recused himself because he has investments with several of the
Defendant financial institutions, leaving pre-calendar phase matters in the
hands of Magistrate Levy; and that I want to have this Court know that based
upon my several personal conversations in the last 12 years I have had with
Jack B. Weinstein over the years in EDNY when our paths crossed in the
hallway, Judge Weinstein was never stuck-up, has always been friendly to me
and initiates greetings - I have always considered Judge Weinstein an honest
Judge, even though a big government Progressive - but then so was my father
too, both are generous and thorough.
79. And were the Court to thoroughly review the incompatbility of Mr.
DiNaopli as the Controller I Elector of the State of New York Pension fund
system, who has sole signature power with fidicuary trust over the State
pension funds and investment, he along with other Executives and Secretary of
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 42 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 48 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
State Perales, have power to investigate a felony for which each will be held
liable as accessory after the fact; all refuse to respond to Petitioner's concerns
in light of the civil RICO case 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML in EDNY now before
Judge Jack B. Weinstein USDJ as to the ongoing theft and money laundering
of $43 Trillions US taxpayer dollars unauthorized by Congress (see
http: I /www.kcandassociates.org/pdfs/111307429-Spire-Law-Federal-
Complaint-in-New-York.pdf ); and
80. That based upon Petl.tioner's understanding and knowledge ofthe
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that GAAP follows an
accounting convention that lies at the heart of the double-entry bookkeeping
system. called Matching Principle. This principle works as follows:
When a bank accepts bullion, coin, currency, checks, drafts, promissory
notes, or any other similar instruments (hereinafter "instruments") from
customers and deposits or records the instrument as assets, it must record
offsetting liabilities that match the assets that it accepted from customers
like the New York Pension Funds or United States Executive controlled
Pension funds.
The liabilities represent the amounts that the bank owes the customers,
funds accepted from In a fractional reserve banking system like
the United States banking system, most of the funds advanced to borrowers
(assets of the banks) are created by the banks themselves and are not
merely transferred from one set of depositors to another set of borrowers;
and
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 43 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 49 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
81. As such in our New York system oversight of securities under the "Blue
Sky Law" and shell companies registered in New York as done in association
with the rules devised by then HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo who while NYS
AG now involve his incompatibility with his present support of the Obama
Administration with the other Executives use of the Federal Reserve Bank of
New York with transaction that involve money of exchange not credit involving
money of account that means that lawful money was and is or probably would
. be disbursed by either side in a covered transaction that in short involves
Union and New York Pension Funds as part of the $43 Trillion dollar mix, just
as Mr. McCall invested funds in ENRON; however, Petitioner is barred petition!
82. That Petitioner beyond the involvement of Eric Holder in the "Fast and
Furious Project" gun running for which he still has not responded just like the
Executive has refused to testify on the Benghazi attack, re-examining the
events surrounding the January 8, 2011 shooting of Federal Judge John Roll
killed during a shooting in Arizona that also involved an attack on U.S. Rep.
Gabrielle Giffords. and U.S. Marshal for Arizona, appears more as a warning to
Federal Judges frorh acting against the Executive actions involving the Theft of
$43 Trillion US Taxpayer Dollars, and that according to a January 11, 2011
article by PAUL MILLER entitled "PERSPECTWE ABOUT THE SHOOTING IN
TUCSON ON SATURDAY WHICH IS OFF ALL RADAR AND WORTH LOOKING
INTO ~ .. ONE ... DID", (19) Miller states:
... Obama recently signed an executive order allowing the feds to confiscate
19 http: I /authenticallywired.com/2011 /01 I 11 /federal-judge-john-roll/
http: //hotair.com/greenroom/archives/20 10/10 /14/proposed-govemment-40 1k-grab I
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 44 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 50 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
all 401 ks and retirement accounts. Our media forget to inform us of this fact.
A single judge adjudicated that Obama did not have that authority and
stopped the confiscation.
Federal Judge John Roll ... The judge, USDC court of Arizona Presiding
Judge Roll, was shot and died on Saturday by a ''crazed gunman." The
historica'z connotations are similar . to Kennedy/ Oswald in several ways.
If I had a 401 k and/ or a retirement account I would convert such to an
investment in a tangible asset made of metal. Either you get rid of it, or
Obama will get rid of it for you. Either way I do not believe retirement
accounts will exist in the near future.
TWO ... DID ... I'd like to know why another question isn't being asked re the
Tucson massacre.
Federal Judge John Roll -for Arizona-was killed. And yet he's only
mentioned anywhere as just another victim.
Here's the question: Why is there possibly no connection being made that
about 72 hours -before he was killed, on Friday, he issued a critical
''preliminary ntling" . against the Obama administration to prevent
them from acting on an FDR Executive Order (6102), which allowed
the government to seize personal savings when no proof of a crime
was committed? ("USA v. $333,520.00 in US Currency et al", Case
number: 4:2010cv00703 Filed Nov 30, 2010).
My first question was: Who was the actual target, Giffords or Roll? or both
(conveniently at the same place)?
While the possibility that Loughner was under mind control has been
disparaged in the press, the knowledge of the existence of such a program,
and known past CIA/ FBI involvement in such incidents, why would there not
be the possible question of a connection?
83. That Usurper has signed 146 Executive Orders to date during the
Usurper's Administration is to be compared as about the same as with other
prior executives effecting pension funds. The Official Executive Orders as they
become available in the Federal Registry and are listed starting on January 25
2009 up to date as of December 21, 2012 as published on
http: //1461days.blogspot.com/2009/01/ current-list-of-president-
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ . ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 45 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 51 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
obamas.html#.UNtjg6D6rRQ (see Exhibit 0); and
84. That inter alia Petitioner is alleging that there is sufficient evidence to
suspect that the Usurper has invaded a pension & retirement fund for
operating capital, bypassing Congress by executive order or otherwise, to gain
access to $43,000,000,000,000; and that as Congress, the Federal Courts,
absolutely have an interest to fulfill the requirements of protection of Public
and Private U.S. Citizens required under the 14th Amendment Section 4 of the
. ~ ~
U.S. Constitution when there is sufficient evidence of ftsurrection, as herein
exists, against the US Constitution and People of the United States- most
certainly both the Congress and Courts are silent as to the Usurper's records
and lack of proof of birth that would otherwfse for any government employee
shall be provided wasn't herein;
85. Petitioner also contends in regards to the mandatory requirements for
any government official I employee and or contractor is to provide copious
proof of all kinds that was not used to also vet the present Usurper in the
Office of POTUS; and that as evidence of the most stringent requirements for
vetting Intelligence Expert testimony by Pamela Barnett that Unvetted Obama
Never Had To Undergo Security Clearance Background Check was offered at
trial as shown in Exhibit G- 11; and
86. That the Usurper under any standard practice or hiring circumstance in
either State or ~ e d e r a l employment would absolutely not obtain a job!!.
87. That if the above were not enough to consider, reflect on what is
transpiring in regards to the United Nations Small Arms Ban Treaty signed by
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 46 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 52 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
the Usurper and pending an adoption vote of the U.S. Senate:
Peter Lanza AND Robert Holmes both to testify Libor scandal.- The father of
Newtown Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza who is a
VP and Tax Director at GE Financial. The father of Aurora Colorado movie
theater shooter James Holmes is Robert H o l m ~ s , the lead scientist for the
credit score company FICO. Both men were to testify before the US Senate
in the ongoing LIBOR scandal. The London Interbank Offered Rate, known
as Lib or, is the average interest rate at which banks can borrow from each
other. 16 international banks have been implicate.d in this ongoing scandal,
accused of rigging contracts worth trillions of dollars. HSBC has already
been fined $1.9 billion and three of their low level traders arrested.
http: //newsworldwide.wordpress.coml20 12/ ... r-scandall and
88. Petitioner further was amazed to discover last year that in regards to his
study of the CIA Operation Gladio and P-2 Monte Carlo Lodge involvement in
that mess, the interim grandmaster of P-2 (Leo Lyon Zagami) had met and
corresponded with Breivek in re : OSLO, -Norway (AP) -- A Norwegian court
sentenced Anders Behring Breivik to prison on Friday, denying prosecutors the
insanity ruling they hoped would show that his massacre of 77 people was the
work of a madman, not part of an anti-Muslim crusade. Read more:
http: I /dailycaller .com /20 12/ 08/24/ norway-shooter-anders-breivik-
sentenced -to,...1 0-21-years I #ixzz2G6Re4 T54
89. Petitioner contends that according to the RICO Statement of the class
action I civil RICO case 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML in EDNY and as documented
by the Levy Institute that Congress has not authorized the present use of the
$43 Trillion Dollars stolen for private use starting in 2003 from the New York
Federal Reserve Bank without the knowledge of the Congress and or then Bush.
Executive reducing the use and surety status of the Public I Private US Citizen
Taxpayers to that of a moral obligation surety bond without their knowledge,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 47 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 53 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
and thereby improperly binding Petitioner as a Private US Citizen secured
. beneficiary back into a surety. debtor status while wasting his secured
beneficiary Usufruct organization (shown in Exhibit B) accounts under the very
same executive that has conducted the theft.
SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF EQUITY RELIEF FOR
A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OF RESPONDENTS
That since 2008 much has transpired as a result of the cowardice and or
corruption of judges and government officials, and all who refuse to enforce the
minimum standard of law under the United States Constitution Article 2
Section 1 Clause 5 mandate. that every person seeking the office of POTUS shall
be a "natural-born Citizen". Why this is so? I believe it best explained above, as
a well planned unfolding of a more . than thirty year UIF A effort to transform
individual ownership of real property under local State sub-division jurisdiction
into instruments for conversion at a distance without judicial due process and
equal protection, and with the intent that the fractional banking system would
~ . .
e: .
be strengthen by adding real property into the mix beyond the projected
~ . .
lifetime earnings of a Public U.S. Citizen who remains subservient with the
surety to the State trustee of the Usufruct construct owner by the 1868 ratified
14th Amendment to conform to the authority of the United States of America
forward; and as with Petitioner, any Public US Citizen may reclaim his/her
Private US Citizen freedom and liberty guarantee status- known before the
first World War in teaching trust law. This Court has an opportunity herein.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 48 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 54 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
As for a New Election for US Senator from New York, even Justice
Schmidt in his order of November 19, 2012 shown as Exhibit D-5 found such
issue of first impression tantalizing, but cloaked himself with the exigencies of
Justice Schack.
As for my request for a Stay of the State action with the Motion shown as
Exhibit E by Mr. Farkas representing the AFL-CIO / New York Electoral client
Union Boss elector as a fiduciary with close dealings with the Federal
Government, Usurper and Enterprise, consider He and others named
incompatible under A2S1C2 that warrants equity review for relief in Federal
jurisdiction as even the Justices consider a Federal matter ahd whether they
are right or wrong is irrelevant a stay and hearing on the merits is reasonable.
As for the matter of New York State elector incompatibility after the vote
by December 17, 2012 is finished, begs the fact that Mr. Jeffries and Ms. Meng
are to appear on January 3, 2013 and review their own vote under the 12th,
20th and 25th Amendment process for office of POTUS on or after January 7,
~ ~ 8
20 13 is a m a t t e r ~ properly belongs before this panel. for relief , time is of the
essence with imminent irreparable harm and no other forum to seek relief
Affiant respectfully wishes that there be an original proceeding trial
herein with expert testimony as outlined in Exhibit D, that the State action be
subject to a stay, that the Congress be ordered to show cause why the Usurper
should be swam in on January 20, 2013 that t h e ~ Trillion dollar obligation f'
should not be deemed a nullity, and further and different relief as the Panel
deems necessary for justice herein including Petitioner's right to sur-reply.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 49 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 55 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
That Affirmant has read the above and I know its contents as an expert witness; the
facts stated in the Petition are true to myown personal knowledge, except as to the
matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those
matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated
upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd parties, books and records, and
personal knowledge, except as to those. stated upon information and belief, which I
believe to be true.
Sworn to before me this
the of December 2012
: -. .-.._ : .. MARK FURMAN
--.. OF NEW VORl
.. : ;_. No:-,01FU6212320
. "'Qualified In Kings county
My. commission Expires october 1 3. 20 1.;
Christopher -Earl: Strunk in esse
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 50 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 56 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
That Mfirmant has read the above and I know its contents as an expert witness; the
facts stated in the Petition are true to my own personal know ledge, except as to the
matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those
matters I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated
upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd parties, books and records, and
personal knowledge, except as to those stated upon information and belief, which I
believe to be true.
Sworn to before me this
the cfl f S ' ? ' ~ a y of December 2012
NOTARY PUBLIC
MARK FURMAN
NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW VORl<
No. 01 FU6212320
Qualified in Kings County
My Commission Expires October 1 3, 20 l J
Christopher -Earl: Strunk in esse
http://www.scribd.com/doc/117739292/ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING PETITION Page 50 of 50
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 57 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
, .'
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 58 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit A
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 59 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Barnl:"k Husse.iu Obama iff es..stt,
alk!a Bany Soetoro In &oSa.
;./kfn.Baq:y .Duuhnm.in .
n!k!n Bam Ouchim1 in esse
DBA BARACKHUSSErN OBAAIA.lNC.
HEIR(S). AGEN!(S),
A.SSlGN(S)
hu::.areof!
the AGENT IN CHARGE Of THE
STATEs SECRET SERVICE
OjJica cfGm-inwumt arid Public Ajfi#J'S
245 Mumw Dri.\'c,
Btlildit1g4lO;
Waw.itigtOJ.\ DC20223


5.93.Vanderbilt
:Bll09klyn, Ne\v York .
Zip Cc;de bli$.{ 11232
Clui.stopher-,Earl:
}fot. n. <:6rporntiM
.
.
.No Thi:cd

NOUCE TO T.HH AOli.NTJS NOTICe 1'0 PR.lNClPALNOTlCE TO PRINCifAL
. . . . .
Attachments:
RE: OFFER CONTRACT
Received 20 Janumy 2009 :21. 2009
FOR.TIIE RECORQ .
RETURN Af\'1>.
TIMELY, \VJniotrr J>ISiiONOR.
WITH THE U.ES'flUCTED
NO'f A CORPORATION . .
. 'Tlte
Oatb of20 )l!nUilr:Y 2.009 ollbr ror oontrac;t & Redrafted
Oath of2l J.afiuiu;y 2009 .y{fer.for conu:act/Retume4 & Redrafted
Notice to the Clerk o(Rect>rds
Nolie: (pag..1 uf.2)
Judicial Notice (page2 pt 2) retout$a
. . /"'r%, . . . '. . /
I
f} . 'J ....l A. '.l -..
,.:J.:,:r .. JP. .. :. '< ,,
l oF c; ;,t;.; *'r
oi\;!t a etlmwiatlpn
i;
,,.
f tnited Stute;),.''
((I of m:
President "And will tn lh<e of my
rso hcip me Gmt"
Presidem Obam1.1: ''S\) hdp rnc
f{ ' l 1 ;n6

;2 t>F G
: s\iH

n
..- " . '
l.dn:..t

..
f . ie
f.. "'" f .

( - !.>.""'" . .,.,.,
.i" I t "::lil"'.
_. i;F ,;if<.
. "'"-'f' . rrs''
.
.,
..
t,..,l . I "" cq
f \ $;
. \
Uf!der teservtr! w!th cop-y.:.ctaim

I /L.,L; .... J3.>!
.:r--::!'#.tl .h. j

,.,...
esse
riot cotpcira!illn
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 60 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
hn;,.
R(>:iJ:--;:Ci;-:.\
8HO

CJ Ri::.bertz:
BHG
:::,.;
tiHO
J..i
D!!O

OHO
C.J
b\HG
;J.S. .'; a.
Offlca of Proesi4ent o.f the Unit;;\! and t .'\V tt;;; te;n of nw .
Fie CJ;mstrttltu:)rt or. t\1e Unftia.l
1
Um;l'er the wpy-daim
wJtht1Mttecuurs!t
..,.,......, . >' (,.?" i. ,/., JA
.<' , .......... '. .., 1/i_..lA';!'
/ }v-<h .. t"'''f"J
t., . .:

N.011CE TO THE ClERK OF RECORDS
Tfu= YD" mnp, bonk or lbrng will;
ynt:t :ate c()mmiuing oitnes a;ainstjus!iec lllldtr Rc\'lsei:l Statute$ United States f.ir.5t
Sections :S-HJ3, $407 nrnl540S tmsling, up '" S9.000 in tutd up to 12 yttaJ'S ln priS{ln p1.1r
Bffidavit yoo f.-;illn Tti:edrd-. Tille U:l USC 207 l. als.u.o.wi.$ ami
1\(lt lo likcmilte. younrtt
still 1WpOI1sible, ali J Ill.\ ,1\ily di5lrict flUOnlC)'. or
from. t!hl 311 ;lJ1:d dt> lmve A (o. make a lct:al dctenhl.nation iu
*l$mnltc:r astbcydo nut n:prt:$1."1\l Me and Ytll, lhc cletk, dtlll<ll huvc the< to t.;:pri:S!.'nt
S.huuld Yttil f1til to. up.bold Yuur swom t>aili and pcrUmn ycn1r I wfll have no clioice bull.o
r.ord M of Criminal (;'ornplaint ngmt Y ou1 ;.mJ scnil a copy to Y ourbundin,
Titlt} t.:>.,"X,.-:.CR.lMfS.,_...CfiA. CRIMES AGt\lNST JUSTICl;.
SEC5403-. E.\;wy woo wllllttlly delllfQ}'1l or to dcitrny, or, with iitten! to sW'11
t;J!;:c;s a11tl ciltrlt$ ;mray auy 1i:ctml. paper, or proc.ecdin!! or n coun tif ju:stkc, filed or d..:pp:ritcd with nny
clf<fl\ Qr bfficcor.i:Jfi!i.Ueh ll'Qlltlt ut ni)Y pnper,Qr oneciord tih:d or deposited in !Ul.JI pvblii;; offi<:..,,
nr t\ith any judlclnl or omcer, sttnll, \\:itl1out rererence ttt the value ofthe :wt:Qm, p!ipl!f, diJtilHIII'T!I.
or Si.l i!l:ketl; a flue of not more thnn lWtl tltllll!lllllU UG1Ii1IS, llt' 51lff'l'll' nnpri:Solilni:ol, itt h\rd
!a!W.t. not mllrt Ull\n y<:m, : I,Mi4.l} 1'id() I.J<:.K- CIUMI?$.-- CHA-
t'1UMES JUSTICE (DOOro}'ittg:, .&c,. publie rt!':Cord$,)
.SE.C._<;,HJ7. lfW;o or mm:u it!WSlllte .or Temttlt)' compite f<'>r the }lurpose .
iUndeting. or dutnti!lg. in ouy the:dile r:uutl>1e ofjus&iee in lillY Still!! with
itttca\t to deti.y to ruwddze,tl the c:quol of the: lnw-:i, or 1o'injurid1im or his pri,perty for ln.wl'Wiy
enfurclng, ntitll11pt4ig io rlghtohny or clm rifper.;tm, to the i'qUlll pmteclion ,,r
til each of sucll pmo:n.sb.'lll be p!!1!1s11i:d by a fmc of not I.e$!! fhre lnmdrro fhttt
lhuusaud dt)l!atS, or by imptiscnurtcnt, witlt or wiihtnrt blllli labor; nolleiiil tbmt six nwnlbs lbiin
sf:t- yt!ar;;, fir by !I1Jl:h nn!l impn$1mml!ltt;. Sec 1977-l!])j)l, S5()6.$.SHq ride LXX-
- CRiMES. - t:HA Ot.L\1ES 1\GAfNSi. JVSTlCE (Cunlipirncy i,o.defeat nflhe laws.)
SE.C,54QS. livllJ:Y h:w:ing tllil t;ll$tq11y of :m)l'l'i!rd, paJlC.'f, cr pro;;ecdin!1<specified itl
ftf\yfour bundrcd Dnd i!Jrec; who fraudulently lnkc5 awa), or witlulrnws, or destroys lUiy Slicli
r=rd, dt'<:UI:ll(!Jlt, J}!IJ'CT, o,r filed in his office or with him nr in
a fuie oflttJl milrl!! 1l11Ul tWtl lhPuswlll surret imprisunnHml.ilt h:ltd Iabar not muui thilulhrl-> .
yem:, or both; l11tld sll!'.ll fotfeit ttls ofllce it:tii. br: futevcr ai\f.ln\'E!ti:l disqu!l!Hicd !Wm
;my under Ql)vemme-nt of unh<Ml Stlltcs. by in cbarg/
IS USCS SECT10Nltl7l (l(llil}
2Q1.1. C!i'll.tcahm;nt,. P.'nmvltJ, AAr mutilation
(a) Wht:lCVt-'1. willfully ami util:,twfvlly OOIICI!i1lli" tnutihl!s,$, Qt tW
lu do su, l!r, with i11lent lu do St' mkw jlnll wrries liiWa.y mn.p,
book, pl!JlCr; d01mmcrtt,.,'lt otlle:r tilo:d'(lr with any cicik or QIT\c;c;t iit;y t;Uilfl <Jf
tile lJuited Slate$. iJ:t in ittl}' t3 Uier:. or nny or tollh:(it of the Utrilcd
sbml he f!he!! IbiS tille t:ir imtn't$1)nd ne>t lltnlt thl'f,.'# )ll'J.Ifil, ooth.
(b) ha;v.ing the. !l'f 1iny:)ueh ttl0!1, llp.;urucnt, piip!lt.
11thwUling, wllllulty ami reut()\'Cii'> mutilntl.l$, fulsi!lmt, t>r
$Mll:. lihnli be .liru:d untltr dde ur hnJitisonoo nor wom.tltan lhrt--e ye;us, Of om:! shall
furfai.t nud be d!squaUiicd n-om l.tolulng llfiYoffi.ceumlcr the United As IUW in
this subsef:liim. the bmn"ullice .. lilUI im:lutlc the office bel\! by un.r J'Cf".,{Jtl as 11. 1\.'i.ircd
the pf tb.e Vnited SllltC'S.
A F. a
,.;...1
Unqer res.ervev.!th !,'leeppy-claim

' . . "" .iiYt ..!. ' ;I 1.4
l .! bt--l l :;'U,.ftJt
t.> . ...in
not a corporat!Ol:! Uvlng.,SQul
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 61 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m

iWhi!e the: afa mulma1 J;tf constitute basts
for an lnfurcnce .of legal tmutt'' uny 9mission or in111olves
O,f legal duty. or colfidcnee-. justly and is lti another.
or hy an undue all vantage is ofunHlher, maybecorrt:e the for
uf and wllen a duty to speak. tbe of a material
fact.n)a) be. Ci:liJaUy as wrongiul as. a positive Tex. Civ. App, 1943,
1!:1Jir111ttti r6Sirld 7382 f./2 Tex.J6ii150A.L(I.
. . . . - .. . . .
tparty b.'ntirig :$tipet1(1t knowledge wno take$ o(nn<it,.er.s ignorance of the
taw to eeivt'l him by :Itudied or eun be held reapmt-.
"ible (or tlt!tc:onduet. 1981.: FlnuSitflp/y. Abiltme Notltmu/IJm/4
SW1djJ1)
[We (judgesJ have. no. moro to dec!jne is
{this witl include tbe county tuurt of Victor Carillo.) than to UsUrp dun .
which is not gi"v"tn. The urn: nr Uie o;Ju:r wc:ndd be tn:ason lotbi: CWtStltJ.liion.""
(''olnm 11. IS Wheal. iM. t/821); J.99 U.S,
(0'(\V)he-n a govt:nutli!l\E beee>meu. pa.rmer In at\}' trading_ it dlvesiS lw:!lf;
so fa:rus thee cransactiom.Qf that eompany. of it$ tand
tuk.es Uuit of :a ro witb i.bosc wi:th wlwrit it
itSel r, ,and che character which fx:longs to its l:isirol:iatcs and to me. business
\\<biuh ls to be l:rtlmiacted.'. !Junkt:{Un'uedl/ta'es v..Plunterl.' Bani; uf(;!!.fJ.rgla.
21 91J4(flt24).] . . . ' . . . .
l .. United States ofoommen=.ial pnpeNitmld$ln oo ditli:fent tight than
anv other dm\\t.-e;"' ''The I Jnited Stares dims businesS. on u is noi
e.'ternpt-ed fi"om ihe the righ[s and duties otc.trawees b'
larg.:ne:Jll oh$ dealings il.lld its having .::mploy to do what lfdone by a
principal in would feave u.o nwm r()r doubt.., Ciem:ffeld 1HJ.rl Ca: V; UT1ilcJ
J18 u.s.
[''COUrtS enforcillg IDe'R SfanlteS dt) U()t at:tji:Jdicially.. mini$leliil!Jy. fta'ling ilU
judklallmmunity. artd unlike CQuttS qfl.aw. do not obtai11 by service of
process nor by Arrest and ... Otis, 9 fft)Wartf
J)fi. .
("Wnm c>fju.risdietlon n1ay mnbe c.l.U'l!!d IWrC,OI)ScJltQf 1he ...
('.l.R.. 31] U.S ... J,/0, #),1 ' ,
i:: ..... ;("'
?
lln.det t-e$e.rvei 6opy,<:lair.n
'fVfthout
N:it
[Judicial Notice]
l. ["Ajudgment.r:endercd in violation of due process is void." World Wide Vo/.kswagm
Wood'sen, 444 U.S. 291; Mttionai Bankt. Wiley, 195 US 257; Pe.nno._'J.!fJrv. Nel
9.5 us 7t4]
[ " .. the requitem,ents of due proecss must be met befo.re the court ean properly assert in
person.amjurisdiclion."' v, Well$ Fargo .. .556 F2d 416.J
[. Notification responsibility is ..'the first essential of due process ofJaw."
Connally v. Gene.ral Gonstruction 269 US 385,3911
[. statute which. either forbids or requb-es the doing <;fan act in terms so vague that
men oJ' cQ.mtnon intelUg.ence must necessarily guess at its eaning and difier as to its
application., violates the fJ.rSi essential of due Qflaw. Ci:m11ally v. Geueral
Construction Co ... 269 U.S. 385.,391]
[. ..Whenever it appears that ilie c.ourt lacks subject. matter jurisdiction, Ute eourt is
obli,ged t.o dis.mi$ tbe action.'' Willy v. Coastal Corp.t 503 U.S. 131
1
136-37; U. v.
Teras, 257 F. supp 254]
"Oncejurisdictitnt is challenged, thetJourlcannotpmceed when it, clearly appears
' tlutt the court the court h8S no authority to reach merits. bu4 ml.her
should dismiss the Malo v. us .. 505 F:.2(L I 026]
[4l;There is no discretion to ignorcJack of jurisdiction.""' [!. .. 474 F 2d 2l.Sl
.c; e;P G
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 62 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m

111'/tiMPOST_IJ.L SfRVICE.
Track & Confirm
Search Results
LabeUReceipt Number: RE40 0301 908U S
Status: Delivered
Your item was delivered at 8:07AM on January 27, 20091n
WASHINGTON, DC 20223.

Notificali011 Options
Track & Confirm by email
I Help I Sl_gn In
Track & Confinn
Enter Label/Receipt Number.
)
Get current event information or updates for your item sent to you or others by email.
SltaMap Coni.ICIUs Forma Jobs Privaq Polrcy Tarmso!Use Nauonal & PremAI' Accounts
Copyright\'il 1999-2007 USPS. All Rights Reserved. No FEAR Ad EEO Data FOIA

li
EXHIBIT
i UltCUV'W t---.,.

i ! Aeawed by
oiS ' --- .t'
" ,;,;;, . .&iino)f-
FullValue S$0';00.
c-
======================================
JAF 31st STREET tiS T-1
NE\'1 YORK, New Vork
101999004
3558250157-0097
01/23/2009 (212)330-2163 02:50:36 AM

===--=Sales Receipt--==-=
Product
Description
Sale Unit
Cty Price
Final
Price
DC 20223 $0.59
Zone-3 First-Class .
Letter
1.60 oz.
Return Rcpt (Green $2.20
Card)
Registered $10.00
Insured Value : $0.00
Article Value : $0.00
Label 1: RE400301908US
Issue PVI:
$12.79
=========
Total:
$12.79
Paid by:
Cash
$20.00
Change Due:
-$7.21
-- Save this receipt as evidence of
insurance. For infornation regarding
domestic insurance. visit our
website at
usps.com/insurance/postoffice.htm
Order stamps at USPS.com/shop or
ca 11 1-BOO-Stamp24. Go to
USPS.com/cl icknship to print
shipping labels with postage, For
other information ca 11
1-800-ASK-USPS.
B i 11#: 1000300668752
Clerk:34
All sales final on stamps and
postage
Refunds for guaranteed services only
Thank you for your business
************************************
************************************
HELP US SERVE YOU BETTER
Go to: http://gx.ga llup.com/pos
TELL US ABOUT YOUR RECENT
POSTAL EXPERIENCE
YOUR OPINION COUNTS
+++++ ............................ "'""................................... ..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 63 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Mr. Christopher Strurik
Unit281
593 Vanderbilt Avenue
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Dear Mr. Strunk:
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 26, 2009
Thank you for contacting the office of President Barack Obama. The
President appreciates your taking the time to voice your concerns and opinions.
We would like to be of assistance to you; however, due to the separation
of powers, it is not within our authority to become involved in legal matters. You
must resolve this issue through the judicial system.
Please be aware that you can visit www.usa.gov or calll-800-FEDINFO
for information abot1t Federal Government assistance.
We hope your concerns are resolved to your satisfaction.
Again, thank you for your correspondence.
:t't, I
::. ; ' " . . ....
-: ;; _,.:
..,,.. ;
Sincerely,

F. Michael Kelleher
Special Assistant to the President and
Director of Presidential Correspondence
-t'" "
! ,; .: ......... .., ..
.,. .!.' . ;" :*. h:... .. 1'1'
-<- i .. !; ..
II ---., '
.
!i.
tJ, "1
lt
#.. . fl.;
i 8
r,
b !
.....

! <t'
';.
('(
llJ g
. g
0 u
'i:l
t
:.t
as: z
ld -
X i
... :'(

N
.....
$&1)
c:
;::. c:Pl
,::,
U) "'('1'1
t :!:!?'{
.t: - >-
Q. -fz

cu
"g ...
.,.. c-E
""OO m...,..
.c.N >:SZ
u..., 0
i! e
z :;:)1, Ill
1

l
::i
.i
...;
:;;
...:
j

]
i
m
....
....

USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 64 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit B
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 65 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Revised Article 9 UCC Search
UCC Search Results
File amendmentto this UCC I Return to search form I
File number:
Filing date:
Lapse date:
Status:
ACTIONS
2012-2614943-04
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM
12/12/2017 4:57:28 PM
A- Active
---------------------- --------------------
Action File Date Status-
Initial financing Statement 12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM Active - Filed online
NAMES
-------------
Debtor/Secured Party/Filer Date Added Address
Debtor
CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK
OrgiD: 03766
Type: BUSINESS TRUST
Jurisdiction: NEW YORK
Secured Party
Christopher Earl Strunk
Filer
Christopher Earl Strunk
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn NY 11238
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn NY 11238
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn NY 11238
COLLATERAL DESCRIPTION
Date Filed
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM
IMAGES
Document Type
UCC Filing - Initial financing
Statement
Collateral Description
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE ENTERED INTO THE COMMERCIAL
REGISTRY ACCEPTED FOR VALUE EXEMPT FROM LEVY-- ALL
PROPERTY OF DEBTOR INCLUDING ORGANIZATION NAME,
"CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK".
PDF
PDF
Tiff Image File Date Pages
12/12/2012 4:57:28 PM 1
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 66 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
...... -., -'
..... ! .
' ,
r ,
...
...
\
..
= ... --..
..
ltealth
MFiCiil.!. :. -
___ "" . ...: '

,, .
NOTICE OF RELEASE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION
-E-xhibit A
COPY
STATE OF GEORGIA
SUBDIVISION COUNTY OF LAMAR/-
TO : STATE OF NEW YORK, Releasee
C/0 THE CLERK OF THE COUNTY OF 1.AAR STATE OF GEORGIA WITHIN TIIE
TOWN OF BARNESVIlLE, GEORGIA with Chapter 17-B of the New York
State Estates, Powers and Truala Article 10 Section 9.2 Release of a power of
i''
0

INRE: USUFRUCf "CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK," "ClnUSTOPHERE. SlRUNK, "OuistopherB. Slnlnk"
FROM: Christopher Earl Strunk, in esse Releasor
:NOTICE OF RELEASE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION
Exhibit A- USUFRUCT Deed Certificate No.: 03766 with Certification of Birth N00232437
Back cover of the October l, 2012 submission tendered in New York County.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
October "-- 2012

Christopher-Earl: Stzunk in esse Releasor
593 Vanderbilt Avenue -281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Plione 845-901-6767 Email: chris@strunk.ws
COPY
DEPUTY CLERK
NOTICE OF RELEASE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION
TO. : STATE OF NEW YOI_U{, Releasee
IN RE : USUFRUCT 'CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK," 'CHRIST0'6WM; Strunk"
FROM: Christopher Strunk, in esse Releasor I hereby certify and foregoing to be
a f.rue, correet:'l!!id i:omplete copy of the original
STATE OF NEW YORK I
COUNTY OF KINGS : ss. . .
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse (Releasor) penalty
ofpeJjury:
Releasor until further notice is located for servide at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue -281 Brooklyn, New York
11238 within the State of New York subdivision of the city of New York.
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, absolutely release all personal property interests, legal and/ or
equitable, in the pubUc United States Citizen "CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK" created on January 24,
1947, upon the filing of the trust instrument in the State of New York subdivision County of New York
within the City of New York, the USUFRUCT Deed Certificate No.: 03766 with the Certification of Birth
N00232437 (see Exhibit A).
I, Christopher-Earl; Strunk in esse, reserve aD personal property rights. Legal and equita'\>le. granted or
secured by the Constitution of the :United States. the Constitution of the State of New York and related law.
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, intend no longer to be the Surety for the State-created pubUc United
States Citizen 'CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK," "CHRISTOPHER E. STRUNK," "Christopher E. Strunk" or
any derivative of the "nom iie guerre thereof, such as "CHRISTOPHER. STRUNK with ID No. UX94571A".
I, Chr;istopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, \)f the of York, inten,d t'?. return to my
former natural-born Citizen status ccnfeJ:Ted at my natural birth on January 23, 1947 of licensed Citizens,
that status being a private individual United States Citizen conferred by Section 1 of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, and'fin'ther'.ttcfinedin Hale v Henkel, 201 US 43; 74.
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, intend to be legally boun\1 by this Release executed and delivered in
accordance with Chapter 17-B of the Sl:!ite ofNewYorkEstates, Powers and Trusts Article 10 Section 9.2
Release of a power of appointment
This Release renders null and void any previous Release filed with any third party recoiU keeper of the
StateofNewYorkandoraubdivision(s). .("'""\ /


'. ;_{l.: ... ... \J( ___ .
\ , .. ,
. .. ..
COPY
STATE OF NEW YORK " .. -
SUBDMSION COUNTY OF NEW YORK
WITmN THE CITY OF NEW YORK' .
TO : STATE OF NEW YORK, Releasee
CfO THE CLERK OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK
with Chapter 17-B New York State Estates, Powers and Trusts
Article 10 Section 9.2 Release of a pouier of appointment
-. ::'"':
IN RE: USUFRUCT 'CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,' "CHRISTOPHER E. STRUNK, 'Christopher E. Strunk"
. FROM: Christopher Earl Sjrunk, in .esse Releasor
NOTICE OF RELEASE WITHOUT CONSiDERATION
Exhibit A- USUFRUCT Deed Certificate No:: 03766 with Certification of Birth N00232437
Dated: New York, New York
1:?/ . -t 2012
{..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 67 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Jl#hl.Uif
Hew York
112205313
3568880337-oD97
11/10/2009 (718)7480665 12:02:20 PH
==5:;-=R;;j;t::=::: .
Product . Sale Un1t Final
Description Qty Price .Price
WASHINGTON DC 20230
Zone-3 First-class
letter
0. 70 oz.
Return Rcpt (Green
Card)
$0.44
$2.30
Certified
label #:
r
Issue PVI:
$5.54
$0.44
letter
o)o oz.
Rcpt (Green $2.30
Certified S2 so
Labe I t: 7009;?2500003656B53Js .
Issue PVI:
$5.54
. . $0.44
letter '
0.70 oz.
Rcpt (Green $2.30
Certified $2.80
Label t: 70092250000365685345
Issue PVI:
$5.54
$1 Wisdom 4 $1.00 $4".00
PSA
Total:
f'ltl.62
Paid by:
Cash
$.'1().$2
Order stamps at USPS.cOIII/shop or
ca 11 1-BOD-Stamp24. Go to
USPS.comjclicknship to print
shipping labels with postage, For
other Information ca 11
1800-ASK-USPS
.
Clfrk;14
j
OF'J'BltDI!PARTMENTOFCOMMERCE. ;_
SUPERVJSOR(s). HEIJtS(S), AGENT(S), -'-
ASSJGN(S) ln tare or:
u.s.
1401 Coastlludoa Aveaue N.W.
WubiagtOD, DC 20230
luCnreof:
593 Vanderbilt A:-.mue- 281
New York
Zip Cooe exempt DMM t22-3l
Chrilltopiler>-l!:arl: Strunk in moo
Nol a corporation
Living--Soul/ Atfwtt
.No Third
Timothy Geithner in esse
D/B/A: TIMOTHY FRANZ GEITHNER, INC.
DIBIA: THE UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY,
SUPERVISOR(S), AGENT(S), ASSIGN(S)
In care of: The United States Department of tbe 'fieasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20220
NOTICE TO THE AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
RE: NOTICE OF REPLEVIN DEMAND
FOR THE RECORD_ WITII WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CODE CHAPTER 37 SECTION 16-3701: DEMAND PRIOR TO ACTION;
COSTS In an action of replevin brought to recover personal property to which the plamtiff is
entitled, that is alleged to have been wrongfully taken by or to be in the poslleSSion of and
wrongfully detained by the defendant, it is not necessary to demand poSsession of the property
before bringing the action; but the costs of the action lllll)' be awarded as the court orders.
TIMELY WITHOUT DISHONOR WITII THE RESTRICTED SPECIAL-
APPEARANCE NOT A CORPORATION The Living Soul
Attachment: NOTICE OF REPLEVIN DEMAND FOR RETURN OF
PROPERTY PENDING THE REPLEVIN COMPLAINT
FILING affirmed November 9, 2009 Page 2 of2
Pagel ofl
STATE Of NEW YORK)
) !8.:
COUNT\' OF KINGS }
Cbristopber-Earl: Stmnk, being duly sworn, depose and say:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR TBEDISTRICf OF COLUMBIA
In the Replevin matter or
Cbristopher-Earl:_ Strullk ill
Plaintlft' I Claimaat
v.
Baraek Hllllda Obama (alk/a Barry Soetoro) In case,
Gary F. Loeke Secretary or the u.s. Deportment or Commerce, and
Timothy F. Geltbner- Secretary of tbe U.S. Trea.\Ury
Defendaata I
NOTICE OF REPLEVIN DEMAND I?ORRETURN OF PROPERTY
PENDING THE REPLEVIN COMPLAINTFD.JNG
The Plaintiff sues the Derendanls for unjustly detaining the Plaintiffs goods and chattels, as the
Usurpec, &rack Hussein Obama, is ineligible to be the President of tho Unitm States Trustee/ Administrator
over any United and Secretaries with fiduciary responsibilities and Che Usurper having been
denied use of Plaintiff's power of Attorney on Jaiuuuy 23, 2009 has by Usurper's continued actions that are void
ab initio, inclnding the waivers issued as to Defendant Secretar:Ws and others, pillage Plaintiff's personal
propert;y to wit:
A) the Plaintiff's Bond issued upon his birth certificale of CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK after the
birth in New York City on Januazy 23, 1947 in the amount of 19687.5 troy ounotls of gold;
B) the Plaintiffs privato acoount at tlio US 'Imtsuty is seured by the Plaintiff's numbered Bond kept at
Che U.S. Department of Commerce wiCh the Bond number issued by the Social Securiiy Administmtion; and
C) The interest accrued upon the Plaintiff's investment into commerce since the year of 1963 thru now
calcultued upon the record by the Social Security Earnings Statement compounded tmllually at the respective
annual U.S. Treasury Bond Ra!!! from 1963.
And Che Plaintiff claims that the sanie be taken from the Defendants and delivered 1o Plaintifli or, if they
are eloigned, that Plaintiff may have judgment of their value IUld all mesne pro ills and damages, which be
estimates at the present value of $21,656,250.00 dollars based upon the equivalent current market value of gold
witbanetpn:sent va1ueof5,8171roy 0111\USof gold,ai!d 909 troy OlllltCSOf goW llel:umulated interest on

Cbrlstopluor-Earlt Strunk ei11"""
593 VanderblltAvenuell281
Brooklyn, New York
Zip Code exempt DMM 122-32
EmaU: cluis@strunk.ws; Ph 631-745-6402
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 68 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
. beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit C
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 69 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
.
- - - ---- .. -""_..! ,fi:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
------ ................. ,.,... .... -------------------------------------x:
Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue-281 Brooklyn New York 11238
'
Petitioner,
-against-
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A -- NY 11238
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 11354
Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooklyn, NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio of 442 11th Street - Brooklyn, NY 11215
Walter Cooper 150 West96th Street, #I2G --New York, NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue;;_ New York, NY 10037
Christine C. Quinn of 263 Ninth Avenue, #3A - New York, NY 10001
William Thompson of 106 West I 21st Street-- New York, NY 10027
Scott Stringer of 155 West 71st Street, #3A --New York, NY 10023
Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY 11103-
Archie Spigner of 11210 175th Street- Jamaica, NY J 1433
George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #60- Bronx, NY 10473
Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 10710
Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street MM Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road M- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive-- Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adams of I 1 Poplar A venue - Orchard Park, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive-- Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue -- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein JOt Brandywine Drive-- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street -- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Respondent(s).
---------------------------------------------------}(
To the above-named Respondent(s):
Index No.: (, l q_ G(_ l2.
Petitioner designate
The County of Kings as the
Place of trial.
The basis of venue is the
Petitioner's place to vote
NOTICE OF PETITION
YOU ARE HEREBY PETITIONED to answer the petition in this action and to serve a
copy of your answer, or, if the petition is not served with this notice, to serve a notice of
appearance, on the Petitioner within 20 days after the service of this Notice, exclusive of the day
of service; and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by
...
default for the relief demanded in the petition.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 70 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
November {4.' 2012
To: Respondents as follows:
Christopher.Earl: Strunk, in esse, Petitioner
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238.
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: chris@strunk.ws
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 11354
Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio of 442 11th Street -- Brooklyn, NY 11215
Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #I2G --New York, NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue-- New York, NY 10037
.Christine.C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A-- New York, NY 10001
William Thompson of 106 West 121st Street-- New York, NY 10027
Scott Stringer of 155 West 7lst Street, #3A --New York, NY 10023
Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street -- Astoria, NY Ill 03
Archie-Spigner of 11210 1 75th Street-- Jamaica, NY 11433
George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- Bronx, NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #6D --Bronx, NY 10473
Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 107iO
Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road-- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street-- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road-- Rochester, NYl46l0
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive-- Rochester, NY .14609
Scott Adams ofll Poplar Avenue-- Orcha:fd Park, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner I 02 Woodside Drive -- Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone I 07 Vanderbilt A venue -- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive-- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street-- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 4 78 Russell Washington, DC 2051 0
2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 71 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS Index No.:
--------------------------------"----------------------------------)[
Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse
, 593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281 Brooklyn New York 11238
Petitioner, VERIFIED PETITION
-against-
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenuet #2A -- Brooklynt NY 11238
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354 FOR EQUITY RELIEF BY
Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street -- Brooklyn, NY I 1232
Bill DeBlasio of442 11th Street Brooklyn, NY 11215 WRIT OF PROHIBITION WITH
Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #120 --New York, NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wrightof2225FifthAvenue-NewYork,NY 10037 TRO STAY, INJUNCTION AND
Christine C. Quinn of 263 Ninth A venue, #3A -New Yorlc, NY 10001
William Thompson of 106 West 12lst Street-- New York, NY 10027 DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Scott Stringer of 155 West 71st Street, #3A --New York, NY 10023
Emily Giske of440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014 AS TO ELECTORAL COLLEGE
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street -- Astoria, NY 11103
Archie Spigner of 11210 I 75th Street-- Jamaica, NY 11433 PUBLIC OFFICERS WITH U.S.
- Geo-rge G-resham i3 i3 East 233rd Street-- Bron:X, NY H)466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 BoytonAvenue, #6D -- BroiD4 NY 10473 CONSTITUTION ART.-2 1 Cl. 2
Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 10710
Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road-- Orangeburg, NY 10962 AND VOID US SENATE ELECTION
Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road -Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street-- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road-- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adams of 11 Poplar Avenue- Orchard Park, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive-- Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue-- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive-- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street -- Middle Granville, NY and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Respondents.
-............. _.._ ______ ..... ..;.. ...... ..: .. ..;.. _____ __... .. ______________ --- -
Petitioner, Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse, a non-surety private natural-born U.S. Citizen self
represented without an attorney, as and for his Petition for a writ of prohibition with Temporary Restraining
Order (TRO) and permanent injunction with a declaratory judgment as to U.S. Constitution Article 2 1
Clause 2 (A2SlC2) exclusive power 9fthe State legislature fonnation of the New York electoral college that .
under CPLR Article 78, the New York State Election Law Article 16-100 jurisdiction over Election Law
Article 12 and related law as applies to twenty-nine (29) U.S. Citizens to serve as Public Officer members of
the New York Electoral College after the November 6, 2012 General Election thru December 25, 2012; and
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 1 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 72 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
that this Petition requests expedited emergency equity relief with a CPLR 7805 injunction with a stay of
New York Electoral College vote due by December 15, 2012 until the Court renders a declaratory judgtnent
()n the issues of law under CPLR 7806 regarding U.S. Constitution: Article 2 in its entirety, especially
Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 3 (A2SIC3) as amended by the Article 7 Amendments the Ii
11
, the 14th
especially sections 3 and 4, the 20th, and the 25th; further, especially as to the U.S. Constitution Article 2
Section 1 paragraph 5 (A2S 1 CS) term of rut "natural born Citizen" (NBC) natural law issue versus the idiom
"born a citizen" positive law created by the New York State Board of Elections (NYS BOB); further, the
U.S. Constitution: Article 3 Section 3; Article 4; Article 6; and furthennore, related New York State law and
regulations as applies to the public officer oath, duties and obligation as applies with use of NYS Civil
Service Law 105, and that Petitioner seeks equity relief on six ( 6) issues of Law with Facts pertaining to the
misapplication and misadministration of Public Officer acts as relate to the December 5, 2008 Order and
J)ecision as a tnatter of State Law heard by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at I.A.S. Part 1 in the
.Article 78 Petition with Kings County Index No.: 2008-29641, and Cmnplaint with Index No.: 2008 29642;
and also, Petitioner challenges the New York U.S. Senate Election as void ab initio with U.S. Constitution
_Amendment 17 and NYS Constitution Article 3 7 grounds; and that based upon information and belief and
at all thnes hereinafter tnentioned, with imminent irreparable harm as time is of the essence and without
all()ther forum for relief, alleges of captioned Respondents and related persons as follows:
1. Petitioner Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse, is a duly registered voter of the 64th Election District
of the 57th Assetnbly District (AD) and within the New York 8th U.S. House District at 593 Vanderbilt
_A. venue- 281 Brooklyn New York 11238 for ten years with email: chris@strunk.ws and cell phone 845-901-
6767, and an enrolled metnber of the Republican Party who participated at the November 6, 2012 General
Election there voted entirely for the Republican Party line of candidates with Wendy Long for US Senate.
2. On November 9, 2012, Petitioner duly served his COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A
cRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN
l{lNGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS (hereinafter the "COMPLAINT")
upon the respective County District Attorney (DA) with jurisdiction over the domicile of residence of the
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 2 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 73 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
respective Public Officer member of the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle Electoral College for a
total of29 members variously domiciled in Fourteen (14) Counties that are now duly elected without
challenge on Novetnber 6, 2012, pending the NYS BOB final tally I canvassing by the end of November, all
serve as public officer electors to cast their votes by December 15, 2012 and that then will be transtnitted to
the U.S. Senate President Joseph Biden in a joint seating of the new Congress on January 3, 2013 take their
oath of office in the new Congress that there will select the next President I vice President of the United
States (POTUS) according to the 1ih and 20th Amendments of A2S1C3.
3. That the criminal COMPLAINT affirms of each Public Officer in each domicile therein quote:
[each] Elector as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State ofNew York
November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate for the office of President
and Vice President of the United States (POTUS) by their vote cast by December 15, 2012; and that
such Public Officers are to participate as a tnen1ber of the State ofNew York electoral college
intending to vote for Barack Obama as if mandated by the State ofNew York legislature with
exclt!sive power ~ f f o r d e d by Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constituti9n with use of New_ Y ~ r k State
Election Law and related rules, McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), with the proviso that no
Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a federal officer
including office ofPOTUS, U.S. Term Limits. Inc. v. Thornton, 514 u-.s. 779 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon infonnation and belief contends that Barack
Obama is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment intimidation of witnesses and racketeering in the
matter of his alleged Common Law citizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to
married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British Subject with dual allegiance at birth wherever
that was to the minor US Citizen mother in wedlock to a majority aged British subject foreign alien
student who then were duly divorced on March 20, 1964; and then when in the mother's custody
~ . ..
during her 2 marriage Barack Obama was adopted in Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-
father, LoloSoetoro, who gave the name "SO;EBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department
record affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian
Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barry Soetoro) reentered the USA in 1971 alone without a US Passport
t.o live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social
Security Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in
furtherance of usurpation of the office ofPOTUS no later than April25, 2011, according to tnore
than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as if of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affirmant contends that Barack
Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath owing exclusive allegiance to the United
States, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GULEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United
States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through Morocco, giving them aid and comfort
within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or
public officer including ... who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office ofPOTUS
is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition and treason.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 3 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 74 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 25,
2011 forged public document is for the purpose ofusurping the POTUS, andthat were any New
York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would
be an accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affinnant
provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, NYS
Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S.
Election Law 16-100, N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any
public officer misapplication and ad1ninistration of laws; the same is true to my own knowledge,
except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those 1natters
I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon infonnation and
rd
belief are as follows: 3 parties, books and records, and personal knowledge. "
4. That the respective County DA with jurisdiction over crhnes of electors in each of fourteen counties
are: P. David Soares Albany District Attorney; Robert T. Johnson The Bronx District Attorney; Frank A.
Sedita, III Erie District Attorney; Charles J. Hynes District Attorney of Kings; Sandra Doorley District
Attorney ofMonroe; Kathleen M. Rice District Attorney ofNassau; Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. District Attorney of
New York; Willian1 J. Fitzpatrick District Attorney of Onondaga; Francis D. Phillips District Attorney of
Orange; Richard A. Brown District Attorney of Queeris; Thomas J. Spota District Attorney of Suffolk; Gwen
Wilkinson District Attorney of Tompkins; Kevin C. Kortright District Attorney of Washington; Janet
DiFiore District Attorney of Westchester; and act independently of this civil action.
5. On November 9, 2012, Petitioner duly served a NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78
PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
PENDING A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS (hereinafter known as
the "NOTICE'') upon the respective County District Attorney with jurisdiction over the domicile of
residence of the respective Public Officer member of the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle
Electoral College of29 members in Fourteen (14) Counties got Notice that stated quote:
"Please take notice of Petitioner's intent to file an order to show cause application at the Kings County
Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the lOth Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday November
19, 2012 for a preliminary injunction relief pending a deciaratory judgment on issues of law; e.g., Are
public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of POTUS and Ballot
access? Are public officers presented with the facts ofBarack Obama ineligibility able to change
qualifications before the Electoral College Vote scheduled December 15, 2012?"
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 4 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 75 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
6. On November 9, 2012, Petitioner had a person not a party to this suit serve a copy of the
COMPLAINT and NOTICE upon the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle Electoral College
Members for a total of29Inembers in Fourteen (14) Counties individually as follows:
1. Andrew M. Cuomo 138 Eagle Street-- Albany, NY 12202
2. Gerald D. Jennings of 113S New Scotland Road-- Albany, NY 12208
3. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- Bronx, NY 10466
4. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #6D --Bronx, NY 10473
S. Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street-- Buffalo, NY 14208
6. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11232
7. Hakee1n Jeffries 3S Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238
8. Bill DeBlasio of 442 11th Street-- Brooklyn, NY 1121S
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road -- Rochester, NY 14610
10. Joseph Morelie of 133 Deerfield Drive-- Rochester, NY 14609
11. Tmn DiNapoli 100 Great Neck Road-- Great Neck, NY 11201
12 .. Eric Schneidt?rman 64S West End Avenue, #8F --New York, NY 1002S
13. Walter Cooper ISO West 96th Street, #I2G --New York, NY 1002S
14. Sheldon Silver ofSSO Grand Street, #SA-- New York, NY 10002
1S. Keith L.T. Wright of222S Fifth Avenue-- New York, NY 10037
16. Christine C. Quinn of263 Nint4 Avenue,#3A --New York, NY 10001
17. William Thompson of 106 West 121st Street-- New York, NY 10027
18. Scott Stringer of ISS West 71st Street, #3A --New York, NY 10023
19. Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of 11 Poplar Avenue-- Orchard Park, NY 14127
21. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive -- Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY 10962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street-- Astoria, NY 11103
24. Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 113S4
2S. Archie Spigner of 11210 17Sth Street-- Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue -- West Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive-- Ithaca, NY 148SO
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street-- Middle Granville, NY 12849
29. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 10710
7. That Petitioner has been barred frmn filing any further suit without leave by the Order of Arthur M.
Schack J.S.C. in the fraud complaint Strunk v NYS BOE et al Index No.: 2011-6500 under penalty of
contempt against Public Officers:
Andrew M. Cuomo of 138 Eagle Street-- Albany, NY 12202
Tom DiNapoli of 100 Great Neck Road-- Great Neck, NY 11201
Eric Sclmeiderman 64S West End Avenue, #8F --New York, NY 1002S
Sheldon Silver of SSO Grand Street, #SA -- New York, NY 10002
; and therefore, such named Public officers are not included herein unless by leave to do so.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 5 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 76 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
AS AND FOR THE FIRST QUESTION THE NEW YORK ELECTION OF KIRSTEN
. GILLIBRAND TO US SENATE IS VOID AB INITIO AS THE ELECTOR
QUALIFICATIONS ARE NOT EQUAL TQ THAT OF THE NEW. YORK ASSEMBLY
8. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 7
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that as and for the first question
the New York election held November 6, 2012 ofKirsten Gillibrand to the U.S. Senate from New
York is void ab initio as to elector qualifications are not equal to that of theN ew York Assembly .
9. Petitioner seeks to overturn New York's U.S. Senate election with U.S. Const. Amendment 17
"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the
people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall
have the qualifications requisite for electors of the mostnum.erous branch ofthe State
legislatures . .. "
as the November 6, 2012 election for U.S. Senator from New York between Den1ocrat Candidate
Kirsten Gillibrand and Republican Candidate Wendy Long was conducted for electors not meeting
the qualifications of a member of the Assembly with State Constitution Article 3 Section 7:
".No person shall serve as a member of the legislature unless he or she is a citizen of the United
States and has been a resident of the state of New York for five years, and, except as hereinafter
otherwise prescribed, ofthe assembly ... district for the twelve months immediately preceding his
or her election; ... or member of assembly at the first election next ensuing after a readjustment or
alteration of the ... assembly districts becomes effective, a person, to be e.figible to serve as such,
ntust have been a resident of the county in which the senate or assembly district is contained for
the twelve months immediately preceding his or her election . ... " (Emphasis added by Petitioner)
10. In addition to the above listed State Officers, Petitioner has also been barred from filing any further
suit without leave by the Order of Arthur M. Schack J.S.C. in the fraud complaint Strunk v NYSBOE et al
Index No.: 2011-6500 under penalty of contempt against other Public Officers and State entities:
The New York State Board of Ellection and its agents
The New York Secretary of State
City ofNew York among many other persons;
as such named Public officers and agencies are not included herein unless by leave to do so, Petitioner
wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask the Governor set a special election, because a
significant number of the electors casting their respective vote were domiciled in New York for less than
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 6 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 77 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
fives years had not lived in their respective county of domicile for at least twelve months and there is no
way to determine from the votes cast on Novemebr 6, 2012 of those qualified what candidate was voted for.
11. That Petitioner's right to suffrage, a republican form of govemement, Freedom and Liberty; are and
would be infringed were the election of US Senator not held void ab initio and that a new special election
held; and therefore, public officers yet name along with Respondent Kirsten Gillibrand of 15 West 26th
Street, Suite 4R, New York, NY 10010 with her present place of business at Washington, DC Office
478 Russell Washington, DC 20510, as a public officer has infringed my rights and acted contrary to the law
of the land with those yet named as each Respondent must either be sanctioned and barred from office and a
new speeial elelction arranged for qualified elelctors as soon as possible.
12. In addition to the US Senate regarding the POTUS Election there are five (5) categories of
elector public officers who are the respondents herein that each of whom have separate and or co1nbined
. - -
issue questioned specifically as to each member of the respective categrory or jointly, and that based upon
information and belief arid at all times hereinafter mentioned, Petitioner respectfully alleges a question of law
issue as to the captioned Respondents within each category of those public or quasi public officers with
fiduciary duty who were notified of an accessory crime in which each participates in, especially if their
respective vote is cast as an elector are :
a. The Electors who are Public Officers elected to Congress duty as to matter of law and facts.
b. The Electors who are Public Union trustees have fiduciary duty as to matter of law and facts.
c. The Electors who are Registered Lobbyists have fiduciary duty as to matter of law and facts.
d. All the Electors as Public Officers when notified of crime have duty as to the law and facts.
e. The Elector private person as an Elector Public Officer duty as to matter of law and facts.
13. That Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 7 801 as to the nature of proceeding for relief
by writ of mandamus or prohibition that shall be obtained in a proceeding under this article is made for a writ
or order of prohibition, in which such reference shall, so far as applicable, be deemed to refer to the
proceeding authorized by this article.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 7of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 78 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
14. That Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 7802 as to captioned Parties of electors listed
herein in part is in keeping with the definition of "body or officer", and the expression "body or officer" that
includes every court, tribunal, board, corporation, officer, or.other person, or aggregation of persons, whose
action tnay be affected by a proceeding under this article; and that Petitioner contends that Respondent
Electors have maliciously acted contrary to the prohibition in favor of another and where this proceeding is
brought to restrain the Electors individually and as a body or officers from proceeding without or in excess of
jurisdiction in favor of another, the latter shall be joined as a party; and that Petitioner understands that other
interested persons in adequately represented by Petitioner actions herein by order of the court may direct that
notice of the proceeding be given to any person, and may allow other interested persons to intervene were it
not to prejudice the emergency nature of this action.
15. In addition to the above question Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 7803
raises Questions that may be raised in a proceeding under this article that are as follows:
AS AND FOR THE SECOND QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS HAKEEM
JEFFRIES AND GRACE MENG AS TO NEW U.S. HOUSE MEMBERS AND
ELECTORS WITH A DUTY AS TO A MATTER OF LAW AND FACTS ARE IN
CONFLICT WITH A2S1C2 AS SUCH PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED ARE
BARRED ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE REVIEW AFTER JANUARY 2, 2013.
16. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 15
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers Respondent
Hakeem Jeffries and Respondent Grace Meng as to new U.S. House members and Electors with a duty as to
matter of law and facts are in conflict with U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 2, i.e. A2S 1 C2
states "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of
Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be
entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of
Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." as such persons
similarly situated are barred Electoral College vote review after January 2, 2013.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 8 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 79 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
17. Other than U.S. Constitution Article VI it does not specify the form of oath a Congressman is to take
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State
Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several
States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test
shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
and was a function of the respective state and federal law as in New York State Public Officer Law 10
requires every public officer to take and file an oath or affinnation prior to the discharge of any of their
official duties and to be certified to the clerk of the respective body . The form of the oath or affirmation is
set forth in Article XIII, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution (I)
18. That Petitioner's understanding of the Decision and Order of Justice Schtnidt referenced above is
that a New York Electoral College Elector is merely a private person not required to take an oath in New
York or elsewhere to uphold the State or Federal Constitution and as such may vote as a private person.
19. That Petitioner's New York State Assembly Representative of the 57th AD is P.resently Respondent
Hakeem Jeffries of 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238 and pending the final tally and
canvassing by the end of the month of November will also be the Elected member of the United States House
ofRepresentatives from the New York 8th House District
20. That Respondent Hakeem Jeffries intends as a House tnember to take his oath to uphold the State
and US Constitution on Janaury 3, 201J, intends to sit in the joint session of Congress thereafter to review
his own and other votes as an elector as a second bite of the apple despite the prohibitition by A2S1C2 to do
. . . .
so; and intends so despite that Respondent has been given notice by Petitioner.
1
NYSC ARTICLE XIII Public Officers [Oath of office; no other test for public office] Section 1. Members of the
legislatUre, and all officers, executive and judicial, except such inferior officers as shall be by law exempted, shall,
before they enter on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affmnation: "I do
solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of
New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of ...... , according to the best of my ability;" no
other oath, declaration or test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust, except that any
committee of a political party may, by rule, provide for equal representation of the sexes on any such committee, and a
state convention of a political party, at which candidates for public office are nominated, may, by rule, provide for equal
representation of the sexes on any committee of such party. (Amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and
approved by v o t ~ of the people November 8, 1938.)
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 9 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 80 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
21. Respondent Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 11354 is a American lawyer
holding an office of trust and profit and is a member of the New York State Assembly, representing the 22nd
assetnbly district in Flushing, Queens, New York, and pending the final tally and canvassing by the end of
November will also be the Elected member of the United States House of Representatives frmn the New
York 6
1
h House District.
22. That the Respondent Grace Meng as a House member takes her oath to uphold the State and U.S.
Constitution before Janaury 3, 2013, and then intends to sit in the joint session of Congress thereafter to
review her own and other votes as an elector as a second bite of the apple despite the prohibitition by
A2S 1 C2 to do so; and intends so despite that Respondent has been given notice by Petitioner.
23. That arguend9 re A2SlC2, "but no Senator or Representative. or Person holding an Office of
Trust or Profit under the United States. shall be appointed an Elector" use is still with the original meaning
and intent despite the addition of the li
11
, 14th, 16th and 20th Amendments notwithstanding; and that the
original use before ratification of the 14th amendment considered each State of the several States was
sovereign and not subservient to the USA in regards to the enforcetnent of the Bill of Rights applied to the
Federal entity that was properly termed these United States not as now termed after ratification of the' 14th
Amendment (1868) became the singular United States, as each State of the several States became and now
remain subservient along with every state citizen therein placed under USA jurisdiction per se; and
24. Further arguendo re original use of A2S 1 C2, "but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding
an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States. shall be appointed an Elector" includes any state
officer and or public officer accordingly, and that the same meaning for "Senator" \Vho was appointed by the
respective State legislature before the 17th Amendment as the representative of the respective State is then
and now intended to equate that relationship to every House member even though elected by State Citizens
privileged to vote, and therefore also equates to every "Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit' too,
and therefore includes every Public officer, in any state or federal jurisdiction, all except a private person per
se; and.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 10 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 81 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
25. Furthermore arguendo re the issues of Law with Facts pertaining to the misapplication and
1nisadministration of Public Officer acts in 2012 as relate to the December 5, 2008 Order and Decision as a
matter of State Law heard by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at I.A.S. Part 1 in the Article 78
Petition with Kings County Index No.: 2008-29641 as a matter of the Federal Law of the Land A2S1C2 still
un-amended is that the only interpretation of State law involved in the Order and Decision of December 5,
2008 by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. must be in keeping with the exclusive power, McPherson v.
Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892), of the New York State Legislature in its plenary formation of the New York
electoral college may not change the 1neaning of A2S 1 C2 and A2S 1 C5 at best would have to be a retiring
public officer to serve as an elector but make any "Person holding an Office of Trust or Pro/if' after
January 2, of the year following the general election of the POTUS ineligible and as such the member of the
respective Electoral College is to be a private U.S. Citizen under Federal jurisdiction as an elector is a public
o-fficer per se who votes by no later than December 25, 2012 every four years and when the joint seating o.f
Congress convenes on January 3, 2013 the next year and every four years thereafter until there is a
amendment to the quasi Federal officer status of an elector means that without an amendment, no State and
or Congress may change the eligibility requirements of a Federal officer includes the elector as well as that
ofPOTUS with A2S1C5, U.S. Term Limits. Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995).
26. A State Officer and local officer as public officers hold an office of trust, and that persons registered
with a privilege from the State such as an attorney, union trustee, lobbyist hold an office of trust for profit.
27. That were Respondents Grace Metig, Hakeem Jeffries and or anyother person similarly situated
according to A2S 1 C2 who are officers of the State while acting as electors and as persons holding an office
of trust or profit to review their own vote in Congress after Janaury 2, 2013 and also be an elector would
infringe Petitioner's right to suffrage, a republican form ofgovemement, Freedom and Liberty; and
therefore, Respondents acts as public officers is and would be contrary to the law of the land as each
Respondent must either be barred frmn voting or office and or if done be referred for criminal action.
Strunk's PETITION Page 11 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 82 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
AS AND FOR THE THIRD QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO ARE THE
ELECTORS WHO ARE PUBLIC UNION TRUSTEES WHO HAVE A FIDUCIARY
DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW AND FACTS ATTEMPT TO CHANGE' THE
POTUS ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS OF A2S1C5 AND ARE IN CONFLICT
WITH A2S1C2 AND ARE BARRED FROM SUCH VOTE AS A BREACH OF A
FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THEIR MEMBERSHIP AND PEOPLE OF NEW YORK
28. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 27
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that pu.blic officers who are the
electors who are public union trustees have a fiduciary duty as to matters of law and facts attempt
to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications of A2S 1 C5 and are in conflict with A2S 1 C2, are
barred-from -such vote as a-breach of a fiduciary cl.uty to their membership and People-of the State of
New York.
29. That Respondent George Gresham is a incumbent elected President of 1199 SEIU United
Healthcare Workers East to participate as a me1nber of the State ofNew York electoral college.
30. That Respondent George Gresham is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as
a qusai Public Officer as a "Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit' who has a conflict of interest
as an elector despite the prohibitition by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elelctor
tovote by Decmber 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
31. That Respondent Mario Cilento is a incumbent elected President of the New York State AFL-CIO
by the organization's Executive Council to participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral
college.
32. That Respondent Mario Cilento is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as a
qusai Public Officer as a "Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit' who has a conflict of interest
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 12 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 83 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
as an elector despite the prohibitition by A2S 1 C2 and A2S 1 C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elector
to vote by December 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
33. That Respondent Scott Adams is a incumbent elected director ofUAW Region 9 with Local 686
Local 774 Local1069 Local2300 Local3303 to participate as a member of the State ofNew
York electoral college
34. That Respondent Scott Adams is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as a
quasi Public Officer as a"Person holding an Office o(Trust or Pro/if' who has a conflict of interest
as an elector despite the prohibitition by A2S 1 C2 and A2S 1 C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elector
to vote by December 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
35. That were Public Union Fiduciary Respondents and any other shnilar representative similarly
situated to cast a vote a POTUS candidate that is not eligible for POTUS would infringe Union metnber trust
and similarly private US citizens like Petitioner's right to suffrage, republican form of governement,
Freedom and Liberty; and therefore, their action as public officers is contrary and should lead to removal
fr01n their office and or dis banning the respective union and return of alll union member funds.
AS AND FOR THE FOURTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO ARE
THE ELECTORS WHO ARE REGISTERED LOBBYISTS HAVE FIDUCIARY
DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW AND FACTS ARE QUASI PUBLIC OFFICERS
WITH A FIDUCIARY DUTY ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE POTUS ELIGIBILITY
QUALIFICATIONS OF A2S1C5 AND IN CONFLICT WITH A2S1C2.AND
ARE BARRED FROM SUCH VOTE AS A BREACH OF A FIDUCIARY DUTY TO
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
36. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 35
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers who are the
electors who are registered lobbyists have fiduciary duty as to matters of law and facts are quasi
public officers with a fiduciary duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications of
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 13 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 84 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
A2S 1 C5 and are in conflict with A2Sl C2, are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary
duty to the.People of the State ofNew York
37. That Respondent Emily Giske is a incumbent govemtnent affairs specialist based in New York with
extensive experience in Albany and New York City. She has lobbied for corporations, financial institutions,
not-for-profit entities and local municipalities including Las Vegas gambling interests lobbyist to participate
as a metnber of the State of New York electoral college.
38. That Respondent Emily Giske is a lobbyist with the state ofNew York as a qusai Public Officer as
a "Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit" who has a conflict of interest as an elector despite the
prohibitition by A2S 1 C2 and A2S 1 CS to do so; and intends to proceed as an elector to vote by Decmber 15,
2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
39. That were a Lobbyist registered in New York and any other similar representative similarly situated
to cast a vote a POTUS candidate that is not eligible for POTUS would infringe the trust due the People of
New York as similarly to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom and Liberty.
And therefore their action as public officers is contrary and should lead to retnoval of Respondents license,
order fines levied under State Lobbying law, and crimnal investigation.
AS AND FOR THE FIFTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO also are
AN ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFICER ALSO HAVE DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF
LAW AND FACTS ABSENT A VIOLATIONOFLAWMAYNOTVOTEFOR
WHOM THEY WISH BY CHANGING THE ELIGIBILITY OF POTUS.
40. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 39
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that all public officers holding more
than one public officer job for pay excluding a cmnmissioner of deeds or notary public with a fiduciary
duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications are in conflict with A2S 1 C2 and
A2S 1 C5 and are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the People of the State of
New York; and
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 14 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 85 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
41. That each Elector is mandated by the State of New York legislature with exclusive power afforded
by A2SlC2 and A2SlC5 with use of New York State Election Law and related rules, McPherson v. Blacker,
146 U.S. 1 (1892), with the proviso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification
requirements of a federal officer including that of office of POTUS, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514
U.S. 779 (1995) as apply to each respondent below:
42. That Respondent Robert Duffy is the incumbent 76th Lieutenant Governor ofNew York to
participate as a me1nber of the State of New York electoral college
43. That Keith L.T. Wright is a incumbent Member of the New York State Assembly
from the 70th district to participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral college
44. That Respondent Stephanie Miner is a incumbent 53rd Mayor of the city of Syracuse New York to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
45. That Respondent Sheila Comar is a incumbent elected Executive committee chair of the New York
State Democratic Committee to participate as a me1nber of the State ofNew York electoral college
46. That Respondent Joseph Morelle is a incu1nbent member of the New York State Assembly
representing the 132nd Assembly District, which includes eastern portions of the City ofRochester and the
Monroe County suburbs of Irondequoit and Brighton to participate as a member of the State ofNew York
electoral college
47. That Respondent Christine C. Quinn is a incumbent Speaker of the New York City Council
representing District 3 to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
48. That Respondent Ruben Diaz, Jr. is a incumbent President of the Borough offhe Bronx in New
York City to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
49. That Respondent Ken Jenkins is a incu1nbent Westchester County 16th District legislator, and was
elected again Chairman of The Board of Legislators to participate as a member of the State ofNew York
electoral college
50. That Respondent Steve Bellone is a incumbent Suffolk County Executive to participate as a
member of the State ofNew York electoral college
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PEtiTION Page 15 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 86 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
51. That Respondent Felix Ortiz is a incumbent representing New York's 51st Assembly District to
participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral college
52. That Respondent Anne Marie Anzalone is a incumbent appointed Chief of staff to Representative
Joe Crowley of the 7th New York Congressional District to participate as a member of the State of New
York electoral college
53. That Respondent William Thompson is a incumbent selected by the NYS Governor to head NYC's
Battery Park City Authority to participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral college
54. That Respondent Scott Stringer is a incumbent 26th Borough President of Manhattan to participate
as a member of the State ofNew York electoral college
55. That Respondent Bill DeBlasio is a incumbent New York City elected official, holding the citywide
office ofNew York City Public Advocate to participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral
college
56. That Respondent Byron Brown is a incumbent mayor of Buffalo, New York to participate as a
n1e1nber of the State of New York electoral college
57. That Respondent Gerald D. Jennings is a incumbent mayor of Albany, New York to participate as
a member of the State of New York electoral college
58. That Respondent Archie Spigner is a incumbent District Leader for the 29th A.D. -Part A, and
Executive Member of the Guy R. Brewer United Democratic Club to participate as member of the State of
New York electoral college
59. That although the following public officers are being questionably protected by the enormity of
Justice Schack invidious infringement ofPetitioner basic rights otherwise protected by the US Constitution
and 14th Amendment guarantees and related State law with an order and decision taken on appeal case 2012-
5515 filing pending, the following public officers would be effected by a Court decision herein as follows:
a. That Andrew M. Cuomo is a incu1nbent 56th Governor ofNew York to participate as a me1nber
of the State ofNew York electoral college and was notified ofPOTUS ineligibility as the NYS
Attorney General and an elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded to vote.
Strunk's PETITION Page 16 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 87 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
b. That Tom DiNapoli is a incumbent 54th Comptroller of the state ofNew York to participate as a
member of the State ofNew York electoral college and was notified ofPOTUS ineligibility as
the NYS Attorney General and an elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded to vote.
c. That Sheldon Silver is a incumbent Member of the New York State Assembly from the 64th
district and speaker of the assembly to participate as a member of the State ofNew York
electoral college and was notified of POTUS ineligibility as the NYS Attorney General and an
elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded anyway to vote.
d. That Eric Schneiderman is a incumbent 65th Attorney General of New York to participate as a
member of the State ofNew York electoral college
60. That all the above named Public Officer Respondents as the body and or its officers with
the expressed exception of private US Citizens as electors that failed or are about to perfom1 a duty
enjoined upon it by the law of the land as to the requirement to conform to U.S. Constitution Article
2 Section 1 Paragraph 5 as to the eligibility requirements for any candidate for the office of the
POTUS; and
61. That the nru.ned Respondents as the body and or its officers that proceeded, and is
proceeding or is about to proceed without or in excess of jurisdiction to allow violation ofNBC
Eligibility; and
62. That the named Respondents as the body and or its officers that proceeded, and is
proceeding or is about to proceed despite the warning of the misprision of felony sedition and
treason are to be referred for criminal investigation and removal from office under New York Civil
Service Law Section 105;
63. That Respondent public officers as Elector Public Officers have duty as to matter of law and facts
and when in violation oflaw must be held accountable or would infringe the trust due the People of New
York as similarly to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of govern1nent, Freedom and Liberty.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 17 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 88 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for King's County
AS AND FOR THE SIXTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO AS THE
ELECTOR PRIVATE PERSON WITHOUT ANOTHER PUBLiC OFFICE AS AN
ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFICER ALSO HAVE DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW
AND FACTS :BUT ABSENT A VIOLATION OF LAW MAY VOTE FOR WHOM
THEY WISH.
64. repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 63
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers who as the
Elector private person without another public office as an Elector Public Officer also have duty as to matters
of law and facts but when absent a violation of law may vote for whom they wish.
65. That Respondent Irene Stein is a candidate past super delegate in the 2008 Democratic presidential
nomination and wife of Peter Stein the Totnkins County legislator for the 11th District to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college
66. That Respondent Walter Cooper is a candidate in, an individual capacity as a citizen ofNew York
to participate as a metnber of the State ofNew York electoral college
67. The Elector private person as a US Citizen without another public office as an Elector Public Officer
also have duty as to matter of law and facts and when in violation of law must be held accountable or would
infringe the trust due the People of New York as similarly to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of
governement, Freedom and Liberty.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner wishes a temporary restraining order; preliminary injunction
hearing, and Declaratory judgment under CPLR 7806 and permanent injunction against the
Respondents of each category and such other relief as the Court deems just including a TRO Order:
a. A hearing on the legal issues as to the void ab initio US Senate Election in New York ..
b. A hearing on the issues of facts as to forgery, sedition and treason.
c. A hearing on the issues of the actual historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen held by
the State of New York from before and after the 1776
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 18 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 89 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Dated:
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
d. That Public Officers elected to Congress and as a public officer electors be barred from
reviewing the elector votes in keeping to the mandates of the law of the land
e. That based upon a review of the facts associated with the forgery of public documents to
facilitate usurpation of the office ofPOTUS that Electors be given notice of their being
held as an accessory after the fact to a forgery crime that would be referred for criminal
proceeding.
f. That based upon a review of the facts associated with the allegation of misprision of
felony sedition and treason that Electors be given notice of their being held as an
accessory after the fact to a felony, sedition and warned of treason per se crime that
would be referred for criminal proceeding.
g. That electors be instructed as to the actual historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen
held by the State. ofNew York from before and after the 1776 issuance of the
Declaration of Independence and with the proviso that were a Public Officer other than
an independent elector per se to attempt to chapge the eligibility of a federal officer
would be held in civil contempt in breach of public officer duties.
h. And for further and different relief as the Court may deem necessary herein.
Brooklyn, New York
November /g-' 2012
~ @ v
Christopher-Earl: Strunk, in esse, Petitioner
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238. .
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: chris@strunk.ws
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 19 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 90 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
PETITION VERIFICATION AFFIDAVIT
STATEOFNEWYORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of
perjury:
I have read the foregoing Petition with six ( 6) questions at issue against each category of
Respondent Public Officers and Electors in their official capacity and or individually as against the
unlawful misadministration and misapplication of New York Public Officers in the conduct of the
General Election ofNovember 6., 2012 in the election ofUS Senator Kirsten Gillibrand that is void
ab initio, and in which Petitioner wishes a writ of prohibition with Temporary Restraining Order
and permanent injunction with a Declaratory Judgment equity relief under jurisdiction of the CPLR
Article 78 in conjunction with the New York State Election Law Article 16-1 00 requires
emergency equity relief with a CPLR 7805 injunction with stay of New York Electoral College
vote due by December 15,2012, and a declaratory judgment. under CPLR 7806 as time is of the
essence with irreparable harm; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters
therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.
The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd
parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
Sworn to before me
This of Novem .
Christopher-Earl: Strunk
ARf\JOLO I. TISHFJELD --._._,.-;a --
Notary Public State Of New
No.41-4611662
Quafified In _Queens County
Certified In Kings County
Commission Expires March 30, 20
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 20 of 20
- .- ..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 91 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse.
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281 Brooklyn New York 11238
,.
Petitioner,
-against-
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A NY 11238
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooklyn, NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio of442 11th Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11215
Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #I2G --New York, NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue- New York, NY 10037
Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A --New York, NY 10001
William Thompson ofl06 West !21st Street- New York, NY 10027
Scott Stringer of 155 West 7Ist Street, #3A- New York, NY 10023
Emily Giske of440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY I I I 03
. of 1 175th NY: 1_1433 _
George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- Bronx, NY I0466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #60 --Bronx, NY 10473
Ken Jenkins I08 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 10710
Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road-- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road-- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive -Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adams of l1 Poplar Avenue-- Orchard Park, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue-- West Babylon, NY 11704 _
Irene "Stein 101 Brandywine Drive-- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Respondent(s).
_.;. .. ............... ..... .;. ......... _.. __ .;. ___________ ................ _ .......... - .... -.......... x
. NOTICE OF PETITION
PETITION
PETITION VERIFICATION AFFIDAVIT
Index No.:
Dated: Brooklyn, N}ew York
November J:L, 2012
m
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238.
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: chris@strunk.ws
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 92 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Christopher Earl Strunk in esse
2. {q lf .8 /tz.
Petitioner
v ..
1. Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238
2. Bill DeBlasio of 442 11th Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11215
3. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11232
M. Cn6mo 138 8agle Sneet 1\lbmJy, N x t1262
5. Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road-- Albany, NY 12208
6. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street -- Bronx, NY 10466
7. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of 820 Boyton Avenue, #60 --Bronx, NY 1,473
8. Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street-- Buffalo, NY 14208
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road -- Rochester, NY 14610
10. Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive-- Rochester, NY 14609
oil. 1\nu D'1l'fapub 100 Great Road-- Great Nectt, MY 11201
...1.2. l*ie Sclttieidennan 645 End Avenue, #8" -1\few "'1 mk:.J\fl)" 10025
13. Walter Cooper ISO West 96th Street, #I2G- New York, NY 10025
.J 4. Sheldon Silvet ot SSO Grana Street, #SA lork, N i I 0002 ..
15. Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue- New York, NY 10037
16. Christine c.Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A --New York, NY 10001
17. William Thomp.son of 106 West I 21st Street.:... New York, NY 100.27
18. Scott Stringer of 155 West 7lst Street, #3A- New York, NY 10023
19. Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street --New York, NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of 11 Poplar Avenue- Orchard Park, NY 14127
21. Stephanie Minet-102 Woodside Drive-- Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- 9rangeburg, NY 10962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street-- Astoria, NY Ill 03
24. Grace Meng of 14714 34th A venue -- Flushing, NY 11354
25. Archie Spigner of 11210 I 75th Street- Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 1 07 Vanderbilt Avenue ..:. West Babylon, NY 11704
_ 27. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive-- It!taca, NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street-- Middle Granville, NY 12849
29 .. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue-- Yonkers, NY 10710 1"'70
0
3o- l<l G t C'C e>'Ff'!'tc.G c,o teV .f.SaL
Respondents W ASHtNGTOc.J {)L
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78 PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING A
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
Please take notice of Petitioner's intent to file an order to show cause application at the Kings
County Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the 1 Qth Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday
November 19, 2012 for a preliminru:y injunction relief pending a declaratoxy judgment on issues of
law; e.g., Are public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of
POTUS and Ballot access? Are public officers presented with the facts of Barack Obama ineligibility
able to change qualifications before the Electoral College Vote scheduled December 15, 2012?
A PDF
For further information Contact :
1 0 r / Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
www. G:Jmjdc:>e- II"Z-?'f-rrJT; 593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Cellphone: 845-901-6767
Email: chris@strunk. ws
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 93 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et aL Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index N'o.;_ 21948 I 20 l2
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF NE\V YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ULSTER )
I, It Van Allen, being duly S\varn, depose and say w1der penalty of petjury;
a. Am over 18 years of age and not a party tQ this action.
b. My place of business is located at 351 North Road H.urley New York 12243.
c. On November 14,2012, Christopher Strunk instru.cted D:ie to serve a true co11formed copy of the NOTICE OF
PETITION, PETITION with AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION affinned November 13, 2012 along with a
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FlLE AN ORDER TO SHOW AP.PLICAT.ION FOR.A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION PENDING A DECLARATORY IN.JUNCTION ON ISSUE OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
D'ECLARATORY l{ELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
1
a Notice of Petitioner
1
s intentto file an order to cause
application .at the, Kings County Supreme Court Building at iO AM on the 10th -Floor intake at 360 Street on
Monda3r November 19
1
2012 placing a complete set in a prope.rly addressed to .each respondent listed below for
by USPS by certified mail with request for return receipt for proof of service.
d._ On November 14, 2012, I caused each copy\vith proper postage for service by certified mail on the listed .Electors and
where each envelope was properly addressed with the Notification 'URGENTLEGAL SERVICE" and " PRRSONAL &
CONFIDENTIAL" in the lo'-vet left hand. corner of the envelop that was the.n deposited the USPS for service upon:
L Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill #2A- NY 11238
2. G tace Meng of 14714 34th A\renue ;.. Flushing, NY 11354
3. Felix Odiz 189 B'33rdStrec1 .. w NY 11132
4. Bill DeBlasio of4421Hh NY 11215
Walter Cooper 150 West 96th #20: --New NY 10025
6. Keith L.T. \\'right of2225 FJfih Avenue ... New York, NY 10037
7. Christine C. Quinn of263 York,J\1),. 10001
8: \Villi;;tm Tbom.psonoflO(j Wt;!st l21stSireef-- NewYQt'kt NY 10027
9. Scott Sbinger ofl55 West7lstStreet, #3A .-..New NY 10023
ElnUy Giske of440 West24th Street-.. NewYorktNY 10014
u. Ann Matie Anzal()ue 2827 48th Street .... Astorht, NY 1: 1l03
l2. Archie Spigner of 1 1210 nsa1 Street- NY ll433
13. George:Grcsitant_ B1'onx, NYl0466
14 .. Ru bet:t Ji; of 820 Boyton A -- NY .1 0473
15 .. Ken Jenkins 108.BusheyAvenue .... NY 10710
16. Marl() CUe11to NY 10962
11. Ger:dd D;. ort135 New SootlandRoad -- Albany. NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street --ButTaiq,NY 14208-
19. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Rochste1', }:IY L46 tO
20 .. Joseph 14609
2 r. Scott r\;dams:ofl i .p.oplar Avenue -- Orchard Park, NY 1.4127
22. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside NY 13224
23. Steve Bellone 107VfU1derbiJtAvenue -- NY 11704
24. Irene Stein lt;ll Drive-- }.ry 14850
Shc!ila Coma.r 29 Depot Street - Middle Granvilie, NY 12849;
26. Kirsten '\ith DC Office 478 Russell WashingtontDC 20510
Sworn to before me
This lk:_ day ofNoveniber 2012
CMI RRNo 70121tH00006874974i
CM/ RR No 701210,1000068749819
CMJ RR No 70 t:il 0 t 000068749758
CM)RR. No 7012101000068749765
CM1 RR No'70l210l000068749956
CM /RR No 7012J OJ 000068749826
CM /RR No 7012101()000687498:33
CM/ RR No 7012I01000068749840
CMJRRNo 7Q12l01000068749857
CM I RR.No 7012.101000068749864
CM/ 701210l00006874990l
CM l RR No 7012101 QPOQ()8750242
crvr /RR No 1012 t0l()00068749963
CM i ltR :No 70121 01000068749196
crvr IRR No 70l2tOl000068749949
CM l RR No.70l2101 000068749895
CM I RR No 7012101000068749970
CM /RR No 7012101000068749802
CM I RR No 7012101000068749772
CMIAA.Nt> 7012101000.068749789
CM/ RitNo 1Pl210f00006874-9..871
CM lRR No 70I210l000068749,888
CM/RRNo7012101000068749918
CMIRRNo 10t21 01000068749925
CM I RR No 7012101000068749.932


,' ./
.. \Villian1 Vau Allen
- _
NOTARY PUBL:ICT, STATE,: OF NEW YORK
, NO. 01MA6095585 .
OUALtFIED iN 'ULSTER COUNTY/. t;;
COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 14. 20_-__
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 94 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
- be-neficiary
P E ~ I ~ I O - N FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit D
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 95 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
!]'
(-41
ft1r Oefendant{s)
-& Address:
NOTE OF ISSUE
-- ;:., OF ACTION OR: SPECIAL. PR:OCESOUtO
orott 0 Mot;ar vehicle negligence
D malpractice
c Meitcrt - --- -

ro""i.!;
..;._,
;1011
Iii"
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 96 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
OP READJNESS fOR TRIAL
(11emal7 Dl.Uit be
N.
-
"


' .
BiB af,partic.ulats -*---................................. ;o-
v
. lk$.i*II"M
6 .. m adl.oDJ .(12 .... ,..-....... .. --

......
7. Dbet!<very
s., "l.lrere am requests.Jor
9. Tb:ere bas beeu. a re:a$otu\ble opponwdty to oomplem 'the ..
There has.heen: with any issued t4l .th.e .Rules
1-l.lf. ..
12. 'lheeue m readl, t.'riat. . :. .
o.ik .... ....
.atttr amdl that & ll!ot
t9 thetiM-.1con il'lc {We: 18 e-f age mi at
on the ur of . .
. the within :rmte o;.f a&ue: .mtt of_
taditOeM em
fatt

!: duri!lg the f:mm $aid m1i= , ,
(a,} by then ad- 1 ... 1).& We BAUUJ ll\it.)J
8 .. .-. . . . . . .. :
I
a :in a meeU-ed direetml m Hid ..
1. _ tbe drop !Dr box.
t. . .., ......... .
. mmtoM()mtnb.tm.
. . . ..
_
. t"fAl*L
:em, atlct _mat. dqo:omt
pmiy . tlp.au id. at
-
Titat 01*. the " . .... .. ' . . f"'L..
=med tho: trllf.bi;ar ol. lli
zeed.hmaor;; . . . , . , . . .. .

d .
. t11e addHu :tu by
. a uve ume mel,_. U\ ;a
1iitder
dur entorlJ" of the United Sl*tu "P<nUt Sew
ice withm Nfif York ..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 97 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281 Brooklyn New York 11238
Petitioner,
-against-
Hakeem Jeffries , Grace Meng, Felix Ortiz, Bill DeBlasio,
Walter Cooper, Keith L.T. Wright, Christine C. Quinn,
\Villiam Thompson, Scott Stringer, Emily Giske,
Anne Marie.Anzalone, Archie Spigner, George Gresham,
Ruben Diaz, Jr.; Ken Jenkins; Mario Cilento;
Gerald D. Jennings; Byron Brown ; Robert Duffy;
Joseph Morelle; Scott Adams ; Stephanie Miner; Steve Bellone;
Irene Stein; Sheila Comar; and Kirsten Gillibrand
Respondents.

STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Index No.: 21948 I 2012
Filed November 14, 2012
PETITIONER'S
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
NOTE OF ISSUE WITH
CERTIFICATE OF READINESS
FOR TRIAL OF ISSUES AND
FOR PARTIAL SEVERANCE
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
To: Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C. Part 1,
Hon. Arthur M. Schack J.S.C. Part 27,
1. This is Petitioner's in support ofhis note of issue and certificate of readiness by CPLR 3402
for a trial of issues by December 14, 2012 with partial severance for the benefit of captioned Respondent
electors ofthe New York State Legislature's Electoral College and members of Congress before the deadline
to vote by December 17, 2012, and after January 3, 2013 for candidates for the office ofPresident ofthe
United States, and that whether by casting a vote for Barack Obama each may be charged with the crime of
accessory after the fact of a felony committed on or about 25 April 2011 by persons as yet named, aided and
abetted by White House Counsel Bob Bauer, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney and Barack Obama who
during the 27 April2012 White House Press Conference, see the transcript evidenceherein (see Exhibit 1),
expressly presented a forged instrument to the People of the United States, a crime c01npounded by spoliation,
concealment, perjury, tampering with the public record, intimidation of witnesses and other crimes.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's Affidavit in support of Note of Issue Page 1 of J
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 98 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
TRIAL OF THE FACTS
2. That Petitioner requires a trial of the facts of a crime before December 17, 2012 essential for the
proper execution of the Electoral College vote, say on December 13, 2012, and at which Petitioner will bring
only one expert witness for testimopy by Typographer Graphics Expert Paul Edward Irey from Delray Beach
Florida .to testify solely as to the nature of the forgery referenced above without determination of who the
perpetrators are per se, as that is a criminal matter for authorities with jurisdiction.
3. That expert testimony by Paul Edward Irey is based upon the Affidavit with Exhibits A through D
affinned December 4, 2012, and herewith (see Exhibit 2) that is res ipso loquitur.
4. Petitioner contends that the body of the crime complained of has been brought to the attention of
Respondents and various district attorneys with authority and jurisdiction to further investigate, and that the
testimony deals with the fact that in 1961, well before computers or such other technologies that tnay be in use
today; that ANY-birth certificate papetworkwas done either by-hand ana or onfon.ris designed for use with the
mechanical typewriter technology that was then widely used, rendering a forgery detectible; and that testimony
presents the proof of forgery in the context of then mechanical technology in use, and also to prove the forged
instrument is of current manufacturer, that the forgers use of tlie Unsharp Mask software by Adobe to create a
Halo around lettering thus also sets the chain of custody of the forgery along with where it was manufactured.
5. That Respondent public officers as if Elector Public Officers and private US Citizens have duty as to
matters of law and facts and when in violation of law must be held accountable or would infringe the trust due
the People of New York as similarly to Petitioner's right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom
and Liberty, any elelctor who would commit a crhnne by adiding and abbetting a felony is incompatibkle. as to
New York State law as applies to the public officer oath, duties and obligation with use of NYS Civil Service
Law 1 05A and is to be barred as a person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States.
6. That it is a well-settled cmnmon law rule that a public officer cannot hold two incompatible offices
simultaneously (Matter of Smith v Dillon, 267 App. Div. 39,43 [1943]). This rule seeks to prevent offices of
public trust from accumulating in a single individual. Two offices are incompatible if one is subordinate to the
other or there is an inherent inconsistency between the two offices (see People ex rei. Ryan v Green, 58 NY
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's Affidavit in support ofNote of Issue Page 2 of3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 99 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
. Struak v Jeffries et al. Article 78. NYSSC for Kings Couuty Index No .. : .21948 ... 2012
[t814]f o:Malley v Macej'ka; 4.4 NYU 530,535 (19781; Mmt.- ofDupms v County ofClin.to14
213 AD2d 952,953- [1995];, Matter of Dykeman vS)mJonds, 54 ADld 159, 162 Fttuclv 38 Mise\<
2d 56.4.)15.61 19 AD2d 777 [1963)).
7. That dual office holders that have an .,bas been said to exiJt when. there is a buitt .. m
dgb.t of the balder of one position. to interfere with that of the .. u (0 44 NYld at S3S) ... Where
one person &aida beth such. posts thea ,.the a cheek onthe other would t.. .
I. The-trial of the issues a& a matter of mte.rest is brought by the Article 78 petition filed
. November 14 2012 that was served u.poD the Ne:w YOlk State .SitctDf'al Cllfe
bodyby certified mail with a return. receipt flqllfit on November 14. 2012 md .fken 'by regular mail
on November 30, 2012 (see Ea;hibit and that the Issues were joined by the purchase of a lUI on
16, 1012 (see Bxblbit 4) and of Petitioner and the New York smm; attomey geuml
offiee,,s As&istaut AUOmq General Joibua.P Lltjjation Bu;reau before the 'David I. SChmidt
- .
who for.reuoBJ aplah:ts m hi$ or<Jer(see EDib.iii) to li8n the order to show
application, ad tlmt thea ca.Novem:'ber 30) 2012 wbh doe DGtioe give to
the aon .. ArtburM. SChack forreoomddemtionpeu.ding ..see ..
WllerdO"'Petitioner widls the Com tO appJlicatioa for a trial of the facts to serre the
Etectbm with thl foots that so to dle Pedliqn ibrN!WmchldiD& dedamtoryjuttsments pamal!ysevered 1hlt
depmd upmt thi& mat and expmtestimony, ad along: with other and diflerent relief for justice bereill; as the
ame i$ kUC to my except 18. tod:ac matters theteio stated to he aDeg:ed
belief: and as to those mattert l believe it to be.tme. The grounds. of'my beliefs 1$: to all tr:t1tte11 Ml$tamd upon
itdbnnationad belief are ut.Uows: lnt pmies,. 1Joob and and pemonat kn ge.
Swom to heloreme
!Ws day of December 2012
Christopher.wBad: Stnmk's m support ofNote oflssue Page 3 of3
. '
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 100 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index 1 ~ o . : 21948-2012
_Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue
Exhibit 1
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 101 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
of IS
What was really dorrinating a lot of discussion was lhis fake controversy, essentially, a sideshow, lhat was
distracting fromlhis real issue. hid an example of that would be when major Democrats and Republicans went onto
mainstreamnews organizations to talk about" their budget plans Including the President they were asl:ed about
this. They were asked about what they thought about the They were asked if they believed the
President was born in the United Slates. Jlnd it was really a distraction.
That really struck lhe President, led himto ask his counsel to look into we could ask the state of Hawaii
to release the long-formcertificate. which is not something they generally do. Jlnd he did that despite the fact that it
probably was not in his long-term- it would have been in his - probably In his long-termpolitical interests to allow
1his birther debate to dominate discussion in the Republlcan Party for months to come. But he thought even though
a rright have been good politics, he thought it was bad for the country. And so he asked counsel to look into this.
Jlnd now Ill have Bob explain that. and then we'll take your questions.
MR. CARNEY: I just want to - sorry, I meant to mention at the top, as some of you rmy have seen, the
President will be earring to the briefing roomat 9:45 am, rmking a brief statement about this -- not taking
questions, but just wanted to let you know.
MR. PFEIFFER: hid he will use this as an opportunity to make a larger point about what this debate says about
ourpofltics.
Go ahead, Bob.
MR. BAUER: Early last weeklhe decision was made to review lhe legal basis for seeking a waiver fromthe
longstanding prohibition in the state Department of Health on releasing the long-formbirth certificate. And so we
undertook a legal analysis and detemined a waiver request could be rmdethat we had the grounds upon which to
rmke that request
Jlnd by Thursday of last week, I spoke to private counsel to the President and asked her to contact the State
Department of Health and to have a conversation about any requirements, further requirements, that they thought
we had to satisfy to lodge that waiver request She had that conversation with the state Department of Health on
Thursday - counsel in question Is Judy Corley at the law firmof Perkins Cole, and you have a copy of the letter she
subsequentiy sent to the deparlrrent with lhe Presldems written request
The department ouUined the requirements for the President to make !his request. He signed a leHer making that
request on Friday afternoon upon returning fromthe West Coast. And private counsel forwarded his written request
-written, signed request - along with a letter fromcounsel, to the state Department of Health on Friday.
------e--- t -----"-"l''"''''c-t:-c"' !-''"'' , . ..,_,,.,,._,_, J".' ......... ,
Home B1ie!,{i1lf,l Rnom Briefings
The WhHe House
Office of lhe Press Secrelary
For lrrmediate Release April27, 2011
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
8:48AM. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Good moming, everybody. You can read the paperwork we just handed out in a ninute. Let me
just get siarted. Thank you for coming this morning. I have with me today Dan Pteifler, the President's Director of
Co111ru11ications.as well as Bob Bauer, the President's White House Counsel, who will have a fewthings to say
about the documents we handed to you today. Jlnd then we11 take your questions. I rerrind you this is off camera
and only pen and pad. not for audio. And I give you Dan Pfeiffer.
MR. PFEIFFER: Thanks, Jay. What you have in front of you nowis a packet of papers that includes.the
Presideni's long-formbirth certificate fromthe state of Hawaii, the original birth certillcate that the President
requested and we posted online in 2008. and then the correspondence between the President's counsel and the
Hawaii Slate Department ol Health that led to the release of those documents.
Hyou would just give me a l)inute to - indulge me a second to walk through a IHtle of the history here, since all
of you weren't around in 2008 when we originally released the President's birth certilicate, I will do that. And then
Bob Bauer will walk through the timeiine ol how we acquired thesedocuments.
In 2008, in response to mediainquiries, the President's campaign requested his birth certificate !romthe state of
GH Hm:nl tlpdiltl"s i ("ontact Us
Search WhileHouse.gov
2012 UNION
BLOG POSTS ON .THIS ISSUE
March11.20128:04PMEDT
Call "ith !'resident Ka r7.ai Following the
Report of Afghan Ci'ilian CasUillties
civilians.
March n. 2012 9:00AMEDT
President Obama reached
out to President Karzai
Sunday following the
reported killing and
sounding of !'lghan
From the Archives: Tsunami in Japan
3/11/20f2 11:00 PM. II ofiS 3/11/2012 11:00 Plvi
're.<S Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27120TITTiiC White House PfessGaggle by Pre.-. Secretary Jay Carney, 4/271201 I I The White How;e hllp://www.whilebow;e.gov/tbe-press-ollice/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-came_
ofl5
The department as I understood H, after reviewing the lawand reviewing the grounds asserted in the request,
came to the condusion that a waiver could be appropriately granted. We were advised that the long-fom1 birth
certificate could be copied and made available to us as early as Monday, April 25th - the day belore yesterday. Jlnd
we rmde arrangements tor counsel to travel to Honolulu to pick it up and n was retumed to the White House
yesterday aftemoon.
Let me eiTJlhasize again, there is a specific statute that govems access to and inspection of vital records In the
state of Hawaii. The birth certificate that we posted online is, in fact, and always has been, and remains, the legal
birth certirocate of the Preside?! that would be used for all legal purposes that any reside?! of Hawaii would want to
use a birth certificate lor.
However, there is legal authority in the department to make exceptions to the general policy on not releasing the
long-formbirth certificate. The policy in question, by the way, on non-release has been In effect since tho
rrid-1980s. I understand. So while f cannot tell you what the entire history of exceptions has been. tt Is a llrrited
one. This is one of very few that I understand have been granted for the reasons set out in private counsel's leHer.
MR. PFEIFFER: We11 be happy to take some questions.
a f guess I just want to make sure that we're clear on this. Even though lhis one says "certificate ol live birth"
on here, this is dilferemthan the other certificate of livebirth that we've seen?
MR. PFEFFER: Yes. The second page there Is the one that was posted on the l'ltemeL
a okay.
MR. PFEIFFER: And that Is a copy .olthe one that has been kept at the Hawaii Department of Heallh.
a Okay. hid this is the one that would be referred to -that people havebeen asking for that is the birth
certificate?
MR. PFEIFFER: They are bolh- the second one is the birth certificate. The on.e on the top is what is referred
to as the long-lormbirth certificate. As you can see - and Bob can walk you through it -It contains Sllm3 additional
information lhat is not on the second page, which was lhe birth certificate which was released during the carrpaign.
Hyou could just explain the d'11ference.
3/11/201211:00 Pt< of IS
Hawaii. We received that document; we posled Hon the website. That document was then inspected by
independent !act checkers, who came to the campaign headquarters and inspected the document - independent
fact che4kers d'1d, and declared thai it was proof positive that the President was bamin Hawaii.
To be clear, the document we presemed on the President's website in 2006 is his birth certilicate. tt Is the piece
of paper 'that every Hawaiian receives when they contact the state to request a birth certificate. It is the birth
they take to the Department ol Motor Vehides to get their driver's license and that they take to the federal
government to get !hair passport tt Is ihelegally recognized docurnenL
That ess&mially - tor those of you who followed the carrpaign closely knowthat solved the issue. We didnl
spend any time talking about this after that There may have been some very fringe discussion out there. but as a
carrpaigr Issue it was seWed and it was -
a When you posted this did you post the other side of it where the signature is?
MR. PFEIFFER: Yes.
a Because it is not here and that's been an Issue.
MR. PFEIFFER: We posted both sides and when Hwas looked at it was looked at by - the fact checkers carne
to headquarters and actually e>CaJTined the document we had.
That seWed the issue. 1'1 recent weeks, the.lssue has risen again as some folks have begun raising a question
about the original -- about thelong-lormbirth certificate you now have In front of you. Jlnd Bob wm explain why -
the extraordinary steps we had to take to receive that and the legal restraints that are In place there.
But it became an issue. again. And Hwent to - <:>ssentially th.e discussion transcended fromthe nether regions of
the Internet into mainstreampolitical debatein this country. tt became sornething lhal when bolh Republicans and
Dem:lCrl!ts were talking to the mediathey were asked about tt was a constanl discussion on mainstreamnews
Jlnd the President befieved that Hwas becorring a distraction fromlhe major Issues having in
this country.
hid he was particularly struck by the fact that right aHer the Republicans released their budget framework and
the Preside?! released his, we were prepared to have a very importanl, very vigorous debate in this country about
the future of the coumry. the direction we're going to take, how we're doing to d9al with veryill'!)Oitant issues like
education, Medicare, howwe're going to deal with taJces inihis country. And that should --that's the debate.we
should be having yeL
Alook back at the U.S. response to the devastating
earthquake and tsunarri that hit Jilpan in March of
2011.
March 10. 2012 6:30AMEDT
Weekly Address: Investing in a Clean
Energy Future
Speaking from a factory in Virginia, President
Obarna talks about howCOITJlanies are creating
more jobs in the United States. making better
products than ever before, and how many are
developing newtechnologies that are reducing our
dependence on foreign oil and saving farrilies
money at the puiTJl.
vn:wau_ RF:I
Facebook YouTUbe
Twitter Vlmeo
Fllckr !TUnes
Google+ Unkadln
3/11/2012 11:00 p:
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 102 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
of IS
MR. PFEIFFER: There will always be sorre selection ol people who will believe sorrething, and that's not the
issue. The issue is that this is not a discussion that is just happening arrong conspiracy theorists. tt's happening
here in this room; it's happening on all of the networks. And it's sorrelhing that, as I said, every O"ajor political figure
of both parties who's actually out trying to lalk about real issues is asked about this by the rredia. And so the
President decided to release this. hld nt leave it to others to decide whether there's still - there will be sorre who
Still have a diHerent - have a conspiracy about this.
a . You've got two certilied copies, according to this study. You have these physical --
MR. PFEIFFER: Yes. I showed you one. Just one.
a You showed us a photocopy ol one.
MR. PFEIFFER: No, I showed you --
Q Does that have a starrp?
MR. PFEIFFER: H has a seal on it.
Q Why does this rise to the level of a presidential staterrent(
MR. PFEIFFER: The President-- this in itself- when you hear the President I think you'll understand the point
he's rraking. That will be in not too long.
Q Did the President change his own rrind about this? In other words, was he advocating during U1e caJl1lQign
let's just put It out there get it over with, or wa!i this an Internal shift in thinking based --In other woods, was It
the President who steadfasUy during the C311lJalgn said this is ridiculous, I donl want to give this any mJre ground,
and has now changed his l)'ind? Or is this the -
MR. PFEIFFER: Let's be very clear. You were there for the campaign. There was never a question about the
original birth certificaJe during the caJl1lQign. ft was a settled issue. I was there for the original decision to release
the birth certlncate. I was there when we posted it online. rmnot sure I even knewthere was an original one that
was diRerent than the one we posted online because it wasn't an issue. So it wasn't like -let's be very clear. We
were asked lor the President's birth certificate In 2008; we released the President's birth certificate; and it was
done. That was iL
3/1112012 11:00 Plvi
rress Gaggle by Press Secreoary Jay Carney, 4/27/20 II I The White House hup://www.whitehouse.gov/lhc-press-ollice/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-came ..
ofl5
hld so there hasn't been a discussion about this other docurrentlor years. H's only been in the last lewweeks.
hld so to your second question, the President decided to do this and hell talk about this when he gets here -
decided to do it at the tirreline that Bob laid out because it was a -- this was a sideshow that was distracting from
the real challenges that we're lacing.
H's not just a sideshowlor him; it's a sideshow for our entire politics that have become focused on this.
Q Not to give Donald Trulfll more publicity than he has, but is he the person who sort of - sort of lhat bridge
between what you're calling a fringe and the mainstream? Do you think that he's the reason why this tripped the
switch to a level where you nowhave to deal with something you thought was dealt with?
MR. PFEIFFER: H's not for me to say why mainstreammedia organizations began to cover this debate. They'll
have to answer that for themselves.
Q How concerned were you about running against Donald Trulfll in a general election?
MR. PFEIFFER: fd refer any questions on the election to the calfllaign.
Q Can you address the reports of Petraeus to the CIAand DOD--
MR. PFEIFFER: You get points for that, Carol. (Laughter.)
MR. CI'RNEY: Yes. I don\ have -but you'll be disappointed to learn that I don\ have a personnel
anilouncerrent for you. The President wiD be addressing this - questions about personnel torrorrow.
a Dan, was there a debate about whether or not this deserved being discussed by the White House, whether
or not- and fmgoing back to the birth certifiCale. I lose points, I understand. But was there debate about whether
or not this was worthy of the White House?
MR. PFEIFFER: The point ld make is that we weren't the ones who- not the first ones to bring this up in
this room. Jay has been asked questions about this; the President has been asked about in R-edia interviews.
hld so that wasn't a decision that we made, and the President made the decision to do this and he made the
decision to-- and when he c01119s down here this morning talk to you about why he thinks there's an important
point to be O"ade here.
Q Gelling back to the personnel announcerrents, does the President understand that these announcerrents
have been made and sourced satislactorily lor rrost news organizations belore he speaks up and he's not letting his
3/11/2012 11:00 Plvl
of IS
Mt;l. BAUER: There's a difference between a certificate and a certilication. The certilication is simply a
verilicl!tion ol certain inlom1ation that's in the original birth certiliCale. The birth certificate, as you can see, has
signatures at the bottomlromthe attending physician, the local registrar, .who essentially oversees the maintenance
ol the records. tt contains sorre additional infom1ation also - that is to say, the original birth certificate - it contains
some informalion like the ages of the parents. birthplaces. residence. street address, the name of the
hospitill.
The core inlom1ation that's required lor legal purposes and that is put into the actual certification that's a
document, which we posted in 2008, that infomlation is abstracted, il you will, fromthe original
birth certificate, put into the computerized short-formcertification, and made available to. Hawaiian residents at their

So the long form, which is a certific.ate, has more inlorO"ation, but the short form tJas the inlorrnation that's legally
for all the relevant purposes.
Q . This first one has never been released publicly, correct?
MR. BAUER: That's correct His in a bound volume in the records at the state Departrrent ol Health in Hawaii.
Q , Bob, can you explain why President Obarna let this drag on for lour years? Was it Donald Trump that
prolfllted you to Issue this?
MR. BAUER: I'R let Dan -
MR. PFEIFFER: Sure.
Q I know you expected that question, right? (Laughter.)
MR. PFEIFFER: He even said you would be the one who would ask it. (Laughter.)
I don't think this dragged on for lour years because this was a resolved-- for those of you who rerrerrber the
calfllalgn, this issuewas resolved in 2008. And it has not been an issue, none ol you have asked about called
about it, reported on ft until the.last lew weeks.
hld as I said eariier, it probably would have been -- a lot of the pundits out there have talked about the fact that
this whole birther debate has been really bad for the Republican Party and would probably be good lor the
President politically. But despite that, the President, as I said, was struck by howthis was crowding out the debate,
3/11/2012 11:00 P:
'ress Goggle by Press Secretary Joy Carney, 4/27/20TII The White House http://www.wliitehool'e.gov/lhe-press-offiCel20il/04127/press-gaggle-preS.<-secreoary-jay-came..
oft5
particularly around the budget, on ilfllOrtant issues, and was an exalfllle ol the sort ol sideshows that our
focuses on instead of the real challenges that we have to conlront as a country.
hld so that's why he O"ade this decision now, because it became an issue that transcended sort of this - it
essentially was something that was talked about, as I sald, from the nether regions olthe Internet onto mainstream
network newscasts. In fact, Jay has been asked about this just yesterday in this room.
Q So I guess the Implication is that you did get political advantage by having not released this until today, over
the course of the last four years?
MR. PFEIFFER: There has been- no one that I can recall actually asked us to-- we were asked to release the
President's birth certificate in 2008. We did !haL hld then no one - it never - up until a lew weeks ago, there was
never an issue about that that wasn't the birth certilicate fromany credible individual or media ouUet. hld it hasn't
been until - I mean, Jay was asked about this yesterday --
Q When you say that, you mean certification - you released the certifocation?
MR. PFEIFFER: When any Hawaiian wants -requests their bii'th certificate because they want to get a driver's
license, they want to get a passport, they do exacUy what the President did in 2008. And that's what that is. And we
released !haL And that's what any Hawaiian would do to release their birth certificate. hld that was good enough
for eveo;yone until very recently this became a question again. And so the President O"ade this decision. He'll talk to
you rrore about his thinking on thaL
Q And this is going to sound - I mean, you can just anticipate what people are going to -- remain
unconvjnced. They're going to say that this is justa photocopy of a piece of paper, you could have typed anything
in there. Will the actual certificate be on d'osplay or viewable at any -(laughter.)
Q Will the President be holding it?
MR. PFEIFFER: He will not, and twill not leave ft here lorhimtodoso. ButitwHI--the State Department of
Health in Hawaii wiD obviously attest thai that is a - what they have on lile. As Bob said, it's in a book in Hawaii.
MR. BAUER: And you'll see the letter fromthe director of the Health Department that states that sheoversaw
the copy and is attesting to -
Q lBut do you understand that this could quiet the conspiracy theorists?
3/11/2012 11:00 I'M
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 103 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
II ofl5
MR. CARNEY: I donl have anything for you on that this morning.
Q Just quickly, back on the birth certificate, yesterday you said this was a settled issue. So -
MR. CAANEY: wen, as Dan said, again, it has been a settled issue.
MR. PFEIFFER: Froma factual point of view, it's absolutely a seHled issue. But the fact that n was a seHled
issue did not keep frombecorring a major part of the political discussion in this town for the last several weeks
here. So there's absolutely no question that what the President released in 2008 was his birth certificate and
answered that question, and many of your organizations have done e>Cellent reporting which proved that to be the
case. But it continued; the President thought it was a sideshow and chose to take this step today for the reasons
.
Q Aside from.the policy distractions that was presented, did you have some concern because it was sort of
reaching back into the mainstreamnews coverage that this could become a factor in the 2012 election with centrist
voters?
MR. PFEIFFER: No.
Q Just to darify what this document is
MR. PFEIFFER: This is the- the letter lirst and the two certified copies-- this is one of those. This Is the same
thing you have a copy of as the first page of your packet.
Q Howdiditgethere?
MR. PFEIFFER: As Bob said, n arrived by plane -the President's personal counsel went to Hawaii and brought
n back and we got it last night.
Q Last night?
MR. PFEIFFER: Last night.
Q Whattime?
MR. PFEIFFER: Between 4:00p.m. and 5:00p.m.
311112012 11:00 Pl\1
'ress Gaggle by Pre."' Secrelary Jay Carney, 4127/2011 I The White House http://www.whiteho1L'ie.gov/lbe-press-ol!icef201 1/04127/press-gaggle-press-secrelnrY=Jay-carne..
,l2ofl5
Q When did you decide to do this gaggle?
MR. PFEIFFER: What's that?
Q When was this gaggle put on - when was this planned?
MR. PFEIFFER: Whatever time you received your guidance suggesting that Uwould be "this time tomorrow
morning."
Q Pie these tellers supposed to demonstrate the legal steps that were involved in releasing it to theWhite
House counsel?
MR. BAUER: The letters that you have, the personal request fromthe President, along with the accompanying
letter fromprivate counsel, is merely meant to document the legal path to getting the waiver of that policy so we
could get the long-formcertificate.
Q The waiver of Hawaii state government policy?
MR. BAUER: RighL The non-release of the tong-formcertificate, which has been in effect since the 1980s -- a
natural question would have been, well, what did you do to obtain the waiver, and those letters represent the
requesL
Q Well, isn't it true that anybody who was born in t:tawaii can write this letter? I mean, that's all there is to the
waiver process?
MR. BAUER: No. Let me just el<plain once again because I also noticed, by the way. in one report already the
wrong certificate was actually posted on the website. The certificate with U1e signatures at the bottom- and that's a
key difference between the short formand the long form- the long formhas signatures at the bottomfromthe
attending physician, the local registrar, and the mother, is the original birth certificate, which sils in a bound volume
in the State Department of Health.
The short fromis a computerized abstract, and that's the legal birth certiHcate we requested in 2008 and that
Hawaiians are entitled to. Since the mid-1980s, the State Department of Health, for administrative reasons, only
provides to people who request their birth certificate the short form. They do not provide the,long form.
So in order for us to obtain the long form, we had to have a waiver. We had to actually deterrrine that there was
311112012 11:00 PI<
of15
White House corroborate?
MR. CARNEY: I don' have a comment on that for you, Bill. (laughter.)
Q I mean, this is such BS. It's all out there and you guys are - okay, the President is going to talk about this
tomcrrcw so we canl say anything.
MR. CARNEY: Bill, you're free to make phone calls everywhere you can. rmjust saying lhat we don't have a
personnljl announcement lor you today.
Q Mel hell tomorrow, hell cover all the aforementioned sWitches?
MR. CARNEY: We11 have a personnel announcement tomcrrow.
Q J.ay, yesterday you talked about failsafe triggers as sort of a positive alternative to spending cuts. rm
wondering if lhe WMe House has any openness to including that, because U's a-White House proposal, including
that in any legislation that would raise the debt ceiling lirriL
MR. CARNEY: Well, what we've said very clearly, and I think Secretary Geithner said it eloquently yesterday, it
is a dangerous, risky idea to hold hostage any other- hold hostage, rather, raising the debt ceifing, a vote on
raising the debt ceiling, to any other piece of legislation. The comrritment this President has to moving aggressively
towards a comprehensive deficit reduction plan is clear. l will be clear again when the President convenes a
meeting, bipartisan, bicameral meeting, next week. And he hopes that progress will be made on that very quickly.
In terms of negotiating what that would lock like, I think the negotiators Shi?<Jid do that, led by the Vice President,
Republicans and Democrats together. But again, expliciUy linking or holding hostage the absolute of
raising tlje debt ceiling to any other piece of legislation and declaring that welt tank the U.S. economy and perhaps
the globli! economy if we don't get this specific thing that we want, I think is a dangerous and unprecedented thing to
do.
And we're confident, remain confident, that the leaders of both parties in Congress, as well as the President, will
agree wiih the PresidenL as I have said many times, that we do not have an alternative to raising the debt ceiling
because1 as many have said, outside observers, econorrists and businessmen and women, the impact of that would
be calarritous at besL
Q !1<> even though irs your own proposal that you guys endorsed you don' want to see it as part of the final
3/1112012 11:00 P.
f'ress Gaggle by Press Secretiiy Jay Carney, 4/27120ilTThe WhiteHouse hUp:ffwww.whitehoiL'ie.gov/lhe-press-ol!icef2011/04127/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-came..
Oofl5
package?
I
MR. CARNEY: rmnot negotiating individual pieces of a package that we hope Republicans and Democrats can
come tedether around fromthis podium. But again. we believe it's essential to -the President believes - that's one
of the reasons why we're doing this right new - we believe that these are big that need to be had. They
can be 09ntentious, argumentative, serious, comprehensive, detailed, because they're important; they're all about
Plnerica'$ future. And they're about visions of this country and where we're going that need to be debated. And this
debate was being crowded out in many ways by a sideshow.
And looks forward to having a debate on the real issuesthat Plnericans want us to talk about -long-term
econorrib plans, defiCit reduction, investments in the kinds of things that win help this economy growand create
jobs, dealing with our energy needS, a long-termenergy plan. These are all issues that have been sidetracked at
least in the public debate by some of the issues that we're talking about this morning.
Q Is !here a concern that more and more people were actually starling to believe ils sideshow -- I mean,
people been asking about -
MR. CARNEY: I will let the President speak for himself, but what Dan was saying and I think is important isthat
the here is that the President feels that this was bad for the country; that it's not healthy for our political
debate; when we have so many Important issues that Plnericans care about, that affect their lives, to be drawn into
sideshows about lallacies that have been disproven with the full weight of a legal document for several years.
So, again, as Dan said, and a lot of political puncfliS have said, you could say that n would be good politics,
smart politics, -tor the President to let this play ouL He cares more about what's gocd for the country. He wants the
debate on the Issues. He wants the focus on the that Plnericans care abouL
Q jay, the President yesterday said that he had been talking to oil el<perters about increasing output. Who
specifically has he been talking -
MR. CARNEY: Well,l said -I want to clarity. I said several times I believe tromthis podiumwhen asked
questions about our overall handling of the issue of high gas prices that we've had conversations with oil-producing
states !ll!d allies and those conversations continue. I don't have specific "the President spoke with this leader or
other government officials spoke with others; but those are ongoing conversations that, of course, we would be
having in a situation like this.
Q f?o you guys have any comment on the NATOsoldiers that were killed in Afghanistan and any confirmation
on there were Plnericans?
3/111201211:00 PN
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 104 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
""',"' V] I lii:O;:,;\ ,;n,;,o...lc;l.o.U)' .lolJ l I IOC WilllC l10USC ..
113 ofl5
I
a legal basis for providing it. and then ask themto exercise their authority to provide us with the long form. The
steps required to that were a letter fromthe person with the direct and vital interest- the President- so
you have a letter fromthe President. and then there was an letter fromcounsel basically formalizing
the request. So the reason we included that is that those were legal steps we took to obtain the long form by way of
. thiswaiver.
Q , Do we have the letter rrom the President -
MR. BAUER: h's in the packet.
a And you went to Hawaii?
MR. BAUER: I did not go to Hawaii. The counsel, Judy who signe:l the- the President's personal
counst\1 at Perkins Coie, Judy Corley, whose letter - signed letter of request is in your packet, traveled to Honolulu
and picked up the birth certificate.
a , Aquestion on the situation regarding the Defense of Marriage,Act. Yesterday Attorney General Eric Holder
rejected attacks on Paul Clement, who is taking up defense of the statute on behalf otthe U.S. House. Paul
Clement has taken a lot of heat fromthe LGBT community tor volunteering to take up defense of DOMA. Eric
Holde< said, 'Paul Clement is a great lawyer and has done a lot of really great things for this nation. In taking on the
representation - representing Congress in connection with DOMA. f think he is doing that which lawyers do when
we're at our best. That criticismf think was very msplaced." And Holder went on to COITpate the criticismof
Clement to attacks on the Justice Department lawyers for their past for detainees at Guantanarno Bay. Does the
President share Eric Holder's views on this?
MF!. CARNEY: We do share Eric Holder's views on this. We think - as we said fromthe beginning when we
talked about - when I did fromthis podium- about the decision no longer fromthe admnistration to defend the
Defense of Maniage Act. that we would support efforts by Congress if they so chose to defend it. And so f have
nothing to ad<;! to the Attorney General's comments.
a Following Monday's Af-Pak Situation Roommeeting, what is the President's assessment of the sttuation in
Afghanistan and Pakistan? And does he think that July drawdown is still on?
MR. CARNEY: The P.esident's policy, which included the beginning of a transition -- beginning of a dmwdown
of American troops, is absolutely still on track. t don't have anything additionally fromthe meeting yesterday beyond
what we've said. But the policy remains as n was.
3/JI/2012 11:00 P.
'ress U:iggle by Press Secrerary Jay Carney, 4/27/201 I I TI-e White House liiiji://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-ofiice/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secrerary-jay-came..
l14ofl5
MR. EARNEST: Jay, we should wmp it up here.
MR. CARNEY: Yes. Last one, yes.
a Given the comments of the Pakistani official quoted in the Wall Street Journal. is Pakistan still a U.S. ally,
and to what extenl?
MF!. CARNEY: Pakistan is still a U.S. ally.
Thanks.
END 9:18A.M. EDT
3/11/2012 11:00 Pill
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 105 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue
Exhibit 2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 106 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVlT
STATE OF FLORIDA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH )
I, Paul Edward lrey, being duly sworn, depose and say underpenalty of
perjury:
1 .. I am over the age of 18 years old, am a resident of Florida located
at Delray Beach and have been previously accepted by the courts as an
expert witness and have testified as such expert to the information
contained in this affidavit is based on my personal knowledge and,
if called as a witness, I could testify completely thereto.
2. I have 57 years experie-nce in --graphics. first in serving with the U ~ S . Air
Force being trained as a clerk typist, two of those years with the
National Security Agency for which I had a Top Secret security
clearance_during the years 1957 and 1958.
3. Following that I was employed in Manhattan, New York on the art
staff of the Hearst trade journal American Druggist I was employed at
various advertising agencies in Manhattan-until 1968 when I started
my own business in Ft. Lee, New Jersey named Bergen Graphics.
4. By the mid seventies I employed 60 people as graphic artists, typesetters,
camera and darkroom workers doing pre-press services for major retail
and printing firms in the New York city area such as Montgomery Ward
Catalogs and weekly newspaper ads nationwide, Acme markets
newspaper ads for the entire supermarket chain in the northeast, Hearst
Blue Book Auto Repair manuals, Key Food Stores of New York and Long
Page 1
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 107 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Island, Diana. stores, Great Eastern Stores, Finest Supermarkets, Hills
Supermarkets, Grand Union Supermarkets, etc.
5. In addition to overall knowledge of typography, Photography, four-color
stripping and all facets of film preparati.on for offset printing, I have 26
years experience in desktop publishing with Macintosh Computers since
their inception and have used Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator on a
daily basis since their inceptions in 1987 and 1989.
6. The first Exhibit "A" annexed herewith i s ~ page from a recent issue of
my latest graphic production was published by the t ~ e - Washington Times
weekly edition that contains much of the evidence that I will explain in this
affidavit.
7--. 1--F>FeJ)ared-aAd-wfote-thi-s fufl page -shown-as 6xhi-13it A-my-se-lf-and -attes-t--
that the evidence contained therein is accurate and represents evidence of
forgery of what on 27 April at the Press Conference presentation by
White house Consel Bob Bauert While Press Secretary Jay Carney and
Barack Obama himself allege is Obama's long form birth certificate.
8. The actual document I used for examination of the Obama birth certificate
is described in the following chain of evidence contained in Exhibit "B" ...
page 1 & 2 & 3 anneexed herewith, and
9 .. That shown as Fxhibit "B, page 1 and 2 is the proof of purchase of a 14'' x
16
11
reproduction print from Associated Press through their division called
"Replay Photos" that sells photographic items from their news service and
that shown as Exhibit "B" page 3 is a copy of that page purchased as a
true and accurate copy of what the ASSOCIATED Press acquired from the
White House at the news conference on the morning of 27 April 2011 ~
Page 2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 108 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m

below is an enlarged section of the Qbama long form birth certificate that released online at
whitehouse.gov on 2 7 April 201 L No admission has been made as to who actuall)r scanned and converted this
to an Adobe Acrobat PDF file and posted it on the official \1\'hite House \.Yebsite. It is not kno\Vn if it was
. .
so1neone at the "White House or so1neone at the Honolulu depart1nent of health that had previously provided
two copies of Qbama's birth certificate that were hand-carded from Hawaii to the '1\'hite House.
The hnportant feature_ to observe is that everythingin black is outlined in \hite. This vvill be referred to as
"The \.Vhite Halo".
TheHonolulu dept. of health alleges that the procedure for making copies of birth certificates is totake the
binder '"'here the 'birth certif1cates are stored and open it up to _the one they copy, place it face do\.xrn on an
ordinary copy1uachine and simply copy the docun1ent to green security paper instead ofwhite paper.
Given that this is the normal procedure, I see no reason for the white halo. I have seen many other birth
certifi.cates from Honolulu in the year-and a half that I have spend examining this issue of forgery, and ca11
attest that none of those other birth certificates front HaV\raii had a white halo.
paQe 3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 109 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Paragraph 11
Shown below is what we should haVe seen if the birth certificate original form was
actualy copied tQ the green paper and we would see no vvhite halo. ,'Copiers, ,
do not print white', which is the only way. w,hite cou:ld be anywhere over this
green security paper .. I was:. able to purchase: this special paper on the internet The
green color and hash marks are dye printed through to the other side. In other words
the paper is green on both sides and there .is no white anywhere*
page 4
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 110 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
arag&#aph 12
ro answer the question as to how the white halo happened, I show the a}(ampfe below.
On the left is a copy from the White House release. On the right is my example of a
computer created halo. I have put a white halo on paragraph 11 using the unsharp
mask filter found in Adobe Photoshop. The settings I used
are seen here to the right. As I see it, the forger made the
forgery on a computer, used a scan of the security paper
and included it in the file with the other elements of the
forgery. Then after flattening aU the layers, applied the
unsharp mask filter to sharpen up the soft edges of the type.
The forgers serious mistake was to flatten the layers before
applying the sharpening filter. This filter that I have been.
using for 22 years chokes back the black edges and leaves
around the form type:and rules. There is no other way in
graphics science to create the white halo seen on both
documents below, the forgers and mine._ Proof of forgery.
oaae 5
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 111 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
ParagB"li>h 13
To view a closer and better look at the comparisons shown in paragra,ph 14 of the
deposition, see belo,w stilf showing the PD:F reJeaseti by the White House on the
. . . . . .
left against my own exa:mple of a computer creation of the ha'lo seen on the right.
page 6
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 112 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
The chain of evidence for the white halo is proven with this enJarged s,ecUon of the
Associated 'Press purchased print referred to in Exhibit tlB 1 & 2" that came from the
x,erox co,py made at the White House of one of the two originals sent from the Honolulu
o,ept of Health, according to the description made during the news conference at the
White House ;on 27 April 20 12.. The Wh:ite Hous,e black and wh[te copr,er would have
normally dropped out the green security color background along with the white halo.
However J found that by the background of the A,ssociated :Press copy, we
are still able to see reminents of the white halo a This shows us that the white halo must
also be on' the original sent from the d,epartm,ent of :health in Hono'lu'lu. We now have
new evidence on this issue when a Los Angeles law firm requested that the Honolulu
Q,ept. of Health confirm that what is currantly downloaded from whitehouse .. gov website
is thier document. See the, next paragraph 15 of this affidavit.
page 7
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 113 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Paragra 15
The first picture at the bottom left is a section of the original PDF file released on
whitehouse.gov on 27 April2012. It represents the color appearance we have been
looking at for 1 1/2 years. The middle picture at the bottom center is a section of the
document sent to the attorneys for the Mississippi Democratic Party in Taitz et al v.
Democratic Party of Mississippi 3: 12-cv-00280-HWT -LRA (S.D. Miss.) See
attachment "C". the letter from the registrar of births for the
state of Hawaii, Alvin Onaka.
It is my understanding and belief that Attorney Tepper
requested a confirmation from the director of the Honolulu
Dept. of Lorretta FuddyJ that the PDF file released
on whitehouse. erg on April 27, 2011 came from their office
and Loretta Fuddy passed it on to Alvin o-naka who replied
to T_epper with letter "C". Tepper passed that on to Begley .
. Begley, who is a MS lawyer, filed it with the court, along with
the altered PDF file that we must assume came from Onaka.
The bottom right picture is my example to show the result of
the specific settlngs needed fo match the afteradons seen- in
HUE/SATURATION FILTER
LEVELS FILTER
the center photograph. These are seen in the 3 boxes
at the right that resulted in my own match of Onaka's effort
to change the evidence. My conclusion is that the PFD file
was altered to eliminate the white haJo by actions taken at
the Honolulu DepL of so as to hide the error that ,
proves manipulation by a computer proc$ss not available irt
1961, and otherwise represents proof of
if not
SECTION OF ORIGINAL PDF
SAME SECTION OF
ALTERED VERSION
page 8,
BLUR TOOL
TOP OF OUR VERSION SHOWING
STEPS TAKEN TO MATCH
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 114 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
That I, Paul Edward lrey, am willing to as an expert witness to the.
accuracy of every statement in any venue permissible as the same
is true to my own knowledge. except as to the matters therein stated to be
alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be
true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon
information and belief are as follows: 3rd parties, books and records, and
personal knowledge.
_@cJ
Paul Edward lrey
Delray Beach, Florida
Sworn to before me
Tfiis day of Decerhber 2-0-f2

Notary Public
MICHAEL GERUCK
Notary PubUc, Slate or FJorida
MyComm. Expims NOv. 29.2013
No. 00943069
page 9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 115 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Paul Edward Irey's AFFIDAVIT
Exhibit A
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 116 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
The important soctian or Obama l(ins f11nn .birth
is displnyl!d bc.lcill' und enhll'gtll:ltti .fit this PJl!!C:
We have found I9prooft 11J'/11rgci'J' onthiJ; docnn1cnt
(ar::md arc .showing nilf easiest to .miden>1and
c\'iili:nec here. We nil! 2 lypogmphcn; Wilh u combined
experience .of 70)'Ctlr.l cnmting wid examining our own
. ulong wUh itt se;uming. 8i'itpbkarts,
phulurnpby ,reprodut:lion. priniing,und including
the u!ie tlf the *l mm\ul)l tyJ)CwiiiCI'll ;dung \vith
cre.licd dUc.:umcntatilln while .lilarting iind mvliing our own .
employing 0\'er 70pcople. Alledgedly
in !Wit. a typr.ll'ritcr pmduccd this docurnent on n. rorm,
but the cio'idcncc slul\vs us this birth t:cnilkmc crt>.utcd
last yenr oti o: cumputer. sc:itding two copies of
that form to tbli: White House.. Titc Wlrltc JJOU:>e then p(Mcd
n copy unlincnnd 1,!11\'C to the thnt
i1- the lhr n..'l!onize that
document examiners should lie involved in this, Ottr group
nuemptcd to employ over Z2S oftltc 2,000 _t:t.>niiioo forensic
dodnnent ciamlnc.rs in Ibis t:(Juntry. All o{ them tt1
either look at or discuss the Obruna birth ccrillieatc.
given were do \vorl: fbr !lie guve.mmcnr'' or "l
suppuli Obamn." or"J sec-the We
formd tllis birtll tY!rt{/icate to be a badiJ doni! fiJrgcry.
1. Miss--MatcbedTjped Letters
CnmpL lhesc type\\otiten letters cnlnrged frmn lh!! birth ceuificmc. We hnvc marked
the oJ!Cs c1lostm with :t blue dut urulcrthc original letter. Of the 15 pain; chosen, one SCI is
from Ute"\V(ird .. Student,. tlwt exhibits two different type styles of the .. t., \\ithin the samu
word; 1ltC$C QUr oontentiunlllut lhe typed lctte1-s were .Ct'lpied ood assembled
from .diffcro. nfdtX:U m.cn.ts. Notelhesize:. E . E. n 6 11
ands.hnpe aa
.J J .;.
Aft If iin Ss ElU1:
.. s t t ' y y .;J. K' .. j'U :
.. : . . . .. . . . . < .. .J- . ' j . . f
2. The Bent Cap uw
We have enlarged ''HUSSEIN"
below 10 /l(!nt cap "ll".
It h 11111 ful' typewri.kr lcllcn; I(}
be bent, They 3JC often OOIIlWhcn lhc
typist gets 2 l:eys .together and
mu .. 'lt pull them npnrt If a typewriter
leucr bcnt, il bcn1 und U()Cl; not
IYI:I<l bcnl-h,rthe 1yping of only a sin1,:le
lcllcr. proof o/fl1rgcry
tltc oilier 8 cap "irs on ll!is birth
cediflcote are
3. The Certificate Number
Jf.somccmc dC"eided last yCUI'I'> f<lrt;_e u birth
t'l::J1ifkatcJO! u person . they would need n birth
rortifi.:.otenumbcr"thui wn.'> in the 1961 era.
A baby born the day in Huw.aii
Obumu . died the ncxL dny. We believe tlmt
babies number was 61 J064t. The family
requested her bit1h cel'titk.atc ;md _gnt lhe short
fhrm with n numbt'f Olllt:if .1\C{)UI.'nce. They then
frini1nnd were refusro. They
btuught n t:nvKuit Ute Ha\\;iiiim ci>urt\. It
denied. wiih the r:t)un explaining thlll the
Hono1nlu l)ept. tlf.Hcallh l"outd decide ifl.hay
wanted to dtl.l bitlh. cmllkntc of the
deceased bJJby or nm.
'Kapiolani
4.The Start of line Error
Irregular line Spacing Irregular tetter Spacing
eumbinntions below are
mnrked wilh ll bluemttlinc. These arojusisbme ufihe Q(liDbtnutions
that vary in the !.pa<.-e between tho lettel'l\. Tl1csc lipaC'ff sllou/d lle-
'l"hls Wrth oonlficr.tte fonn fol' l)'p:!
st. tlwt eveydme u
The. woril''*apioJaat shouidbc cxndiy return, it would ruh--3m.'4.' down exactly .2 picas to mllleh
under tlie.word."Malc", not luJlf space- thefonn.llne f{)fli . Titb> wa,Hlomrnom flr :ill
11tit; is proiu of forge;y. the inaddur typewriters. We wt'l'c unable lo find aoother
fncl tlull not all the.lines arc 11ush to tbc !eli is birth t>.eniflcatc from H:twl_lifwilh uneven line splicing
suspicious. Ntt orltctbirth ct.trl(ficaie exllillits like dJs 1ii1e. T>1tcwritcn ilo mJtdoJ/Jis,
tlris peculiar Tltf$ l$.prtlriftif Jorgcf!.
7.. The White Halo white hnlo,.sccn on the online White Houl>C release in wi1ileouiiine
around C\'C!1hing on I he birth ccrtificulc; NQ other birth certificate this . See Jt tll! EJ>Idbil
& Exhibi.t "'B".sbowing how iU;hi1\IIU l()()k; .cui1scd by the Adube.Pholoshop filler used !(J
sharpen edges. h d-oos this by choking back the fcnving n while halo; We shnw in. Exhibit "C"
1lO\V we did the: same thing lO nur .SJ)Qdmcn example. The Hawniiun Dept. or Health il> iu have
pltl the uriginnl birth 1.tl1ilicute on 11 ci1picr and io u speciul grcn gc:i:urlty plJ>CT of \\;hilc
p:tpci', The lnly rc..;uJt pll!i.liiblo frotn tlilLt is Exhibit "B' .. J\;OT exhibii "A"'. 11Jc linin pmvcs 1hat tb(:!
forger combined a 81i:an (lf che security puper on a cilntpnter ... nauenooall of the elements ii1 the file asul
then 1"1pplied the Un!ihitrp Musk. II is C\'CII uri tbc birth ccn.i11cmc 1100\'(: ... lll.)C upper left l:orner. Sini.X!
this is udircel {:Opy t;f the birth cenificine sent fronrHuwaii.lhnt pnwes the white lmlo Wl!S on 'what
they cupied, so we must tlle Hl)waiian original it uls<>. Tltis t:; protJ/ tJ/foty(!rJ.
fxblblt B Exllibitc . applied.
1
lU/If.al,. trn.tdlffertmt, sin , lhc-. old ID.O .. Ri>-. iy-pc:-... .
writcnc nlwnys move<h specific: amount lifter 1
each Je.ucr was typed . We that the forget. a' .
mttnullly un n. . . . . ,
comp.utc.r r,uuld .. nut TqJ ... .'.j\)nlc.lhc c..Met sp:t.eing -:--11 b. .
tlu!l the nld llt)lu moohunicaltypewritcrs 0 . . n

Dcmuld Tntmp's w:ts thlll il fort:-cd Obnmn io
rush OUI a forgery. In n !>IIJIC CongreSs
wmtld ht1ld and litdllr} everything he
did in oflke. ,\san U!iurpcr Obnnl:tcan'tlx:.
inipcnched. but should be press-ed ({)r the crimes
of f<rgcry & in:asun. Obamus is
c!llJity ofit}tegrity. Now CjingrcK-' ha.;; a Duty
tn investigate" or may sc)t)n becume .:ttl
After the Fact to fdimy und ucas-on .
@Paullrey & Ooug.las Vogt 2012
Congress failing to investigate this forgery is neglecting their constitutional "Duty to
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 117 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Paul Edward Irey's AFFIDAVIT
Exhibit B
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 118 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
I I
'' ''
g 1
Your Order from Replay Photos has been sent!
If your order oontaJned multiple products, notification about shipment of the other products Jn
YQtJr or<ter may arrive lna se_flarate
1f you need to reach Replay Photos with a question about YQUr Order. please email us at
If you prefer to speak to
someone, please call us at 877-421-2300. Our business hours are Sam to 4pm ET fv1onday
through If you don, reach us, please leave us a message v11th your name and telephone
We will respond to eman and voice mau In order to expedite your email or
call. please have your Order reference number
As a reminder. your Order reference number is 278149.
Thank you for your business.
The Replay Photos Team
www.repJayphotos .. com
Replay Photos and the Replay Photos Logo are registered trademarks of
905 W. Main Streetf Suite 23C Durham. NC 27701 Ph. 877.421.2300
:rom: REPLAYPHOTOS COM
OS, AM
o: Toornas Putnam . . . .. . . . . .
ubjact: Confirmation from REPLAYPHOTOS.COM
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 119 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
I I
'' ''
Ill II
=rom: R YPHOTOS COM
;enc Wednesday, October os, 2011 9:Js. AM
ThOmas Putnan!l
;ubject:.- Payment Receipt: 890-67 Confirmation from REPLAYPHOTOS COM
REPLAYP OTOS COM
Your Purchase has been approved
This receipt confim1s payment for your purchase from REPLAY Pt10TOS llC<\ This order will appear
-on your credit card statement as -REPLAYPHOTG&-60M. -To contact tuJ! pl:ease $end an &m-ail-to- -
.. or call 91'9..e8S..2100.,
::pt "'
Transaction Time: Oct 05. 2011 09:38AM
Gateway ID: 51243
R.e:ceipt Number: 1342168417 .. 4181
Sales Order Number: 89007
Transaction M.aii/Phone Order
Authorization Code: 29547'1
Name: Thomas Putnam
Compa:ny (Optional): Motion Systems _
Card Type: AM
Card Number: xxxxxxxxxxx3099
: Quanti Daacrl _on Unit
1nttmns 1 order '2.78149 expedited shipping 1
us DoUarTota1
16Jl0-
16.00
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 120 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 121 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries etal. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Paul Edward Irey's AFFIDAVIT
Exhibit C
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 122 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Case Document 35-2 Filed 06/06/12 Page 1 of 1
Department of Health
1250 Punchbowl Street
Honoh.1lu. Hawaii 96813
STATE OF HAWAII
Office of Heeilth Status Monitoring
Box 3378
Honolulu, Hawaii 96801
VERI'FICATION OF BIRTH
Recipient of Yerificatiqn: Scott J. Tepper and Samuel L. Begley, ,attorneys for the
Mississippi' Democratic Party. in Taitz et al v., 'Democratic
Party of Mississippi [sic].{ et al, No. .. Q0280--HTW ... LRA
(S.D. Miss.)
Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-14.3, I verifY the following:
originaiCertificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein n, is on file
. 9f of
2. The information contained in the "Certificate of a,irthn published at
htt :/lww it.ehouse. ov/blo /2011:/04/27/ .. resldent-obamas .. :lon ,
and reviewed by me or'i the date 'oftnis a copyot
Which is with your requestr matches the information contained in
of Live BJrth for Barack Hussein Obarna, II on file with
ttje state of Hawaii Department of Health

h'the
. d'.to
t.
May.31; 2012
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 123 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Paul Edward Irey's AFFIDAVIT
Exhibit D
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 124 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
- - -------- ---- ---- ---- .. -------o-. -----
- MAIL
L-l __ - - - - - Clauic
Re: binder 11 ...
From: "Henry Wayland Blake" <hwblake@bellsouth.net>
To: "Paul Irey" <pauledwardirey@gmail.com>, "Doug Vogt" <Diehold@comcast.net>,
orly.taitz@gmail.com, cestrunck@yahoo.com, "Chito Papa" <rajska7@gmail.com>
3 Files (1688KB)
1051324... 1051324... 1051324 ...
Dear Paul,
Tuesday, December 4, 2012 11:26 AM
I think you have proposed the most probable scenario based on the creation and file dates of the
associated court documents.
1. The paper copy of the Tepper to Fuddy 3-page letter was dated 05/26/2012.
- --
2. The electronic version of this 3-page letter appeared on Scribd on 06/06/2012
3. The Tepperfour-page electronic document 10513240131.pdf (same as 35-1.pdf) was created on
06/04/2012 and was last modified on 06/06/2012. Pages 1-3 of this document are the 3 electronic
pages of the Tepper to Fuddy letter that appeared on Scribd on 06/06/2012. The 4th electronic page is
the Tepper page 4, LFCOLB. This four-page document was filed in MS on 06/06/2012.
4. We really don't know when the Tepper page 4 LFCOLB was created.
5. The paper copy of the one-page Onaka to Tepper verification letter was dated 05/31/2012.
6. The electronic version, which is court document 35-2, was created on 06/04/2012 and was last
modified on 06/06/2012. This one-page electronic document was filed in MS on 06/06/2012.
i believe that the most likely scenario is that Tepper created a paper copy of his three-page ietter to
Fuddy on 05/26/2012. He attached a paper printout copy of the original WH LFCOLB and mailed this
four-page paper copy to Fuddy.
Tepper and Onaka then collaborated to alter the WH LFCOLB to create the Tepper page 4 LFCOLB.
On 06/04/2012, Tepper created the documents 10513240131.pdf (same as 35-1) and 35-2.
He then filed the two documents 35-1 and 35-2 in MS on 06/06/2012.
We really don't know the individual actions of either Tepper or Onaka with regards the modifications of
the WH LFCOLB PDF image file to create the altered LFCOLB PDF image file. Onaka may have modified
the WH LFCOLB and then sent the altered PDF image to Tepper as a one-page PDF image file. There is
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 125 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
.&.a."'':t'l 1 -...,.A..A..A-.L""-1._, 1 .A..A. ...... .&.&.J'-+.&..&""-J"-""-J.&..&.M .&.&..&.VI V.&..&."-' Yt' .&.t'..L...,UU'-+l:;)- ........,
nothing in his verification letter that indicates that he attached this altered LFCOLB to his verification
letter. However, his letter does refer to the LFCOLB copy that was purportedly attached to the four-page
request letter from Tepper to Fuddy.
Alternatively, Tepper might have had someone else modify the WH LFCOLB PDF image to create the
altered PDF image. That might explain why the METADATA was not entirely erased from his four-page
electronic document. We know that a scanner was used so Tepper's forger would have had to have
some means of re-sizing a scanned and altered image of the WH LFCOLB back to the correct size to
-match a real1961 Certificate of Live Birth printed form.
I am now certain that the 21 added objects which are invisible in Adobe Reader pre-existed before
06/04/2012 as a separate PDF image. The 21 objects include 121ine segements, 2 broad-line strikeouts
and 7 Black redaction rectangles. This (/redaction" page is smaller than the LFCOLB image page size. I
have successfully separated this smaller (/redaction" image from the flattened and altered WH LFCOLB
image in both Adobe Illustrator CS6 and lnkscape. I have attached my latest screenshots from Adobe
Illustrator as proof. The screenshot [105132401131_ss3.jpg] attached shows the (/redaction" page slid
off the LFCOLB image page to the right. The background of the (/redaction" page is transparent.
So an alternative scenario would be that Tepper had his forger modify the WH LFCOLB and Onaka
provided the (/redaction" image to assist Tepper's forger re-size his scanned image. This would lessen
onaka's in-volv-em.ent wi1:h-the-creation-ofthe-frau.dulent LFC6Li3tepper-page4 [FCOLI3. -
So scenario A would be that Onaka did the deed and scenario B would be that they collaborated to do
the deed.
Either way they both are guilty of attempting to pull off a bait and switch on Judge Wingate. They
substituted the Tepper page 4 LFCOLB for the WH LFCOLB and didn't tell Judge Wingate about the
switch.
I can provide a notarized copy of my sworn affidavit whenever you need it. Also, I can provide any of my
screen shots as required. I would prefer not to testify because of personal reasons. I also believe that. if
I were to testify, then I would quickly become a (/punching bag" for the defense because I don't have an
IT certificate and I have never testified as a forensic expert.
Sincerely,
Henry
From: Paullrey
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 5:54AM
To: doug@vectorpub.com ; orly.taitz@gmail.com ; cestrunck@yahoo.com ; hwblake@bellsouth.net
Subject: binder 11 ..
____ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 7763 (20121204)
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 126 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support ofNote of Issue
Exhibit 3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 127 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78NYSSC forKlngsCounty Index No.;. 21948/2012.
AF.FIDAVIT OF SERVICE.
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ULSTER )
Accordingly, l, H. William Van Allen, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of petjury:
a. Am over 18 years of age and nat a patty to this action.
b. My place of business is located at 351 North Road Hurley New York 1. 2243.
c. On November 14, ChristopherStrtink instructed me to serve.a true conformed copy of the NOTICE OF
PETITION, PETITION with AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION affirmed November 13t 2012 along with a
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN OR.DER TO SHOW CAUSE APPLICATION FO.R A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION PENDING A DECLARATORY IN,JlJNCTION ON ISSUE OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS, a Notice 9f Petitioner's intent to file an ord.er to show cause
application at the . .Kings CountySupreme Court Building at 10 &VI on the lOth Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on
Monday November 19, 2012placing a complete set in a properly addressed to each responde11t listed below for
delivery by USPS by certified .mail With request for return receipt for proof of service. . .. . . . .
d. On Nove1nber 14, .2012tl caused each copy with proper postage for service by certified mail on thelisted .. Electors and
where each envelope wa:s properly addressed with the Notification i'URGENT LEGAL SERVICE" and (f. PERSONAL &
CONFIDENTIAL" i:n, the lower left hand corner of the envelqp that was then deposited with the USPS for service upon:
L Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill #2A --Brooklyn, NY l 1238
H714_ 34th ;._ NY .
3. Felix Odiz 189 B 33rd'Street .... NY
4. Bill .of 442llth Street-- Bt(}ok1y1l, NY ll2l5.
Cooper 1 SO West 96tli #l2G .... New NY l002S
6. Keith L. T. Wrigbtof2225 Fifth Avenue Ne\v NY 10037
7. Christine C. Quin:n Qf263 N4Jth A ventre, #3A- New NY 10001
it Willil)nt Tbon:lpson ofl06 West12JstStreet':"- Ne\v NY 10027
9. Seott 155 V{est7lst #3A ;;;;.New York. NY l0023
'I 0. Esnily G.iske of 440 West24th Street:.. .. NYJ 0014
11 . 2827 4$th Street- NY I 1-103
J 1210 }75th .. Ja1naica,l\TY 11433
13. George Gresitam E3$t 23.3j:d.St1'eet -- Brqnx,, NY 10466
14. Q:ub1;ll)iaz", Jr. ,of820 Boytori Avenue, #9D NY 10473
15. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Ave'tu.te NY 10710
19;. Cjlcnto 3 ISabel Road Orangeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D. of 1135NewSoodand.Road AlbMye'NY 12208
18. Byron BrOWJ)l4Biaine NY 142()8
Hl.. RobertD'uffy 1 Q4 Croydon Road;.;.. Rochestel', NY 14610
Joseph qf 13,3 Dee!field Drive-- Rochest(.!fk NY 14609
l4l27
22'. St'ephanle 1\finea 102 Woodside Ddve ... NY13224
23. Steve :Bellone 107 -- NY 11'704
it I1ene Stein 1 QI Brandywine Drive -- Ithac3! NY 14850
25. Sheila: Comar29 Depot Street--- Middle Granville; NY 12849;
GUlibrand \vith DC Office 478 Russell Washington, OC 20510
Sworn to before me
Thisjk day ofNoven1ber2012
CM I RRNo 7012101000068749741
N9 __
CM/RRNo 7Ql2J0l0000687497S8
CM/ RR No 70121010000()8749765.
GM.I RR No 70121 0100006874995(}
CM /RR }{o 7()12._10, 000068749826
CM /RR No 7012101000068749.833'
CM/RRNo 7<ll2toloooo6S749840
CM/RRNo 701210100008749857
CMl RRNo 7012:10100.0068749864
CM/ RR No 70121:01Q00068749901
CM I RR No
CM
:CM' I RRNo. 70121 0100()068749796
CM /RR No 70l2t01000068749949
CM l RR N(i70l2l0l000068749$95
CM lRRNo 7012101000:068749970
CM/ RR Nq 7012101000068_749802
CM l RR No 10121 OlQOo06S749712
(JM lRRN(} 7012HH

CM I RRNo 7012101000008749918
CMfiffiNo 7012101000068749925
CM.l RRNo 7012101000068749932
eM '/'h000068749987
.
.
NOTARY NEW :YORK
NO. 01MA609S585 .
QUALlFIED.lN'OLSTER COUNTY/. c-
COMMfSSION 'EXPIRES' JULy 14.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 128 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Christopher Earl Strunk in esse
Petitioner

g /rz.
I. Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A- Brooklyn, NY 11238
2. Bill DeBlasio of442 lith Street- Brooklyn, NY 11215
3. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd SlrCCI- Brooklyn, NY 11232
.+ '1 h iilillDS!daWL id'i#;;y, u
5. Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
6. George Gresham 1313 East233rdStreet- Bronx, NY 10466
7. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of82b Boyton Avenue, #6D- Bronx, NY IIN73
8. Byron Brown 14BlaineSirCCI-Buffalo,NY 14208
9. RobertDuf!Y 164CroydonRoad-Rochester,NY 14610
10. Joseph Morello of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
.t-1. 'fomf>i'Nipoii IUOOteatNet:kR&d OtcatNetk;ln ll%01
-laM li!lt.l(t ltlim
13. 10025
.14. SlcldouSiluCJUISSOOiiridSUUCi;hSA 14en kblk,NI 10002
IS. KeithL.T. Wrlghtof2225FifthAvenue-NcwYork.NY 10037
16. ChristineC.QuiMof263NinthAvenue,113A-NcwYork.NY 10001
17. Williamlbompsonofi06West 121stSirCCI- NewYork,NY 10027
18. ScottSiringcrofiS5West71stStreet.t13A-NewYork,NY 10023
19. ErnilyGiskeof440West24thStreet-NcwYortc,NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of II Poplar Avenue- Orchard Park. NY 14127
21. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Symcuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road - pnmgeburg, NY I 0962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY 11103
24. Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
25. ArchieSpigoerofll210 175thSneet-Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue.:. West Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive -ltJtaca, NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849
29. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonken,NY 10710 tl-""70 n L
3e- I<IP-<i"'cl" GLl-f'812il.vD pc O'!=Fic.G' -.-to ,.v.r.ret
Respondents w ASHrNGTVlJ PL
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78 PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING A
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
Please take notice of Petitiop.er's intent to file an order to show cause application at the Kings
County Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the lOth Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday
November 19, 2012 for a preliminary injunction relief pending a declaratory judgment on issues of
law; e.g., Are public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of
P01US and Ballot access? Are public officers presented with the facts of Barack Obama ineligibility
able to change qualifications before the Electoral College Vote scheduled December 15, 2012?
A PDF .Q;;E? '
For further information Contact :
W&AHAJ: BD- V
l' Brooklyn New York 11238
Cellphone: 845-901-6767
Email: chris@strunk.ws
Walit:t Coopt(
15o Sire!!. 11110 -
Ntw Yolk, NY
o.s. Postilf Servtce.. , - -'
CERTiFIED MAIL,. RECEIPT
;N6llnutrtn""Com
S'fATlHlf'NWYORK )
):!IS.
COU.Nl'Y OF )
AfFlUAVJT OY. SERVICE
Aecctdinsty. f, H. Willbw Vun Allen, belnf.! duly sworn. dcp(lSll nnd :<ny under ui' petiury:
a. i\fi) fl'it:1' ;md h(l\ ap:.rww 1luoae\ilm.
h. My ofhti!SI-lfi. ll'1>."lb WM!l. Hufle) l'ii""' Ym'l< t'n-4:.'1.
e. Oitl-lovtmbtr t4, "2Ul<l, Strunltinmrw:loo me !<Ut'JYol"" tru" e<Jnfmmoo ro..r of"th NOTte& i)f
l'ETITION, P&TmON with AFPIDAVI'l' OF VERIFICATION affimwd N:ovm1b<lr 13, l!H2 along, with ll
NOi'lC: OF 11\'l'P.N'f TO FlU\ AN tmUEitTO SllOW CA.USl: Al'l'LlCA'l'ION f'OR A PRELIMINARY
L'IJUNCTJON l'CNOIN<O ,\ DECt.AitATOkY lJ\'Jl!NCTlON ON ISS tiE OF LAW AS 'fO t:LF.C'fORS
Dtcl.AIIATORY lll':Lltf'.,\S l'O LECTOR.<;," NQtke '" !ilr."" iltJkr '"
apJilk.ution at llu-, t':iliJrtnnlll!ing-ni lU AM an to l"'l..:i<r m :;r.g Atlom$ Stro:t<>n
),!DndnyN.,..,mll<lr 19. 2'0-l2 1tn:>kte Jlt In a addr""l!ffl tHjl!lllmrntlll!t<:<lllclwr f<1r
tt<Uvccy IJSP'S by_eenJI'il:d !1'.hll wilh 1'1.'q\10l!t for mum te'llt'lpt lor proof (lif
;:!. On NM'<11lbof .1>1. 'o!tHll; l. l'.allfitll <'J!Cll "'J'.Y with ll"f"'"'l' r ..... l'.rvk.<> b;, "'"iWi.O tnGU "" u..t;:d f.:!"""""' Gnd
.ewh proptnly with tb< Nr>lifiO'ftiootr!I:IJEflo"l' l.lliC.i\U-; SERVlCW !'$R$QN.\l,J;<
\11: !IJ'\"0<: t.,n .hlmd ootitll'l' lhlll W!>_s thl:lJ\
1. i'l.\-lhwi:lr".NY mls
2.
" ... nvmsz
4,
5. Wl'llS
NY Uil/31 CM! N{>1(lii:J(Il(i0001iil149l!i{>
1. C'MlRitNI>"'lll:liOIQ000&74lJ!\!;il
ll. 1(1(121
'1. 10021
10. &mllyl;iW>Df tlWG! 10014 CMf RR N<;
il,
U.
n. IU466
14. ftlib<tn tlftQilll(>yliitl NY CM 11\II"N;,
15. Krll Jffltillt'< IOU.a11t}' A'ltliil- Hl710 C:.'M! Nia
16. hllh<:l 10961 CM!I\RN<>10111010fl(lll<il!'l4!18't!
!1. 11 'NwS<Wiwld ,,ll.,ny. NY tUINI t'M
"IS, U,rrtm bfll!fD 141MIIilb:'S!m1-llPf!i1dk\ "l'"' 142ffll CMt RR S'u 16l21!)ll!OC%3749l!!II
19, lli:>b< Doll)< R!W NY !4@1 C.'MflU\ Na_ 7<1!ZIOI61MIQ68149rl'1
20. J<iscpb U:.:rfoeldllfivt-lt<XIm!i:r,l\Y lM\!iil CM /ltlt Nl):rtllllltii!OOooi!'I4<J-ill!)
21, nm O.l!llll.
CMfi\RN4>'mli1fljl)l)i}j)(oir.l!9!!8$
;tl. Slffllldlo11e ttl' WC$1 Oalt)1tl!',N).' 117114 CMI
21. !dR lUt Prl.-..-JU-NY 14!1511 CM 1(ltl!l0100flilol\674\l'r.!S
2S. (A\nmr-2\1 Sf"""i- Ml"'"" fimrwlltll, NY t:.\1! RRN<>
26. 0117&'/l_;;-
Swom to bllfoo: me lllll Voo Allen
This J:k. day oi'Nnvembl.'f 2011
Cl
Q ReiUmReceiptFee

CJ Rlttt1ctl!dDeftveryF..
t::J (EnoorsemeniAeqund)
o't
__
Scott Stringer
cf ISS West 71st Street, #3A-
Emi!yGiske
440 West 24th Street_ -:-
New York, NY 10023
New York, NY 10014

USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 129 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
'u.s. Postal
CERTIFIED MAll," RECEIPT
lltJ Naft Olf)JI'f Pii.W/de-rlJ
U.S. Postal service."
CERTIFIED MAIL,, RECEIPT
(l}llt1ltMt'Jt MAfl No ln.'ll(,.tntmc P!Pl kJ.D\'11
0
g

8 --- $
""
ru
..... ..


Robert DuffY
164 Croydon Road -
Rochester, NY 14610
U.S. Postnl ' ,
CERTIFIED MAIL, . RECEIPT

USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 130 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 mssc for Kings County IndeX: No.; 21948 I 2012 0
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
OF NEWYORK )
_,.., )
ss.
KINGS )
A-ecordingly, I, fl_ovJte. e!J lfAt...L being du1y sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. G5) f/1/t.. 1(._ 1 1 zo b
Mf place of business is located at .
November 30,2012, Christopher Strunk instructed me to serve a true conformed copy of the PETITIONER'S
SECOND AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF OSC with EXHIBITS annexed AFFIRMED November 30,2012 along with a copy
of the NOTICE OF PETITION, PETITION with AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION affirmed November 13,2012
placing a complete set in a properly addressed envelope to each respondent listed below for delivery by USPS regular
mail.
d. On November30, 20.12, I caused each copy with proper postage for service by first class mail on the listed Electors and
where each envelope was properly addressed with the Notification "URGENT LEGAL SERVICE" and " PERSONAL &
CONFIDENTIAL" in the lower left hand comer of the envelop that was then deposited with the USPS for service upon:
1. Andrew M. Cuomo 138 Eagle Street-- Albany, NY 12202
2. Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
3. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- Bronx, NY 10466
4. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of 820 Boyton Avenue, #6D NY 10473
5. Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street-- Buffalo, NY 14208
6. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11232
7. Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238
8._ J3.illDeBlasioof#21lth_Street NY 11215
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road-- Rochester, NY 14610
10. Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
11. Tom DiNapoli 100 Great Neck Road-- Great Neck, NY 11201
12. Eric Schneiderman 645 West End Avenue, #SF-- New York, NY 10025
13. Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #120 --New York, NY 10025
14. Sheldon Silver of 550 Grand Street, #SA -New York, NY 10002
15. Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue-- New York, NY 10037
16. Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A --New York, NY 10001
17. William Thompson of 106 West 121st Street- New York, NY 10027
18. Scott Stringer of 155 West 71st Street, #3A- New York, NY 1'0023
19. Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street-- New York, NY 10014
20 .. Scott Adams of 11 Poplar Avenue -- Orchard Park, NY 14127 -
21. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive-- Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY .1 0962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY 11103
24. Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 11354
Archie Spigner of 11210 175th Street-- Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue-- West Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive --Ithaca, NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street Middle Granville, NY 12849
29. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue - Yonkers, NY 10710
30. Joshua Pepper NYSAssiatant Attorney General Office of Attorney General 120 Broadway NY NY 10171
31 (;- kl ,.t.f-,8 W/4J5f-1i 't>C-Uit'lO
!.QJ>.efore me
This. of November 2012
Notary .,ic
KAMAL P. SON\
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01806089949
Qualified in. KingMs
2
015
Commission Ex.ptres arc '
Q2/}aaL
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 131 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of Note ofissue
Exhibit 4
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 132 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL INTERVENTION'. For Court Clerk Use Only::
(3/2011) IA:S E::ntry uate
Supreme COURT, COUNTY OF Kings
Index No: ZJ '1i.f'O - Z.t1(4... Date Index Issued: JJqV. 2.0/1L
.. Jud_ge Asstgnea .
CAPTION:
Enter-,he. caption. : .. ano . ffmore space is
reauired attachacaption rider sheet. . . . .
KJI.uate


Gp.AGr;z rn.t:rNG, Jt

8rL(, DEIBlA'St6
1
AJAt::fE:/e..
l,...,a T" Gt-f"'t
1
C.riVftS?rtv'E. WtU.JAW7 /Jidnrp$oNJ s-eon
G=-JSI<E"
1
/iNIJ'fr Y't1An..t5 )Tfl..c
1
"'1trz
Rtir3Jav Jll . .) Crl.EMTa
1
D ,..je7.1AJJt.P-1_; ey/ZIJN :_
{(tJ6'en:r )OS\!}01-l
.Ce
.: .. :.:,: :: .. ::
MATRIMONIAL COMMERCIAL .""'0 ;;.....:
D Contested - 0 Business (including corporations, partnerShips, .-
0 Uncontested : 0 Contract . -.:5 r-
NOTE: For all Matrimonial actions where the parties have children under : 0 Insurance (where insurer is a party, except arbltration)P f'Tl
the age of 18, complete and attach the MATRIMONIAL RJI Addendum. ;0 UCC (including sales, negotiable instruments) . .
TORTS , 0 Other Commercial: ...,
Q Asbestos (spec:lfy)
0 Breast Implant ! NOTE: For Commercial Division assignment requests [22 NYCRR .
O _th_e_c_o_M_M_E_R_C...,IAL_D_IV_R_JI_Ad_de_n_d_um---1.
(specify) REAL PROPERTY: How man, does the application include?
0 Medical, Oental, or Podiatric Malpractice I 0 Condemnation
Q Motor Vehicle 0 Foreclosure
0 Products liabDity: _________ ___. ______ --IPropertyAddress: -----------------
(specify)
Street Address City State Zip

(sperJfy)
NOTE: For Foreclosure actions involving a one- to four-family, owner-
occupied, residential property, or an condominium,
0 Other Professional Malpractice:;..._.. __ complete and attach the FORECLOSURE RJI Addendum.
(specify) 0 Tax Certiorari- Block: Lot: ----1
0 Other 0 Other Real Property:. _________________ --1
(specify) (specify)
OTHER MA1'1'CRS SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
Certificate of Incorporation/Dissolution [see NOTE under Commerciaq 0 CPLR Article 75 (Arbitration) [see NOTE under Commercial)
Q Emergency Medical Treatment CPLR Article 78 (Body or Officer)
0 Habeas Corpus Law . . .
0 Local Court Appeal 0 MHL Article 9.60 (Kendra's Law)
0 Mectlanic"s Lien 0 MHL Article 10
Q Name Cllange 0 MHL Article 10 (Sex Offender Confinement-Review)
0 Pistol Permit Revocation 0 MHL Article 81 (Guardianship)
. 0 Sale or Finance of Religious/Not-for-Profit Property 0 Other Mental Hygiene:-------------------1:
0 Other.. __________ (specify}
(specffy) 0 Other Special
1-------------------------1 (specifY)
. , ... ' .. "" . , ' .... . .. . ._. !' '.. I :..: ..;k"
STAtliS'Of 'ACTION .. (
Has a summons and complaint or summons w/notice been filed?
Is this action/proceeding being filed post-judgment?
I YES NO I
"0 0 If yes, date filed: _ Nov I <.f '?-(!
1
'2..
0 1Q If yes, judgment date:-----------
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 133 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Note of Issue and/or Certificate. of Readiness
0 Notice of Medical. Dental, or Podiatric Malpractice Date Issue Joined:-----------
0 Notice Of Motion Relief Sought Return Date: __ -..;.--:..--... ................... __;, _ __;,_
0 NotiCe of Petition Relief Sought: Return Date:

Show cause Relief Sought: 78o, lt'JC''f, tl'fJu,-t:nt# .. Return Date: P!{e 1 'Z- 0 1 "2-
0 Other Ex Parte Application Relief Sought: J;fb
0 Poor Person Application
0 Request fOr Preliminary Conference
0 Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Settlement Conference
0 Writ of Habeas Corpus
0 Other (specify):

Case Title Index/Case No. Court Judge (if assigned) Relationship. to Instant Case - "' ...
fl. ZCfG,'f (- 4 (("tM:;J -<;'If' ,3c14!11e.OT .1$(. .. l N
t.J k-V" 2...- t,t tl A c r< vt:. 2oo"'P litPct faA:
v ,..YS.BfJ f* ?,f?IJ .. (;,$otO I' .JcHt...!C -1sc /'2- .... SJ.l"
PARTIES: I
Parties: Attorneys:.
un-
List parties in caption order and Provide name; firm name, business address, phone .. number ..and e-mail Joined
Rep indicate party role(s)(e.g. defendant address of allattomeysthat have appeared1!1 ffle.c:ase. (YIN):
3rd-party plaintiff).

. i
D
0
First Name
Primary Role:
Secorid8ry Role (if any):
s.c:.nd8y Role (if any):
Last Name
First Name
Primary Role:
Secondary Role (If any):
Last Nama
First Name
Prlrnary Role:
Secondary Role (If any):
JYES
LntName

Firm Name
Street.AddrMa City
Phone Fax
LaM Mime Fht-
Finn ......
Striltt .Address car
Phone Fa
LatHam Firat-
Firm .....
StreetAddi'Ma City
Phone Fu .....
Insurance Caritel'(s):
I AFFIRM UNDER THE PENAL TV OF PERJURY THAT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, OTHER THAN AS NOTED ABOVE, 'DIERE ARE AND
HAVE BEEN NO RELATED ACTIONS OR PROCEEDINGS, NOR .RE .. .. S ... T. FOR .... , .........'-.' J. UDICIAL PREVIOUSLY BEEN.
FILED IN THIS ACTION OR PROCEEDING. . . . <i-' ,
Dated: //""' / f,.,-; 2I!J /2-- -..
F . -nn/1 . . . SIGNATURE -- ..
1 ""'/ Qrz.C ;' {cYr?JC
ATTORNEY REGISTRATION NUMBER PRINT OR TYPE NAME
...
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 134 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue
Exhibit 5
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 135 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS:
------------------------------------------------------------------------><
CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK
PETITIONER
-against-
HAKEEM JEFFRIES ET AL.,
RESPONDENTS

SPECIAL ELECTION PART
Index No. 21948/12
Hon. David I. Schmidt
November 19,2012
Upon the foregoing papers, petitioner purchased an index with the County
Clerk and submits an order to show cause with the court for signature. Although it is
----difficult to discemlhe exact-nature oftheTeliefsought by petitioner, the main thrustofhis
papers seems to challenge the validity of the November 6, 2012 election ofKirsten Gillibrand
to the office of United States Senator from the State ofNew York. Specifically, the petition
states that "Petitioner wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask the Governor
set a special election, because a significant number of the electors casting their respective
vote were domiciled in New York for less than five years." At a minimum, both the
Governor and the Board of Elections in the State of New York are necessary parties in any
proceeding seeking such relief. However, neither has been named here. In this regard, the
court notes that in an order dated April 11, 2012, Hon. Arthur Schack of this court
specifically enjoined petitioner "from commencing future litigation in the New York State
Unified Court System against the New York State Board of Elections [and] Andrew Cuomo
1
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 136 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
(among others) . . . without prior approval of the appropriate Administrative Justice or
Judge."
Under the circumstances, the court declines to sign the instant order to show cause.
Prior to presenting any further orders to show cause to the court, petitioner must name all
necessary parties and obtain the proper authorization as set forth in Justice Schack's order.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
ENTER,
J. s. c.
IIQN. DAVID I. S C R ~
2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 137 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries. et Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Inr'ex No .. ; 21948/2012
AFFIDAVIT OF SE]lVICE
STATEOFNEWYORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Accordingly, f\:tNHlEt.N HAU- , being duly sworn. depose and say under penalty of perjury:
Am over 18 years of age and not a party to this acrt:ion. D _ _ _ _ .
1 1
. 1\ _ c.
b. Myplaceofbusinessis locatedat _'-"SA ,-jq@K
c. On DECEMBER 6,, 2012 .. Christopher Stru.nlc instructed J:ne to serve a. true conformed copy of the PBTITJONBil'S !iOTE
(W ISSU8 WITH CEJtTIFICATE- OF READINESS FOR TRIAL AF"IRMBD DECEMBER 6, 2012 WITH PBTJTIORER'S
AITIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF NOTB OF ISSW WITH CB,RTIPICATB O:B RBADDIBSS BOll TIUA.L WITH J1VE.
BXIDBITS AN1iEXED AFI'IIUIED, DECEMBER 6, 2012 _ witb. each set in a properly addressed envelope_ to each
nmpondent listed below for delivery by USPS regular maiL
On DECEMBER 2012, I eaused each copy with proper postage- for service by first class mail on the listed. Electors and
where ea.<:h envelope was properly addressed with tll.e Notifi.eation: Kf)RGENT LEGAL SERVICE" and PERSONAL &
CONFIDENTIAL" in the1m.ltrer left hand corner of the envelop that was then deposited with the USPS for serv.ice upQn:
1. P. David Scams Office of Albany District Atmmey 6 Ledge Snat, RQOtn +01, Al!baey. NY 12101
l. Roberi T, Jolmscm Tho of Bronx County Dint Attorltoy 19! l61st StrMt Btonx, NY 10451
l. Fmnk A. Sedita, m Erie O'J.'mJ(.)' Dislrlet Offi(:e 2S Delaware AV!cnuc BUffalo, New'Yoik 142.02
4. CharJcs.,J. H)'lne!iiUnm County Atlt>meys Otfice lstt Jay Strr::et Neow NY 11201
s. Ddey County Dislrict Attorney's Office. 47 SOUth Fitzhugh Street :Rochester, NY 1461.4
6. Kathleen M. Rice County. Ohtrit Att<J.m,ey 262 Old: Coutitty Roao Mineola,. NY HS01
1. Cyrus; B.. Vuce- Jr The New York Couaty District Attonwy's Oftice OM Mogll11i Pla.oe New NY 10013-
S.. 1. Piti:pBtriQk Onondaga Qrumy DA Office Criminal Cotn1$ Bmtding-4th Floor ${1$ Smte NY tl2<f2
9. Fl'Mcis Phillips Off'ice: of the Orange County 40 Motthews NY
Hl Bmw:n 125..{}1 U4!5
.JJ._ __ _JOOD,lli&.t Om . . .. . . ding 1f Vekir3n$ MemmiaUUtdtway NY U788
12. Owen _. Offtec eooatq Dls:t.rict .t!\ttomey _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ , . - -- - -- -- --
13. Kevin c. KtrightOffioe OfThe County District: C 333 New Yk 12828
14. DiFioN Of'f'iee mWC$tchestcrDistriet Attorney 11 __ Dr. Martin t{jng. Jr,B)yd. White Plains,. New Y cdc 10601
lS. JOshua Pepper NVS As&iamnt Attomey Gen.e.ral of Attcmey General 12D Broadvmy NYNY HH11
16. M. Cuomo 138 Eagte Street- Albany,. NY 12202:
f1. Gerald D-. Jmminp of UJ$ New Scotland Road -Albany;, NY 12208
18, GeorpClmsbam llU 10466
19. ]lubcn of821.l AvenUe!, MP .... Bronx. NY 10473
20. Bynm Bt"''Wn 14 Blaine stteet- Buft'WO:t NY 14208
21. Fdix Om B 33rd BE'.klyi:t. )NY
22. 3S #2i\- Brooklyn.. NY 11238
;23, Bitl])eBluio of442 .lith Smti -BrOOklyn,_ NY lUIS
24. RobOl't Dutrjdi4Cfoydmi Road- Rha&tet,NY 14610
Joseph Mtm:DeofUJ Deerfield Drive ...... Roohcst, NY 14609
26. 'Thm DiNapoli lotOreat Neck ROad - Ned(, NY U201
2'1. Eric Scmttdcrmm 645 West Bnd Avenue, NSF - New'Yodr.INY l002S
28. Walter Coop ISO Wen 96th StreetM ttl.Z{i ...; New York. NY 10025
29. Shc1doo, Silver of 5SO Orand Srreet. #5-A. -New Y ori<. NY lOOG2
3{1. Keith L.T. Wrightof1225 Fifth, Ai4m:Ue- Vfll't, NY 10037
ll. Christine C Quittnof26l NcwYorkt'NY lOOlU
32. William T'nonnpsott Of 106 West lllst Yori, N.Y
33. Scott Strirapr of 155 WW&J7lst Street; tllA-' New York. NY 10023
:34. Emi1fGiiSkc o440 West 241ilS!rel:.t- New NY 10014
35, _ Poplar Avotme..,. Part, NY 141.27
36. Srepbanic Miner Hll 13224
37. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road- Orang.elmrg. NY 10962
38. .AnirJc Mtuie AnZalone 2827 41th Street- Astoriat NY U 103
Mens: of 14714 341b 1_\vemre- Flushing., NY 11354
40. Arehle Spigner of 1121& J1Sih Stfe,et - NY 1l433
4!. &ewB.ellan,e WcS.tBabyk.mtNY 11104
42. Stein ]01 BQ:ndyWine Drive ...., ,NY)48SO
43. Sheila Conwr 29 Depot Sueet- Gnmvme, NY 12849
44. Jerik:ins. 108- Busbey Avenue- Y-onkers, NY 10710
45. KinteR Gimbnmd with DC O:ffi.ce 478 Russell Washington, DC 20St0
Sworn to before me
This _ ofDecember 2012
KAMAL P. SONI
Notary State of New York
01 806089949
Qualified 4n Kh1gs County
Commission EJ<pires March :n, 2015
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 138 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
For the COlmTY OP KINGS IndaNo.:
, ....... ,.,_
Christopher-Earl:. S-trunk in esse,

llakeem .9n&ce M;en&, Felix
\.Yalfer f!:o'Mr' Keiib
\VBJ .. Di1lsQitJJ$fJll, ;SU1JJ1Jer, Btd;F G ...
Mane A8zatQDC. Artllie Spigner, ...... .
lklbeJj Kea i\tado
Gtftld J). Jemdap; ilyroD BtoWa
Joseph MoreUe; Scott Adams ; Steve BeDoae;
Jnme.lteid; Sheila. Ce.mar; ad Kintul Gll ... d.
Respondents.
_ _.,. ...... . .. , iinit1iit!liiill ......
'k '"<: !'- ""'- -*'<"- ""-9'!"1' ! ................ ,. "''"'"'I< ' ..
219482012
NOTB OF.ISSUE WITH CBRnPICA.TE.OP'ltBADINESS
PETfDONB.Ji'SAFFIDAVITIN SUP.POltT'OFNOTE.OBJ'SSU. 'Wft1l .
CERTIFICATE OF READINESS FOR TIUALOF ISSIJES AND FOR PARTIAL
SEVIRANCE ,
Ex 1 - 21 April2012. White HOU&e Press Conference
li .
Itt 2 Paul. Bdward key Aftidlavit \tllk A- D
Ex3 -Copies of Sendee Aftldav.i.t. l.lJ =tiffed mail oaNo\rember 14,. 20l2
" :
Service Affidavit by ... mai:t nn 2tU2
Ex 4 - ...,, of the lUI oo lf.t 2t)l1
Ex 5 November 19', 20t2 decision and order by Hoa Da.v.1d J
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
Dated: B.-oolld.yn, N
Deeember
l
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 139 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit E
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 140 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK.
-against-
HAKEEM JEFFRIES ET AL
Petitioner,,
Respondents.
SPECIAL ELECTION PART

Hou. Da"Yid I. Schmidt
....... .. ------X
MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF
RESPO:NDENT'S MOTION TO DJSMISS TIIEVERtflEDPETITIONt
AND IN SUPPORT RESPONDENT'S CROSS-MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Steven C. Esq.
COLLERAN} O'HARA & MILLS. L.L.P.
Attorneys for Respondent, MARIO CILENTO
1225 Franklin Avenue, Suite 450
Garden New Yorktt530
(516)Z48-51.51
TAPLE OF CONTENTS
PREUMINARY STATEM.ENT ; .. .................................................................................... .
FACTUAL BACKGROUND.,. .............................................................. _ .... _ ........................ .
ARGUMENT
l. STANDAA.D roR A MO'tlON TO DISMISS ....... .................................................. .
U. THE VERIFlED PE.TmONMUSTBE DISl'vfiSSED BECAUSE
PETITIONER LACKS STANDING. AND THE VERIFIEllPETITION
FAILS TO STATE A CLAIM UPONWHICI-LRELIEFCAN BE GRANTED.
PRESENTS NQN-.JUSTICIABLE POLITICAL QUESl'lONS, and
CONTAINS DEFECTS ..... , ................................................. .
A. Petitioner LaCks Standing, Having Suffered No Particularized Injury ......... .
B. Pet.ilioner Fails to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can.
Be ()ranted, and Instead Non-Justiciable Political Questions ........ .
C. Petitioner"sCJaims.MuatBe Dismissed on the Grounds of Collateral
Estoppel .......................................................... .. .. "- ..
D. The Verified Petition Must Be Dismissed Because Petitioner Failed. to
Specify ihe Time aod Place of the Hearing on the Petition. and Failed to
Properly Serve fl,fr. Cilento .......................... ................................................ .
E. Petitioner's Conduct is WO.rthy of Saneti()n UnderPart 1.30 of the
Compilation.of New York Rules and Regulations ........................... .
CONCLUSlON .......................................................................... " ........................................ ..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 141 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
IABLEOFAUTHORil'IES
CaseS,.
A]Jen V. Wright.. 468 U.S. 737 (1984) .. , ........ ,. .............. ......... ................... 5
Buechel v. Bain.:97. N.Y;2d:.:29.S (2001) ...... .................................................................................... 7
Buder v. McCany.l9l Misc.2d Ct. MadisonCty, 2002) ................. .4
Butlerv. MCCartY. 762 N.Y.S.2d 129 (App. Div. 3d Dept. 2003) ........ ................................ m .... .4
FourSeasonsHotelsv. Viimik.St5N.Y.S.2d 1 (App.Div.lstDepL 1987) ................. - ............ ..4
Gilberg Barbied. 53 N.Y:.2d28S ... " ................................................................. 7
Guggenheimer v. :Giilsburg . 43 N. Y2d.268 (1977) ...... .................................................. _, ... ,, ........ 3.
Huntington Yacht Club v. hie. ViU. ofHunHMton BaY>
767 N.Y$.2d 132 (App.Div. 2dDept. 2.003) .... ; ....................................... m ............................. .4
Kent Truman . 9A.t>.2d,649.(l.st ........................................................................ 6
............... ............ ................................................. _ ... 3'
Lujan v. Defenders of WijdJife,.S04 U.S. :555 (1992) ........................................................... ... - .. .5
McNear,y v. Niagara MohawkPowerCom 728 840 (App. Div. 3d Dept. 2001) ......... .4
Morone v . M(lrone . SO N.Y .2d: 481 ( .............. .................................................................. 3
753N.Y.S;2d541 (App. Div. 3d Dept. 2002) ................ .4
Saratoga County.Chambet:ofCommerce v. Pataki,100N.Y.2d 801 (2003) ................................ ..4
Sibetskv v New York Citv. 270 A.D.2d 209 (1st Dept. 2000) ........................................................ 6
Strunk v. New YotkStateBd; of Elections. 35Mist:. 3d 1208(A) (Sup Ct 2012) ................. passim
Travis v. New York StateDem..of Envtt Conservation. 185 A.D.2d 714 (4th Dept.1992) .......... 7
Ulmann v. NorroaKamali Ttl<? 207 A.U.2d 691 (1st ................................................ .4
Statutes
42 u.s.c. 1983 ................ , .................. , .... ...... ................................................................................ 4
Civil Pu.cticeLaw: and Rules 3013 (McKinney ........................... - ............................ , ...... :5
Civil Pu.cticcLaw 11d Rules '32Jl (McKinney. 2012) ........................................................ - .... 3. 8
Civil Practice Law and 304 ........ ........................ ._ ......... - ................... 7
Civil Piactic:,e Law and Rules 308 (McKinney 2012) .................................................................... 8
Civil Practice Law and Rules 403 (McKinney 20 12) .............................................. - .................... 7

Rules
Civil Practice Law and Rules Rule 3014 (Me!Kinney 2012) ....................................................... 5. 6
22 NYCRR 130.1.1 .... ............... .. ....... ; ... m .:. .. :-.. ; ........ ......... - .................................. _8
Constitutional
u.s. Constitution Article 2,. l ........ ............... - ...................... - .......................... - ........... ...... !
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Respondent. MARIO submits this Memorandum of Law in Support of
Re.spondents Motion to Dismiss the Verified. Petition ofChristopher.:Earl Strunk (j'Petjtioner .. ),
fded on N\>VeJl1ber 14, 2012. As this Cou:rt L'> a wan; Petitioner is familiar with CC)urtS. of the
State of.New York. haviug,filed similar lawsuits in the past. In this latest.iteration, Petitioner
t to challenge of President Blll'ack Obama to.bc President of the ..Uuited
while also challenging the qualifications of twenty-nine (29) individuals. to serve as
[ electors in the E1ectoral College for the recently-held general election. Petitioner also :seeks an
:injunction staying electoral college vote (orDeeember lS. 2012, in order to .Ulow
I . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
this court to issue a declaratory judgment the U.S. Constitution.
PeQ!!oners Verified Petition must be dismissed because Petitioner Jacks standing to
i bring this having suffered no part,icularlzed Petitioner has also failed to state a
:claim upon which relief can be granted. and has presented to this Court a rambling set of
:
iju.'iticiabJe polit1cat This l$ m addition to (>asic pn:x:edural. and jurisdictional defects,
, im;Juding. failing to list a return date and location on tbe Notice of Petition, and improper serviee
I
, of the Respoudent, Mr.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 142 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On Nc)Vember 14, 20L2; Petitioner filed a Notice of Petition and Verified Petition in this
matte.r. requesting v.ario.us Jorms ofrelief. Affmnation of Steven c. Farltas . &hibit"A''.
Respondent MARIO CILENTO is the president of the New Y otk State AFL-CIO, and is also a
Democratic Presidential
As Judge:Schack commented in a_ prior decision e>n one of Peli.tionet's pre'iious
attempts to the same relief. the Petition rea$ more like a political manifesto tllail a claim
for relief. See Strunk v. New Xork.State Bd. of Elections. 35 Misc. 3d 1Z08(A)(Sup Ct 2012),
annexed to the Affirmation of Steven C. at Exhibit At its core,. the Petition appears
to be a challenge to the qualifications of President Samek to position e>f the
President of !he United States . ThiS challenge is based primarily on the claim that President
Obama is not il. citizen . of the United States, a claim that hu beep kept
Un:ougboul the last four years by sQ-'caUed ''birther' movement.- Petitioner contends .that
President Obama is guilty of a number of offenses. including forgery and theft,. in addition to the
disqualifying of not being a citizen of the :United States, Further
allegations include the claim that Pre.<;ident Obama commits treason by actively giving aid and
<;Omfort t() of theU.nited States.
Thouglt diffiult to discern, the Petition suggests that any member of Electoral
College who ca.o;U a vot.e for President Obama is guilty of aiding and abetting in the
4
'usurpation''
of the Office. of the President. MARlO CILENTO, along with .most of'the other Respondents, is
an elec:tor who east a vote for the President of the. United States on December 15, 2012 ..
Petitioner alleges that any elec:tor who casts such a vote is an aecessory to a felony. and asks the
Court to enjoin tbe vote until a decision can be madQ on the issue of whether or not President
2
<.;.
Obama is qualified . to hold the Office. Petitioner also seeks a judgment from this CQurt,
declaring the election ofUoited States Senator Kirsten GilUbrand to be void .. ab inilio'". dmHo
, the alleged disqualification of the Respondents as. electors. The remaining five (5) .. questions"
are aU. variations on that theme.
Petitioner has not joined Governor Cuomo, Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli,
Attorney General Eric Schneid.ennan, or New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.
based on a restriction found in Judge Scllack's Order of April 11.2012 .. On 19,
this Court 4ecUned to sign Petitioner!s Order b;) Show Cause seeking the relief requested in tbe
Verified Petition. because the. Petitioner had not obtahied court approval to join these
parties. Priorto the issuance of.tbat Order, in lieu of propedy serving Mr. Petitioner
I .
mailed the Notice of Petition and Verified Petition to Mr. CILENTO at his house, v.ia certified
mail.
J.
ARGUMENT
STANDARD FORA MOTION TO DISMISS
Petitioner's Verified Petitttln .must be dismissed pursuant to N.Y. CPLR 32ll(a){7). as
the Verified Petition fails to set forth a cause of action upon w_)lich relief can be granted. When
deciding a CPLR 32U(a)(7) moti_on to dismiss. courts will liberally construe the pleadings and
aecept the facts alleged in the complaint as true. See Leon v. Martinez. $4 83, t:l (1994)
citing Momne v. Morone. 50 N.Y.2d 481,484 (1980). "The criterion is whether the proponent
of the pleading has a cause ofaction, not whether he has stated one. hh citing Ouggenheii:ner v.
Ginsburg.431'tf.Y.2d 268,215 (1977). Review of a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211
. requires tbe court to accept as true the allegations contained in the complaint aruJ.to accord the
plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference and detetinine whether the facts alleged state
3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 143 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
any legal claim. Butler v. 191 2d. 318; 740. N.Y.2d 801 (Sup. Ct
Madison Cty. 2002),eff!:J, Butler v.McCarty,762}.tY.S.2d129(App.Div. 3dDept . 2003).
. moreis 11eeded to claim llilegatii)J)s.which are Oi.'
vague. Niagara MOhawk Power Cotp .. v. 753 N.Y.S.2d 541. 545 (App.
(citing McNearv v, Niagam MOhawk Power Couh 728 840 Div. 3d. Dept.
2001)); Four Seasrins Hotels v. Vinruk: . 515 (App' J)i:v. lstDept.
Huntington YaCht Club v. Inc, Vill. of Huntington 767 N.Y.S.ld 132, 134 Cl\PP .Div. 2d
Dept. 2003) (diSmissing a 42 tlS.Q. where tllaintiff to allege facts
to support its conclusocywlegation.that it was treated differently from other simllarlysituated
applicants."),
The.inslMt Petition must. if is. fmed. With nothing tl,lore than C(inclU$0ty
allegations. Petltion(l['s claim mu-;the dismissed because the Court need not accept sweeping
legal tQnclusions <:astin .()f UJmann v. Nonraa Ka:JnaH. Inc., 207
A.D.2d 691 (lst Dept. 1994). Similar to the claims made by this !arne Petitioner in Strunk,
Petitioner's. ArtiCle 78 Ve.dfied .Petition is. more Qf apoUtical:Qlarlifesto th11Jl
U. THE VERil!'IED PETmON MUST BE DISMISSED :BECAUSE PETITIONER
LACKS STANDING, AND THE VERJFlED PETITION FAILS TO STATE A
CLAL\f li'PON WBlCH ULJEF. CAN BE GRANTED, PRESENTS NON-
JUSTICIABLE Q"QESTIONS,;AND CONTAINS J1JRISIUCTJONAL
DEFECTS
;... Petition_,., Uu*5 Standing, Having No Particularized Injury
Standing to is. -a compQnent of the it1dictal system. gttarding Plllh.way to
Coun house.forthose seekingjudiclal relief. Saratoga County Cllamber o{Commeree v. Pataki
100 801. &12 (200?). It is. a !d.. m orderfor a Jitipnt to have
that litigant ll111$thave au interest in the claim at issue iliat the law willrecogt:Uze:as a sufficient
4
;I..
. predicate fo.r the issue .at theJitigant' s request. Strunk, 35 Misc. 3d 1208(A). at * ll.
The party seeking_ relief must have SU$tained an, injury fairly traceable to the Respondel)ts'
: allegedly unlawful conducl:. and likely to be redressed by the requested relief. ld. at *12; citing
' Allen v. Wright.. 468 737, 751 (1984).
Here. Petitioner lacks' stand,iiig because his only are infringeJl1eriron
rig}lt to suffrage. form of government, freedom and liberty." Affirmation
Exhibit .. A", p.14, f35. These arc the l)'pe ()f .. generally available grievances abotlt
go,ernmentclaiming only harm to his and every citiWl'S in proper application of the
Constitution and and seekiut; relief that no more directly and tangibly benefits him than it
dotS the public at h1rge<\ that the United Supreme Court already decided n[do] not
.state an Article m case or controveJSy.'' Lujan v. Defenclers of WUdlife .504 U.S. 555
1
571
(1992). Similar to the claims in Strunk . here again only raises "abstract and
. 1heoretical claims, . failing. w. show any <>f a particularized injury.'' Id. at 12. Here. as
. in &!:!!!!k. the claims must be dismissed with prejudice.
B. Peb'tioner Fails to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Om
Be Granted, and Instead Presents NOJJJustieiable Political Question&
Petitioner's claims must be dismissed because they amount lo nothing more than bare
legal conclusion$,. which are nothing more than "bald cloaked facur 35
, Misc. 3d 1208(A), at*12, &i!.Wg Ruffmo v. New York City Tr.Auth . SS A.P.3d 817, .818 (2C
Dept. '11Je nnribling, confusing. often incomprehensible statements also fail to. provide
i Resporufents with lhe required by CPLR 3013 and CPLR Rule 3014. Section 3013
requires statements in a pleading to be "sufficiently particular to give the court and parties notice
of the transactions, occuriet:Ices. or series of.transactions or occw:rencs.:inttmded.to be proved
and the material elements of eaclfcauseof action or.defen$e."' Rule 3014 also requires "separate
5
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 144 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
..
eauses of action or defenses shan be separately stated and nmnbered and may be stated
regardless of consistency/' CPLR Rule 3014. The First Department has. stated that
that are not enough to lhe. parties with of the
transaction or occurrences to be proved must be. dismisSed/" Sibersk,y v New Yortc Cit;X, 270
AD.2d 209 (lst Dept. 2000).
The VerJficd ,Petition must be dismissed .because Petitioney has failed to follow the
requirements of the CPLR. this Court. and .the. Respondents. have been
presented \\ith the type of pleadingtbaUudgeScback call ella
Rambling ,prolbt -:complaint, with its in:elevant, scattershot morass of .aUeged
historical teferencesi virulent ;mti-Catholic meto.ric and extens.ive political rant
fails c.q "'ead his .alleged causes of .actiOn ia a manner "sufficient! y particular to
give cthe tourt and parties Mtlce Of the transactions. OCeutxences:, ()f. s.mes of
transactions. oroccunenccs, intended.tobt provat.and die material dements of
each cause of action and organized in jplain and concise statements in
consecutively numbered paragraphs.'
. 35 Misc. 3d 1208(A); at *13,. There,. as the nor this
Oourt, should be fo.rced to spell out. an arguable shadow of a cause of action. !!:b. i!i.ng Kent v.
Tnmum. 9 i\.D.2d_ 649 {1st .Dept. l9S?>
The claims in the Verified Petition center-around the quaJifteatiorts of President Bm:ack
Obama to hold and the voting procedures Qf the Electoral College. These claims.
are.non.;.justiciable political questions. 35 Mise:. 3d 1:20S(A), at *14. This Cow:t is
to pass judgment on left to the entities of 1M federal government to which tite
Constitution delegates such authority . I!L. at *15.
C. CJailllS Mu,t Be ,DismJS&!d on.tlbe of C91l;,tte.-al Estoppel.
A$ shown ,above; Petitioner, has already brought tlllese claims in the courts .of the. State of
New York, and has had them dismissed with prejudice in the matter of 35 Misc. 3d
6
"'-
J208(A). The doctrine of collateral estQppcb is ''based on the notion that it is not fair tc). pemiit a
party to reliligate an issue which ba.-. been .decided against him in a proceeding in
which he had a fair opportllnity to tully litigate the point:' Gilberg v. Barbieri, 53 N. Y.2d
291. (1981). As stated by the CoUrt of in Buechel v Bain, "'fhere must be an identity of
issue which has necessarily been decided in the prior action and is decisive of the present action,
.and there must have been a ful[ arid fair opportunity to eontSt. the decision now said to. be.
controlling." 97 N.Y2d 29$, 303-3o4 (2001).
Here, Petitioner has already litigated 1nany of these issues in &n!gt,. cited above. He
recognizes this fact by saying llaat .Petitioner seeks equity relief o.n six (6) issues of Law wilh
Facts pertaining to the misapplication and misadministration of Public Officer acts as relate to
fhe.Oecember 5, 2008.0rder and Declsi()n as a nuitter of State Law heard by the Honorable
L Schmidt 1.S.C: Aff. at Exhibit .. A' ... p,2. CoUateral estoppel must preclude
PetitiQner from pursuing the instant action.
D .. The Verified Petition.Must Be Dismissed Because Petitioner Fail.ed to Specify the
TlDle and Place of the Hearing on the Petition, and Failed to Property Serve Mr.
Cilento.
Petitioner's Verified Petition must be dismissed beCause the Notite of Petition failed to
specify the time and place of the scheduled hearing on the as required by CPLR 403. In
New York, ,a special commenced, and jurisdiction acquired. by service. of a notice
: of petition. See CPLR 304. By not indicating a return date. Petitioner failed to comply with
1
those. statutory requirements. preVenting this Coutt from ac:quiring personal jurisdiction over the,
, ResJlOndents. This must lt2d to the dismissal of the Petition. See Tra"is ,v. New York State :bepL
ofEnytl. Consetvttlon. 185 714 (4th Dept.1992).
7
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 145 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
1,.
Further. the CPLR spells out the methods for With initiator)' papers.
Mr. CILENTO is a natural person, meaning that the Petitioner must <:Omply with the service
in CPLR 308. Qf the. described in sU\tute include s-endi"g
the Notice of ,Petition.and Yedfied PetitionbY Certified Mail. Return. .Receipt This is
the method Petitionet"used SW/e Mr . CILEN:J'O; See Farka$ Aff .. at.&hibit -c 'l"hus. this
Court dOes. l1pt have personal jl.lrisdlction Mr. CILENTO. by virtue of Petitioiier!s repeated
failure$ to comply the
E . Petitioner's cOnduct is :Worthy of Sanction Under l'art :130 of the Compilation
of New York Codes, Rules anc) :RegulatioDs
As this Court is well P.elitinnerhas aheady litigated the issues that art discussed in
the Verified Petition. The Compilation of New YQJk and allows
Court. in its .discretion'\ to financial sanctioos upon pftriy of attorney in a civn
action or proceeding who. in frivolous conductf'.$Sdefmed in P$.1130 . NYCRR
130-Ll(a). Part 130 later cxn:tdttct as which b"completely With()ut merit
in law and ca.wwt be supported by a reasonable;. argument.for an exten&ion, modification or
reversal 22NYCRR
As discussed in 3d 1208()\), Plaiiilillts claims appear to be
requiring an intetpretll,tion of th.e United States Constiu.tion that. is completely wi'lhout merit in
law .As such. Petitioner should be forced: to pay for l!.he costs incurred by Respc)ndent in
respondinglO the
CONCLUSION
Based on the, foregoing. Respundent respectfully requests that upon the Notice of Motion
1 ,_ t() Djsmiss dated December 18. 2.012; the Affilma.Uon of: Steven C, Farkas in with
'B
aiiJle:ted exhibits. aud .the Memorandum of Law submitted in support of this Motion to Dismiss,
andln Support of Respondent's Cross-Motit>n for Sanctions, daied December 18, 2012, that tbi,
Court an Order and Judgment dismissing the 2012 Verified Petition filed by
Petitioner STRUNK. against Respondent, in its entirety, and for such
; other and furiher relief 8$ this Court deemsjus.t. proper: and equitable, including sanctions against
, the Petitioner. and the costs of this motion.
'Dated: Garden City. New York
December 13, 2012
,c
...'HARA ... . &. MILLS . LLP.
By: . f'z:?-
STEVEN C. FARKAS
Attomej$.for RespolidCnt, MARIO ClLENTO
1225 Fratiklin Avenue. Suite 450
Gatden City, New York 11530
(516) 248-S7S7
9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 146 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME.COUR.TOF THE STATE Of NEW YORK
COUNTY OFK1NGS
-.;... . ..; .. _..;_...,.._ __ .


SPECIAL ELECTION PART
-against-
HAXEBM JEFFRIES ET AL.,
Index N2.!
Hon. David I. Schmidt
Respondents.
__________ ....---........ ..... ----- ..
SIRS:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon .the: attached Affirmation of' STEVEN
on .Deeember.l8, 2012._ with supporting Exhibits;; and the
Memorandun1 of Law in Support of Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the :Verified l
in Support of Respondents Cross.;Motion fur theRespcindent MARIO
his attorneys COLLERAN. O'HARA& MlLLS L.L.P, will-move this Cqurl,8t Room
the Suprem,e Court of the State. of New County of Kiilgs, 360 Adams Street, 1
New York, on Januari 22, 2013 .ol" as soon theteafter as counsel may l>e heard.
an to N.Y. C.P.L.R. 3211 directing the of$BJ Ordef'and Judgment for
Respondent andagainstilie Petitioner dismissing the. Verified.Petition dated. November
and for such. othet' and further relit:{' as iO this. Court may seem and. priJperi including!
sanctions againstthe Petitioner, and the costs of this motion.
PLEASE TAKE FURTBERNOTICE tbataU answering: papers served on
undersigned on or before J:anwuy lS, 2Qt3.
Dated: .Garden City:, New York
December 18, 2012
TO: CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK
593
}lrooklyn, New York ll2l3
ll.'Y ubm .. i.tted.. ..
STEV
Attorney for Respondent MARIO CILENTO
COLLERAN. O'HARA & MILLS, L.I ..P.
1225 Frimklin Avenue, Suite 4SO
Garden City, New York 11530
Tel. No. (S l6) 248-5151
NEW YORK
OF K1NOS
........ ----- ----------X
CHRISTOPHER--:EARL S'IRUNK.

-against-
HAKE&\1 JEFFRIES ETAL.
ReSpondents.
------------'---:...-------""'-_,.;...., ____ X
SPECIAL ELECllO!ol PART
.Index No.: 21948112
Hon. David J. Schmidt
AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
STEVEN c. FARKAS, an attorney duly admitted before the courts. of the State of
New York, hereby affirms the following under the threat of perjury:
l) That I am associated with the law firm ofCoUeranJ O'Hara & MiUs
attorneys for ,the Respondent MARIO ClLBNTOt and that I submit this Affinnation in
Support ofNlA.RJO CILENTO's Motion to Dismiss theVerified Petition of Christopher-
Earl StmnkdatedNovember l3t2012in its.entifetypursuant toCPLR 321l(a)(7).
2) That I am fully familiar with the f-acts, circumstances and materials of this
proceeding,
3) On or about November l6t 2012. Petitioner
STRUNK ("Petitionerry commenced the instant action by Notice of Petition and Verified
Petition against a number of including MARlO CILENTO. Annexed.hereto
as Exhibit "A" is a copy of the Notice ofPetition and Verified Petition.
4) Oninfonnation and. beliet the Notice of Petition and Verified Petition w&-e
I
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 147 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
sentto Mr. CILENTO via Cem.fied Mait Return Receipt Requested. Au.:hedas Exlnbit
;4_Bn is copy of the certified mail en:velope that was used to send tbe paper.; to Mr. Cilento.
S) 1n this. action. Petitipntr seeks various fonns of relict aU aimed at SfJiyi.ng
the New York Electoral. College vote. unti1. the Court renders a judgmenr on.
iSsl1es of law regardingthe United States Exhibit "N'at
6) Petitioner appears to challenging pnb.lie electibns on the grounds that the
candidates are not qualified to bold 1bus making an elecl;oral vote in 1heif favor .a
violation of the
7) Prior to the instant itt. 2008 tmd. the same
Petitioner herein commenced two (2) proeeedings against various
s:imilar relief. See 29641108,.29642/08 and:6S00/20H. Annexed hereto as
&Jlii)it"C', is m Strunk v .. New YorkState.Bd. of
plootionst Index No. Misc. l2Q$(A)[Sup. Kings .Cty. 2012].
3) No request for such been by MARIO CILENTO.
II
your affimtaid:
dismiSsing the November 13, 2012 Pd.itioa
p
; STRUNK, against in its entiR:ty+ pur.!iO\!JIIt n; S ..Y;. CP{..lt:
and fot sucb 01her;: and further relief as this Court deems just. proper
including 1he costs of'this motion..
Dated: Garoen City. New York
December 18,2012
COLLERAN, O':HAR,A & MILLS, LLP
Attorneys for MARJO ClLENTO

STEVENC. FARKAS
lZ2SFranklin Avenue, Suite 450
Garden NeW York 11530
(Sl<i) 248-.5757
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 148 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
.. .. .......
fl.!LDA.rC{)Tt'(.UUht
--------ciiiliiFiEii MAil.:--------
... .
7Dlf! :LOlD DODD 1:.&7'1 lf61:!5 tOOO .
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 149 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit F
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 150 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
P R E S EN T: QM. ,mPt ... scW>C\{J.S.C
HON. ARTHUR
Justice.
CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK, in esse
Plaintiff,
-against-
NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS;
JAMES A. WALSH/Co-Chair, DOUGLAS A.
KELLNER/Co-Chair, EVELYN J. AQVILN
Commissioner, GREGORY P. PETERSON/
Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D.
VALENTINE, Deputy Director STANLY ZALEN;
ANDREW CUOMO, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN,
THOMAS P. DINAPOLI, RUTH NOEMI COLON,
in their Official and individual capacity, Fr. JOSEPH A.
O'HARE, S.J.; Fr. JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J.;
FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ, JR.; PETER G.
PETERSEN; ZBlGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI;
MARK BRZEZINSKI; JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.;
SOEBARKA!f {a.k.a Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack
Hussein Obama, a.k.a Steve Dunham); NANCY
PELOSI; DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE OF
THE STATE OF NEW YORK; STATE COMMITTEE
OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW
-f-
At an IAS Term, Part 27 of
the Supreme Court of the
State ofNew York, held in
and for the County of
Kings, at the Courthouse,
at Civic Center, Brooklyn,
New York, on the lith day
of April2012
DECISION & ORDER
Index No. 6500/11
SCHNEIDERMAN, Comptroller THOMAS DINAPOLI, the NEW YORK STATE
BOARD OF ELECTIONS, billionaires PETER PETERSEN, PENNY PRlTZKRR,
GEORGE SOROS and six New York State political parties. Thirteen motions are
pending before the Court.
Plaintiff STRUNK's complaint is a rambling, forty-five page variation on "birther"
cases, containing !50 prolix paragraphs, in at times a stream of consciousness. Plaintiff's
central a! legation is that defendants President OBAMA and Senator McCAIN, despite not
being "natural born" citizens of the United States according to plaintiff's interpretation of
Article II, Section l, Clause 5 ofthe U.S. Constitution, engaged with the assistance of
other defendants in an extensive conspiracy, on behalfofthe Roman Catholic Church to
defraud the American people and usurp control oft!Je Presidency in 200.8. Most of
plaintiff STRUNK's complaint is a lengthy, vitriolic, baseless diatribe against defendants,
but most especially against the Vatican, the Roman Catholic Church, and particularly the
Society of Jesus (the Jesuit Order).
Plaintiff STRUNK alleges seven causes of action: breach of state constitutional
fiduciary duty by the NEW YORl< ST 1\ TR BOARD OF ELECTIONS and public officer
defendants; denial of equal for voter expectation of a cotTect ballot; denial of
substantive due process for voter expectation of a correct ballot; interference with the
right to a republican form of government by the two Jesuit defendants and defendant
F.A.O. SCHWARZ, m .. , who were all members of the New York City Campaign Finance
-3-
YORK STATE; ROGER CALERO; THE SOCIALIST
WORKERS PARTY; IAN J. BRZEZINSKI; JOIIN
SIDNEY MCCAIN III; JOliN A. BOEHNER; THE
NEW YORK STATE REPUBLICAN STATE
COMMI'ITEE; THE NEW YORK STATE
COMMITTEE OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY;
STATE COMMITTEE OF THE CONSERVATIVE
PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE; PENNY S.
PRlTZKER; GEORGE SOROS; OBAMA FOR
AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND; MCCAIN
VICTORY 2008; MCCA.JN-PALIN VICTORY 2008;
JOHN AND JANE DOES; and XYZ ENTITIES.
Defendants.
The following papers numbered 1 to 25 read on this motion:
Notice of Motion and Notice of Cross-Motion and
and Affidavits (Affirmations) _________ _
Opposing Affidavits (Affirmations) _______ _
Reply Affidavits {Aflinnations).;__ _______ _
Papers Numbered:
1- 13
14-21
22-25
If the complaint in this action was a movie script, it would be entitled The
Manchurian Candidate Meets TheDa Vinci Code. Prose plaintiff CHRISTOPHER-
EARL STRUNK brings this action against numerous defendants, including President
BARACK OBAMA, Vice President JOSEPH BID EN, Senator JOHN MCCAIN, Speaker
of the House of Representatives JOHN BOEHNER, fotmer House of Representatives
Speaker NANCY PELOSI, Governor ANDREW CUOMO, Attorney General ERlC
-2-
Board; interference with plaintiffs election franchise; a scheme to defraud plaintiff of a
reasonable expectation of successful participation in the suffrage process; and, a scheme
by all defendants for unjust enrichment.
Plaintiff requests a declaratory judgment and a prelimimuy injunction against
defendants, including: enjoining the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS
from puUing Presidential candidates on the ballot for 2012 unless they provide proof of
eligibility, pursuant to Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution; ordering
that this eligibility certification be submitted to the Court for proof of compliance;
enjoining the Jesuits froin interfcting with the 2012 elections; ordering expedited
discovery to determine the scope of damages, alleged to be more than $12 billion; and,
ordering a jury trial for punitive treble dan1ages.
Various defendants or groups of defendants, all represented by counsel, present
eleven motions to dismiss and one motion to admit an attorney pro hace vice for this
action. The eleven individual defendants. or groups of defendants arc, in chronological
order of filing their motions to dismiss: defendants President BARACK OBAMA, Vice
President JOSEPH BIDEN, OBAMA FOR AMERlCA and the OBAMA VICTORY
FUND; defendants MCCAIN VICTORY 2008, MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008 and
Senator JOHN MCCAIN; defimdants MARK BRZEZINSKI and TAN BRZEZINSKI;
defendant Representative NANCY PF.LOSI; defendant GEORGE SOROS; defendants
THE SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY and ROGER CALERO; defendant Speaker
-4-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 151 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
JOHN GOEHNER; defendant ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI; defendants Father JOSEPH A.
O'HARE, S.J., Father JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J. and FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ,
JR.; defendant PENNY PRITZKER; and defendant PETER G. PETERSEN. The eleven
motions to dismiss assert: plaintiff STRUNK lacks standing; plaintiff STRUNK fails to
s t a t ~ a claim upon which relief can be granted; plaintiff STRUNK fails to plead fraud
with particularity; the action is frivolous; plaintiff STRUNK is batTed by collateral
estoppel from pursuing this action; and, the Court lacks both personal and subject matter
jurisdiction in this action.
The motion to admit counsel pro hace vice for the instant action, by counsel for
de!t:ndants MCCAIN VICTORY 2008, MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008 and Senator
JOHN MCCAIN, for Todd E. Phillips, Esq., a member in good standing of both the
California and District of Columbia bars, is granted.
Further, plaintiff STRUNK cross-moves to consolidate the instant action with a
similar "birther" action filed by him, Strunk v Paterson, eta/, Index No. 29642/08, in the
Kings County Special Election Part, before Justice David Schmidt. Many of the
defendants oppose consolidation because Strunk v Paterson, et al, Index No. 29642/08, is
a disposed case.
The cross-motion to consolidate this action with Strunk v Paterson, eta/, Index
No. 29642/08, is denied. Defendants who oppose plaintiffs cross-motion are correct.
Justice Schmidt disposed of Strunk v Paterson, et al, Index No. 29642/08, on the grounds
-5-
Commissioner, GREGORY I>. PETERSON/Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D.
V ALENTIN.E, and Deputy Director STANLY ZALEN; ANDREW CUOMO, ERIC
SCHNEIDERMAN, THOMAS P. DINAPOLI and RUTH NOEMI COLON, in their
Official and individual capacity; Father JOSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J.; Father JOSF.PII P.
PARKES, S.J.; FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ, JR.; PETER G. PETERSEN;
ZBIGNIEW KA!MIERZ BRZEZINSKI; MARK BRZEZINSKI; JOSEPH R. BIDEN,
JR.; BARACK H. OBAMA, NANCY PELOSI; thcDEOMCRATIC STATE
COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK; the STATE COMMI'!TEE OF THE
WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE; ROGER CALERO; the
. SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY; IAN J. BRZEZINSKI; JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III;
JOHN A. BOEHNER; the NEW YORK STATE REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE;
the NEW YORK STATE COMMITTEE OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY; the
STATE COMMITTEE Or THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE;
PENNY S. PRITZKER; GEORGE SOROS; OBAMA FOR AMERICA; OBAMA
VICTORY FUND; MCCAIN VICTORY 2008; and MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008;
without prior approval of the appropriate Administrative Justice or Judge.
Background
Plaintiff STRUNK previously commenced similar actions in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District ofNew York and this Court, the Supreme Court of
-7-
of collateral estoppel, failure to join necessary parties and laches.
The eleven motions to dismiss are all granted and plaintifTSTRUNK's instant
complaint is dismissed with prejudice. It is clear that plaintiff STRUNK: lacks standing;
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; fails to plead fraud with
particularity; and, is barred by collateral estoppel. Also. this Court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over most, if not all, defendants.
Furthennore, plaintiff STRUNK's instant action is frivolous. As will be
explained, plaintiff STRUNK alleges baseless claims about defendants which are
fanciful, fantastic, delusional and irrational. It is a waste of judicial resources for the
Court to spend lime on the instant action. Moreover, the Court will conduct a hearing to
give plaintiff STRUNK a reasonable opportunity to be heard, pursuant to 22 NYCRR
130-1.1, as to whether or not the Court should award costs and/or impose sanctions upon
plaintiff STRUNK for his frivolous conduct. At the hearing, an opportunity will be given
to counsel for defendants to present detailed records of costs incurred by their clients in
the instant action.
Therefore, plaintiff STRUNK, who is not a stranger in the courthouses of New
York, is enjoined fiom commencing future litigation in the New York State Unified Court
System against: the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, JAMES A.
WALSH/ Co-Chair, DOUGLAS A. KELLNER!Co-Chair, EVELYN J. AQUILN
-6-
the State of New York, Kings County. In Strunk v New York State Board of Elections, et
al., Index No. 08-CV4289 (US Dist Ct, F.DNY, Oct. 28,2008, Ross, J.), the Court
dismissed the action because of plaintiffs lack of standing, failure to state a claim and
frivolousness. In that action, plaintiff STRUNK accused the NEW YORK STATE
BOARD OF ELECTIONS of"misapplication and misadministration of state law in
preparation for the. November 4, 2008 Presidential General Election" by, among other
things, in ~ 5 1 of the complaint, of "failure to obtain and ascertain that Barrack Hussein
Obama is a natural citizen, otherwise contrary to United States Constitution Article 2
Second I Clause 5 [sic]" and demanded "Defendants are to provide proof that Barrack
Hussein Obama is a natural born citizen and if not his electors are to be stricken from the
ballot [sic]." Judge Ross, at page 6 of her decision, held "the court finds that portions of
plaintiffs affidavit rise to the level of the irrational" and, in footnote 6, Judge Ross cited
two prior 2008 Eastern District cases filed by plaintiff STRUNK in which "the court has
determined that portions of plaintiffs complaints have contained allegations that have
risen to the irrational."
My Kings County Supreme Court colleague, Justice Schmidt, in Strunk v Palerson,
et al, Index No. 29642/08, as cited above, disposed ofthat matter, on March 14,2011, by
denying all of plaintiffs motions and noting that the statute of! imitations expired to join
necessary parties President OBAMA and Senator MCCAIN. Further, Justice Schmidt
-8-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 152 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
denied plaintiff an opportunity to file affidavits of service nunc pro tunc and to amend the
complaint.
Then, plaintiff STRUNK, eight days later, on March 22, 20 II, commenced the
instant action by filing the instant verified complaint. Plaintiff STRUNK's complaint
recites numerous baseless allegations about President OBAMA. These allegations are
familiar to anyone who follows the "birther'; movement: President OBAMA is not a
natural-born" citizen of the United States; the President is a radical Muslim; the
President's Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth docs not prove that he was born in Hawaii;
and, President OBAMA is actually a citizen of Indonesia, the United Kingdom, Kenya, or
all of the above. For example, Plaintiff STRUNK alleges, in '\124 of the complaint, that
President OBAMA:
is a Madrasah trained radical Sunni Muslim by birth right ... practices
Shariah law ... with the full knowledge and blessing of Defendants:
Peter G. Peterson; Zhigniew Brzezinski; his sons Mark and Jan; Penny
S. Pritzkcr; George Soros; Jesuits Fathers: Joseph P. O'Hare, Joseph
P. Pukes; Brennan Center Executive Frederick A. 0. Schwarz, Jr.;
Nancy Pelosi, John Sidney McCain III; John A. Boehner; Hillary Clinton;
R.ichard Durbin and others.[sic]
-9-
complaint weaves the occasional true but irrelevant fact into plaintiffs rambling stream
of consciousness.
Moreover, plaintiff STRUNK alleges, 22 of the complaint, that defendant
Vice President niDEN knew that President OBAMA was ''not eligible to run for
president because he is not a Natural-Born Citizen with a British Subject Father with a
student visa. however in furtherance ofCFR [Council on Foreign Relations] foreign
policy initiatives in the mid-east supp01tcd Soebarkah [President OBAMA] as a Muslim
[sic]."
Also, Plaintiff STRUNK discusses, in the complaint, then-Senator OBAMA's
April 2008 co-sponsorship of Senate Resolution 511. This resolved unanimously that
Senator MCCAIN, born in 1936 in Panama, while his father was on active duty in the
United States Navy at Coco Sola Naval Air Station, is a natural born citizen of the United
States. This resolution put to rest questions about Senator MCCAIN'S eligibility to run
for President. However, plaintiff STRUNK alleges, 43 of the complaint, that Senate
Resolution 511 "is part of the scheme to defraud" and "a fraud upon Congress and the
People of the several states and territories contrary to the facts." Then, plaintiff
STRUNK, in ,144 of the complaint, cites Senate Resolution 51 I 's text as evidence that
President OBAMA concedes that the definition of natural born citi7.enship for President
requires both parents of a candidate be U.S. citizens at birth. Further, the complaint
-II-
1ben, 28 of the complaint, plaintiff STRUNK alleges that President OBAMA
"or his agent(s) as part of the scheme to defraud placed an image of Hawaiian
Certification of Live Bilth (COLB) on the Interest ... and as a prima facie fact means the
I lawaii issued COLB does not prove 'natural born' citizenship or birth in Hawaii, only a
long .form document would [sic.]"
Plaintiffs alleged vast conspiracy implicates of political and religious
figures, as well as the 2008 presidential candidates from both major parties, with
. numerous absurd allegations. They range from claiming that an associate at the large law
firm of Kirkland and Ellis, LLP masterminded the conspiracy because she wrote a law
review article about the U. S. Constitution's natural born citizen requirement for the
office of President to the assertion that Islam is a seventh century A.D. invention of the
Vatican. Further, plaintiff STRUNK alleges, 129 of the complaint, that he:
is the only person in the USA to have dulyflredflredflredBHO [President
OBAMA] on January 23,2009 by registered mail (rendering BHO the
USURPER as Plaintiff is entitled to characterize BHO as) on the grounds
that he had not proven himself eligible ... and all acts by the usurper arc
void ab initio- a serious problem! [sic]
Plaintiffs allegations are strongly anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim and xenophobic. The
-10-
alleges that JOHN MCCAIN and ROGER CALERO, presidential candidate of the
SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY, were also ineligible, like then-Senator OBAMA, for
President because of their failure to qualifY under the natural born citizen requirement.
Plaintiffs alleged injury, 47 ofthe complaint, is "[t]hat on November4, 2008,
Plaintiff, as a victim of the scheme to defraud, voted for the electors representing ...
McCain ... not a natural-born U.S. citizen." Further, 49 of the complaint, "as pat1 of
the scheme to defraud, Plaintiff voted for Candidate McCain despite the fact that his wife
is a most devoted Roman Catholic whose two sons were educated by Jesuit priests."
Plaintiff alleges, 51 ofthe complaint, that Senator MCCAIN, was born in
Colon Hospital, Colon, Panama, which was not in the Panama Canal Zone. Further,
plaintiff alleges, in 'fi 52 of the complaint, that according to the November I 8, 1903 Hay-
Bunau Varilla Treaty, by which the United States obtained the Canal Zone, Senator
MCCAIN is not a natural-born citizen.
Plaintiff STRUNK, in his finaJ t;venty pages of the complaint, alleges that the
massive conspiracy to defraud American voters was perpetrated by hundreds of
individuals, at the behest of the Roman Catholic Church and especially the with
the aim of bringing about the Apocalypse through the destruction of the AI Aqsa Mosque
in Jerusalem and the re-building a new Jewish Temple on that site. Among the entities
that Plaintiff STRUNK implicates in his alleged conspiracy me: the Muslim Brotherhood;
-12-
- - -.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 153 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
the Cnrlyle Group; the CFR; Halliburton; Kirkland and Ellis, LLP; and, the Brennan
Center for Justice at NYU. For example, 91 of the complaint, plaintiff STRUNK
states:
That members of the Council on Foreign Relations including
Peter G. Petersen as then Chaim1an that act with the Jesuit Order by
the oath of allegiance superior to the United States Constitution, Treaties,
and various States' Constitutions that starting no later than J aliuary 2006
sought to usurp the executive branch of government using Barack Hussein
Obama II and John S. McCain Ill, as a matched set of contenders then
under joint command and control, to preclude any other contender in
preparation for a banking and sub-prime mortgage collapse that requires
subsuming the sovereignty oft11e people of the united States of America
and New York to Intemational Monetary Fund conditionality with loss of
the dollar reserve currency status, and collapse of the living standards of
the vast of the Americans to that of a third world status. [sic]
Plaintiff STRUNK. in1jl39 of the complaint, alleges that defendant GEORGE
SOROS "proves his. allegiance to Rome by promoting Muslim Brotherhood overt control
-13-
Article rr, Section I, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, means that not only the candidate
is natural born, but both of the candidate's parents are natural borri.
The following exchange at the oral arguments took place, at tr., p. 34, line 25 - p.
35, line 16:
MR. STRUNK:
TifF. COURT:
MR. STRUNK:
My injury, I voted for McCain.
Is that an injury?
My injury is he did not challenge Mr. Obama
afler he went through the whole exercise:
UlliCOURT: You're saying he should have challenged Mr.
Obama's presidency?
MR. STRUNK: Absolutely, and the ballot. The onus is on me
because he violated his agreement with me. You can't challenge the eligibility
until he's up to be sworn. McCain, since everybody in Congress, since they
didn't want to know about anything, so it was my responsibility. I fired him
by registered mail within 72 hours.
THE COURT: I saw your letter that you fired the President.
I guess he didn't agree with you because he's still there.
-IS-
of Egypt ... We cannot forget that the Jesuits in Cairo created the Muslim Brotherhood in
1928,the san)e year the Order created Opus Dei in Spain [sic]." Further, plaintiff
STRUNK, 145 of the complaint alleges that "Defendants Pritzkcr and Soros have
managed a crucial role for the Vatican State as a member of the CfR and high level
Freemasonry and in conjunction with King Juan Carlos (the King of Jerusalem) to create
global regionalism that subsumes national sovereignty of the USA and the People of New
York state to the detriment ofplaintiffand those similarly situated rsic]."
Eleven defendants or groups of defendants filed motions to dismiss, arguing that
plaintiff STRUNK: lacks standing; failed to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted; failed to plead fraud with particularity; and, is barred by collateral estoppel.
Further, defendants argue that the Court lacks both personal and subject matter
jurisdiction and the instant complaint is frivolous. Plaintiff, in response, filed an affidavit
in opposition to the motions to dismiss and moved to consolidate the instant action with
Strunk v Paterson, et al, Index No. 29642/08.
On August 22, 2011, I held oral arguments on the record with respect to the
thit1een instant motions. At the hearing, plaintiff STRUNK agreed with the Court that
President OBAMA, with the release of his long-form Hawaiian birth certificate, was born
in Honolulu, Hawaii [tr., p. 23]. However, plaintiff STRUNK, at tr., pp. 30- 31, argued
that a "natural born citizen," eligible to run for President of the United States, pursuant to
-14-
A discussion ensued as to how plaintiff STRUNK alleges that President OBAMA
is a Muslim [tr., pp. 36- 38]. The following colloquy took place at tr., p. 37, lines 4- 8:
THE COURT: II ow could you come to the conclusion that he's
a radical Sunni Muslim?
MR. STRUNK: Because that's what his records show and that's
what the testimony of individuals who were in class with him show.
The following portions of the exchange, at tr., p. 39, line 9 - p. 43, line 8
demonstrates the irrational anti-Catholic bias of plaintiff STRUNK:
THE COURT: What I lind fascinating, first of all you said
there was a connection there where you say Cindy McCain says she's a
Catholic. I don't know if she is. I think you said she's Catholic faith,
Cindy McCain.
MR. STRUNK: She is the largest distributor of Budweiser.
THE COURT: 1 know that. That doesn't make her a Catholic
necessarily.
MR. STRUNK: It's the connection that counts. Your don't get
those connections.
-16-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 154 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
. THECOURT: ... I don't know if the Busch family is Catholic.
I don't care.
MR. STRUNK: That's big business.
TllF.COURT: That's big business selling beer ... Let's put
Anheuser-Busch to the side.
You said she's a Catholic and you get into this whole riff or rant,
whatever you want to call it, about the Catholic Church and Father O'Hare,
the Vatican. You go on and on about the Vatican ... but it seems to me
you have this theory that everything is a conspiracy and it always falls
back to Rome.
MR. STRUNK:
THE COURT:
MR. STRUNK:
That's a matter of public record.
Oh, okay.
What the key is here, Ms. McCain is on the
Board of Directors for a Jesuit run school where her children are going to
school.
THE COURT:
MR. STRUNK:
MR. STRUNK:
THE COURT:
MR. STRUNK:
TIIF.COURT:
MR. STRUNK:
THE COURT:
have it in the movie.
. MR. STRUNK:
THE COURT:
Could very well be. I don't know.
... In fact, it turns out in the discovery of the
17-
I was aware of the movie at that point, but--
Okay, forget it.
This is the one with Frank Sinatra?
And Laurence Harvey.
The Queen of Diamonds/ Now you've brought -
You mentioned The Manchurian Candidate. They
I've used it as a pejorative .
I understand that, and 1 think that The Da Vinci
Code, to make some interesting argument, that's a work of fiction. At least
I think it's a work of fiction.
MR. STRUNK: The Manchurian Candidate was not a work of
fiction. The work-- I didn't want to get into this area.
THE COURT: Let's not get into analogies. I understand you
have various arguments but it seems to all come back to Rome.
MR. STRUNK: No, it comes back to New York State and
whether r have standing in the Supreme Court of the State ofNew York
-19
connection to the Jesuits it was so compelling that when I started really
digging into the background of this scheme of defraud, putting up two
Manchurian candidates at once, which would take advantage of New
York State's weakness in our law which required honesty. We require to
have honesty and didn't get it.
THE COURT: Your case is more TheDa Vinci Code.
MR. STRUNK: The Da Vinci Code is a phoney book.
THE COURT: With all due respect to John Frankenheimer,
The Manchurian Candidate according to you and the school of the Vatican,
by that way it describes the gist of your argument.
MR.SlRUNK: Frankenheimer?
THE COURT: He directed the original Manchurian Candidate
movie.
MR. STRUNK: The old?
TilE COURT: With Frank, not Denzel.
MR. STRUNK: Frankenheimer?
THE COURT: 1962 movie.
-18-
on the question ofwho's going to take responsibility to enforce the law
which has not been done.
THE COURT: Okay, that's your argument.
Standard for a motion to dismiss
"When determining a motion to dismiss. the court 'accept the facts as
alleged in the complaint as true, accord plaintiffs the benefit of every possible favorable
inference, and determine. only whether tltefttcts as alleged fit IVitllin any cognizable
legal tlteor,v' (see Arnav Indus .. Inc. Retirement Trust v Brown, Raysman, Milstein,
Felder & Steiner, 96 NY2d 300, 303 [200 I]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88
[1994]) mldetfj." (Goldman v Metropolitan Lifelns. Co., 5 NY3d 56!,
570-571 [2005]). Further, the Court, in Morris v Morris (306 AD2d 449,451 [2d Dept
2003]), instructed that:
In determining whether a complaint is sufficient to withstand a motion
pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), "the sole criterion is whether the
pleading states a cause of action, and if from its four comers factual
allegations are discerned which taken together manifest any cause of
action cognizable at law a motion for dismissal will fail" (Guggenheimer
v Ginsburg, 43 NY2d 268, 275 [1977]. The court must accept the facts
-20-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 155 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
alleged in the complaint to be true and tletermine only whether the facts
ollegetljit within tmy cognizable legal tlleory (see Dye v Catholic Med.
Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens, 273 AD2d 193 2000]). However, hare
legal co/lclusions are trot e11titled to tile benefit oftlte presumption
oftrutlt ami are not accorded every fitvorable inference (see
Doria v Masucci, 230 AD2d 764 (2000]}. [Emphasis udtledj
For a plaintifTto survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action,
the factual allegations in the claim cannot be "merely conclusory and speculative in
narure and not suppottcd by any specific facts." (Residents for a More Beautiful Port
Washington, Inc. v Town of North Hempstead, 153 AD3d 727,729 (2d Dept 1989]).
"The allegations in the complaint cannot be vague and conclusory." (Stoianoffv Gahona,
248 AD2d 525 [2d Dept 1998], app dismissed92 NY2d 844 (1998], certdeniedby
Stoianoffv New York Times, 525 US 953 [ 1998]). (See LoPresti v Massachusetts Mut.
Life Ins. Co., 30 AD3d 474 [2d Dept 2006]; Levin v Jsayeu, 27 AD3d 425 [2d Dept
2006]; Hart v Scott, 8 AD 3d 532 [2d Dept 2004]).
Plaintiff STRUNK's complaint must be dismissed because the "Court need not,
and should not, accept legal conclusions, unwarranted inferences, unwatTanted
deductions, baseless conclusions of law, or sweeping legal conclusions cast in the form of
-21-
instructs that:
[i)t is the law's policy to allow only an aggrieved person to bring
a lawsuit ... A want of "standing to sue," in other words, is just
another way of saying that this patticular plaintiff is not involved
in a genuine controversy, and a simple syllogism takes us from there
to a "jurisdictional" dismissal:(!) the courts have jurisdiction only
over controversies; (2) a plaintiff found to lack "standing" is not
involved in a controversy; and (3) the courts therefore have no
jurisdiction ofthe case when such a plaintiff purports to bring it.
"Standing to sue requires an interest in the claim at issue in the lawsuit that the law
will recognize as a sufficient predicate for determining the issue at the litigant's request."
(Caprer v Nussbaum. 36 AD3d 176, 181 [2d Dept 2006]). "An analysis of standing
begins with a determination of whether the party seeking relief has sustained an injury
(see Society of Plasticlndus. v County of Suffolk, 77 NY2d 761, 762-773 [ 1991 ])."
(Mahoney v Pataki, 98 NY2d 45, 52 [2002]). "The Court of Appeals has defined the
standard by which standing is measured, explaining that a plaintiff, in order to have
standing in a particular dispute, must demonstrate an injury in fact that tails within the
relevant zone of interests sought to be protected by law." (Caprer v Nussbaum at I 83}.
-23
factual allegations. (Ulmann v Norma Kamali, Inc., 207 AD2d 691 (ld Dept 1994]; Mark
llampton, Inc. v Bergreen, 173 AD2d 220 [ld Dept 1991])." (Goode v Charter Oak Fire
Ins. Co., 8 Mise 3d 1023(i\], at 2 [Sup Ct, Nassau County 20051). It is clear that the facts
alleged by plaintiff STRUNK do not fit into any cognizable legal theory.
Plaintiff STRUNK'S complaint is more of a political manifesto than a verified
pleading. Similar lawsuits challenging the eligibility of President OBAMA and Senator
MCCAIN for the presidency based upon plaintiff's incorrect interpretation of the term
"natural born CitiT.en" in Article II, Section I, Clause 5 ofthe U.S. Constitution have
been dismissed as a matter oflaw. (See Drake v Obama, 664 F 3d 774 [9th Cir 2011];
Barnett v Obama, 2009 WL 3861788 [US Dist Ct, CD CA 2009]; Berg v Obama, 574 F
Supp 2d 509 [ED Pa 20087, affd 586 F3d 234 [3d Cir 2009]; Robinson v Bowen, 567 F
Supp 2d 1144 [ND Ca 2008]; Hollander v McCain, 566 F Supp 2d 63 [D NH 2008]).
Plaintiff STRUNK lacks standing
Plaintiff STRUNK lacks standing to sue in state court, having suffered no injury.
"Standing to sue is critical to the proper functioning of the judicial system. It is a
threshold issue. If standing is denied, the pathway to the courthouse is blocked. The
plaintiff who has standing, however, may cross the threshold and seek judicial redress."
(Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc.; Pataki, 100 NY2d 801 812 [2003], cert
denied 540 US I 0 I 7 [2003)}. Professor David Siegel, in NY Prac, 136, at 232 [4d ed]
-22-
A plaintiff, to have standing, ''must allege personal injury fairly traceable to the
defendant's allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.,.
(Allen v Wright, 468 US 737,751 [1984]). )fa plaintiff lacks standing to sue, the plaintiff
may not proceed in the action. (Stark v Goldberg, 297 AD2d 203 [I st Dept 2002]).
Plaintiff STRUNK clemly lacks standing to sue because he cannot establish an
injury in fact. Plaintiffs claim that his November 2008 vote for Senator MCCAIN for
President was his injury is the type of generalized grievance that is foreclosed by the U.S.
Constitution's particularized injury requirement. "We have consistently held that a
plaintiff raising only a generally available grievance about government-claiming only
harm to his and every citizen's interest in proper application of the Constitution and laws,
and seeking relief that no more directly and tangibly benefits him than it does the public
at large-does not state an Article III case or controversy." (Lujan v Defenders of Wildlife,
504 US 555, 572 [I 992)). "Thus, a private citizen who does not show any special rights
or i n t e r e s t ~ in the matter in controversy, other than those common to all taxpayers and
citizens, has no standing to sue." (Matter of Meehan v County of Westchester, 3 AD 3d
533, 534 (2d Dept 2004]}. (See Diederich v Rockland County Police Chiefs' Ass 'n, 33
AD3d 653, 654 [2d Dept 2006]; Concerned Taxpayers of Stony Point v Town of Stony
Point, 28 AD3d 657, 658 [2d Dept 2006]). Plaintiff STRUNK's complaint alleges
nothing more than non-justiciable abstract and theoretical claims. Therefore, the instant
complaint, failing to state any allegation of a pruticularized injury, is dismissed with
-24-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 156 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
prejudice. (Silver v Pataki at 539; Mahoney v Pataki at 52).
l'laintiff Strunk's failure to state a cause of action
Alternatively, plaintiff STRUNK's complaint must be dismissed for his failure to
state a cause of action. The Court is under no obligation to accept as true plainti!T's
complaint, full oflcgal conclusions and bald assertions cloaked as facts. (Ruffino v New
York City Tr. Auth., 55 AD3d 817, 818 [2d Dept2008)). As noted above, in Morris v
Morris at 451, "bare legal conclusions are not entitled to the benefit of the presumption of
iruth and are not accorded every favorable inference." Moreover, plaintiff has failed to
plead any facts that fit within any cognizable legal theory. (Goldman v Metropolitan Lifo
ins. Co . at 570-571 ).
Further, plaintiff STRUNK's often rambling and almost incomprehensible
complaint fails to satisfy the pleading requirements of CPLR 30 13 and CPLR Rule
3014. CPLR 3013 requires statements in a pleading to be "sufficiently particular to
give the court and parties notice ofthe transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions
or occurrences, intended to be proved and the material elements of each cause of action or
defense." CPLR Rule 3014 imposes additional pleading requirements that "[e]very
pleading shall consist of plain and concise statements in consecutively numbered
paragraphs. Each paragraph shall contain, as far as practicable, a single allegation ...
Separate causes of action or defenses shall be separately stated and numbered and may be
25
material elements of each cause of action [CPLR 3013]" and organized in "plain and
concise stateinents in consecutively numbered paragraphs [CPLR Rule 3014)." "While a
refined and attenuated analysis might arguably spell out a shadow of a cause of action,
neither the defendants nor the trial court should be subject to the difficulties." (Kent v
Truman, 9 AD2d 649 [ld Dept 1959)). (See Geist v Rolls Royce Limited, 18 AD2d 631
fld Dept 1962J; Safer Beef Co., Inc. v Northern Boneless Beef, Inc., 15 AD2d 479 [ld
Dept 1961)). In a case, such as this one, in which "the amended complaint is prolix,
confusing, and difficult to answer" and the complaint contains "a confusing succession of
discrete facts, conclusions, comments ... and considerable other subsidiary evidentiary
matter whose relevance to a particular cause of action is frequently obscure ...
Defendants should not be required to answer such a jumble." {Rapaport v Diamond
Dealers, Club, inc., 95 AD2d 743, 744 [1d Dept 1983]). (See Etu v Cumberland Farms,
Inc., 148 AD2d 821,824 [3d Dept 1989]).
Plaintiff STRUNK fails to plead fraud with Particularity
"The elements of fraud are narrowly defined, requiring proof by clear and
convincing evidence {cf, Vermeer Owners v Guterman, 78 NY2d 1114, 1116 [1991])."
{Gaidon v Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 94 NY2d 330,349-350 [1999]). Mere
conclusory statements alleging the wrong in the pleadings are insufficient. (McGovern v
Nassau County Dept. of Social Services, 60 AD3d 1016 [2d Dept 2009]; Sargiss v
-27-
stated regardless of consistency."
In Sibersky v New York City (270 AD2d 209 [ld Dept 2000), the Court dismissed
an amended petition for its "complete failure to follow the dictates ofCPLR 3013 or
3014." TI1e Sibersky c;omplaint consisted of"seven pages of single-spaced, unnumbered
paragraphs, the import of which is unascertainable," and the Court held that "[p]leadings
that are not particular enough to provide the court and the parties with notice of the
transaction or occurrences to be proved must be dismissed." Complaints that do not meet
the pleading requirements ofCPLR 3013 and CPI.R Rule 3014 will be dismissed if
"devoid of specific factual allegations" and do not "indicate the material elements of a
claim and how they would apply to the case." (Megna v Becton Dickinson & Co., 215
AD2d 542 [2d Dept 19951). In Peri v State (66 AD2d 949 [3d Dept 1979]), affd 48
NY2d 734 [1979]), a prose plaintiff's complaint was dismissed for failure to comply
with CPLR 3013. The Court instructed that "[a]t a minimum, a valid complaint must
include all.material elements of the cause of action."
Plaintiff STRUNK's rambling, forty-tive page prolix complaint, with its irrelevant,
scatter-shot morass of alleged historical references, virulent anti-Catholic rhetoric and
extensive political rant fails to plead his alleged causes of action in a manner that is
"sufficiently particular to give the court and parties notice of the transactions,
occurrences, or series of transactions or occurrences, intended to be proved and the
26-
Magarel/i, 50 AD3d 1117 [2d Dept 2008]; Dumas v Firoito, 13 AD3d 332 [2d Dept
2004]; Sforza v Health Ins. Plan of Greater New York, 210 AD2d 214,215 [2d Dept
19941).
The Appellate Division, Second Department, in Giurdan.ella v Giurdane/la (226
AD2d 342, 343 [1996), held that:
to establish a prima facie case of fraud, the plaintiff must establish
(I) that the defendant material representations that were false,
(2) that the defendant knew the representations were false and made them
with the intent to deceive the plaintiff, (3) that the plaintiff justifiably
relied on the defendant's representations, and (4) that the plaintiff was
injured as a result of the defendant's representation.
(See Kerusa Co., LLCv WI07./5I5 Real Estate Ltd. Partnership, 12 NY3d 236 [2009];
Small v Loril/ard Tobacco Co., Inc. 94 NY2d 43 [1999]; Channel Master Corp. v
Aluminum Limited Sales, Inc., 4 NY2d 403 (1958]; Smith v Ameriques! Mortg. Corp., 60
AD3d 1037 [2d Dept 2009]; Cash v Titan Financial Services, Inc. 58 AD3d 785 [2d Dept
2009)).
Plaintiff STRUNK presents in his complaint fraud accusations that can be, at best,
described as bare He does not allege that he relied upon any statements of
defendants and fails to allege that he suffered any pecuniary loss as a result of the
-28
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 157 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
statements of any defendant. Actual pecuniary loss must be alleged in a fraud action.
(Dress Shirt Sales, Inc. v Hotel Martinique Assoc., 12 NY2d 339, 343 [1963]; Rivera v
Wyckoff Heights Hosp., 184 AD2d 558,561 [2d Dept 1992]). The mere use ofthe word
"fraud" in a complaint is not sufficient to comply with the specific requirements ofCPLR
3016 (b) that fraud be plead with particularity. Therefore, plaintiff STRUNK fails to
allege the necessary elements for a fraud cause of action.
This Court lacks jurisdiction
Plaintiffs complaint essentially challenges the qualifications of both President
OBAMA and Senator MCCAIN to hold the oflice of President. This is a non-justiciable
political question. Thus, it requires the dismissal of the instant complaint. "The
"nonjusticiability of a political question is primarily a function of the separation of
powers." (Baker v Carr, 369 US 186, 210 [1962]). Under separation of powers, "[t]he
constitutional power of Congress to regulate federal elections is well established."
(Buckley v Val eo, 424 US I, 13 [1976)). (See Oregon v Mitchell, 400 US 112 [1970];
Burr011ghs v United States, 290 US 534 [I 934]). Under New York law, "[t)his judicial
deference to a coordinate, coequal branch of government includes one issue of
justiciability generally denominated as the 'political question' doctrine." (Matter of New
York State Inspection, Security & Law Enforcement Employees, District Council 82,
AFSCME, AFL-C/0 v Cuomo, 64 NY2d 233,239 [1984]).
The tramework for the Electoral College and its voting procedures for President
-29
and other courts to refrain from superseding the judgments of the nation's voters and
those federal government entities the Constitution designates as the proper forums to
d e t ~ n n i n e the eligibility of presidential candidates.
Justice Robert Jackson, concurring in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v Sawyer
(343 US 579,635 1952], in discussing separation of powers stated that "the Constitution
diffuses power the better to secure liberty." Justice Thurgood Marshall, in his majodty
opinion. in US. v Munoz-Flores (495 US 385, 394 [I 990]), on the subject of separation of
powers, quoted from Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in Morrison v Olson, 487 US 654,
697 [1988], in which Justice Scalia observed that "[t]he Framers of the Federal
Constitution ... viewed the principle of separation of powers as the absolutely central
guarantee of a just Government." This Court will not disrupt the separation of powers as
enunciated in the U.S. Constitution and articulated by Justices Jackson, Marshall and
Scalia.
Further, plaintiff STRUNK has failed to properly serve defendants, including
President OBAMAand Senator MCCAIN, pursuant to the CPLR. With numerous other
grounds present for dismissing the instant action, the Court will not elaborate upon how
plaintiff STRUNK failed to obtain personal jurisdiction over defendants.
Plaintiff STRUNK is precluded by collateral estoppel
Collateral estoppel or "issue preclusion," as observed by Prof. Siegel, in.NY Prac
-31-
and Vice President is found in Article 11, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. This is
fleshed.out in 3 USC I et seq., which details the procedures for Presidential elections.
More specifically, the counting of electoral votes and the process for objecting for the
2009 Presidential election is found in 3 USC 15, as modified by Pub L 110-430, 2,
I 22 US Stat 4846. This required the meeting of the joint session of Congress to count the
2008 electoral votes to be held on January 8, 2009. On that day, after the counting of the
Electoral College votes, then-Vice President Dick Cheney made the requisite declaration
of the election of President OBAMA and Vice President BIDEN. ( 155 Cong Rec H76
[Jan. 8 2009)). No objections were made by members of the Senate and House of
Representatives, which would have resolved these objections if made. This is the
exclusive means to resolve objections to the electors' selection of a President or a Vice
President, including objections raised by plaintiff STRUNK. Federal courts have no role
in this process. Plainly, state courts have no role.
Thus, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to determine the eligibility and
qualifications of President OBAMA to be President, as well as the same for Senator
MCCAIN or ROGER CALERO. If a state court were to involve itself in the eligibility of
a candidate to hold the office of President, a determination reserved for the Electoral
College and Congress, it may involve itself in national political matters for which it is
institutionally ill-suited and interfere with the constitutional authority of the Electoral
College and Congress. Accordingly, the political question doctrine instructs this Court
-30-
443, at 748-749, [4th ed), "scans the first action and takes note of each issue decided in
it. Then if the second action, although based on a different cause of action, attempts to
reintroduce the same issue, collateral estoppel intervenes to preclude its relitigation and to
bind the party, against whom the doctrine is being invoked, to the way the issue was
decided in the first action." In Ryan v New York Telephone Company (62 NY2d 494, 500
11984 ]), the Court of Appeals, held that "[t]he doctrine of collateral estoppel, a natTower
species of res judicata, precludes a party from relitigating in a subsequent action or
proceeding an issue clearly raised in n prior action or proceeding and decided against that
party or tltose in privity, whether or not the tribunals or causes of action are the same
[Emphasis adtletl]." Two prerequisites must be met before collateral estoppel can be
raised. The Court of Appeals, in Buechel v Bain (97 NY2d 295 [2001], cert denied 535
US 1096 [2002)), instructed at 303-304, that:
There must be an identity of issue which has necessarily been decided
in the prior action and is decisive of the present action, and there
must have been a full and fair opportunity to contest the decision now
said to be controlling (see, Gilberg v Barnieri, 53 NY2d 285, 291
[I 981 )). The litigant seeking the benefit of collateral estoppel must
demonstrate that the decisive issue was necessatily decided in tile prior
-32-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 158 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
action against a party, or one in privity wit II a party (see, id ). The as an election law matter. [sic]
party to be precluded from rclitigating the issue bears the.burden of As mentioned above, Justice Sclunidt disposed of Strunk v Paterson, eta/, Index No.
demonstrating the absence of a filii and fair opportunity to contest
29642/08, on March 14,2011, by denying all of plaintiffs motions and noting that the
the prior determination. fEmpflasis atftletfJ
statute oflimitations expired to join necessary parties President OBAMA. and Senator
(SeeD 'Arata v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 76 NY2d 659, 664 [ 1990]; Gramatan
MCCAIN. Therefore, collateral estoppel precludes plaintiff STRUNK from pursuing the
Home Investors Corp. v Lopez, 46 NY2d 481, 485 supra; Westchester County Correction
instant action.
Officers Benevolent Ass 'n, Inc. v County of Westchester, 65 AD3d 1226, 1227 [2d Dept
Denial of nlaintiff's cross-motion to consolidate
2009]; Franklin Dev. Co. Inc. v Atlantic Mut.Ins. Co., 60 AD3d 897, 899 [2d Dept Plantiff's cross-motion to consolidate this action with Strunk v Paterson, eta/,
2009]; Luscher ex. rei Luscher v Arrua, 21 AD3d 1005 [2d Dept 2005]). Index No. 29642/08, and transfer the instant action to Justice Schmidt is denied. Justice
Plaintiff STRUNK litigated many of the issues in the instant action in US District
Schmidt. on November 19, 2008, in Strunk v Paterson, eta/, declined to sign p1aintill'
Court, but also in the previously cited Strunk v Paterson, et al, Index No. 29642/08,
STRUNK's order to show cause to enjoin Governor Paterson from convening New
before Justice Schmidt. He acknowledged this, i n ~ 2 of the instant complaint, by stating:
York's December 2008 meeting of the Electoral College, because "plaintiff is collaterally
That this complaint is fairly traceable to the events and actions
estopped.'' This refers to the Eastem District action dismissed by Judge Ross. in which
she found the complaint frivolous.
leading up to the Party primaries during the 2008 election cycle for the
After a hiatus of several years, plaintitl' STRUNK, by order to show cause.
ballot access of the Presidential slates at the November 4, 2008 General
attempted to amend his complaint. Justice Schmidt. in his January II, 20 II sh011-fom1
Election as complained of in the related election law case, Strunk v
order, denied this motion in its entirety.
Paterson, et al. NYS Supreme Court in the County of Kings with
Then. plaintiff STRUNK moved to reargue. On March 14. 20 II, Justice Schmidt,
Index No. 29642-08 before the Honorable David I Schmidt of Part l
in a short-form order, denied reargument because plaintiff"failed to join a necessary
-33- -34-
party President OBAMA and Senator MCCAIN and the statute of limitations to do so "delusional," ibid. As those words suggest, a finding of factual
expired." finally, on November 9, 2011, II. William Van Allen, an ally of plaintiff
frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level
STRUNK. moved to intervene as a plaintiff to challenge President OBAMA 's placement
of the irrational or the wholly incredible.
on the Llpcoming 2012 ballot. In his November 22, 20 II short-form order, Justice
In Denton, the plaintiff alleged that he had been repeatedly raped by a number of
Schmidt denied Mr. Van Allen's intervention ''in all respects." Further, Justice Schmidt
inmates at several different prisons, all using the same modus operandi. The Court
held "[t]his is an action that was commenced in 2008 and has remained inactive for
concluded that these allegations were "wholly fanciful" and dismissed the claim as
several years and it would be improper to allow plaintiff to raise new matters before the
frivolous as a result. In Shoemaker v U.S. Department of Justice (164 F 3d 619,619 [2d
Court afier the extended period of inactivity."
Cir 1998]), plaintiff alleged that the government and television stations conspired to: "(I)
Plaintiff's frivolous conduct
broadcast infonnation about his feces on national television; and (2) file and publici1.ed
"A complaint containing as it does both tactualailegations and legal conclusions, is
false charges of child abuse against him." The Court, citing Neitzke and Denton,
frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis" and "embraces not only the inarguable legal
dismissed the action as frivolous because plaintiff's "factual claims are irrational and
conclusion, but also the fanciful factual allegation." (Neitzke v Williams, 490 US 319,
incredible." Another case applying the frivolous standards of Neitzke and Denton is Perri
325 f 1989)). Plaintiff STRUNK, as cited above, alleges numerous fanciful .. fantastic,
v Bloomberg (2008 WL 2944642 [US Dist C!, ED NY 2008)), in which plaintiff alleged
delusional, irrational and baseless claims about defendants. The U.S. Supreme Court,
that a secret unit of the NYPD was attempting to kill him and his cats. The Court
citing Neitzke. held in Danton v Hernandez (504 US 25, 32-33 [1992)). that:
dismissed the case, finding that plaintifrs complaint has "a litany of sensational
A court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous only i fthe facts
allegations pertaining not only to the NYPD, but also to various arms of government, both
alleged are 'clearly baseless," 490 US at 127, 109 S Ct at"l833, a state and federal. Accordingly, .Perri has not established that he is entitled to a
category encompassing allegations that are "fanciful," id., at 325,
preliminary injunction, because his allegations of irreparable harm are unsupported and
109 S Ct at I 831, "fantastic," id., at 328, I 09 S Ct at I 833, and
bizarre."
-35- -36-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 159 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Plaintiff STRUNK'S complaint, as well as his opposition to defendants' motions
to dismiss, alleges that the correct interpretation of the natural born citizen clause of the
U.S. Constitution requires a natural born citizen to have been born on United States soil
and have two United States born parents. Despite plaintiff's assertions, Article II, Section
I, Clause 5 does not state this. No legal authority has ever stated that the natural born
citizen clause means what plaintiff STRUNK claims it states. "The phrase 'natural hom
Citizen' is not defined in the Constitution, see Minor v Happersett, 88 US 162, 167
[ 1875]), nor does it appear anywhere else in the document; see Charles Gordon, Who Can
Be Presidentofthe United States: An Unresolved Enigma, 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, S (1968)."
(Hollander v McCain at 65). Plaintiff STRUNK cannot wish into existence an
interpretation that he chooses for the natural born citizen clause. There is no arguable
legal basis for the proposition that both parents of the President must have been born on
U.S. soil. This assertion is as frivolous as the multitude of alleged allegations outlined
above.
Moreover, President OBAMA is the sixth U. S. President to have had one or both
ofhis parents not born on U.S. soil. Plaintiff STRUNK and his fellow "birthers" might
not realize that: both parents of President Andrew Jackson were born in what is now
Northern Ireland; President James Buchanan's father was bont in County Donegal,
Ireland; President Chester A. Arthur's father was born in what is now Northern Ireland;
-37-
Dept 20 10]; Glenn v Annunziata, 53 AD3d 565, [2d Dept 2008]; Miller v Dugan, 27
AD3d 429 [2d Dept2006]; Greene v Dora/ Confluence Center Associates, 18 /\D3d 429
[2d Dept2005]; Ofman v Campos, 12 /\D3d 581 f2d Dept 2004]). It is clear that plaintiff
STRUNK's complaint: "is completely without merit in law;" "is undertaken primarily
... to harass" defendants; and, "asserts material factual statements that are false."
Several years before tl1e drafting and implementation of the Part 130 Rules for
costs and sanctions, the Court of Appeals (A.G. Ship Maintenance Corp. v Lezak, 69
NY2d I, 6 [1986]) observed that "frivolous litigation is so serious a problem affecting the
proper administration of justice, the courts may proscribe such conduct and impose
sanctiops in this exercise of their rule-making powers, in the absence of legislation to the
contrary (see NY Const, art VI,. 30, Judiciary Law 211 [I] [b] )."
Part 130 Rules were subsequently created, effective January I, 1989, to give the
courts an additional remedy to deal with frivolous conduct. In Levy v 'Carol Management
Corporation (260 AD2d 27,33 [1st Dept 1999]) the Court stated that in determining if
sanctions are appropriate tl1e Court must look at the broad pattern of conduct by the
offending attorneys or parties. Further, "22 NYCRR 130-1.1 allows us to exercise our
_ discretion to impose costs and sanctions on an errant pa1ty.'' (Levy at 33). Moreover,
"[s]anctions are retributive, in that they punish past conduct. They also arc goal oriented,
in that they are useful in deterring future frivolous conduct not only by the particular
parties, but also by the Bar at large." (Levy at 34).
-39-
President Woodrow Wilson's mother was born in Carlisle, England; and, President
llerbert Hoover's mother was born in Norwich, Ontario, Canada.
Therefore, the prosecution ofthe instant action by plaintiff STRUNK, with its
fanciful, fantastic, delusional, inational and baseless claims about defendants appears is
frivolous. 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (a) states that "the Court, in its discretion may impose
financial sanctions upon any party or attorney in a civil action or proceeding who engages
in frivolous conduct as defined in this Part, which shall be payable as provided in section
130-1.3 ofthis Subpart." 22 NYCRR 130-l.l (c) states:
conduct is frivolous if:
(1) it is completely without merit in law and cannot be supported by a
reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing
law;
(2) it is undertaken primarily to delay or prolong the resolution of the
litigation, or to harass or maliciously injure another; or
(3) it asserts material factual statements that are false.
Conduct is frivolous and can be sanctioned, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (c), if"it
is completely without merit ... and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an
extension, modification or reversal of existing Jaw." (Gordon v Marrone, 202 AD2d I 04,
110 [2d Dept 19941 /v denied 84 NY 2d 813 (1995]). (See RKO Properties, Inc. v _
Boymelgreen, 77 AD3d 721 [2d Dept2010]; Finkelman vSBRE, LLC, 71 AD3d 1081 (2d
-38-
The Court, in Kernisan, MD. v Taylor (171 AD2d 869 [2d Dept 1991]), noted that
the intent of the Part 130 Rules "is to prevent the waste of judicial and to deter
vexatious litigation and dilatory or malicious litigation tactics (cf Minister, Elders &
Deacons ofRefm. Prot. Church o[CityofNew Yorkv !98 Broadway, 76 NY2d 411; see
Steiner v Bonhamer, 146 Mise 2d 10) [Emphasis adcledj." To adjudicate the instant
action, with the replete with fanciful, fantastic, delusional, irrational and
baseless allegations about defendants, combined with plaintiff STRUNK's lack of
standing, the barring of this action by collateral estoppel and the Court lacking personal
jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction over many of the defendants, is "a waste of
judicial resources." This conduct, as noted in Levy, must be deterred. In Weinstock v
Weinstock (253 AD2d 873 [2d Dept 1998]) the Court ordered the maximum sanction of
$10,000.00 for an attorney who pursued an appeal "completely without merit," and
holding, at S74, that "[wle therefore award the rnaxi!Uum authorized amount as a sanction
for this conduct (see, 22 NvCRR 130-1.1) calling to mind that frivolous litigation causes
a snbstantial waste of judicial resortrc(!s to the detriment of those litigants who come to
the Court with real grievances [Emphasis atldedj." Citing Weinstock, the Appellate
Division, Second Department, in Bernadette Panzel/a, P.C. v DeSantis (36 AD3d 734
[2d Dept 2007]) affirmed a Supreme Court, Richmond County $2,500.00 sanction, at 736,
as "appropriate in view of the plaintiff's waste of judicial resources [Emp!tasis atldetf]."
In Navin v Mosquera (30 AD3d 883, 883 [3d Dept 20061) the Court insiructed that
-40-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 160 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
when considering if specific conduct is sanctionable as frivolous, "courts are required to
examine 'whether or not the conduct was continued when its lack oflegal or factual basis
was apparent[ or] should have been apparent' (22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c])."
Therefore, the Court will examine the conduct of plaintiff STRUNK in a hearing,
pursuant to 22 NYCRR .130-1.1, to determine if plaintiff STRUNK engaged in frivolous
conduct, and to allow plaintiff STRUNK a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Further, at
the hearing, an opportunity will be given to counsel for defendants to present detailed
records of costs incurred by clients in the instant action.
Plaintiff precluded from relitigation of the same claims
.The Court is concerned that plaintiff STRUNK continues to use the scarce
resources of the New York State Unified Court System to fruitlessly pursue the same
claims. He is no stranger to litigation in Supreme Court, Kings County, Civil Term.
Further, plaintiff STRUNK has had several bites of the same apple in U.S. District Court,
which resulted in findings of his engagement in frivolous conduct with, as stated by Judge
Ross, complaints that "have contained allegations that have risen to the irrational." The
Court should not have to expend resources on the next action by Mr. STRUNK that will
be a new variation on the same theme of defendants' alleged misdeeds and misconduct.
The continued usc of the New York State Unified Court System for the personal pursuit
by plaintiff STRUNK of irrational complaints against defendants must cease.
Our courts hav:e an interest in preventing the waste of judicial resources by a party .
-41-
is fully warranted to put an end to such activity ... Commencement of
action upon action based on the same facts dressed in different garb,
after thrice rejected on the merits and having been repeatedly
warned that the claims were barred by res judicata, can only be explained
as malicious conduct.
In Muka v New York State Bar Association ( 120 Mise 2d 897 [Sup Ct, Tompkins
County 1983]), a pro se plaintiff commenced a fourth unsuccessful lawsuit against the
State Bar Association upon various conspiracy theories. The Court in dismissing the
action, based upon res judicata, observed, at 903, that "all litigants have a right to
impartial and considered justice. Insofar as any litigant unnecessarily consumes
inordinate amounts ofjudicial time and energy, he or she deprives other litigants of their
proper share of these resources. A balance must be kept."
Therefore, plaintiff STRUNK, with his history of abusing the civil justice system,
by bringing prose actions devoid of merit against the same defendants, is precluded from
relitigating the same claims and issues which waste court resources and is enjoined from
btinging any future actions in the New York State. Unified Court System against: the
NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, JAMES A. WALSH/ Co-Chair,
DOUGLAS A. KELLNER!Co-Chair, EVELYN J. AQUILA/Commissioner, GREGORY
P. PETERSON/Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D. VALENTINE, and Deputy
-43-
who knows that his or lawsuit has no legitimate basis in law or fact and continues to
attempt to relitigate resolved claims and issues. (Martin-Trigona v Capital Cities/ABC.
Inc., 145 Mise 2d 405 (Sup Ct, New York County 1989]). The Court, in Sass ower v
Signorelli (99 AD2d 358, 359 [2d Dept 1984]), noted that "public policy mandates free
access to the courts ... and, ordinarily, the doctrine of former adjudication will serve as
an adequate remedy against repetitious suits." Then, the Sassower Court observed, in the
next paragraph, that: "[njonetheless, a litigious plaintiff pressing a frivolous claim can be
extremely costly to the defendant and can waste an inordinate amount of court time,
time that this court and the trial courts can ill afford to lose (see Harrelson v United
States, 613 F2d 114)."
Pro se litigants whom abuse judicial process have had their access to the courts
limited. In Spremo v Babchik (155 Misc2d 796 (Sup Ct, Queens County 1996]), the
Court, in enjoining a pro se litigant from instituting any further actions and proceedings
in any court in the New York State Unified Court System, citingSassower and Kane v
City of New York, 468 F Supp 586 [SD NY 1979], affd614 F2d 1288 [2d Cir 1979]). The
Kane Court, at 592, held:
The fact that one appears pro se is not a license to abuse the
process of the Court and to use it without restraint as a weapon of
harassment and libelous bombardment. The injunction herein ordered
-42-
Director STANLY ZALEN; ANDREW CUOMO, EIUC SCHNEIDERMAN, TiiOMAS
P. DINAPOLI and RUTH NOEMI COLON, in their Official and individual capacity;
Father JOSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J.; Father JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J.; FREDERJCK A. 0.
SCHWARZ, JR.; PETER G. PETERSEN; ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI;
MARK BRZEZINSKI; JOSEPH R. BID EN, JR.; BARACK H. OBAMA, NANCY
PELOSI; the DEOMCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE OF TilE STATE OF NEW YORK;
the STATE COMMITTEE OF TiiE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW YORK
STATE; ROGER CALERO; the SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY; IAN J.
BRZEZINSKI; JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III; JOHN A. BOEHNER; the NEW YORK
STATE REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE; the NEW YORK STATE COMMITTEE
OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY; the STATE COMMITTEE OF THE
CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE; PENNY S. PIUTZKER;
GEORGE SOROS; OBAMA FOR AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND; MCCAIN
VICTORY 2008; and MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008; without the prior approval of the
appropriate Administrative Justice or Judge. The Court instructed, in Vogelgesang v
Vogelgesang (71 AD3d 1132, I 134 [2d Dept 20 I OJ), that:
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in enjoining
the appellant from filing any further actions or motions in the ... action
without prior written approval. Public policy generally mandates fi-ee
-44-
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 161 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
access to the courts (see Sassower v Signorelli, 99 AD2d 3 58, 3 59
(1984)). However, a party may forfeit that right if he or she abuses the
judicial process by engaging in meritless litigation motivated by spite or
ill will (see Duffy v Holt-Harris, 260 AD2d 595 (2d Dept 1999]; Shreve v
Shreve, 229 AD2d I 005 12d Dept 19961). 'lbere is ample basis in
this record to support the Supreme Court's dctcnnination to prevent
the appellant from engaging in further vexatious litigation.
(See Scholar v Timinsky. 87 AD 3d 577 [2d Dept 20 II]; Dimeryv Ulster Sav. Bank, 82
AD3d 1034 12d Dept 20 J I]; Capogrosso v Kansas, 60 AD 3d 522 1.1 d Dept 2009];
Simpson v Ptaszynska, 41 AD 3d 607 [2d Dept 2007]; Pignataro v Davis. 8 AD3d 487 [2d
Dept 2004]; Cangro v Cangro, 288 AD2d 417 (2d Dept 2001]; Mancini v Mancini, 269
AD2d 366 [2d Dept 2000]; Braten v Finkelstein, 235 AD2d 513 [2d Dept 1997]).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, that the motion by counsel for defendants MCCAIN VICTORY 2008,
MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008 and Senator JOHN MCCAIN, to admit Todd E.
Phillips, Esq., a member in good standing of both the California and District of Columbia
bars, tbr tile instant action pro hace vice is granted; and it is further
ORDERED, that the motions to dismiss plaintiffCHJUSTOPHER-EARL
-45-
capacity; Father JOSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J.; Father JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J.;
FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ, JR; PETER G. PETERSEN; ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ
BRZEZINSKI; MARK BRZEZINSKI; JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.; BARACK H. OBAMA,
NANCY PELOSI; the DEOMCRA TIC STATE COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF
NEW YORK; the STATE COMMI'ITEE OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF
NEW YORK STATE; ROGER CALERO; the SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY; IAN J.
BRZEZINSKI; JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III; JOHN A. BOEHNER; the NEW YORK
STATE REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE; the NEW YORK STATE COMMITTEE
OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY; the STATE COMMITTEE OF THE
CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE; PENNY S. PRITZKER;
GEORGE SOROS; OBAMA FOR AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND; MCCAIN
V!CTORY 2008; and MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008; without prior approval ofthe
appropriate Administrative Justice or Judge; and it is further
ORDERED, that any violation of the above injunction by CHRISTOPHER-EARL
STRUNK may subject CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRUNK to costs, sanctions and
contempt proceedings; and it is further
OR.DERED, that it appearing that plaintiffCllRISTOPHER EARL-STRUNK,
engaged in "frivolous conduct," as defined in the Rules of the Chief Administrator, 22
NYCRR 130-1. I (c), and that pursuant to the Rules of the Chief Administrator, 22
NYCRR 130.1.1 (d), "(a]n award of costs or the imposition of sanctions may be made
47-
STRUNK's instant complaint by: defendants President BARACK OBAMA, Vice
President JOSEPH BID EN, OBAMA FOR AMEIUCA and the OBAMA VICTORY
FUND; defendants MCCAIN VICTORY 2008, MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008 and
Senator JOHN MCCAIN; defendants MARK BRZEZINSKI and IAN BRZEZINSKI;
defendant Representative NANCY PELOSI; defendant GEORGE SOROS; defendants
THE SOCIAUST WORKERS PARTY and ROGER CALERO; defendant Speaker
JOliN BOEHNER; defendant ZBIGN!EW BRZEZINSKI; defendants Father JOSEPH A.
O'HARE, S.J., Father JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J. and FREDERICK A. 0. SCHWARZ,
JR.; defendant PENNY PRITZKER;-and defendant I'ETER G. PETERSEN; are all
granted, with the instant complaint dismissed with prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED, that the cross-motion ofplaintiffCHRJSTOPHER EARL-STRUNK
to consolidate the instant action with Strunk v Paterson, eta/, Index No. 29642/08, before
Justice David Schmidt, is denied; and it is further
ORDERED, that plaintiiTCHRISTOPHER EARL-STRUNK is hereby enjoined
from commencing any future actions in the New York State Unified Court System
against: the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS, JAMES A. WALSH/ Co-
Chair, DOUGLAS A. KELLNER!Co-Chair, EVELYN J. AQUILA/Commissioner,
GREGORY P. PETERSON/Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D. VALENTINE,
and Deputy Director STANLY ZALEN; ANDREW CUOMO, ERlC
THOMAS P. DINAPOLI and RUTH NOEMI COLON, in their Official and individual
-46-
... upon the court's own initiative, after a reasonable opportunity to be heard," this Court
will conduct a hearing affording plaintiff CHRISTOPHER EARL-STRUNK "a
reasonable opportunity to be heard" and counsel for all defendants may present to the
Court detailed records of costs incurred by their clients in the instant action, before me in
Part 27, on Monday, May 7, 2012, at 2:30P.M . in Room 479, 360 Adams Street,
Brooklyn, NY 11201; and it is further
ORDERED, that Ronald D. Bratt, Esq., my Principal Law Clerk, is directed to serve
this order by first-class maii, upon CHRISTOPHER EARL-STRUNK, 593 Vanderbilt
Avenue,# 281, Brooklyn, New York, I 1238 and upon counsel for all defendants in this
action.
This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.
-48-


J. s. c.
...u\Du
t\OM. /IIR I nun m.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 162 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
AFFIDAVIT
In re Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
a private U.S. Citizen secured
beneficiary
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Exhibit G
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 163 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffrii!S M: ai .. Article78 NYSSC for King$ County Indel{ No.! 21948-2012
SUPREME COURT 01)' THE STATE Olt' NEW YORK
FORTilECOUl'"TYOF KINGS lndex'No.:219:48/2012
------"'------ :o. ;... X
ChristtJpher-Earl: Strunkine:!Se . . . Filed Noveinbcr.l4, 2012
593 Vande'J'l;ilt Avenue <lSI Brooklyn New York U238
Petitioner,
-agait\st-
llakffm Grac:e :Meng,. Felix Ortiz, :BiUDeBiusio. PETITIONER'S
Walter Cooper, Wright, christine- C. Qti:inn.
William ThontJ>!Wrt. E!Uily:Gbkel ..!U'FIDAVll.'lN SUPPORT OF
Anne Marie AJuruone.Archie George Gteshnm,
Ruben Diru:, Ken. Jenkins; Mario . ORDER TO SH.OW CJ\.USE
Gerald]). Jenning$; Byron :Brown; Robert))uffy;
Joseph Morelle; &:olt Adams.; Stephanie Steve Bellone; WITH RECONSIDERATION
Irene Stein; Sheila Comm; and Kirilten GillibMlnd
Respondi>nts.
--.- - .-. ,.._.,----.-. ---.--x
STATE OF.N:EW YORK )
. . ) $$.
COUNTY OF )
Accordingly; I., Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse; being duly and say :Wt.der p...>nalty of perjury:
To: TheHon.Davidi.Schmidt!,S.C.Part l,
I. "fbi$ for of the Decision order (De,:ision) entered
on November 2012.> see Exhibit 14 as :n \)ontinuation of: the U Exhibits that tfubtpptication;
declining to sisn tJt.e appli.:atiori for an. order cause J274777Jf.' and
2. !herein:lhil the. Comt non-conf(l.mting 'vith1be of Hon,
Arthur M S(;haclois if il would apply, whri then and Petitionete:ontends He eomply with thai prior
decision and ord.er arid that Petitioner doe.;, not circuriwent prior. prder aqd or is SbnHihow barred by -res
and coUntcrru and thnt thisrequesUs respectfully;subtt1ittad $ tbt has, acted in error
that based Upon a nlisUndersumt:{ing t>.f tJle facts presented, iri )Vhat may admittedly a time
constraints.. as an L'lattfut form ofapplication: wish for relief;. and that this affidavihvill perhaps clarify in
support if recmt<>ideration. as remainS timely.thatthe.te l'emains .an imminent irreparable han)l as
ChristoplterEarl! Strunk's

support P.age l of9
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article78 NYSSC :fur Kings CoUii.ty Index No.: 21948-<20 12
I
tinH: is of the essence, and .Petitioner is wlthot.1 another forum for relie(. as and for his Petition wishes threi!
I
declaratory judgments on law:
A. US. Senate EJection in New York as to the .Amendmeu:tclulllenge
, 3. A decl3!3.l1Jry judgment as.to.the certified U.S: Senate Election in New York ..ask\ the t7d
1
challenge with jwi'ldiction.a(tbrded the Court hyEt 16-100, in thnt election held Un.
I
Nqvember 6, 2012 is \oid ab initi requires a new election by order of the Governor as to elector
qUfUifications are not equal to that of the: New Y_ork ASsembly: arid therefore. Petitioner sed;s to overturn Ne.v
Yo/k's U.S. Senate election with U.S. Const. l 7:
I
I
I
"The Senate ofthe United States shall be compooed of two $enators fron1 each State, elected by the.
people thereof. for si:< and each Senator Shall ha\e on!i', Tlu 'electors in each State shall
/rave the qualifications rt!quititefor eleClol'!i oftiJenttnt.tlunrerou.v brandt .of the State legisiJltures.
"
asiilie November 6, 2012 election for U.S: Senator from New York berweenDI!mocrat Candidate Kirsten
Gi!llibrand and Republican Candidate Wendy Long among others Will! condllCted for electors not meeting the
i . . '
qUalifications of a member of the with State Con.'ltitution Article 3 Section 7:
I
". No person shallserve as a member of the legisiJlture unless he or sl1e is a eilium of/he Umted
Statl!s and has been a rf!JJident of the state of New Yorli/orjbe yean, and, except as hereinafter
othenvise prescribed. of the nSWnb{r ... diMrit:;jor the Melve mcmths immediatel_v preceding l1i.'i: or
her election; ... or member ofAASemblyat the first election next ensuing after a reaclju.iitment or
alteration nf the . .. assembly distriCts beJmes effective. a persori, to be e(igible to serwtas $Udt,
nu1st been a resideiJi of the coun(l' in wllidt thesenille or asstJJib(J' districtis containe,tlfor the
twelve months immediately preceding hi$ orheri!leditJn " (Et)tphasls added by Petitioner)
4. That a.<> for Respondents Jeffries, Meng. Orti;r., Wright andMorelle are prime exa111Ples of the e.lectom
ofl most: numerous branch of the State mat before the 11
11
Amendment \vcre lhe 1ected the
i .
refpective U.S. Senator of two senators fron1 the siate ofNew York, as the Assembly had a mlilrgin ofelector
I
control over the State Senate with a ratio of3 to 1 senator,
5. And as such Petitioner wishes the Court to void the U;S. Senate Election nnd ask the Go\'emor.set a
special election, because a significantnumber of the electors casting tb,eir respective vote weredomiclled in
i
Nw York for less than fives years und had not in their respctive county of domicile {or at least
tnpnths and there is no way to detennme from the votes cast On Novemebr 6, 2012 of tlwsequalified What
cdndidate was voted for.
Cluistopber-Earl: Affidavit in supp()rt ofOSC Page 2 of9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 164 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk Jeffries et al .. Article 78 NYSSC for .Rings Cow1ty IndeX No.: 21Q4ll-2012
6. That any person electedatthe Novembet6, 2012 general election. including Respondents, are .now
certified as elected by the and 9ecause unable to challenge in the
certitlcation fiiSt thaUhen w9uld include tr.eNY.S BOE and not conform with wisite:s.:of Judge
but .now during_the post which any congressman elect during the hnne <lUQk
session of eongressc be( ore Certified woulg be.sworn into office on or al)er 'anwuy :,3-,; 2013
not only does not .require the appea,tance the l\'YS BOE, but as with any challenge of f.irst irttpression
regarding a t?nly requiii,!.S :fetiti,oner.pr<)vide, proper notifroation.ofthe ofthe
Attorney General which Pelitione:r did by Lisa ]3sq. by email on FridaY Npitenlber 16, 21Jl2
(see Kthibit 15).; and
1. That whenJpshua Pepper, E!lq. Attorney from !.be litigation Jn.u:eau, undet the
supeiYision of Lisa Dell of His Office, v-oluntarily as an intervener at the prlliiti.ri.arY iniak\! hearing
of this application before the Court ai CoUrtroom .al'l;dthereat. Mt. Pepper thathe represents U+e
B.xecutive including the,Oovernor. Comptrolieran4Attorney Generallvfr. Silver. the Speaker: of the
8. Therefore how would Petitioner-be hel.d liable, under what legal theory for another's voluntary
action applies, whether that be fut lnte(Vener as petitioner or respondent?
9. lt i.s Petitioner understandlng i.lmt he is u,"tab.le to amend a petition per se. thisisnot a complaint.: and
even were a legal theol)' to requir-e Petitioner doesn't have sufficienifunds to file il
companion petition that-for aU i.ntents.isunnecessary. because .Mr. Pepper did not appear by speeial
appearance per se but announcedto the Court. he actually represents the Executive and the Speaker by name.
10. \\-'hy shotildn;t :Mr. Pepper: s voluota!J appearance.representing those. named be deemed as :such.
wjthout imposing further injwyupon Petitioner for the acts of otheJ;S whose job it is to appear without any
further 14u. amendment .invidiou.-; ,<fepriva,tion ofl?etitionerTundam ental rights too?.
B. Perso11 holding m1 office oftrustor profit
under tbe 14-0t States
ll. Petitioner eqllity relief with Tem,!X)rncy Restrainir;lg Order of those State and local Officer
electors with act independentoftheNe\V electoral. college by Dec.embet
Strunk's 2'
4
@1Piwit insupport ofOSC 3 of9
Strunk,, Jeffries et aJ. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
and who are incompatible with the office held. be stayed froni voting pending a trial on the facts of a
fbrgery and permanent injunction with a declaratory judgment as to U.S, Constitulion Article 2 1 Cl. 2
12. Petitioner needs a declaratory judgment as to the incompatibility of any Person holding an office of
profit unde.r the 14'" Amendment United States who are also electors that are to be barred from
r
the elector votes as present in Congress after January 2, 2013 in keeping to the of the law.
i 13. Petitioner needs a declarntozy judgment as to the incompatibility of any Person holding an office of
or profit under the 14th Amendment United States who are also. electors are to be barred lrom changing
eligibility of a person seeking the office of President of the 'United States <tualifications are in conflict
A2S1C2 and A2SlC5 and are ba:n-ed frC>m such vote as a bteac.b of a fiduciary duty to the
of the State of New York according to the SCOTUS must be in keeping with the aclusi1--e power.
McPherson v. !Jlacker.. 146 U.S. I (1892), of the New York State Legislature in its plenary formation of the
York electoral college may not change A2Sl C2 and A2SlC5 U.S. Term Limits. Inc. v. Thomton. 514
77?(1995).
TRIAL OF THE li'ACTS
14. That Petitioner requires a trial ofthe facts of a crime- before December 17,2012 essential for the
execution ofthe: Electoral College vote, say on December 1:3, 20l2, and that Petitioner will file a Note
op ssue by December 5. 2012 on the facts of forgecy of an instrument fQr the purpose <lf usurping the o(fice of
Rre.">ident of the United States (POTUS)m, and then a clelennination of whether an elector of the New York
I
Electoral Colleg.: when dul}' notified is an accessory to felony as to New York State law and regulations
I
applies to the public officer oath. duties and obligation with use of NYS Ch'il Smice Law 1 OSA.
15. That the urgency of a trial on the facts of a crime having been committed is notwithstanding whether
the actual perpetralor(s) or accessories before the fact of the forgery are before this Court as a criminal matter
afforded elsewhere; and nevertheless Petitioner is entitled a fo.rum under this petition for a trial of
me fact of a forgery per se that the electoral college body as necessary public polii..'Y and law would become
accessories by their vote, notwithstanding any matter related to the legal issues referenced and
mandates that this trjal must deal exclush'ely with the: proof of the actual forgery before December
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's :l'd Affidavit in supportofOSC Page 4 of9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 165 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Jeffries et al. Article78 NYSSC for KittS$ Cowty No.! 21948-2012
l7, 2012, and at which Petitioner will present expert testimony by Typographer Graphics Expert Paul Edward
Irey who has hi:> latest work published by Washinston Times .on 19. 2912 :shown :as Exhibit 10
and therein Mr. Irey. states quote;
The i.mporhint orthe Obamalong form. birt,h below and.
this page. 1Ve havefound document SQ fur and ate $howing 5 of our
easiest to evidence . We are 2 typ<igmpberswith a cOmbined. e,.\-perlence of 70 years
creating and examining oUr' own documents along with expert.ise.in scanning, graphic art.-;,
photographyi reproduction. printi.tlg, arid also use of the old.niam.tat typewriters along
with computer created. documentaticin while owning our own sucoessful
employjng 70 people, Allegedly in l%1, a typewriter produced thm. f<il:m. but the
evidence shows us this birth certificate was created last year on a Macintosh sending two
copies of that forin to the White House .. The \Vhite house !lien Posted a copy online and gave zewx
copies to the media thM the source for Qur eXam .. , Wehav.t foun!l tllis birth c.ertijicme to be a bildly
done forgO')'.
t.l\lisnaatched T.)'ped L.-tters. Co.ntpare thesetypewritteli letters enlargedfrom the birth certific::iie.
We have marked the ones chosen with a blue dot under the originallel:ler. Of the 1 S pairs one
set is from the word '"Student" that C.diibits two diffen:rittype styles of the t" wilill.ntbe same word.
These support our contention the typed letter$ \vere copied. and assembled from different
documents. Note the size Md shape These letters CQuld not have co.me from the same
typl!Writer . This is proof of forgery.
2. The Stolen Birth Nuntber tf decided 13$t year to forge a .birth certificate fora
per.son, they would a birth.certificate number that was issued in the 1961 e,a. A baby .born the
same day inHawaii as Bnrack Obama .. died the next Qay. \Ve belieye that babies number -61
10641. The fantily requested her birth certWcate and got the short torm with a number way out of
sequence. They .then requested the-long form .and were refused.1'hey brought a lawsuit before the
Hawaiian courts. Its was denied;. with the court explaining that the Honolulu Dept of :Health could
deeide if they wanted to provide the birth certificate of the deceased baby or not. But that is not the
law in the state of Hawaii.
3. The Start Error1'he word .. should be :exactly under the word ''Male"; nt71 a
half space indented. This is proofofforgery. Also the fuct that not aU the lines are flush to the left is
suspicious. No ollt.er birlh certificate exhibits lit. is peClllim styltt.
4. Irr.egul;tr Line Spaehtg This birth certificate form was designed for type-writers. SO that eve:ry
time the typist pulled n <.'all'iage: return. it would advance down exactly 2 picas to match the form line
for line. This was common for al1 forms made for typewriters. We were unable to find another birth
ccrtlficate Hawaii with uneven line spacing like this one; Tjpewriters.t.W hot do lhis. This is
proof
s. The WJ1ile H.alo The white hale:. seen on the online Wh.tte release. i:> a white Qutline around
everything on the birth certificate. NO other birth eettificate lms IbiS. See it on Exhibit 'W' below &
Exhibit "B''. showing how it should look. This was caused by the. Adobe Photoohop filter used. to
sharpen edges: It does this by back the edge leav mg a.white luuo. We show m E.xhibit '"C'
how we dill the same thlltg to our $pecimen exrunple. the Hawaiian Dept. of Health is supposed to
have put the original birth certificate on u (;()pier and printed to a special green se.curily: p}lper instead
of white paper, The result possible fr:om that is exbibit""A'''. Tlw halo pi:Qye.S
Strunk's'Ta Affidavit insupporto{OSC Page 5 of9
Strunk v JetTries et. aJ. Article 78 for Kings County No.: 21948-2012
that the fmger contbined a scan of.the security paper on a computer .... flattened aU of the In
the file and then applied 1he Unshar.p Mask. It is.even on the birth certificate above ... see upper left
comer. Since 1hls is a direct copy of the biltb certificate sent from Hawaii, that proves the white halo
wnson what lheyc(Jpied, so we must the Hawaiian original has it :also. This isprqofof
forgery.
16. !he Chain of oftht;: docun1ent.o; from Hawaii w the is frozenwith.useofthe
II4l by !he Un$harp Maskprogrom for ;kiob'e and as f.urtht---r referenced by Faul Edward trey in the
ouhine of the e>:pecllid Affidavitin support of the Note oflssue filed by say 2012 would aflirm.
17. that Mr. Irey at my requetrt is pre. paring an affidavit that will fruril the ba.<>is of his .Ex-pelt te.stimony
in. support pf Petitiooer'sNote Qflssue filed on December 5, 20 12 i..\'iih refurences, see Exldbit 16 with sub
e.'Xhibits Exhibit A and 1 lhrough B-3: and !\.4r. Irey states <tU.otq:
./; I have 57 years in graphic:::. first with the U.S. AirFQree being trained as a clerk
typist, two of those. years with the. National Security Agency for which I a Top .Secret security
clearance during the years 19.57 and 1958.
../ Following that! \VS.'lc employed inll.1anhattan, Nw Y ork;.on the art stn!f of the Hearst ttade journal
; American Druggist. I was :at various advertising agencies in Manlmttnn until 1968 when I
started my own business in .Ft. Jersey named Bergen Graphics .
../' By the mid 1 employe(! 60 pe(lple as graphic artists, typesetten;, camera and darkroom
i workers doing press services for major retail and printing firms in the New York city area such as
Ward Catalogs and weekly newspaper ads natlonwide,; Acme markets newspaper ads for the
entire supennarket chain in the northeast, Hearst Blue Book Auto Repair manuals. Ke)' Food Stores of
New York and Long Island. Diana stores, Great ffilstem Stores. Finest Supermarkets,
1 Grand. U":ion Supennrukets, . . ,
./ In addition to ovemll ottypography. Photography, .four -color stnppmg and aU facets ot film
preparation for offset printing, l have 26 years experience in desktop publishing with Macintosh
Computers since their inception and have used Adobe Photoshopatl.d Adobe Illustrator on: a daily basis
since theirinceptions in 1987 and 1989; and
..r; The !mit Exhibit
11
N is a from a recent. i!;Sue of the \Vasb.ington Times weekly edition that
contains much of the.ev idertce that I wiH later add to this affidavit, l prepared and wrote this lull page
myself and attl:st that the e\'idence cont.'lined theiein is accuraw and represents evidence of forgery of
Obama's long form birth certi tieate .
./!. The actual document I used for t':leamination of l.hc Obama birth certlficate is desi:ribed in 1he following
chainpfevidence. Exhibit ... page l &2&3 is the proof of purchase cfa x reproduction print
! from. Press through their division called "Replay Photos" that sells photographic items from
their news sen: ice. EXFUBIT page 3 is a copy oftbat J:i\lge purChaSed. They acquired lhL"l from the
White.House at the new$ conlerence on the morning of27 Apri1201 t.
18. As to the ftrSt Exhibit shown in Exhillit 16 front a r.eeent issue of the Wasliingtort Tilnes wl!iekly
Mr. h'<'!Y in addition to the p.ubli(:-.ation shown as Exhibit 10 states quote:
1 Typed Letters
1
2.The Bent Cap w1n "Hussein
Cllristopher..;Earl: Strunk's Affida:vit in support ofOSC Page 6 of9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 166 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Siruuk \f Jeffries et at_ Article 78 NYSSCfor Kings County llldexNo.!21948-2012
3.The Certificate Number
4. The start of Line Error
&.Irregular Line Spacing -This birth certificate form was designed for so.that every
time the typist pulled a carriage return, it would adVance down exactly, 2 to match the form
line for line. This. was common for all form$ made for were unable to find another
birth _certificate from .Hawaii with uneven line spacing llkethis one; Typewriters donqtdo this.
This is proof of forgery. - -
6.1rregular Letter Spacing .. The-originallc;,catlons of thetwo..Jetter cotnbini!tions- _below are
marked with a blue outline, These are some oHhe combinations thatvary, In the space
between the letters. ThQSe spaces should be equal. riot di(ferent, since the old monO,spaced
typewriters always moved a specffic amount atter each letterwas:typed We feel that the forger,
assembling these manually on a not replicate the exact spacing that the
old style mechanieal This is proof of forgery.
1. The White Hal0w ThE! white halo, seen on the online 'White House release a outline
around eveJYthing on the birth certificate, No other birth certificate has thi_s . See it on EXhibit 'W'
below & Exhibit showing how It should k:lol<. Thl.swas caused by the .. Adobe Photoshop. filter
used to sharpen It dQes this by ohol<ing back the edge leaving a: white halo; We shoW: in
Exhibit ''C" hqwwe did the sa ow. thing to our specimen example; The Hawaiian OepkoU-tealth
is supposed to have put the original birth certificate on a copier and printed to'a speeial green
security paper instead of white paper. Tte only result possible fromthaUs Exhlblt"a'', NOT
"A". The halo proves that theforgercombined,a scan ofthe security paper.. on
... flattened all Qfthe elements in the file and then the Unshatp It is even on lbe
birth certificate above'" see upper left cotnef. Since this is a direct copy of the birth certificate
sentfrom Hawaii, that proves the white ha.lowas ori what copied, tK>We m(Jst assume the
Hawaiian original has it also, This is proofofforgery.
19: That Respondcntpublic,otTicers as if Elector tiubllc Officers and private US Citizens have dut:ya'> to
matters oflaw and facts and when in violation of law must be held accowtt!ible or would the trust due
the People of New YOlk as similarly to right to republiean form of government, Freedom
and Lib<1rty,
20. That it is a well-settled eontmon law rule thata public officer erumo t hold two incOMpatible offices
simultaneoustr (Matter of Smith v Dillen. 267 AJ)p; Dlv. 43 (1943]), Thismteseeks toprev,entoffices oi
public trust from accumulating fu,a individual Two ort1ce$ are incompatible if one Is subordinate to the
Cluistoplter-Ead! Stmnk's.2"
4
Affidavit in support QfOSC . 7 .of9
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article. 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
otht!r or there is an inh<:rent inconsistency bet\veen the two ollic)!S (.we PeDple llX z'li!.Ryan v Green. 58 NY
495,304-05 0 'lllalte:n Macefka. 44NY2d 53(),535 v County:ofClint<m.
AD2d 952,9.53 ( 1995]; Maller t Symonds, .54AD2d 159. 16i [1976]; Fauci\; Lee. 3'& Misc.
2d 564,567 [1963], a_{fd 19 AD2d 771 [1963]).
21. That dual office holders that have nn inc<J$patibility Mhas said to e>xi:st when there is li built-in
rtght of holder of one. pOsition to interfere that of the.otller. , ." (0 44 at 535). Wl1ere
4JlC f'C:fS0Jl holdS both SUch pOSts then NthC design that OflC Be[ 3S a Check ()Jl the Other would be
22. That upon a close e.-.iunin.1lion Qf interveners. each member of the Executive bmnch has a conflict
i
of interest as each possesses the authority and power to pre\ent cmnyism incompali\lilily of electors in the
e,ectoral college, but ha:ve failed to and apparently aet along with the Bosses who hold the private person
tf'S Citizen enrolled party men1bem or otherwise in .distain. with the exceptiOJJ of two persons listed herein.
i '
rtrme to allow pri\ateU.S. Citizens to tnke pari in the of'the,State L\lgislature delegaledto !:he
College resplmsibilities, pra!l)tice (.lrony Bt'IS.Sism and grant political favors that are
i*compatable with the position of a mem her of the electoral and the bcdy ba.'> allowe_dllawyers,
union leaders, professiot'lllls, party leaders and other persons holding an of trust or
I
Pfofit under the 14m Amendment United States. and ilieludes State. and Local officers too.
23. And were the- C'.ourt to thoroughly reYiew the incompatbility ofMr. DiNaopli as the Intervener
I
q<>ntroller 1 Electur who has sole :siW'Jaiure power with fidicuary trust over the State pension funds and
i+vestmcnt, he ith other Executives and Secretary of Perales. hmrce power to investigate a felony
which each will be held liable as uccessoryafter the fact, all refuse to respond to in
I
of the civil RICO case 12-<W-04269'-JB\V-Rt\riL. in EDNY now before Judg(! Jack B. Weinstem USDJ
I .
the ongoing l1eft and money laundering .oU43 Trillions US taxpayer dollars unauthorized by Congress
I
http;//www .kcandiJ!>sociates:.orglpd.tS/11131)7429-Spire-Law-,Fede:ral-Complaint-in-N(lw-Y ork.pdf = and
I
1
24, That based upon Petitioner's undrstanding and knowledge of the Aceepted Acc9unting
Pfine;iples (GAI\Pi. and that GA'\P follows an accowjting convention that lies at \he heart of the double-entry
bbokkeeping system called Matching Principle; This principle works as When a bank accepts bullion,
CluistopherEarl! Strunk's t'd Affida:vitinsupportofOSC Page 8 of9
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 167 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSCfiit lOngS: CoUnty Index No.: 21948-2012
coil\ cutrency,ehecks. drafts, promissory notes. or ,any instrunlents (hereinafter
from .CWJtomers and depo .. '1its (Jt records the instrument. as .it, mJ,!St rCC9:rd offsetting liabilities that match
the ilss'* customers Jike the New Y()rJt Funds, The liabilities represent the
amounts .thatthc blink oWe$ the funds.accepte(i from customers. In a fracti<mal reserve banking
.like the United States banking system, most of the .funds. to borrow ens (assets of the banks)
are created by the banl:s and are not transferred from .one set of depositors to another set of
and assuch, in our system under the "Blue St: Law"' and couipaniea registered in New York
as done in associatit1nwith the rules devised by lhef}HUD. Secretary. Andrew Guomo who while NYS AG now
inv()lve .1neorilpa!ibility with his present support ofllieObama with the other Executives
use of the Rcs.moe B!!.nk. of New York with that inv.olve money of exchange not credit
involving m(lney means that lawful monl.'ly \Va$ and is or probably would be disbursed by either
side in a covered transaetkm that :in short involves Union and.Nc\\' York Funds as part of the $43
Trillion dollar mix,Just.as 1>.1r.lv,lcCaii invested ftmds in BNRON> however, Petitioner is barred a complaint!
wishes the Court to expe-dite OSCapplicationfor a trial of the facts to serve the
Electors With the fuctS and setto.the meat of the Petition fot relief.alorig witb other and different relief for
justice as the snme is :true to my own knowled&e '*cept asto lhematters flu,-rein stated to be alleged on
information and belief. and as to. those matters I l!elieve Itto be true. The. grounds of my beliefs as to aU
matters not stated upon information 1llld belief are as foUows:.3td parties, books and records, and personal
knowledge,
SwQtnto before me
Tlus _.dayofNuvctnber 2012

Cc; Hon. Arthur'M, Schack .J.S.C .
. Joshua Pepper,. NYS MG
Electors
Strunk
2"'* Affid.1yit in of9SC Page 9 of9
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christoplter-Earl.: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support ofOSC
Exhibit 14
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 168 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KING$; .
X
C.HR.l.STO'PHBR-EARL STRUNK
PE'{'ITlONBR
-against-
HAKEEM JEFfRIES T AL.t
RESPONDENTS
-- X
SPBCIALELECT10NPART
Index No. 21948/12
Hon. David L Schmidt
NQvember 19, 2012
Upon the foregoing petititmer purohasedan index numberwitbthe.County .
Clerk and submits au order to show cause with the court for signature. Altllough it is
difficult to discern the exact nature oftherelie{sougbt by petitioner, the main thrust ofhis
papers seems to challenge the validity oftheNovember6;2o 12 electionofKitstcnGillibmnd
to the office ofUnited States Senatorfrom the State ofNe.w York .. SP;ifically, the petition
states that .. Petitioner wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask the Governor
set a special election, because a significant number of the electors casting their. respective
vote were domiciled in New York forless than five At a minimum, both the
Governor and lbe Board of Elections in 1he $tate of New York are necessary parties in any
proceeding seeking such relief. However, neither has been 11amedhere. In this regard. the
court .notes 1)Jat. in an order. dated April 11. 2012!t Hon. Arthur SchaCk of this court
specifically ef.\ioined .petitioner "from commencing future litigation in the New York State
Unified Court System against the New York State Board ofBlecdons (and] Andrew Cu.omo
(among others) without prior approval of the appropriate Administrative-Justice ot
)udge."
Under the circumstances, the court declines to sign the instant order to show cause.
Prior to presenting any further orders to show cause to the court, petitioner must name aU
ne.:;essary parties and obtain the proper authorization as set forth in Justice Schack's order.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
ENTER,

J.S.C.
JllN. DAVID I. 8Cfl1lm't
2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 169 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Articte 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in suppott of OSC
Exhibit 15
Wotbpace Vkbooil :::Piint: ...
II of2
f!!!!! I ; Close Window
OSC application on Monday 1119.12 re Strunk -v Jeflrief> et al21&48-2ot2:
Froul.: <:htis@stt'tmk.ws
Fri, N<!V 16,2012 3.:32 pm
Jisa.delf@ag.ny.gov
chtlstophf1rStruok' <cestrunck@y ahoo..com>, "paul.irey"' <pauledwardlrey@yahoo.cc>m>, "Bill AUen"
<bvanallen@hvc.rr.com>, "etd" <.raptorprimo2004ad@yahoo.com>,:"f:anya Vasilevsky"
, <FanyaVas@yahoo.com.>, "Julian Panachyd" <julianpologroup@gmail.com>, m.aldew@yahoo.corri,
Cartoll1429@ao!.com, vetvieWS@!IIJlaltcom,jimt@highWcl!security.eom, pearlywiSe@aolcc>m,
alternativemedlawaruimez@yahoo.com, scorpion68@mintl.spritJg.com,
"jerhargel" rosenbergforsenate@gmaiJ.com, "Staten Island Tea. Party"
Bcb <taxdayteaparty:ainy@gmaU.com>, pressjotm@gmall.eom,."Rachel Bodner"
. ' "Homework cltygirl4@optonHne;net;shlomocholna@gmaU.com,
bronxtparty@yahoo.com, neatzlt1990@aotc:Om,.mfxvTdeo66@yahoo.com . naeA1Qoiten@yaboo.com:,
"SVbUGra:tlano" <ye$$pell$ye$@;hotmaiLeom>, pcntl@optonlfne..net,
si.ls!lnmoses1940@aotcom, e.pev2ner@gmailcom. "Sandy
"Scott Swnmersl'.<lnphoman'911@Yahoo.com>, "Eric Phelps'' <eric@vatfcanassasslns..on.J>,
Cham Ish" <chamist!ba@gmail.com>,lsrael@schoolcbolcenj.org,;"Amaldo Ferraro"
1
<arnaldofer@msn.com>, "BILLVANALLEN" <hVilmillen@hve.rr.com>
r . . . . ---. ----. -. ----,-.-----:----. ---l
I h.t!P.:J!lwww.scrlbd.com/doc/:J.12747771/NOTICE-o('-PETITION-IrmEXNo-21948-2012-ln-re.:. . ,
1 Complalnt-ofattemot-to-commit-a-cdme ..by-tiY-Publlc-omcers.-tn-the-2012-Eiectorai-Coltege-
,
I
l
.1 Distriti Attoniey,or Westchester, and act independently of thi$ civil action.
I
On No,\embcr9. Petitioner duly _a.NOT!CE OFl!:vTEAT TOl<'ll.E JJ."' AR11CLE 7$ PE711'10N WIJH
I AN TOSHOWCAUSEAPPUCATION FOR A PRELIMJN.1RY INJUNCTION PENDBv'() A
I .
t DECL14lMrOJ?.Y JUDGNJENT'ON ISSUES OF lAW AS ID $LECTORS jbereinafict known as the . "NOTICE") upon
I -
I the respective County DiStrict Attorney with jurisdiction over .the donticiie ofresidence t'f the respective Public
I Officer member ofthe. New York 2012 Pcesidel1tiid Electloo Cycle Elec:toral College ot 29 members !n Fourteen (14)
f !
I CountiesgotNo.tice !hat stated quote:
\ .. take notke of Petitioner's intefit fo file an order to cause at the King; County
t Supreme Court Ouildingnt l1 M-..-1 <>.n theHlth.Flcioririlake at 360 Street P.n Monday November 19,2012
! fol[ a prelimii:mry.iljunction .relief a declamtotyjucl8!1len1 on js,s.ues of la'h--; e.g.. Are public offiers to
! beiheld liable as aecessorie.s to in usurpation ofOffice of PO:'rUS .and :Sllllot sccess?.Are public
officers presented with the ofBarack Obama ineJigjbility able to change before the Elec.tQml
Cdllege 15. 201:2?';
. 2012, Ptitl.oner had -a petsofinot a party to lhis suit serve a copy of the COiviPLAINT.and
u.pqn New YOtk 2012 Presidential Election Cycle Elec.tal Membe.t'Sfor a total of29 n1eml>ers
in Fouitecn (14) Counties .individually as 1o1lnws:
I .
: l. AndiewM. Cuomo !38 Eagle Street Albany, N 12202
:2 Gerold P. Jennings of ll3.?Ne'r Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
!3. George Eas.t233nl-Street-Bron.x, NY 10466
14. Jr. of820 BoytonAvenue, II6D- Bronx. NY 10473
:5. Byron Brown 14Bla!ne -.Buffalo; NY 14208
:Q. Felix Oiiiz 189 B 33rd Street ...:. &:iokl)'li. NY Il232
ll/30!2012 12:45 Al\1
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 170 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Wo:rksP!lce :: Print ...
12of2
7. Hakeem Je.ll'ries $S Undcdli!l.l\venl,le., #2A -- :at'ooldyn, NY 1123.S
S. Bill DeBlasioof442l.lth,Streetl3toQklyn,NY H215
9. Robert Duffy 164 CmydonRoad -Rochester, NY 14610
10. Joseph MoreJie of 133 Deerfield Drive -Rochester, NY 14609
11. Tom DiNapoli lOOGreat.Neck Road;.;, Great Neck. NY H20 I
12. Eric Scbneidemtan645 WestEndAvenue. #8F --New Yo;rk. NY 10025
13. Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street. #I2G --New York. NY I 002$
14. Shelckm Silver ofS50Grond Street; #SA --New York, NY 10002
15. KeitbL.T. Wrightof2225l'ifthAverue -New Y<>rk. NY 10037
16. Christine C. Quinn of 263. Ninth Avenue; #M --New York, NY 10001
17. William Th.."'1l!psonoflo6West t2lstStreet-- New York. NY 10027
18. Scott StringeroflS$ 7lstStreet; #3A- New York,. NY 10023
19. Emily Giske,ot440West NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of 11 Poplar O.r:chanl Park, NY 14127
21. Stephanie Miner l02WoodSide Driv(l-- Syracuse, NY 13224
22 .Mario Cilentn3 Isabellwau- Orangeburg. NY I 0962
23. A.rJn: l\1arie Anzalone 2827 48th Street - Astoria, 1\'Y 11103
24. Gmce.Mengofi471434UlAvenue -.Flushing, NY 11354
25. Archie Spignet of 11210 175th Street --Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 \>htl.derbilt Avetru.e ....: 'Nest Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein lO I Brandywine Ithaca; NY 14850
28. Sheila Coma.r 29 DpotS.treet ...... Granville. NY 12849
29. Ken.Jenk.im .108. Bushey Avenue -Yonkers. NY 1()710
That Petitioner has beenbarred from any further suit v."ithout.leave by the Order of Arthur M Schack J.S.C. in
the fraud compiaintStrtmk\1 tjYS BOE etal In:lexNo.: 2011-6500 underpe.nalty of contempt agaimtPublic
Oft'icem:
Andrew M. ammo of 138 Eagle Street- Albany, NY l2Z02
Tom DiNapoli of 1.00 Great Neck Great Neck, NY 11201
Eric (i45 \Vest End Avenue, ffl!F --New York. NY 10025
Sheldon Silver of 550 Grand #SA- New Yor.k, NY 10002
therefore, such named Public. officers are not included herein unless by leave to do so.
CopyfiglltQ 2003--2012. M rights reseJVed.
11130!2012 12:45 Ml
Strunk v Jeffries ec al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings C.ounty Index. No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 16
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 171 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
J Paul Edward Jrey do hereby state and swear that the .following facts .are 1r.ue:
1 am over the age of 18 years old and am a resident of. Florida. The information
contained in this affidavit is based on my personal knowledge. and, if called as a
witness, I co.uld testify completely thereto. I have 57 years experience in
graphics. first in servingwith the U.S. Air Force being trained as a clerk typist,
two of those years with the National Security Agency for which I had aTop
Secret security clearance during the years 1957 and 1958.. Following that I was
employed in Manhattan, New York on the art staff of the Hearst tradejournal
American Druggist. I was employed atvariousadvertising agencies.jn Manhattan
until1968 when I started my own business iri Ft.. leer New'Jersey named Bergen
Graphics. By the mid seventies I employed 60 people as graphic artists,
typesetters, camera .and darkroom workers doing pre-press services for major
retail and printing firms in the New York city.area such as Mol,'itgomery Ward
Catalogs and weekly newspaper ads nationwide, Acme markets newspaper ads
for the entire supermarket chain in the northeast . Hearst Blue Book Aut() Repair
manuals, Key Food Store$ of New York and Long Island. Diana stores, Great
Eastern Stores, Fine.st Svpermarkets, }-I iUs Supermarkets. Grand Union
Supermarkets. etc, In addition overall knowledge oftypography,Photography,
strippjng and all facets of film p.reparation for offset printing. I have 26
years .expe.rience in desktop with Macintosh Cor:nputers since their
inception and have used Adobe PhotoshopandAdobe Illustrator on a. daily basis
since their inceptions in 1987 and 1989.
The first Exhibit ''A" is a page from arecenUssue oHhe Washington Times
we.ekly edition that contains much of the. evidence that I wUllateradd to this
affidavit. I prepared and. wrote this fuU page myself and attest that the .evidence
contained thenain is accurate. and represents .evidence of forgery of Obama's
long form birth certificate.
The actual document l used Prthe. Obama birth certificate is
described in tne. following .chain of evideJ?Cer Exhibil u. page 1 & 2 .&: 3 is
the proof of purchase of a 14" 16
11
print from.Associated Press
through their diVision called "RepJay Photosli that sells photographic. items from
their news service; EXHIBIT "B'' page 3Js a copy .Qfthat.page purchased. They
aquired this from tne White House at the news conference. on the morning of 27
April2011.
PAGE1
--------------------------------------------
. .;.
:.bm;;,.,J l"'liillti ,m,;.;,: 11c s<mt;! .
..":P.""'Ji.i!!fllrtl .. .:ry. '."' .11<1 .. mQ."'. 'll< .. "'"'.("." !."'.;'"""' .... "". p:.ljile.. . .tly -n!'l!t ... P7mJ. . #fl!) . . rrt ... ..
"'!< i.nlW>l '>!' llis . ...uw:ry. ).IH !!>
l!UI 'm..W.,illtd .tithd,llill::r<>t4i!l:\Wtllt 0bt1i:tt;;iili . . .. .

ai>lllih(ilfll.ill'ilil'lj? Ui'IIIWJ'""""" . toA, .
2. The Bent Cap
1
H"

belnwrol)llitrt 0;inhe

wla#ll n.;


... olaysk.,jl.roltl.
type11oJtH.>e a.r ifl!isii o>Dl};;

. .
tcnlflt:$.im: SWit.fil'
SSE IN
3.Tite Certificate Number
...tjoez,;.>
. !o., 1'""'-'li, t:I'...Y pt.!,d,. bH1b
il ... l!t1h,!t9!11 --

t;!,o""' '1m
Mti<l1o wlli.'.6l10641.1b: fflfuili


rrnml11!11,.._
hlfmgbi 01 tht! it
.\;e; duic;!. wltlllll<i .. ..a
if1ltey

.
5.1rregul.ar Une Spacing &.ltngutar Letter Spacing .. .

.

11&-'1<""' li"" i<>< boo< Thi\\;.\ '""""""' '"'

foci tl,01 ::IJ1llhl-Jl!t>!bt.Mi IDIIl'""'""'...,.;.g
m>tdolill
#II:IJ'ft'lilf ..'tilf'* . . . l1lil It pibQ{<>.f(#,ttf}"
1. The...wn. . Ue Halo .. 'IJi:> !mi.,-!'<'. m ... w.t<>1.
binh ll:!>: '"' E.\hlll'll ",\Nbcl<>w
.& J'.;b)bll it :<b....U.d 111i "'"''""u;td ,lbc Ao.lnbc 11..,U k>
<id* JJH< lit lao;! # 1::1 E:dut>li"C .
hnw.wulid Dqitlf !!!
pqtdtaud$il!ull.olnl!
pq,.r. '"''"'fntj, l"""'iW" r .....,!lt<tl. h l:!hilnl ''a', Nf!f c11tiuil nn; h1d" lh;,! 1111.!
,;el;llrl!)<'poperoa .11 u.od
11 !J< <>wnmtli! Mnli ... ki,fll:<ii!Wt.
.llilil a lb.; .wl:Jie ltwwa> tlll w!ull
11\Cr.wp;..J,I .. ""'"""l"""'""': tln:Hm""'"'" <>tl.!;lr:r.lll""' 1.1 Tlwbpi'it<>/.nffai'&uy.
&f111lltB .Exhibit& ='hllh
:t.bt t'll!!illilll..:"';.,i!<il(lllll
,.f
""'Y nc.lott<>ni, Utriu .. 41l>c
.:'.'"".'." . '" .. lf't/11. r." . ... ;i"" .. .. .. .. .;cyl'>' .. . til'.' . . .
1
..Wet..,llcQnef>Tfi."Tg' '

"'"' .. ....l4 .w. "'.t-1 .. d... ... .:t .....1. .a!. .


.. llllljJim'

1iL! a....m ...-.. 1>1!
imp.:Jdl<d, 1>: J>!'-">'<cdl\.,..,thNI!Mi!
;.,

hl
if;}Pll!Ul &; OoiJgl.aSVcigt ;!0!2
failing to investigate this forgerr is ne.gfecting their constitutional "DutY to
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 172 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
EXHlBlT "8" .. p.age 1
Fromt.9rders@replayphotos.com .
sent. Wedne5day, October05,.20ll 9:37AM
To: Rutnamt@motionsystem.com
Subject: Replay Ptwtos Order Shipped
Your oraerfrom Replay PMtos n:as 1)-etm
lf your order ooruained multiple pro,hJcts; nottficatlorl abOut shipment otthe cUHu il'!
your order arri\<a lna separate em an.
if you need to reaCh Replay Photos with a question .about your Order, please emall us at
maltto:oraers@replayphotos,com?subiect=Order%20#278149. if you prefer to speak to
someone; pt.ease :eau us ata11421'2:300;ourousiness l'tours to 4pm ET t.wnaay
through Friday. If aon't react\ us. please us a nwssage with your name and telephone
nmnber, V'le wm respond to email and volce mall ln order to expooHe yo:ur email or
call, please ha'll'e your Order reference number handy.
As. a reminder. your Order reference number Is 278149.
TI1anKyou rory10urbus1ness.
The Replay Photos Team
www.replayphotos.com
.Replay Photos ar:4 tiw Rep!a;y Pootos Logo registe--red tral:!err.arks of ReplavPbotos.com.
MalnS'.ro>et, Sulte 23C Dutham, NC 21701 Pfx . 877A2l.2'300
From: REPlAYPHOTOS COt4
5entVvVednesday, O<;tober 051 20119:.39 AM
To: Thomas Putnam
Subject: Payment Receipt 89057 Confir01ation .from RERLAYPHOTOS COM
EXHI
ITHBH
... page2
front: COt-1
5ent:.We4nes.day_.. October OS; 20.U 9:38AM
To: Thomas Putnam
Subject: 89067 COnfirmation fro1ri REPtAYPHOTOS COM
REPLAYPHOTOS COM
Your Purchase has bmm approved
This (,Onfmn.s paymenHor your purcha$e from REPLAY PHOTOS lLC, Thls order will appea
on yourtcredit card statement as REPLAYPHOTOS 1fo contact us, pl:e.as.e send an e-mail to


Number:
Sates Ortie-r Numbw:
Type:
Code:
oroers@reptayphotos.com or call919.QS,fh2100,
oo; os. 2011 09:38AM
51243
1342:1684 11'.4181
89067
:Mail/Phone Qrdet
295471
Receipt
9UUng
Thomas
(Optional: Motion Systems
tarq_Type: .
card
AM
xxxxxxxxxxx3099
Order OetaHs
Descrl on Unit Price Subtotal
mnttrans 27814.9 shippin9 16.00
US Dollar Total
16.00
16.00
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 173 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
!
EXHIBitr
Shown Js an enlarged section of the Obama iong form birth certificate that was released online at whitehouse.gov
I
on 27 Aprll2011. No admission.has been made as ,!o who actually scanned :alld converted this documenllo an Adobe
Acrobat PDt: file and. posted lt on the official \1\Jhite website, It Is not known ff it was someone at the White House or
someone at Honolulu department of health that had previously provided.two copies of Obama's birth that
were from Hawaii to the Wllite It will be one or other certainly.
i
The feature. to observe is thai evetrthing on the PDF file that is black is oullined in white. Tilis will be referTed
to as "The Vlfhlte Hato.
I
The dept. of health alleges that the procedure for making copies of birth certificates is to take the binder where
U1e birth are stored ami open it up to the one lhey copy, place it face down on an ordinary copy machine and
simply ei:lpyithe doeumentto. green security paper Instead of white paper.
this i$ their normal procedure. 1. see no reason for the wl'lite halo on this birth certificate . bave seen many
other birth from Honolulu In the year and a haif that I have spentexamining this issue of forgery, and can attest
Ulat none ori other birth certificates r:rorn Hawaii have a white halo.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 174 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
EXHIB1T"D"
Shown b.eJow is what we should have seen if the: birth certificate originaf form was
actualy copied to the green security paper and we would see no white halo. Copiers
do not print white) which is the only way white could. be seEm anywhere over this
green security paper. I was able to purchase this special paper on the internet The
green.color and hashmarks are dye printed through tothe.other.side. In other words
the paper is green on both sides and there is no white anywhere.

To the question as to how the white halo ha,ppened, .I show the example below.
On the! left is from the White. House release. On the right is my example ofa
computer create() halo. 1 have put a white halo on EXHIBIT fcc" using the unsharp mask
fiiter found in A<;iobe The settings I used are
seen here to the right Asl see it, the forger made .the
forgerY on a computer, used a scan of the security paper
and included it in the file with the other elements ofthe
Then after flattening all the. layers, applied the
unsharp mask filter to sharpen up the soft edges of ihe type.
The forrgers ser1ous mistake was. to flatten the layers before
applyirig the _sharpening filter. This filter that I have been
using fbr 22 years chokes back the black edges and leaves
. I , ,
white te create a sharper edge. You see lt. everywhere even
around! ttre form type and rules .. There is no other way.in
science to create the white halo seen on both
the forgers and mine. Proof of forgery.
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 175 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Sttun){ v Jeffries et at J\rticle 7S.NYSSC for Kings County Index No.;'21948l2012
STATE OF )
)ss-.
COUNTY OF KlNGS . )
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
Ac<:ot'dingly, I, beitig di.uy sw:oft4 depose and say under pen:,dty of:perjl.lt)':
a. Am overl8 of Rge and not a party to this action.
b. MY place is located at . . . . . . .
e. On November. 30; 2012, Christopher .Stnmk instntcteilme: to senre.a <:on,formetl copy o{U1e
SECORD AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF-OSC With :EXHJBITS anitelredl,FFiRMED Nollllmbe,r witli a copy
of the NOTICE OF P&TJTIOB, PETITION with AJI'FU)AVIT OF VER'IFICATIOB affinned November 13, 2012
placing a seUu a properly . .addresSEd envelope to each re$pondentJisted belmv for delivery by USPS regular
mail.
d. On Nowmber 30, 2012,1 caused eacll Ct'.>PY with for. :service by clasa mail on. the listed EliilctotS and
where each envelope 'vas 1>ropedy witb the Notification and "'PERSONAL &
CONFIDENTIAL" in the lower:Iert hand com.er ofthe mV'ltlop that was then deposited \\itb: Ute US.PSJor S1>rvice upon:
t. Andtew CUomo US Eagle Albany. NY t 2202
2. Gefii,ld o.Jemqs 111' New ScotlimdRi.>i!J ... AI!lru!Y. NY 12208
3, Gi!Qrge Gre$hamJ3 i3 East 233td Eron.'<. NY 10466
4. RubenD.illz, Jr; o820 !lliD l-."Y 10473
5. Brown 14 .alaine.Stre.;t 14208
6. FeliXOitiztS9.B 33m Street NYH232
1, Hnkeem Jeffiies:l$ Undtfbill}\ve.nue;#2A:--.Brookly%NY 112:>8
S. Bill DeBlasio o(442 llth Street- Br.,tiklyn; 'N"l112!.5
9. R.;>bertOW'f}' 164. C@}'d"n Rood- Rool\ffier, N\'14610
10; J(IS(lplt Mo.rclle o( U3 Deeifield Dnve 'NY l4r.i09
U. Tom Dil\!apf.)li lOQOreatNookRoad-,GreatN.eck;NY 11201
12 .. .EricSe:hneidemmn 6'45 New Yom, NY 10025
13. W;\ltet.Cooper 1SOWett9>thSnet, #120- NewYorl:, NY 10Q2S
14. Sheldon Silvet of$50 Omrul Street, IUO(ll
Keilhl.,'f. Wrlgbi1Jt222Sr:illh 11)037
16. ClirlstineC.Quinliof263NintbAvcmie,.#lA-NewYott;NYlOOOl
17. William Thtm1ps.;moHil6 Westl2lst Stmt -NewY(Iik. NY lb027
Ui. ScqU S1ril1genf ISS West;?.lst NewYolk; NY HJ023.

20. of II Ozcbard:Park;:.r-.'Y14127
21, Miner Dri\'e S}'mctisl!',; NY l32,l4
22, Mario Ciimto 31wbd. RAd- NY 1D962'
U. AnneMori.eAnzalone2S27 4SihSttvet..;.At<toria;NY tUOJ
24, .Gm;e M!lllg of 14'ilH4.th Avenue'" fiusbiJJg.NY ll3S4
2$. M!WSjllgner.!fHZ10 1\'Yli43J
26. Sieve B\!llQMJ07 Vanderhilt:A\.em,e"" Wl$t Babylon. NY J 1704
:21. beneStein 101 N850
28. Shcilu Comllt Middle Gmnville, NY 12849
29. KEn Jenkins HlS Hl710
30. J..}shna J:iepper Office of A l20 NY NY 1011I
Sworn to before me
111is_ day:ofNovember2012
Notary t>ublic
I
SUPREME COURT OF iHE STATE OF NEW YORK
cOUNTY OF KINGS;
,_, _ __....___.._____ ---X
STRUNK
PEtiTIONER
-agSillSt-
JEFFlUF.S ET
RESPONDI!t"'TS
-------X

Indei No. 21948/L.i
Hon. David I. Schmidt
November 19, 2012
Upon the foregoing papers, petitioner purohased an index number with the County
.and submits an ordeJ to show cause with the court for signature. Although itis
difficult to discern the exactnatw:e ofthc.reliefsought by petitioner, the main thrust ofhls
papers seems to challenge the validity oftheNovember6,c20 12 eleotiotiofKirsten Gillibrand
to the office of United States Senator from the State of New York. Spcifioally, t1:te petition
states tbat "Petitioner wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask theGovc=mor
sbt a special election, because a significant number of the electors casting their respective
V:ote were domiciled in New York for less than five years." At a miniml.llll, both, the
$ovemor and the Board of Elections in 1he State of New York are necessary parties in any
proceeding seeking such relief. neither has been named here. in this the.
$1Urt that in an order dated April 11,. 2012" Hon. Arthur Schack of this court
enjoined petitioner "from commencing future litigation in the.New York
l!Jnified Court System against the New York State Board of Elections (and]And:rew Cmo
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 176 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
(among others) Without prior approval of the appropriate Justice or
Judge."
Under the circumstances, the court declines to sign the instant order to show cause.
Prior to presenting any further orders to show cause to the court, petitioner must name all
necessary parties and obtain the proper authorization as set forth in Justice Schack's order.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
ENTERl

J.S.C.

2
I
At IAS Part_. __ .of the Supreme
Court of the State of New York
Held ii1 and for tlte County of
Kings, at the cou.rthouse at
360 Adams Street on tltc
Day ofNovem bei:' 2012
i P.RESEi."'fi': Hon. J. t'cc of the Supreme Court , US I

; Strunk in
Petitioner.
-against:..
HAKEEMJEJ<1l1UES FIT AL .
Respondents.
Index 21948/2012
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
FOR TRO;
INJUNCTION, PROTECTION
l>ECLARATORY JUDGMENT
----."'-'-------.;..._--. .. --x Ai'fl>PROIIIDITION ORDER
Upon reading and filing tlie and affida\itofChrislopher EadStnuik
:affirmed fu un the 19'h day of November 2012 with 13 exhibit.CJ, ami b11sed upon tlte underlying
1
Pet.ition with Notice filed NoveJ)lber 2012w.ith juds<l:iction oftbe CPLR 7801 .. 7802 in
with New York State Election Law (EL) Article .16-100, as applies tO .EL Artide 12
1
1lo.m after the November 6. 2012Presidential General Election ofNew York.Electoral College
imeml.lers tltat mustcast a vole by 15 December 2012 for New candidate .for Presidentand
1Vice President of the United States.
Let the respondents or their attorney $bow cause at t11e lAS Room
1
:------' of this Coi.u1, to beheld at the 360 Ad.1ms Street, New York. on
-- .. d.1y <!( , 2014 -.- o'clock in the_. --- noon.or as :soon
as eounsel may be. heard why an order should not be the December 15,.20 12.
I
and New York State election. of their U.S, Senator with
a) A hearing em the legal issues as to. tile :void ab initio. US Senate Election in New York..
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 177 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
b) A bearing on the issues of facts as to sedition and treason
c) A hearing on the issues ofthe actual historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen held by
the State of New York from before and after tlte 1776
d) O<er ofl'mteclion of those Expert witnesses subpoenaed to appear to testify against the
Respondents of each category
e) Utat Public Officers elected to Congress and as a public officet elector be ban-ed from
reviewing the elector votes in keeping to the mandates of the law of tlte land
f) That based upon a review of the facts associated wi1b tbe forgery of public documents to
facilitate usuq>ation of the office ofPOTUS that Electors be given notice oftlleir being
held as an accessory after the 'let to a forgery crime that would be refetTed for criminal
proceeding.
g) 'Dtat based upon a review of the facts associated with the allegation of misprision of
felony seditiott and treason tltat Electors be given notice of their being held as an
accessory after the fact to a felony and sedition and warned of treason t>-er se crime that
would be referred for criminal proceeding.
h) Titat electors be instructed as to actual the historical meaning ofNalur<tl Born Citizen
held by tbe Stale of New York from before and alter Ute 1776 issuance of the Declar:ation
of Independence and with the proviso that were a Public Officer other Utan an
independent elector per se to attempt to cb3nge Ute eligibility of a federal offLCer would
be held in civil contempt in breach of public officer duties.
i) And :for:further aod different relief as the Court may deem necessary herein.
As it is alleged that six issues oflaw and issues offact arc Utat as time is of the essence with
imminent in'eparable harm with no other forum to seek relief from turtber infringem,ent of his
2
-----==-.-
.t}eedom and liberty, and that Petitioner bas not sought this nor is another lo benelit
ffll'm such relief other than as a member of a class simi lady situated; and concelll$ in:fringement
. basic rights oU1erwise protected by tbe U.S. Constitution and wi.tb 14rh Amendment
guarantees and relattxl state law including the New York State Constitution :
i
I
As the tirst question is the New York election held November 6. 2012 of Kirsten
to tbe U.S. Senate from New York void ab initio as to elector qualifications are not
to that oftbe New York Assembly; and therefore, Petiticmcr seeks to overtum New York's
l!J.S. Senate election with U.S. Const Amendment 17. as the November 6, 2012 election for U.S.
from New York between Democrat Candidate Kirsten Gillibrand and Republican
<I:andidate Wendy Long was conducted for electors uot meeting tbe qualiilcatioll$ of a member
ofthe Assembly with State Constitution Article 3 Section "1? And Utat Petitioner wisl1es the
G::ourt to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask the Gove1no set a special election, becalise a
l!i gnificant number of tbe electors casting their respective vote Were domiciled in New York for
tbss than f'wes years and bad not lived in their county of domicile for at least twelve
i
thontlts and there is no way to determine from the votes cast on Novemebr 6. 2012 oftlwse
qualified wl1at candidate Wa') voted for.
I
As tbe Se<:ond question are Respondent Hakeell'l Jeffries and Respondent Grace Meng
i
to uew U.S. House Juembers and Electots with a to .matter of law and facts are in
I
with U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 2, i.e; A2SlC2 and A2SlC5?
' As the Third Question are public officers who arc Ute electors who are public union
frustees as with Respondents George Gresham, ll.fario Cilento, and Seott Adams as \'-'ell as for
I
Jttorneys and fpbbyists among others holding an o.ffice of trustor prolil bave a special fiduciary
! . .
duty as to matters oflaw and facts attempt to change the POlUS eligibility of
I .
3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 178 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
A2S 1C5 and are in conflict with A2SlC2, are barred from sucll votp as a breach of a fiduciary
duty to their membet:sb_ip and Peop1e oftbe State of New York?
As the Fourth Question are public officers who tlte:ele;:tors who are public union
trustees as with Respdent Emily Giskc the lobbyj$t and that bold an Qffice of trust or
profit have fiduciary duty as to matters of Jaw and facts are. quasi public officers with a fiduciary
duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications and are in eonflict with
A2S lC2, are barred from suc'Jt vote a breach of a fiduciary .duty to U\e People ofthe State of
New York that ntay not be segregated from their duty appear as im:poopriety?
As tbe Fillh Question are aJl wb() are- public officers who are state of local
officers and or wiil\ a fiduciary duty serving the state excluding :a commissioner of deeds or
notary public who attempt to cbange the POTUS eligibility qualifications are in conflict with
A2S lC2 and A2S lC5 and are barred :from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the People
of the State ofNew York'! and
And as the Sixth Question are public officers who as the private person without
another public office as an Elector Public Officer .also b.ave duly as to matter of law and facts as
a criminal matter but when absent a violatiOn oflaw an<! or. A2S 1C2 and or A2S 1 CS may vote
for whom they wish or are each bound by their alle$iane:e to upon hold- the US Constitution by
birth to US Citizen Parents or as naturalized bound oath ofallegiance WQUid
commit a felony sedition and or treason in casting their votef(tt an ineligible candidate and who
after conunitting a series of crimes for the purpose .of usurping Ute PolUS an accessory to a
telony and crime lliereto'!
Pending the hearing of this motion itisORQEREDthatRespondents are to
a. Stay aU New York Electoral College from casting a vote until further notice
4
Pending the bearing oflhis motion it is ORDERED that Restmndents attorneys are to
'be notified by Petitioner by overnight mail by delivery 24 hours prior to the hearing ordered
; herein with a copy ofl:his ordeT. and Ute papers upon wbich this order is granted; and-
1
1 furthennore,
It is OIIDERED tlmtnamed Respondeilt'i sl1aU appear or by I her atto1ncy show
l cause at the lAS Part ___ ___ ofthis Court, lo be held at the Courthouse, 360
! Adams Street, Brooklyn, New York;. on the--day of , at
___ o'clock in the ___ noon or as soon as. counsel may be heard why an order for a trial
ofllte facts should not be made affecting administration of election taw and orders by the Court.
- j
Sufficient cause appearing Uterefore.Jet personal order by and the
! papers upon wl1ich this order is upon the respondent Respondents by their respective
jattomey and oftlie New Y(irkState Offi.ceof Altomey General on or before tbe __ -..-.day of
; November. 2012 be deemed good and sufficient. An affidavit or otber proof of service shall be
i presented to t.bis C.ourt on the return date directed in the second pa.-agraph of this order.

J.S.C.
5
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 179 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v JC!ffries et at Article 78NYSSC fo.r Kings County N(),! 12
SUPREME COURT OF THE. NEW YORK
FOR TilE COtJi'\1YOF KINGS Index No.: 21948/2012
________.;.;.____ .. ..
Chrl,topher-Earl: Strunk In e,sSe
593 VanderbiltAvenne . .::.2SlBfooklynNew Yl).lk 11238

-against-
flabentJeilries 35 thulerhil! A \1!11Uil'> /P..A- Brooklyn, NY 11238
Gmce: .Meng ofHV14. 34th A_yem1e Fl.usltlng. NY UJ54
Felix Or1lz l$9B33r!JStreet- Brookl)'n.NY llzJZ
Filed November 14.
Bm 0eBI3$1CJ Uth B[QbJ;lytl,
WaUe-rCooper J so West96ili S!reet;; #120 ... New Yoik. NY t002S MEl\llO.RANI>UM
Kelllt Ll'. WrJglri . .,f2Z25 Fifth AVenue NY 101)37' . .. .
CltristrneC.Qu.fnnofZ631'4inthA..,'Ilmw;#3ANcwYQ.tk.to.'Y iooot IN SUPPORT ()tr AN ORD)!;R TO
\ViUiam Thompson N'.ioo West .121St New York; NY llioi7
Scott Stringer C!ftS$\Ve&71$. Slfcltt; -- Ne.wYolk, t-.'Y uifill SHOW CAUSE FOR '\-VRIT OF
EmUyGfskc()f440West .. NewYor.k; N\" .
Anne-Murie.Al1Zillom<28214SlhSir>t,..A:;tQri3,NY mo3 PROHIBITION WlTHTRO ..
Ardde.SpJgnerot.lill!ll7SthStreet ...,.Jrumtk.;t ltt 1143.3
GeorgeGmham.l:mEa$tll3mStnlet-Btt'llli:,NYl046o STAY, INJUNC'flON AND
Rnbth mar .. Jt. #6D- a NY 1047.)
Ken JenldD$108 BusheyAvenue- Yt>lilrets, NY 10110 DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Marlo Cilento 3 lB-abcl fulail . .,... Orangeburg. NY .l0962
Gerald D .J-ennings ofll3S New Scotland Rood- Albany, NY 122US AS TO ELECTORAL COLLEGE
Byron Brown 14 Bufthlo, NY 14208
Robert DuJJy 164 <:.r<>ydon Road- Rccltll$!er, NY HMO PUBLIC OFFICERS WlTil U.S
Joseplt Mo.-ellc or U3Deerlield Prive- . .
--otchtiniPark.liY H.l21 CONSTITUTION ART. :2 1 Cl. 2
lCl D.l'h"ll..; NY 13:224
Steve BeJJon.li>7VandtrbiltA\1lnue- W'$t Babyl<m,NY 11704 AND TO VOlD.AND ORDER A
Irene Ste.in 101 Brandywine Drive lthaea. NY l4S50
SbeUa Conaar 29DepotStreet- Middle Or.ur11ill;NY WJd NEW US SENATE ELECTION
Kirsten willl. DC Qffice47S DC 211510
Respondents.
-----------"------------------------------x
Tius is Petitioners Memorandum of .Law in support of an Order to Show Q\U$e by,
Christopher Ead: Strunk in esse . a Mlt"'Surcty private natural-hom U.S. Citizen self represented
without an A.fndavj.t is in support willt. Twelve (l:2) E,xhibil$
a:flimtecJ November 19. 20 12; a:n:d that Pe#tioner duly served Notice ofPetition and Verified
Petition underlying this a'> shown .liS: Exhibit 6 and 7 accordingly, $eeks
an Orner to Show Cause:as to captioned respondent$ ..11$ time is ofthe essenc(: witb.inuriinent
support ofOSC l of 10
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings Com1Ly Index No.; 21948-2012
inreparable harm with no other fomm to seek relief from further infringement of his: freedom and
liberty. and that Petitioner has not sought this relief before nor is another to benefit from such relief
other than as a member of a elass similarly situated; and concerns infringement of Petitioner basic
rights otherwise protected by the U.S. Constitution and with l4
1
h Amendnent guarantees and
retated state law :including lhe New York State Constitution.
Tilis apt>lication requesls a temporary restraining order (TRO) be enforced until further
notice of the Court in regards a trial on the facts and a declaratory judgment on issues of law.
This application requests a irial no later than December 4, 2012 as the Electors are to vote
between December 7 and December 15 2012 and therefore on the facts of a felony in which the
El,ectoJ'S of lhe New York Electoral College would be accessories to, must be heard and decided on
the Court before U1ey are to vote and the Temporary restraining order being requested herein is
to1 be lifted; and that Petitioner at trial will present evidence and te.oitimony with expert witnessel>
E, lrey, Pamela Barnett, Apuzzo, Walter Francis FilzpatrickJII., Eric Jon Pbelps, H.
Van Allen and others yet named who wiJJ testify as to tnalters explained in a bearing for a
prelintinary uyunction and or a.t trial of facts and require protection by order of the Court; and
I
Not\vilhslanding a trial and Ute criminal complaint,. tbatPetitioner requin."S a Declaratory
ltJgment dealing with the civil incompatibility of members to serve as Electors of the New York
College fonned after Ute 2012 General Election in conflict with A2SlC2 as to each
a public officer's and or private person ;s involvement as an elector under the law of the
clj-Se established by the Decision and Order ofDeccmber 4, 2008 shown as E:'(hibit 3 as a matter of
I
S(ate Law heard by tbe H(morable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at I.A..S. Part 1 in the Article 78 Petition
with Kings County Index No.: 2008-29641 with proc-eeding Transcript shown as Exhibit 4.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's :Mmi.10RANDUM in support ofOSC Page 2 of 10
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 180 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et at Article 78 NYSSCfo.i.' Kings County Index No.! 21948-2012
As tbe first gut>Stion is the New Yorkelectionhetd November 6. 2012 of Kirsten Gillibrand
to the U.S. Senate trom New York void ab initio as to electo.r qu.'llifienti()ns are not equal to lhat of
the New York Asscmtbly; and Jlterefore, Petitipner seeks to ov.erturn New York'$ Senate
eleCtion with U.S. C.onsLAmendment 17:
Senate of the United States sluiU be comp.osed of two. Senatorsftom each State,. eleeled
by tbe people for si-t years; each Senator shall have ()ne \tOL'. 1.'he. in
. each State llave the qualifu:alioiiSI'eqnisitefor electors of the mQSt
brnndt oftlte StatelegiSiatttres. "
as tbe November 2012 election for U.S. Senator from New Yotk Candidate
Kirsten G.illibraml:uid Republican Candidate Wendy Long conducted for elector$ not meeting
the qualifications of a member of the Assembly with State .Article 3 Section 1:
". No JletsoJt sltall sets.oe as a ntemhtr unless l1e or she is a citiZen
United State.' nnd lun f!tU#t a resident of tlte state of Nettl.l:orkfor fi''e.vesrS, and,
as hereinafter prescribed, oftlte .ft.fsemhly ... district for the twelve mo111hs
immediately preceding l1is or lu!r election; or member of at the ftrSt election
nex.t ensuin& after a readjustment or alteyation of the 31>sembly becomes
efiective, a peri;on.to be eligible to m11st havl! btren a resident qfthe
in wllich dte senate or. m-semhly district is clmtaineil for tweb;e IIU)itt/t$ imnutdiately
preceding his or /1er electiotl. . " (Emphasis added by Petitioner) ?1
As Petitioner wishes the Court to void the ttS. Senate Election atld a$k the Governor set a
spceia 1 election, becau,o;e.a significant numb of the eiec.rors. casting their respective vote
domiciled in New York for less than fives yea1'S and had not lived in their respective oounty of
domicile lbr at least lwdve.monlhs and tbete. iS UO: \Vay to delentiine from. tl.e 'iot$ easton
Novemebr 2012 of those qualified what candidate was voted for.
'11tcn under the premise that each is mandated by :the State of New Y (lrklegislature
with e.'{clusive power by A2SlC2 and A2SlC5 and with use of New YorkState.Electi011
Law and related Blacker.,146.U.S. 1 ( 1892). with the provjSo that no.Public
Offi'-iaJ may cbMge: the eligibility:.and 01" qualification requiretttC.JltS of a oft1cer including
that of office ofP01US, U.S. Term Lim itt. Inc. v. Thorntom.514 US. 779 (19.95);and
Christopher-Earl! in support of OSC 3 oflO
Strunk v Jeffries etal. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Under the 11remise .that Petitioner contends that A2SlC2, .. hut nu Senator or
. or Penon holtling au Office ofTntM, or Pn1fit umler tlte U;tited Stoles. slulll he
lmpointetlan Elector'' use is still with the original meaning and intent despite the addition ofthe
i
l21h. 14
111
,17
11
' and 20th Amendments notwilhstanding; and thaUbe original use J>cfore ratification
14
1
b amendment considered each Stale ofthe several States was sovereign and :t;tol subservient
tp the USA in regards to the enforcetnent of the Bill of Rights apj,lied to the Federal entity tbat was
tenned States not as now tenned after rtttification.ofthe '14
14
Amendment
0868) became the singular United States,. as each State of the several Stales became and now
rl::main subservk:ntaloitgwitb every state citizen therein placed under USAjumdicti(m per se; and
that by special apJ:learance of Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse;; as the non-surety private nalural-bom
U.S. Cj(izen is a de jure free U.S. Citizen released ftom differently than all respondents
\tho remain subservient :to the :respective State trustee a.<> the surety oftbe debtor usufruct; and
s1;1bservinl under jurisdiction of the I.Jnited States entity- Petitione1 contends that :
As the Second question are and Respondent Grace Meng as to
dew U.S. House rnentbers attd Electors witll a duty as to n:tattei: of law and facts are in coltflict
\+ith U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section !paragraph 4 te. A2Sl C2 and A2SlCS.?
As the third Question are public officers who are. the electors who are public union
as. with Respondents George Mario Cilento,: and Scott Adams as well as for
lobbyists among others holding an office of trustor profit have a speeial fiduciary
to matters oflaw and facts attempt to change tbe POlUS eligibiiity qualifications of
A2? and arc in eonflictwithA2S lC2,: are ban:edfrom such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty
tlteir membership and People of tlle State of New Yo.rk'?
i
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's !vfEMORANDill.I in support of OSC Page; 4 of 10
-,)
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 181 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk ,. Jeffries et at. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County lnde.1i: No.: 12
A.-.; the Fourth Question are public officers who are the electors who are public tmkm
trustees as with. Respondent Emily Giske tbe lobbyist and others that hold an office of b'u$t or
profit have fiduciary duty asto matters oflaw and facts are quasi public office$ with a fiduciary
duty attempt to the PO:rt)S eligibility qualitications of A2StCS and are in c<m:llictwith
A2S lC2, are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the People of
York that may not be segregated from thek duty appear as impropriety?
As the Fifth Oucstion are all Respondents who are public officers who are state oflocal
ofiicers and or with a fiduciary duty serving the state excluding a commissioner of deeds ornot:uy
public who attempt to change the P011JS eligibility qualification.-; are in conflict with A2S lC2 and
A2S ICS and are barred from such vote as a breacb of a fiduciary duty to the People ofthe State of
New York? and
And as the Sixth Question are public. officers who as the Elector private person without
another public office as an Elector Public Officer also have duty as to matter of Jaw and fact.< as. a
criminal matter but when .absent a violation oflaw and or A2S 1C2 and or A2S 1 CS may-vote for
whom t1w:y wish or are eacll bound by their allegiance to upon hold the US Constitution by birtlt to
US Citizen Parents or as natu,ralizcd bound by oath of allegiance Uiereafter would commit a felony
sedition and or treason in castjng their vote for an ineligible candidate and who after committing a
series of crimes for.tbe. purpose of uswping the POTUS an accessory to a felony and crime thereto?
As a mattl.>r of housekeeping, Petitioner acknowledges the concern expressed by Mr. Joshua
Pepper New York Assistant Attorney General for the New York Executives as shown as Exhibit 2.
and tbat Petitioner does not intend to either name any ofthe parties therein referenced nor revisit the
ballot access or fund raising issues raised as to the natural,..bom Citizen issue now beforetbe New
York State Coutt of Appeals in both the Appellate Seoond Department in a})peal case 20 lZ ..05515
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's MENIORANDUM in support of OSC Page 5 oflO.
Strunk 1' Jeffries et al. Article. 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
as: well as the Third Depal1menl too; however presses the issue that is raised associated with the
of felony, sedition and treason :s the Electors as well a.o; each Respondent's intent is to
change the NBC POTUS eligibility of A2SlCS by reestablishing feudal Doctrine of perpetual
aqegiance eliminated by the Declaration of Independence in 1776 as adopted by the People of the
New York on April20. 1777 New York outlawed the doctrine of perpetual allegiance of
feudalism. Roman Catholic Doctrine, Islamic texts oftbe Koran, Sira. Hadith. and other
totalitarian forms ofhnman subjugation, quote that:
XXXV. And tbis convention doth further, in tbe name and by the autbority of the
good people of this Slate, ordain, and declare t11at sucb parts of the comnu;m law
and of the statute law ofEngland and Great Britain. and of the acts oftbe
legislature of the colony of New York, as together did form tl1e law of tbe said colony on tile
19th day of April, in the year of our Lord one tltousand seven hllndred and seventy-five,
shall be and continue the law of this State, subject to alterations and provisions as tbe
legislature oftbis State shall, from time to tinte, make concerning tbe same. That such of the
said acts, as are shall expire at the times Htnited ior their duration, rest,cctively.
That all such parts of the said common Jaw. and aU such of tbe said statutes and acts
aforesaid, or parts thereof. as nllly be construed to establish or maintain any particular
denomination of Quistlans or their ministers. or concem the allegiance heretofore yielded
to, and the suprettlllcy, sovereignty. govenunent, or: prerogatives claimed or exc:rcised by,
. the King of Great Britain and his predecessors. over the colony of New York and its
inhabitants, or are repugnant to this constitution, be. and they hereby are. abrogated and
rejected. And tltis convention doth fiutber ordain. t11at the resolves or resolutions oftlte
congresses of the colony of New York, and of the cOnvention oflhe State ofNew York, now
in force. and not rt.'tlllgnant to the goverrunent established by this constitution, shall be
considered as making part of the laws of this State; subject. nevertheless, to suclt alterations
and p(ovisions as the legislature of this State from time to time. make concerning the
same ...
XLU. And this convention doth further, in tbe name and by the authority of the good
people of this State, ordain, detennine. and declare tbat it sbaU be in the di-;cretion of the
legislature to naturalize all such and in such mamter, as they shall think proper:
Provided, All such ofthe persons so to be by Utem naturalized, as born in parts
beyond sea, and out of the United States of shall come to settle in and become
slibjec:ts of this State,. shall take an oath of allegiance to this State, and abjure and renounce
all allegiance and sul:!.iection to all and every foreign. prince, potentate. and State in all
matters, ecclesiastical as well as civit<
11
-
1
'. bttp:/Javalon.law,yale.edul18th_centuryfny0l.asp The custom of naturalizing aliens by special act was
ti{:St introduced by the colonial general assembly in 1717. and was continued by the State legislature until the
a4option of the Federal Constitution in 1789. Afterthat date the right to hold land upon declaring an
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's in support ofOSC Page 6 of 10
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 182 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk". Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.:
And that in regard the People of New York detnand for the use of NBC in the second draft of the
US Constitution on July 26 1788 Ratified {l)wamed of secession of tbe People as for NBC held
that:
. That the Powers of Govemment may be reassumed by the Pe()ple. wltensoever it shaU
become necessaty to their Hap11iness; that every JuriSdiction and right, which is not
by tbe said Constitution clearly delegated 'to the Congress of Ute United States, or tbe
departments of the Government Utererif, remains to the People of the several States, or to
their respective State to wbom they may granted tbe same; And tltat
those Clauses in the said which declare, that Congress sba 11 not b ave or
exercise certain Powers, do not imply tltatCongress is ent itlcd to any Powers .not given by
the said Constitution; but such Clauses are to be constmed .either as exceptions to certain
specified Powers. or as inserted merely for greater Caution
That no Persons except natural born Citizens, or such as Were Citizens qn or Wore the
fourth day of July one thousand seven. hundred and seventy six, or such as held
Commissions under the United States during the War, and bave at any time since the fourtlt
day of July one thousand seven htindred and seventy si.>t becmtieCitizens of 011e or other of
the United States, and wlto shall be shall be eligible to Ute Places of President.
Vice President. or Members of either House of the Congress ol'the United States.
That ratber than. burdening the Court with further argumentPetitioner with ion of
Attorney rvfario Esq (l) with his website Jdtp://puz<>l.blogspotcom/ bas given pennission
for me to reference his latest work on the applicability of NBC asto the individual present
usurpation of the \vltite House and at triall wilt call lvfr. ;mE.xpert Witnes.s.
http:l/puzol.blogspot.com!2009/08tlaw-of ..nation.'l--and-not..euglisb--common.lttml

.http://puzo .btmJ
l4tlt-amendment-nor-won.g-kim-ark.html
intentitm to become naturalized was granted by special act untill825, \vhen a general Jaw for this pmpose
was passed. -Hough.
z http://avalonJaw ;yale.edu/1 Sth_c-enturyh'atny.asp
3
Nfario ApUZ7.o, Esq., 185 Gatr.mer Ave. Jamesburg NJ Email: apu:zzo(AT]erols.com, TEL: 732-
521-1900 F A.:'C: 132-521-3906, BLOO; http:!/puzo Lhlogspt,CQril
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's MEMORAi'lPUM in support of OSC Page 7 of 10
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Artic.Ie 78 NYSSC for Kings Counly Index No.: 21948-2012
lrttp:f/puzol.blogspot.comi2012i05lnew-yorksbte,-court-shouW-noLblml
http:/ /puzo l.hlogspot.com/20 I2/10!harack-ohruna-is-ineligih le-to-he.html
And finally, tllat as a matterqfnationa.l security Petitioner includes herein an additional
exhibit to Utis Memorandum that adds Exhibit 13 with some historical background as tQ the charges
including the 2005 Prh'(lle Report to Elias Aoun on Utose responsible for the
of Rafic Baha El Deen Al-Hariri (Arabic: U!J-11 l November
-14 February 20(}5) fmtpublished in 2007by the Beirut and then the June 29,2010
Aftidavit of Eric Jon Phelps as .to the Jesuit Peter-Hans Kovenbach S.J. role in the
i
f1resent use of President Vladimir Putin oJ Russia per se in Syria entitled Power o(tlte Societv of
J"eSus in Ru.s:>ia From Czar Alexander! to tlie Present. and
Tbat as and fur his emetgency application for .awrit of prohibition wiU1 Temporary
Order (1R0) and permanent injunction with a declaratory judgment as to U.S.
donstitution Article 2 1 CJau!l.e 2 (A2SlC2) exclusive power of Ute Swte Jegislature, fotmation of
!
New York electoral college thafunder CPLR Article 78. the New York Slate Election Law
i
l).rticle 16-100 jurisdiction over Election Law Articlel2 and related law as applies to twenty-nine
d!9) US. Citizens to serve as Public Officer members oftlle New York Electoral CoiJege al'ter the
I . .
November 6. 2012 General Election thru Decentber 25, 20 12; and that this Petition requests
e?tpedited emergency equity reliefwiUt a CPLR 7805 injunction with a stay ofNew York
Electoral College vote due by Deeember'IS, 2012 until the court renders a dedru:atory judgment on
I
issues oflaw under CPLR 7806-regarding U.S. Constitution: At1icle 2 in its entil'ety. especially
Article 2 Section l paragraph 3 (A2S1G3}as amended hy Ute Article 7 .t\mendmcnts the 12u' tbe
i
t411lk especially sections 3 and 4. tbe 20m. and the 25
111
; further. espeeially as to lhe U.S.
Gonstitution Article 2 Section lllaragrapb S (A2SlCS)tenn of art "natura! horn Citizen" {1'-.IBC)
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's in support of OSC Page 8 of 10
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 183 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County No;! :l;1948-20 12
natural law versus tbe idiom ''born a citizen" positive law created by th: New York Stale
Board of Elections (NYS BOE); further, tlte U.S. C:onstitution: Article 3 SectiOn 3; Article 4;
Article 6; and related New York State law and regulations as applies to the public
officer oath, duties and obligation as applies with use of 1'-l"YS Civil Sen'ice 105, and that
Petitioner seeks equity relief on six (6) issues of Law with Facts pertaining .to the misapplication
and misadministmtion of Public Officer acts as relate to the December 4, 2()()8 Or(/er and Decision
as a matter of State Law heard by t:be Honorable David I. Sclunidt J.S.C. at 1.):\.S. Patt 1 in the
Article 78 Petition with Kings County Index No.: and Complaint with Index No.: 2008
29642; and also, Petitioner challenges tlte New York U.S. Senate EJection as void ab, initio with
U.S. Constitution Amendment 17 and NYS Constitution Atticle 3 7 grounds; and. that based upon
information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, witlt imminenUrreparable ltann as
time is of the essence and without another forum for relief
WHEREFORE, Petitic:mer wishes a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction
hearing. and Declaratory judgment under CPLR 7806 and p<.>flllantmt injunction b> no later than
December 2012 with such other relief as the Court deems just including, a 1'R.O Order:
a. A hearing on the legal issues a5 to the void ab initio US Senate Hlecti<inJn.New York..
b. A bearing on the issues of facts as to forgery, sedition and treason
c. A hearing on the issues. of the actual historical meaning of Natural Born. Citizen held by
the State of New Yorldi:om before and after the 1776
d Order ofProtection of those Expert witnesses subpoenaed to to testify against the
RespPndents of each category
e. That Public Officers elected to Congress ami as a public o.fficer eleetor be barred from
reviewing the elector voles i.n keeping to the mandates of tbe law of.tbe Jruul
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's lvffiMORAl.'lDUM in support of OSC Page 9 of 10

Strunk v Jeffries Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
: Tbat based npon revie\v oftlte f.1clS associated with the forgery of public documents to
facilitate murpation of the office ofPOtUS that Eleetors be given notice of their being
held as an acessory after the fact to a forgery crime that would be referred for criminal
proceeding.
g. "That based upon a.review of the facts associated with the allegation ofmisprision of
felony sedition and treason that Electors be given notice oftlieir being held as an
accessory after the fact to a felony and sedition and warned of treason per se crime that
would be referred for criminal Jlr'lceeding.
b. Titat electors be ins'll:ucted as to actuallhe hi$lorlcahneaning ofNatural B(w Citizen
held by the State ofNew York front before and after tlte 1776 issuance of the
Declaration of Independence and with tbe pro,>iso that were a Public oUter than
an independent elector per se to attempt to change the eligibility of a federal officer
would be held in civil wntempt in breach of public officet' duties.
i. And for further and different relief as the Court may deem necessary herein.
New York
November_. 2012
Respectfully submitted by:
Christopbet-Ead: Stnmk,., in Petitioner
withoutbeing an. attorney
593 Vandetbi.lt Avenue #281.
New York
(845) 901-6767 Email: cbris@strunk:ws
Christopher-Earl: Strtmk's tvlEMORANDUivi in supportofQSC Page 10 of 10
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 184 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk"\; aJ. Article 78 NYSSG for Kings Gotmty fude."t
SUl'REME COURT OF 'IJIE STATEOI<' NEW YORK
FOR COtJNTY OF KINGS Index No.: 21948/2012

Strunk in esse . . Filed. November 14; 2012
593 York ll23S
Petitioner,
-against-
Hakfent . .Jetl'firs:.3:SlTlidemill #2A Srooklyn., NY 11238
GJ'ate M<'ngof147l4. 34th - Fl.uslt.inl!.NY UlS4
F<'llx 1$9 B 33rd - ll23l
Bill 0e8la$1U Qf442lllll Street -Btol>.kl)'ll, NY till'
UO West 96th Street. #12(1 -:-NewYork;; NY AFFIDAVIT
KetlJtL.T. .
Cltrisune c.. QuJnn *Y IN SUPP()RT OF AN ORDER TO
W1Uiam1'hompsonof JOQ West 121stStreet"7"" NewYork. NYtil027 . .
SHOWCAUSEli'OR\\WTOF
Emil)' (;fslwof440 West )Jtb Street-J<e\\'York, NY10014
Anne- Marlt 4Sih Sli:4et NY HJ03 PROlllBITION Willi TRO,
Ardde SplgnilrofHll!l NY l:i.J33
George Gresham .Utl Ba$t Suwt- Bronx.. NY .10466 STAYt INJUNCTION AND
Rubrh DJa24 BJ'C.'In,.\t, NY iOm
Ken Jenkins 108 BusheyAvenue "Ycrikors, NY 10110 DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
:Marlo Isabel Road .,.,. Omngeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D ScollondRood-::AibM:y>NY 12ws AS TO ELECfORAL COLLEGE
Byron Brown U Buffalo, NY 14208
NY 14610 PUBLIC OFli'ICERS WOH
Josepll Morelle of UlDeerlield DriVe..., NY 1460!:1
ScottAdamsofU J.U27 .. CONSTITUTION ART. i i CJ. Z
Stephanlel\Uner lCl NY l3ll4 . .
Steve Bellone .101 -W$t Babylon, NY t 1104 AND TO VOID AND OH.IlERA
Irene Stein 101 Btalldywine Dtive NY 14850
SlleiJa Comar 29 De!X'tStreet- Middle Oranvill.c-, NY 1284!>. NEW. US SENAl'E ELECTION
Kirsten Glllibrand wilh nci o.mce47S Ru"!illWashingtOri,.OC 20SIO
Respondents.
--
STATE OF NEW YORK )
)ss;
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Accordine,l.y, 1. Slruok in duly: mom, and say 1,1nder peJ1alty of peljury:
.1. Earl: in esse is :a duly' regi,s.tered voter oftlte:64u. Election
District oftbe $7
111
District (AO) and within. Ute New York 8
111
U;S. House District at 593
Avenue -'281Brooklyn New y OJk 1123$ .witbeJilail;chriSI(l'Jstrunk. WS and
Cbristopher-Earl: Strtutk's AFFJDAVI'firi . Page l ofl5
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC tbr Kings County Index No.; 21948-2012
phone 845-901-6767. and an enrolled member oftbe Republican Party \Ylto at the
I
November 6. 2012 General Election there voted entirely for the Republican Party line of candidates
with Wendy Long for US Senate.
2 That Petitioner seeks an Order to Show Cause as to captioned respondents as time is oftbe
dssence with imminent irrq>arable harm with no other forum to seek relief from further
ofbis freedom and liberty. and that Petitioner has not sought 1l1is relief before no.r is
to benefit from such relief other th .. "ln as a member of a class similarly situated; and concerns
of Petitioner basic rights otherwise protected by the U.S. Constitution and wiUt 14
111
t}mendment guarantees and related state law including Ute New York State Constitution.
3. That on November 9. 2() 12 duly 11otified the respondents by regular mail of Petitioners intent
appear on Monday November 19, 2012 to file tlus application dealing with tlte civil
incompatibility of members to setve as the New York Electoral College ibnned after the 2012
Election in conflict with A2S 1 C2. mid the crjminal matter complaint as to each regarding a
officer's and or private involvement First inter alia members as accessory to the
ctirne ofuswpation of the .POlUS by sedition and treason, and Second, as to eaclt member
elector's intent to change thcl)OTUS eligibility ofA2S1C5 (see Exhibit n.
4. That on November 16, 2016 in response to the NOTICE shom as Exhibit 1, Joshua Pep1>er
Assistant AtlO!ney General expressedconcems to the Clerk ofthe court on November 16,
zp 12 (see Exhibit 2) that executives be afforded immunity from suit berein: Andrew :\'1. Cuomo is
a' incumbent 56th Govemor ofNew Yor:k to as .a me.mber ofthc State ofNew York
e'ectoral college and was nQtified ofPOTUS ineligibility as the NYS Attomey General and an
elector in the 2008 Electoral proceeded to vote. that Tom DiNapoli is a incwnbent 54th
I .
of Ute state of New York to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral
c?Uege attd was notified ofPOWS ineligibility as the NYS Attorney General and att elector in the
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT insupportofOSC Page 2 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 185 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et aL Article 78 NYSSCfor ]Cings County Index No.: 21948-2012
2008 Electoral College t>roceeded to that ,Edc Sclmeidcrmau is a incumbent 65th Attorney
General of New York to particit,ate aS. a mmher 9ftlte State of New York electoral coUege, and
that 'lvfr. Pepper references to the C-ase Strunk v NYS BOE et a,b Index No.: 2011-6500 with a order
and decision taken on appeal case 2012-5515 filing due Februacy 22, 2013.
S. 11utt Petitioner is in. compliance .in letter and intent of the order rcl'erenced by !vir. Pepper
expressed in tbe Letter shown a.'> and bec.1use there is no identity of parties nor are the
primary issues the same as the prior 2011-:6:500 ofthe complained of2008 fund raising with
related elements of :fraud per se inter alia that sought to recover the costs of Ute 2008 election, and
did not concerti the composition o( Uten 2(108 New York Electoral College; and therefore is
different now because Ute 2012 General Election matter and petitioned of for emergency
reJieflterein deals with the results ofthe 12 general e.Jeetion incompatibility of members of the
New York Electoral College in regards to Ute law of the land, and that Petitioner seeks equity
relief on six (6) issues of Law with Facts pertaining t() the mi'lapplication and misadministration. of
Public Officer acts as in part to .the December 2008 Order and Decision {see Exhibit 3) as
a matter of State Law heard by the ilonorable David l. Sclunadt J.S.C. at I.A.S. Part 1 in the
Article 78 Petition with Kings Index. No.: and based upon the November 3.
2008 proceeding with counsel'!- and Petitioner (seli: Exhibit 4).
6. In lhat Petitioner's underslandmg oftheJ.>ecision and Order of Ju.<>tioe Schmidt shown as
Exhibit 3 at page 3 is that a New Ymk Elector.llColJege Elector is merely a private person not
eiUter a state or local office or even a public oJlicer aeeording to state defmition required to take an
oath in New York or elsewben;i to uphold the State ot Federal O:>nstitution and as such may vote as
a private person; however, public officers.maynot hold two incompatible offices simultaneously as
this Second question l'aises:
Sttu;Dk's AFPIDAVI'f in support of OSC Pa8E= 3 of 1:5
Strunk v Jeffries t>t aL Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
"It is a well-settled common law rule thal a. public officer cannot hold two incompatible
office.-; simultaneously (Ma.uer ofSmith v Dtl/on, 267 Atlp. Div. 43 [ 1943}). This rule
seeks to prevent offices of public from accumulating in a_single individual Two offices
are incompatible if one is.subordinate to the other or there is an inherent inconsistency
between the two offices (s.eePeopfe:ex rei. Ryan vGreen, 58 NY [1874];
44NY2dS30,53S [1918l;Mattero[Dupras vCQ'Wrtyo[Clinton, 213
AD2d952,953 [1995J;MmterofDji.emmn1Symonds, 54 AD2d 159,162{1976];Fauciv
Lee, 38 Misc. 2d 564,567 [1963], nlfd. 19 AD2d 777 [1963}).
Incompatibility "has been said to exist when there iis a built-in right of the holder of one
position to interfere with th.1t :of the other . " (0 'Ma/Jey, 44 NY2d ai :535). Where one
person holdc; boU1 such posts then ''tbe design that one act as a cheek on the other would be
fulstrated"
i 7. That a State Officer, local oft'icer are public oflicers tbat1told an office of as do
pel:son.c; registered to act for tlte State suclt as an attorney. union tt'UStee.lo.bbyi-;t and others hold an
I
o4'ce of trust for profit. are au exception to J>etitioner' s understanding of the Decision and 0 rder Of
i
Scluuidt shown as E:mibit 3 at page. 5 quote:
"'EJectors of president and vice president are tbus specifica Uy.e."cluded from the
state officer defmiti(m setforlh in the Public Officers Law. Hence, tlte desjgnated
respondents, contrary to petitiortefs claims, violate no New York State Constitutional
provision by holding publicQfficer positions while also serving as
Tbe court further concludes that Ute New York State Constitutional provisions
raised by petitioner do not J)rohibit the designated respondents from holding tlteir
respective public offices as well as 'simultaneously serving as electom e\'en assuming tltat
electors of president and vice president are public officer positions. In this regard, the
court fmds that petitioner's relian.ee upon Article Ill, 7 of th.e New York State
Constitution as bari'ing the respondents from serving as public offi.cers while also serving
as electors of president and vice president is witboul merit..."
8. That Petitioner based upon t11e DeciSion and Order shown as E.xhibit 3 considers an Elector
New York Electoral College is a wbo holds an office of trust or profitdefined by U.S.
C(llnstiLution Article 2 Section 1 2 (A2SIC2); and ll1erefore, any U.S. Citizen. elected to the
i
pdsition of New York Electoral College EleCtor even if solely a private U.S. Ci&i::n is a person who
has taken an oath of allegiance to uphold the U.S. Constitution m the same way as
wbuld any public officer and therefore are ixtui"-ale.nt in that a natural hom citizen inherited the
allegiance, and the naturalized citiZen affinned sole allegiance; it is not necessary to an oath.
Cltristopher.;Earl: Strunk:' s AFFIDAVrr in support of OSC Page 4 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 186 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings CoUnty
9. Titat this Petition is by speda I appearance of Christopher Earl: SlfUJ,ik .in. as. the
surety private natural-born U.S. Citizen having on. October .15.t 2012. duly filer.l a ofReleas.e
without C.(:msiderati(JIJ tltat under U.S. Constitution Article 4fuU and provisions is
binding upon the State qfNew York and its 9ounty \.vitbin thesub..division city of New
York and relieves further as trustee--o\\'ner. oftbe usufruct debtor (see Exhibit 5).
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, absolutely release aU personal prope1ty
interests, legal and/or equitable, hi tlle public (Jnited Stal:esCitizen
"CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK" created on J.anuacy 24; 1947, upon the filing of
the trust instntment in the State ofNe\vYork subdivision County of New: 'York
within the City of New York, the USUFRUCT Deed Certificate No . : Q3766 witll the
Certification of Birth N00232437 Exhlbi.t A).
I, Christopher-Earl: Stnmk in ali persontil prope1ty lights. and
equitable. granted or secured by the Conatittttion of the United States. the
Constitution of the State of New York and related law.
l, Christopher-Earl: Stnmk in esse, intend no longer to be the Surety for U1e State-
created pubUc United States Citizen
41
Cti:RISTOPHEREARt.STRUNK,"
"CHRISTOPHER E. STRUNK," .. Chd:stopher E .. Strunk*' or any derivative ofthe
41
nom de guerre" thereof, such as cHRlSTOPHE R. STRUNK w.ith1D No.
UX9457IA".
I, Christopher-Earl: Stnmk in esse, pmsently a t'esidenl of U1e State bf New York,
intend to return to my former naturolbot1l Citizen>statu$: at my natural
birth on January 23. 1947 of licersed thatsti:\ttls being a private
individual United States Citizen confe:rted by.Sectiort 1 oHhe Fotwteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution. and furthel' defined in #ale .11
Henkel, 201 US 43, 7<1.
10. Tbat Petitioner contends that A2Sle2;. "'b11t no Senator or or Penon
ltoliling an Oflice of Trust or Profit under tl1e United States. sltoll be appoutledon Elector' nse is
still witb tlle original meaning and intent despite the addition of the 121!> 1 1411l 1 'f' and 20lb
Amendments notwithstanding; and that the original use before ratification of the l4
1
li amendment
considered each State ofd1e several States was sove:reignarul pot subservient to the USA in regards
to the enforcement ofthe Bill applied to the .Federal. entity that was t>roperly tenned the.<;e
Unjted States not as now tenned after rati11cation ofthe ' 14'h Anietidment (1$98) became the
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in supj)Ort tifOSC. Page 5 of15
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.; 21948..;20 12
Jtngular United States,. as each State of the became and now n .. main subservient
with every state citizen thet:ein placed under USA jurisdiction per se; and that by special
i . .
Earl: Strunk in esse, as the non-surety private natural-born U.S. Citizen
I
is a: de jure :free US. Citizen released from servitude differently Utan all respondents who remain
to the respective Stale trustee as the surety of l11e debtor usufruct; and therefore
subservi'-'tlt under direct juri.<Jdiction of Ute United States entity
lL That on November 14,2012 J>etitioner:flledhis Petition (see Exhibit 6) fora writ of
with Temporary Order (fRO) and pennanent injunction with a declaratory
judgment as to U.S. Constitution Article 2 l ClaU!ie 2 (A2S 1C2) exclusive power of the State
fomuttion ofthe New York electoral college that under CPLR Article 78, Ute New York
$tate Election Law Article 16-lOOjurisdiction over Election Law t-\rtide 12 and related law as
to twentynine (29) U.S. Citizens to ser\'e as Public Officer members of the New York
College after the November 6,. 2012 General Election thru December 25. 20 12; and that
Petition requests ex']>edited emergency equity reliefwilh a CPLR 7805 injunction with a stay
I
dfNew York Electoral CoJlege vote due by December 15, 2012 Wtlil the court renders a declaratory
on the issues of law umler CPLR 7806 regarding U.S. COnstitution: Article 2 in its
I
especially Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 3 amended by tlle Article 7
4mendments thel2tb 14
11
' especially sections 3 and 4, tbe 20m, and the 25m ; further,
as to the U.S. C.onstitution.Article 2 .lt'aragrapb 5 (A2SIC5) tenn of art "'natuml
CitizenH (NBC) natural taw issue versus tbe idiom '"hom a citizen" positive law created by the
l'1ew York State Board pf Electi<i.ns (NYS BOE); furlbCf, the U.S. Comtilulion: Article 3 Section 3;
4,rt:icle 4; Article 6; and furthermore, rdatedNew York State law and regulations as appties to the
i
officer oath, duties and obligation a.-; appJies with use of NYS Civil Service Law 105; and
I .
Petitioner challenges lhe New York U.S. Senate .Election as void ab initio with U.S.
Christopher-Earl: Struilk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC Page 6 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 187 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk 'i Jeffrieset al. Article 78 NYSSCforKings Coi.mty Iitde....; No.: 21948-2012
ConstitulionAinendment 17and N1'SCon.'ilituliml. Article 3 7grounds. and therefore; wishes the
Court to. void the U.S. Senate Elettion,and ask the Govetnor set a speciitl Jection, because a
significant number {)fthe electors their were domiciled in N!'liV Ycrk:for less
than fives years and ba(i not lived in their cpunty Qfd9nlicilc for at months
and there is no way to detennine from the votes cast on November 6* 2012 of those quafmcd what
wasvotcdfot.
12 Respondent$ ""re duly served tile N{lticeofPetltion and Verified Petition witlue:cond
Notice o.f inLent to file an OSC .along with an on online PDF o.nNovetilber 14, 2012
(see Exhibit 7)
AS ANn FOitTHE FIRST QUESTION THENEWYQRICELECTION OF KIRSTEN
GIL.LlBRAND SE.NATE INI"ri().A$
NOT EQUAL
13. That as a11d for the first question tbe New York election held November o, 2012 OfKifflten
Gillibr;md fu the Y wid ab initio as m qu:ilific:ui()ns are not
equal to tltat oftbe New York A$$t:inbly; and therefQ1-e, seeks to Yorks
Senate election with U.S. .Amendment 17 :
'WJ.)leSetiittc oftbe United State3 bewmposed ofnyo SenatOr$ ft(lm each. State; .
by the tbereut foOl' si.x years; and .each S.enatorshidlhave one vote. The eledors.in
eaclt State sltallltal>e the reqttisitefor. electors of the most numerous
brandt . " .
as the Novtnbet 6,.2012 election for U.S. Senntotfrort\ New York between Democrat Candidate
Kirsten Gillibr:md and Republi:ca11 Candidate Wendy Long was C()nducted tor elect(,)rs tl<>tmeelittg
the of of the Assembly 'vith C.ogstitution Article 3 Secti0Jl.7;
. No person s/t.nllsert-'6 ns amenlher oftltelegislniJue 11/tksS lteor sl1e is a citi:;e11 of the
United Stnttis ofNewYorkfor except
3$ hereinafter otherwise prescribed, of tile liSSeJII{Jly ... tit e. motltlts
immetlil1tdy preceding his or her electiOn; ct member of asst':mbly aUhdicit election
next ensuing afler.a readjustment or afterationoftbe
effective. a person. to be t() serve sui:lt, mu#luwe.bmt a resident of the county
Christopher-Earl: Stro,ok's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC Page 'J ofl5
Strunk v Jeffries et aJ. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 2194:8-2012
in lVIticlt tfte senate t!' Ssemhly ilistrict is tl1e h't!le mont/is
precetling his vr her . .eJectum . (Emphasis by
14. P.etitioner wishes lhe Cvurt to void t1te US. Senate Election and asktbe Governor scl: a
eleetion
1
became a. cant number cof the electors their re,')pecti:ve vote
dqmieiled in New York for less than fives. years and bad notJived in their respective oounty of
domicile for at least. Lwelve months and. there is .no way to detennine from the votes 'CaSt <>n
! . . . . . . . .
6, 2012 of those qualifie.d' c.anciidllte was for.
; AS AND FOR TilE SECOl'tl> QUESTION AS TO PUBLICOFJi'ICERS HAKEEM
AND. GRACE: MENG AS TO NEW US.lJOUSE, Ml!.iMBERS .-\i''ID
: EL.ECTORS WITH A DuTY AS TO A MATTER OF LAW A.l\lH?ACTS ARE lN
: CONFLICTWlTHAZStCZ:AS SUCH PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED ARE
BARRED ELECTORAl .. COLLEGE VOTEREVlEW AFTER ,fANUARY 2, lOU.
1
15. That as and for the flt'St New Yorkelection held November 6. 2012 of:public
offleersRespondent.Hakeem Jeftiies andRcsp(mdentGrace ?1.1eng as to newU.S. HoUsemembet$
Electors. with a duty as to matter of law. and facts are in cenflictwith U.S. Constitution Article
2Section 1 paragraph:2,i.e.
"Each State shalf appoint, in silcJd'v,faliiu:rasthe Legtslcltute thereojnzay direct, a NtJmberof
equ.1l l.tJ tl:e wholeNumberof&natofsandRf...pres,enta.t('res .to which the. State nul)1 be
entitled in the CQllgress: but no Senator or or Person holding an Office of
Trust or Prorn under the United States, shall be appohtted an Elector: (emphasis added) .
1
16, other than Article Vl {l}; it does not specify t1te fomi of oath a
C?ngressman is to take, and was a functi<m of the respective state and federal law as in New York
I
State Public Officer Law 10 requires every public 6fficer to take and file an oaU1 or affinnation
I . . . . . . . ,
to the dLo;charge of any of their official duties and to be certified to the clerk of tht; respective
1
Senalocs and before mentioned, anrUhe Members t>f !be se\reral State Legislattires.llild all
e.xeculiYartdjndlciiilOO:ioers, both tlftbe.United Ste.tes.mtd Qflhe sevenli States; $hall bebou.o.d l)y oatllor
Al1'fmnalion, !o support !his but no religiouS Test shall cn<er be requifed as a Qualification to any Offi9e.or
pll;blic 1'.rust llllder Ute United
Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in suppor:t ofOSC P:1ge 8 of15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 188 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk,, Jeffries et aJ. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings C6unty Index
body The fomi of the oath or affumation is setfmth in Article Xlll. Sectionl of the.New York
State Constitution (a)
17. Respondent Hakeentleffi'ies and Grace :as. s,uch similarly situated
as attornqys and now House membe:rs:el(:Ctwilli;t
office of trust or _profit are barred an ElQCtoral U:lllege vote review after January 2. 2013 as being
incompatible with
18. Titat were .Respondents Grace Meng, Hakeem. Jeffries .and .or anyother pe.rsnn shnilarly
situated according to A2S 1C2 are a.n ufficer t:>fthe state wJrile acting a!! electf;lrs an4 as pet$008
holding an office of trust or profit to revicwtheir.own Janaury2. 20lj., and
also be an elector as well as att.Qmey hotdingan oftice of trustor Jlroftt would.infi1nge Petit.ioners
right to suffrage, a republican f'{)llll of government; Frec:d()m and Liberty; and.
Respondents acts as public officers even as a private Citizen UuitholdS .an office ofttustand profit is
and would l,le cQntrary to tbe law?ftb.e as each Qan-etl from voting
or office and or il'.done be refen-ed fur criminal. action.
AS AND FOR THE TIURD QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHQARE THE
ELECTORS.WH9 Aim-PUBLIC UNION l'RUS'fEESHAVE A I<'IDUCL.\RYDlll,'Y AS
TO l\iATTFRS 01? FACTS A1'l'&\1PT TO CH.t\l'lGE TilE POTUS
ELIGlBILITY QUALIFICATIONS OF A2SiC5 AND AR.ElN CONFLICT \"\'TIH
A2StC2 ANI> ARE BARRED FROM SVCH'VOTEASA BREACliOFA FJQUCIARY
DUl'Y TO TIJEIR MEMBERSHIP
1
li!Y$C Xlli.Publle Officers {Qath of office; iiO cttller test SKUon 1. Member.;
and aU officei'S,' aud judicial, except s,t!4linferiol' oJflicen; as shall be by law e,xen'lpte4, $hall,
before they enter on !he duties their respective lakJ;! artdsubsribeUte ()atll tlrnffiunaliQn: "1 de>
solemnly s.wear (oralllnn) that l\.,.ill support the constitution ()fthe United States; and llw con:stituti()n of the State of
New Yolk. and that 1 will faithlitlly discharge thednlies oflice oL .... ; acocirding to the best of my ability;" no
otl!er oa1h, deel"raiion .ortest shall oo:n:qttired as. a qualifiCati<ln for any offiw of public tnlSt. except that any
comiriittee politiCal pm1y may, by role; pro\ide tbr equal of the sexes oil any such cpmmittee, and a
state 9cttv.entioo of ll potitic&tJ>arty. csndidaiesfQrpublic office by .rule. provide for :equal
representation of thei>ext;S on any OOli:tntittee t>.fsuch jmrt}\ (Arnended by Constitutional. C1.'1Wention of 193S and
approved by vote of tlte people N()Vember8, Hr38.)
Cltrl$topher-Earl: AFFIDAVIT msupp()rtofOSC, Pa.gc 9 of15
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC fbr Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
19. Similar kl tbe conditions described in the Second that public officers \VIto are the.
who public union trustees as with Respondents Gresham. Mario Cilento, :md
Scott Adams as well as for and lobbyists othet'S holdiug an office of trust or profit
a special fiduciary duty as lo matters oflaw and facts tQ change the. eligib.ility
qualifications of A2SlC5 and are in conflict with A2S lC2, are barred from. such vote as a breach of
I .
duty to their membershit) and People oftbe State of New York.
! .
AS AND FOR THE FOURTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO .ARE
THE ELECTORS WHO ARE REGISTEREilLOBBYISTS lL\ VEFIDUClARY
DUTY AS TO 1\<IATTERS OF LAW AND FACT$ ARE Qf!ASI PUBLIC OFFICERS
WITH A FIDUCIARY DUTY ATTEMPT TO CHANGE nm. POTUS EUGIBILITY
QUALIFICATIONS OF A2SlC5 AND. ARE IN CONFLICT WITH A2SlCl AND
ARE BARRED FROM SUCH VOTE ASA BREACH OFAFlDUCIARY DUTY TO
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF l'I'EWYOIU:
1
20. Silnilar to the conditions described in the Third Question that public officers wbo are the
eJectors who are public union trustees as with Respondent Emily the lobbyisLand others Utat
i
an oftice of trust or profit l1ave fiduciary 4uty to matters oflaw and.fats are qua..<>i J)Ublic.
i . .
on;icers w itl1 a fiduciary duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications of .i\2SlC5
ahd arc in conflict with A2S 1C2, are barred from such vote as a breac,h of a fiduciary duty to llte
oftbe St.1te ofNew York that may not besegt-egated from their duty appear as impropriety;
AS AND FOR THE ll'IFTH OUF..STION AS TO .PUBLIC OFFICERS \\
1
HO ALSO
ARE AN ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFlCFR AI,SOHA \tEDUTV ASTO ?\tATTERS OF
LAW AND FACTS ABSEl'IT A "VlOLATION OF LAW MAY NOT VOTE li'OR
WHOM TII!i."Y WlSH BY CHANGING U:IE ELIG,IIULITY 01'
21. That all Respondents wbo are public officers who are. slate oftocal officers and orwith a
duty serving the state excluding a commissim1er of deeds or notary public who attempt to
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in su.pport of OSC Page 10 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 189 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al.Arlicte 78 NYSSC Jbr Kings Cowtty U948-2012
change the .POUTS. e,ligibiiity are in conflict \lith A2S 1 C2 .. nd r\iS tC5 and are
hatred f1'0ID such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the People of the State ofN ew York; and
. . .
22. That eaeb Elector is rna11dated by the State ofNew York legiSlature with exclusive power
afforded by A2S tC2 and A2$1C5 and with ilse,ofNe\:V YorkState Election and related
AlcPherson :v: Blacker,.146 U.S.J (1892), with Ute proviso that no Official may change the
e1i$ihi1ity and or qualiftcali{)fi requilements ()fa federal offic:er including that.of offie ofPOWS.
U.S. .Term Limits, lnc. v. Thornton; 514 U.S. 779 (1995) a$ apply to each respondent below:
AS ANP FOR TI{E SIXTII QUESTION AS TO PUBLiC OFFICERS WliQ AS THE
ELECTOR PRIVATEPERS.ON \YITHOUT ANOTHERPUBLIC.OFFICE AS AN
ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFICER ALSO HAVEDlJ"lYAS TO 1\iAITER OF LAW
AND FACTS 'Btrf ABSEN'fA VIOLATION OF LAW MAY VOTE FOR WHOM
THEY\\1b1L
23.1'hat officers whQ ai;; Elector private person without another publie office as an
fubUc OJlicer dUty matter ofJawAAdfacts . .asa crirnU.al pmlter but when
absent a of law and or A2S 1 (4 and cr A2SJC5. may vote for wh.om they wish.
24. However; as for the criminal matter complained of shown in Exhibit 1 as to eacb of the 29
member el<:ctprs witeili.er a.; pub lie- s and persons inVolvement req1,1est for
instruction by. the Court:
25 . Fir.st Part A as to elector as accessory to the felonycrimeofusutpation of the
POTUS by Felony:
26. Petitioner as to the felonies.associ:tted witlt Forgery oftbe supposed 25 April2011 CoLB for
the putposes ofus.urpiog the o.ffJ,i;e of .POlUS as was. presented byBarack .a!ld White
Counsel ,at the 2i April20U Press conlerence inreaCtion to the by Donald 'l'nnnp with
his l#tesl November l, bt:r(:Wilh (see Exhibit 8), i$:an on going investigation by
Sbe.riff Arpaio of:Mitricopa County AriZona witlt l2 Affidavit Exhibit 9); and at the
CltriStopher-Th,lrl!. AFFIDAVIT in illf.ppurt of.OSC J>age H of 15
Strunk -v Jeffries et at Article 78 NYSSC for Kings Cowt1y lndcl.'c No.: 2194g..;2012
I
before December4, 2012 Petitioner will presenl expet:t testimony Graphics Expert Paul E.
lnfY who has his ll!test work1)ublished by Ute Washington times on No\lembet 19, 20 12 ($ee
Ethibit 10) and the witness E.'q)erttestimony by Pamela B.amctt that Unwttt&f
I
Obama Nel1ei' liai! To Undergo SeCilrityClearance Backgroimd. Check (s Exhibit 1 1).
; 27. 'l11en as for Fil'st Part B as to elector memlx.TS as accessory to the c.:rlme ofthe-PO'nTS
and treason,
; 28. Petitioner as to the matter ofBarack acts of sedition and treason requestltg
instruction by ti,e Court as to the matter of Elector accessory were any to collaborate with
B4rnck Obama, states in his own affidavits shown in 1
. Affinnant ihllt BamckObama ha.'> multiple allegiances despite taking an <!alb owing exc:.lusive
allegiance .to thellnited States; levies war against the People of the. United States, adheres to their.
enemiell $l-Qaida; Muslim Heibollah,. G(HJEN
i People of the United States to establish .the Caliphate .from Tbailand through Morocco, giving them .aid.
and comfort wi!hin the United States. or elsewhere. is guilty of and that any candidate eledor and
: or public .. who aid and abet Barack Obama in of office ofPOTUS
: is no less .than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition and Jrenson.
; 29; 'That Petitioner contends that Obama and Hillary Clinton conspired logetber with
Muslim Br<ltherbood associate President Mosey (If Egypt an.d Monahted uiZI\wahiri tJle
brother l)f Al Qaeda leader A.,vman AI Zawahirl,. to bave Sheikh Otnar AbdcJ-Rabman
(Arabic: 'Abd ar-Ralpnan; born 3 }vlay1938J; Cl)mmohly known in the
;
"TheBJind Sh-eikh". from Federal prison by .in fact Qaida to
I
ki4nat> tlte Ainhassadofrom the Benghazi Embassy Ann.cx or CJA wbere the Libyan
gttn bnypackwas underway
1
to exchange Stevens for Blfud.Sbeikh. As follow-up witlttbe
Obama on September 2012 appeared on the Lettennan Show to reinforce the false flag


TJle "'trailer" \l"aS: inJ'aet by a Palestinian National on Federal probation .from a1999 bani;:.
Strunk's.AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC Page 12 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 190 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk,; Jeffries et aL Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County 21948-2012
fraud conviction \Vork:in g for the Muslim Brotlierhood and.Hamas along \Vitb the Palestinian
terrorist cousin of \Valid Sboebat (see
muslintsl) in supportoftbefalse flag abduction ofUS,Antbassador to Libya Cllristopher Stevens;
and then on tbe day due to the nature ofthe more thanlOO; al Qaida
during the four hour ftre tight, the attack by at Qaida went sideways,.- ending in the
Ambassadotape and death and the. continued of.Tite Blind Sbelkb,the slaughter of
Egyptian. Israelis blamed for the movie trailer, Obama roverup, and now invasion oflsraet
30. Petitioner also. includes as_ to U1e matter ()f Elector crimes the November 8. 2012
Affidavitof Waller Francis Jitzpatdck. Ill States Navy (sec Exhibit 12) affllltls;
1. OBA:\.tArepresents a clear and present danger to U.S. national security; to the U.S.
Constitution and to our Republican fbnn ofgovemment. OBMfAIS A FOREIGN BORN
DOMESTIC.Et-."EMY1.0B .!\.MA.in\rorklng assiduously to destroy America! No d.ocument
re.cord exists tQ he. u Unite.dStates
2. OBAMA paidmoneyand aided and abetted At-Qaeda member:s and groups that attacked
1:\mericans on .U.S.: terrjtocyinBenghazi.Libya on lland 12 Septep1ber 2012 . .t\1-Qaeda is the
jihadist terrorist organizatiQn tlmt attackt"XI the Unitecl States on U Septtmtber 2001.
3, Pro-jihat.li$t andlslamjst0}3A.\IIA personally denied fl-antic cries for help from
Americans m mortal d.inge.r a 7,;hour atta.ck by,approximatelylSO heavily af(ne(l
known jibadist<J .. OBMtl\watcbed four. Amel'icansdie in real time. OBAMA is allowing our
enemies to slaughterour.servicemen piecemeal.atthesametime ordering,ourtroops to disarm.
4. OBM1.<\ lies to the people about.his wi!h every
OBA.MA i$lying tQ the American people about the 11-12 attack in .Libya
in a cover. story :intendc;:d to protect OBAMA from facing a criminal prosecution and conviction.
5. OBAMA is pel'SonaUy responsible for the 6 August20llshoot:-down of an
47DChinook helicopter in 17 Navy SEALS died. All 5 men of ilte CJtinook crew
died. 3 Air special tactics ainnen died. 5 men of a Navy support force died. OBAMA and
his gang of outla\ys He to the America j)eople about that.
6. bt commission. of TREASON OBAMA is .eng11ged in purcltasing and supplying guns,
heavy munitipns and explosives to fureign aggressors-AMERICA'S
the gh)be. OBA.\:lA has and contin\les .to srupweapons from Libya to Syria
tbrougb Turkey. Som1:1 weapoll$Q1aybe being directly.slupped to Syria. Christopher Stevens
was OBAMN!i point man of this operation when Stevens was murdered in BengltaZi during .the
atiack of 1112 September 2012.ln this TREASON OBA.ivl<\.is arming America's enemies: Al-
Qaeda and the Muslim Bf(l1herltood connected Syrian rebels ...
3 I. Second, eadt Resptlndenrs intent is to change tbe NBC.POTIJS.eligibili.ty of A2S lC5 by
reestablishing feudal perpetual allegiance eliminated by the DeClaration of Independence. in 1776.
Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of.OSC :Page 13 .of 15
Strunk v Jeffries et al. At1icle 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.; 12
a tetttporary restraining order, preliminary injunction hearing.
Declaratory judgment under CPLR 7806 and permanent injunCtion by no );tte than Decetttber
4. 2012 with such oU1er relief as the Court deems just including a TRO Order:
a. A lte<U'ing on the legal issues as to the void ab initio US Senate Election in New York..
b. A bearing on the issues of facts as to forgr,Ty, sedition and treason
c. A hearing on Ute issues of the actual histo1'ical meaning of Natural Born Citizen held by
Ute State ofNe\v York from before and after tile 1776
d. Order of Protection of tlmse Expert witnesses subpoenaed to appear to testify against the
Respondents of each category
e. That Public Officers elected to. Congress ami as a public officer elector be barred from
reviewing the elector votes in keeping to the mandates of the law of the land
f. That based upon a review of the facts associated wiUt the forgery of public documents to
facilitate u1mrpation of the ofiice of POTUS that Elcctol'S be given notice of their being
held a.'> an accessory after the 1ct to a forgery crime that would be refem:d for criminal
proceeding.
g. That based upon a review of the facts associated with the allegation of misprision of
felony sedition and treason that Electors be given notice of their being held. as an
accessory afte.r the 1ct to a felony and sedition and warned of treason per se crime that
would he ref(med t'Or criminal proceeding.
h. 11tat electors be ins'b:ucted as to actual the historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen
held by the State of New York from before and after the 1776 issuance of the
Declaration of Independence and wiUt the proviso that were a Public Officer otber than
an independent elecklr per se to attetttpt to change the eligibility of a federaJ officer
would be held in civil contempt in breach of public officer duties.
Clu-istopher-Earl: Strwtk 's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC Page 14 of 15
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 191 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v JeffrieS:ctaLAtticle78NYSSC for Kings C()Ui:dy 21948-2012
. . .
i. And.for .further and.dilferentretief as tbe Court m:ty deem neCe$sary herein.
I have read the foregoing affidavitforau Order to show cause with questions at issue
against each category of Respondent Public Officers .and Electors ijl. their offiial capacity and or
individually as againlil the misadninustration arid mk;applieation of New York Public
Officers in thecvnduci oftbe General Election of November irt lhe :eJection of US Senatnr
Kirsten: Gillibrand thatis. void irtiti(), and in' which Petitionerw.istu:s .a \Vrit ofprohihitron with
Temporary Restrainlnt;rOrderand permanent injunction witlill DeclaratQryJudgment equity relief
ofthe.CPLR Article in.conjunctiotr\vifbfue New York State Law
Arl:icle CPLR 7805 with stay of New
York Electoral College v,ote due by 15, 201; and a.declaratocy CPLR
78Q6 i$ of Ute essence. with harm; is .tme to myownJmowledge,
ex;ceplns to the matters therein stated to be alleged on.infonnation and betiei}and as. to those
matJers.l believe it to be t(Ue, The groundS ofmy as- 1(1, not upon
information and belief are .as follows: .3rd boob artd and personal knowledge.

Swot1,1 tQ betb:re me
This _.dayofNovember 2012
Notary Public
Cb,riStophet-&.rl! Strunks.AFFIDAVlTinsupporl;()fOS,C 15_ofl5
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings C'.ounty Index No.: 21948-2012
Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support ofOSC
Exhibit 1
i
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 192 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Christopher Earl Strunk in esse
Petitioner
v.
I. HakeemJeffiies 35 Underltill Avenue, #2A- Brooklyn, NY 11238
2. Bill DeBiasioof44211th Street- Brooklyn, NY 11215
3. Felix Ortiz 189B33rdStreet-Brooklyn,NY 11232
4. Andrew M. Cuomo 138 Eagle Street Albany, NY 12202
5. Gerald D. Jenningsofl135 New SootlandRoad-Aibany, NY 12208
6. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street- Bronx, NY 10466
7. RubenDiaz, Jr. of820 BoytonAvenue, #6D- Bronx, NY 10473
8. Byron Brown 14BlaineStreetBuffitlo,NY 14208
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road- Rochester, NY 14610
10. JosephMorelleofl33 Deerfiel.dDrive-Rochester,NY 14609
II. Tom DiNapoli 100 Great Neck Road-- Great Neck, NY 11201
12. Eric Schneiderman 645 West End Avenue, #8F New York, NY 10025
13. WalterCooperiSOWest96thStreet,1112G-NewYork,NY 10025
14. SheldonSilverof550GrandStreet,#5A- New York, NY 10002
IS. KeithL.T. Wrightof2225FifthAvenue-NewYork,NYI0037
16. Christine C. Quinnof263 NinthAvenue,#3A-New York, NY 10001
17. William Tbompsonofl06 West 12lst Street- New York, NY 10027
18. Scott Stringer of I 55 West 7lst #3A- New Yorlt, NY 10023
19. EmilyGiskeof440West24thStreet-NewYork,NY 10014
20. ScottAdamsofll PoplarAvenue-OrcbardPark,NY 14127
21.. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive - Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mnrio Cilento 3lsahel Road- Ornngehurg, NY 10962
23. Anne Marie Amalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY 11103
24. Grace Meng ofl4714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
25. ArchieSpignerofll210 175thStreet-Jamaica,NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein 101 BrandywineDrive--Ithaca,NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Stieet Middle Granville, NY 12849
29. Ken Jenkins 108Bustiey Avenue- Yonkers, NY 10710
Respondents
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78 PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING A
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
Please take notice of Petitioner's intent to flle an order to show cause application at the Kings
County Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the 10'' Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday
November 19,2012 for a preliminary injunction relief pending a declaratmy judgment on issues of
law; e.g., Are public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of
POTUS and Ballot access? Are officers presented with the facts of Barack Obama ineligibility
able to change qualifications before the Electoral College Vote scheduled December 15, 2012?
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 701010000068748706
STATE OF NEW YORK J
) ...
CO'Ulf'I'F OF KINGS J.
For further information Contact :
Christopher-Earl: Strunkin.esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Cellphone: 845-901-6767
Email: chris@strunk.ws
Christopher,-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@stnmk. ws
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty ofperjuty:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCfiON IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Kevin C. Kortright District Attorney
Office Of The Washington County District Attorney
Municipal Center Building C. 383 Broadway
Fort Edward, New York 12828
Based upon information and belief, Sheila Comar of29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector
as part of the slate for Barack Obamaand Joe Riden at the State ofNew York November 6, 2012 Geneml Election for choosing New Yolic's candidate
for tho office of President and Vice President of the United States(POTUS) by their vote cast by December 15, 2012;and that such Public Officers arc to
participate as a member of the State ofNow York electoral oollegolntending to vote fur Barack Obama as If mandated by tho State ofNew Yolic
legislature with exclusive power a1Tor<lcd by Articlc2 Section I of the U.S. ConstitUtion with use ofNew Yolic State Election Law and "'lated rules,
MqPbmpn Blgc!:er 146 U.S. I (1892), with the proviso that no Public Official may chango the eligibility and or qualification requl..,ments of a
federal officer including office o:f'POTUS, U.S: Tw limi(S lqc v Thpmton 514 U.S. 719 (1995).
That in addition to the fmegoing, .Affinnant based upon infonnation and belief contends that llarack Obama is guilty of forgezy, spoliation, concealment
intimidation ofwimcsscs and racketeering In the matterofhlsalleged Common Law citizen starus as If a Native-born Citizen notwidistandlngthe
allegiance status of his parents ratherthlin a NatuJal Law NBlUral-bom Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British

in
Indonesia by his lll!lonesian Cidzen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affmned on tho August 13, 196S by Stanley Aan Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(aka Bony Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother whoobtained foreign student fUnding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, aecording to more than three OKperts, forged a Long Form Certificate ofBinb as if of Hawait
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affirmant contends thalllarack Obama has multiple allegi.,;ces despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States. levies wsr against the People of the United States, sdhen:s to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotflerbood, Hamas, Hezbollah. GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the Unhed States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Sheila Comar who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office of POTUS is no less than guilty of misprision offelony, sedition
and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is aprcpond"""ce ofevidenceprovingthat the April25, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that were any New York State Public Officer Elcclors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be nn
accessory after the fact to a felony uadcr New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Const:itution, 18 U.S.C. 23SI through 2390 and related law, including bot not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. <::ivil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and sdmlnistration of laws; the s8meis true to
my own knowledge, except as to tile matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
grounda of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief arc as follows: 3,. parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
Cc: Sheila Comer 29 Depot Street Middle Granville, NY 12849
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924382
STATE OF NEW YORK I
).as.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@stnink,ws
Accordingly, I, Chris10J>her-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Gwen Wilkinson District Attorney
Office of Tompkins County District Attorney
320 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Based upon information and belief, Irene Stein of 101 Brandywine Drive -Ithaca, NY 14850 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as pari
of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Blden at the State ofNew York November6, 2012 General Election for choosing NewYork's eandldate for the
office of President and Vice President of the United States (POTIJS) by their vote cast by December 15, 2012; and that such Public Officers are to
panic! pate as a member of the State of New Y orlc electoral college Intending to vote for Ilarack Obama as if mandated by the State of NowYork
legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use ofNew Yolic State Election Lawand "'lated rules,
MqPherrqn y Rlqqfwr 146 U.S. I (1892), with the P!Oiso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualincation requirements ofa
.federal officer including office ofPOTUS, USTcrm lJm!ti lng y Thqrntqn, !114 U.S. 779 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Obama is gnilty of forgety, spoliation, concealment 1:
intimidation ofwimesses and racketeering in the matter ofhis alleged Common Law citizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstandingthe
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British

in
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gsve the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affumed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Bany Soetoro) reente"'d the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, Illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
_. April25, 2011, aecording to more than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as ifofHawaiL
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama, Affinnant contends that llarack Obsma has mulliple allegiances despita taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollab, GilLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Irene Stein who would aid and abet Barack Obsma in usurpation of office of POTUS is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition and
treason. . '
Based upon the foregoing subjecl there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 2S, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS. and that were any New Yorlc State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
sccessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Aflil)tlant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, IS U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law I OS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
grounds of my beliefs as to aiiiiUlllers not stated upon lnfonnation and belief are as follows: 3,. parties, books.and records, and personal knowledge.
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924498
STATE OF NEW YORK I
, ...
COUN'I'F OF KINGS I
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email:
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty ofperjuty:
COMPLAINT OF ATIEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Kathleen M. Rice District Attorney
Office of Nassau County District Attorney
262 Old Countty Road
Mineola, NY 11501
Based upon information and belief, Tom DiNapoli of 100 Great Neck Road- Great Neck, NY 11201 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector
as part of the slate for Barsck Obama and Joe Biden at tho State ofNew York November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing NewYork's candidate
for tho office of President and Vice President of the United Smtes (POTUS) by their vote cast by December IS, 2012; and that such Public Officers arc to
participate as a member of the State of NewYork electoral college Intending to vote for Barack Obama as if mandated by the State of NewYork
legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with usc of New Yolic State Election Lawand 11'latcd rules,
McP/w,rqa 8/qr;l:er 146 U.S. I (1892), with the proviso that no Public Official may cbange the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a
federal officer including office ofPOTUS, US Term LimiLf 111 Thornton S14 U.S. 779 (1995).
That in sddition to the foregoing, i\ffirmant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Oboma is guilty offorgery, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation of witnesses and racketeering In the matter ofhis alleged Common Law citizen status as If a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his P8"'111s rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British

in
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley A an Soetoro; and tbercafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barty Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who fo..,lgn student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation ofthc office of POTUS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Fonn Certificate of Birth as if ofHawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama, Affirmant contends that Barack Obama has mulUple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United Statas, levies war against the People of the United States, sdheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
Including TomDiNapoli who would aid and abet Barack Obamaln usurpation or office of POTUS is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition
and treasop.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April25, 2011 furged public document is for tbe porpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such All"mnant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution. 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including bot not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of Isws; the same is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the manors therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
...... .., ........... ....... - .. .. .. -.. .. _.-
Sworn to . .,M2
This_


f'-c":::::: ..

Cc: Tom DiNapoli 100 Great Neck Road- Great Neck, NY 11201
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 193 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924443
STATE 01' REW YORK I
I
COUNTY 0.,. KllfOS I
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue - 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk. ws
Accordingly,l, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATfEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
P. David Soares District Attorney
Erie CountY District Attorney's Office
25 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, New York 14202
Based upon information and belief, Andrew M. Cuomo oft38 Eagle Street- Albany, NY 12202 and Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road-
Albany, NY 12208 ore the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State ofNcw York
November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing NewYork's candidate for the office of President and Vice President ofthe"Unlted States (POTIJS) by
their vote cast by December U, 2012; and that such Public Officers..., to participate as a m.emberof the State of New York ele<toral college intending
to vote for Barock Obama as if mandated by the State ofNew York legislature with exclusive power-afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S.
Constitution with use ofNew York State Election Law and related rules, McPherpn 146 U.S. I (18921 with the proviso that no Public
Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a federal officer including office ofPOTUS, U t Term limi'l Inc v Thomrtm,
514 u.s. 779 (1995). .
That in addition to the foregoing,Affirmant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Obama is guilty of forgeiy, spoliation, concealment
intimidation ofwitnesses and tucketeering In the matter of his alleged Common Law citizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegi1111cc status of his parents tutherthan a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soli to manied US citizen parents, .....-tbeless is a British

in
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the Augustl3, 1968 by Stanley Ann Socloro; and !hereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(aka Barry Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and Inter alia In fltrtheranceofusurpation of the office of POTIJS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long FormCertificate.ofBitth as ifofHawaiL
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of S....Ck Obama, Affinnant contends that Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of the United States, adher-es to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hczbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran agalnst the People of the United States to establish tho Caliphate from Thailand through
MorOoco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Andrew M. Cuomo and Gerald D. Jennings who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpatibn of office ofPOTIJS is no less than guilty of
misprision of felony, sedition and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there Is a preponder-ance of evidence proving that the April2S, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that were any New Yorfc State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under- New York Penal Law; and as soch provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing auaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S."Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to
my owo knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe!! to be true, The
...
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924399
STATE OF NEW YORK I
lea.
COUII"TY OF Kll'IGS I
Christopher-Earl: Strunk
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderliilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.ws
Accordingly ,I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty ofpeljury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Thomas J. Spota District Attorney
Suffolk County District Attorney's Office
North County Complex - Building 77 Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, NY 11 788
Based upon information and belief, Steve Bellone of 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for
Elector as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State ofNew York November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's
candidate for the office ofPrcsident and Vice President ofthe United States (POTUS) by their vOte cast by December IS, 2012; and that such Public
Officen are to pa11iclpate as a member of the State of New York electoral oullegelntending to vote for Barack Obama as If mandated by the State of
New York legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use ofNew York State Election Law and related
rules, Mcfbmo y Blqcq 146 U.S. I (18921 with the proviso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a
fede<alofficerincluding officeofPOTIJS,Il:\: Term Limit! 111 y lhqmton SI4U.S.779(1995).
That io addition to the fore8oing, Aff1rmant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Obama is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation of witnesses and mcketccring In the matter of his alleged Common Law citizen status as If a Native-bona Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status ofhls parents rather than a Natural Law Naturalbom Citizen born on soil to married US citizen paratts, never-theless is a British

Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Socloro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the Augost 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soctoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(akallanY Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Pussport te live with his grandmother who foreign student funding, Illegally obtainCtt a stolen Social Security
Number no later thsn 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia In furthenmce of usurpation of the oftlce of POTUS no later than
April25, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Fonn Certificate ofBitth as if of Hawaii.
That the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affinnant contends thai Baradc Obama has multiple allegiiiiCCS despite taking auoath
owing exclusive allegiame to the Unhed States, levies war agalnst the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Steve Bellone who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office of POTIJS is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition
andtrcason. '
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 25, 20II forged public document is for the purpose of
USUJping the POTUS, and that were any NewVorl< State Public Officer Ele<tors to cast a vote aiding abealng each crime the civllserEant would be an
acccssooy after the fact to a felony under- New York Penal Law; and as such AfTmnant provides due notice hereby as a matter- of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N. Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration oflaws; the sime is tnie to
my own knowledge. except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and beliet and as to those malteiSI believe it to be true. The

Christopher-Earl: Strunk
ZVIJINDIG '1'11111
Cc: Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704

CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924467
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbllt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.ws
STATE 01' NEW YORK I
, ...
COUNTY 01' KINOS I
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATfEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCI'ION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECI'ORS
Frank A. Sedita, III District Attorney
Erie County District Attorney's Office
25 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, New York 14202
Based upon information and belief, Byron Brown of 14 Blaine Street- Buffalo, NY 14208 istho2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part of
the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Bidcn at the State ofNew York November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate for the
office of President and Vice President of the United States (POTIJS) by their vote cast by December IS, 2012; and that such Public Officers are to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral collegelntendlng to vote for Barack Obama as If mandated by the State of NowYork
legislature with exclusive power- afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use ofNew York State Election Law and related rules,
McPherron y BIDriW 146 U.S. I (1892), with the proviso tbat no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a
feder-al officer including officeofPOTIJS, T.,m Umft.r ThMnton SI4U.S. 779 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affinnani based upon infomiation and belief contends that Barack Obarna is guilty offorgccy, spoliation, concealment
intimidation ofwitnc:sSes and racketeering in the matter ofhis alleged Common Law citizen status as If a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British

In
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave tbe name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soctoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barry Soctoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and ii1ter alia in fltrtherance of usurpation of the office of POTIJS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long FormCertificate of Birth as ifofHawaii. .
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affinnant contends thatBarack Obama has nauldple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegi1111ce to the United States, levies war against the People of the United States, adhcr<S to their enemies ai-Qalda, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran apinst the People of tile United States to establish the Caliphate fromThailand through
Morocco, giving themaid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Byron Browo who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office ofPOTIJS Is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition
and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the Aprii2S, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTIJS, and that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime tbe civil servant would be an
acC:cssocy after- the fact to a felony under- New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to
my owo knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
Sworn to

. .-- ----
" :.:

Christopher-Earl: Strunk
'I
21116'; I
i
CERTJFIED RE1URN RECEIPT# 701010000068748690
STATE 01' NEW YORK )
I
COUII"TY 01' KINOS I
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vandeibilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.ws
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF A1TEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Janet DiFiore District Attorney
Office ofWestchester District Attorney
Ill Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
White Plains; New York 10601
Based upon information and belief, Ken Jenkins of 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonkers, NV: 10710 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as
part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State ofNew York November 6 . 2012 General Election for choosing NewYork's candidate for
the office ofl'rcsident and VIce President of the United States (POTIJS) by thelrvote Cast by December IS, 2012; and that such Public Officers..., to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college intending to vote for Barack Obama as If mandated by the State of New York
legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use ofNew York State Election Law and related rules,
M@caon BIDcklr. 146 U.S. I (1892), witb the proviso that no Public Official may cha(lge the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a
federal officer including officcofPOTUS,ll$ Tr.rm llmfrr lap v 514 U.S. 779(1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon Information and belief contends that Barack Obama Is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment
intimidation ofwitnesses and in the maaer ofhis alleged Common Law citizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstandingthe
allegi1111ce sta1u11 of his p....nts rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citi7.cn paratts, nevertheless is a British

Indonesia by his lndonesianC'rtizen step-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
tlfT1rmed on the August 13, 1968 by Sttuiley Ann Soctoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(aka Barry Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in fltrtherance of usurpation of the office of POTIJS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long FormCertificate ofBitth as if of Hawaii.
That notwithsttuiding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affirmant oontends thai S....Ck Obama has multiple aDegiances despHe taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiiiiiCOto the United Slates, levies war agalnst the People of the United States, adher-es to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the Unijed States to establish the Caliphate from Thailandthrough
Moroeco, giving them aid and oumfort within the United States or elsewhere, Is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Ken Jenkins who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office ofPOTIJS is no less than guilty of misprision offelony, sedition
andtreasoiL
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the Aprii2S, 2011 forged public docwnent Is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that were any NewYorfc State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civilserEant would be an
aocessocy after the fact to a felony under New Yorlc Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Consthution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to
my owo knowledge, except a. to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe It to be true. The
..... ................... ....
Christopher-Earl: Strunk
r
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 194 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924436
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt 281
Brooklyn New York ll:U8
Email: chris@strunk. ws
STATE OF KEW YORK I
I
COUNTY OF KINGS I
Accordingly,!, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OmCER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. District Attorney
The New York County District Attorney's Office
One Hogan Place
New York, NY 10013
Based upon infonnalion and belief, Eric Schneiderman of 64S West End Avenue, #SF- New York, NY 1002S, Sheldon Silver of SSO Grand
Street, #SA- New York, NY 10002, Walter Cooper of ISO West 96th Street, #120 -New York, NY, Keith L.T. Wright of222S Fifth Avenue-
New York, NY 10037, Christine C. Quinn of263 Nil11h Avenue, #3A- New York, NY 10001 , WilliamThompson of 106 West I 21st Suoet- New
York, NY 10027and ScottSbingerofiSS West7lstStrcct, t3A- New York, NY 10023,Emily Giskeof440West24thStreet-NewYork, NY
10014, andScottAdamsofll PoplarAvenue-On:hardPark, NY 14127 arethe2012DemocraticParty candldateforEiectoraspartoftheslate for
Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State of New York November6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate for the office of
President and Vice President of the United States (POTUS) by their vote cast by December IS. 2012; and that such Public Officers are to participate as a
member of the State ofNew York electoral college intending to vote for Barack Obamaas If mandated by the State ofNew York legislatme with
exclusive power afforded by .Article2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use ofNew York State Election Law and related
l1l9G!!!!J:, 146 U.S. I (1892), with the proviso that no PubllcOffwial may change the eligibility and or quallfu:ation requirements of a federal officer
including officeofPOTUS.lJS. [trmL(mil< lltp v TlwraJM Sl4 U.S. 779(199S).
That in addition to the foregoing. Affinnant based upon infonnation and belief contends that Barack Obama Is guilty of forgcty, spoliation,
concealment Intimidation of witnesses and racketeering in the matter of his alleged Common Lawcitizen status as if a Native-born Citizen
notwithstanding the allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents,
nevertheless is a British Subject with dual allegiance at birth wherever that was to the minor US Citizen mother in wedlock to a majority aged British
subject foreign alien student who then were duly divorced on March 20, 1964; and then when in the mother's custody during her 'i" marriage Barack
Obama was adopted in Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soctoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" aocordlng to the U.S. State
l>eparlment reconl affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(aka Bany Soetoro)
reentered the USA In 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding. illegally obtained a stolen
Social SecurityNumberno later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and Inter alia in funhcranceofusurpatlon of the office of
POTUS no later than Apri12S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as if of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama. Affirmant contends that Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an
oath owing exclusive allegiance to the United Stales, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas:, Hczbollllh, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United Stales to establish the C&llphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Eric Sclmeiderman. Walter Cooper, Sheldon Silver, Keith L.T. Christine C. Quinn, WilliamThompson. Scott Stringer, Emily Giske
and Scott Adams who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office ofPOTUS is no leSs than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition and
treason. .
Based uport the foregoing subject there is a preponderanoc of evidence proving that the Aprii2S, 2011 forged public document is for the
purpose of usurping the POTUS, and thai were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant
would be an accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affumant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing
guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 thrcugh 2390 and related Jaw, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election
Law 16-100, N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the
same Is true to my own knowledge. except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be
true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon infonnation and boobandm:wds,and pcnonal
knowledge. e-:R&-
Ciii'istopher-Earl: Strunk
Cc: Eric Schneiderman 645 West End Avenue, #SF- New York, NY 1002S
Walter Cooper ISO west 96th Street, #12G- New York, NY 1002S
__ 01ll!ld..SitCCI.JISA,..Ncw3odUIY.lOOOL ..
' Keith L.T. Wright of222S Fifth Avenue- New York, NY 10037
Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A- New York, NY 10001
WilliamThompsonof106West 121stStrcct-NewYork. NY 10027
Scott Stringer ofiSS West 71st Street, #3A- NewYork, NY 10023
EmilyGiskeof440West24th Strcet-NewYork, NY 10014
SconAdamsofll PoplarAvenuo-OrchardPark,NY 14127
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924481 ..
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbllt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.w$
STATE OF 1IEW YORK I
I
COUl'fTY OF KINGS I
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OJ' ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC omCER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Sandra Doorley District Attorney
Monroe County District Attorney's Office.
47 South Fitzhugh Street
Rochester, NY 14614
Based upon lnformade>trand belief, Robert DullYof 164 Croydon Road- Rochester, NY 14610 and Soseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive-
Rochester, NY 14609 ere the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part of the slate for Bomck Obama and Soc Blden at the State ofNcw York
November 6, 2012Gcneral Election for choosing New York's candidate for the office of President and Vice President of the United States (POTUSI by
their vote cast by December 15, 2012; and thai such Public Officers are to participate as a member of the State ofNew York electoral college intending
to vote for Barack Obama as ifm'"dated by the State ofNew York legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S.
Constitution with use ofNcw York State Election Lawand related rules, McPher.on y 8/qffret: 146 U.S. I (1892). with the proviso that no Public
Official may change tbc eligibility 8lld or qualification icquiremcnts of a federal officer including office ofPOTIJS. ll $ r,rm 1 fmUr Inc y 77tqmrnn
S14 U.S. 779 (1995). .
Thai in addition to the foregoing, Affirrnant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Obama is guilty of forgCJY, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation ofwitncsses and rucketeering In the matter of his alleged Cormnon Law citizen status as If a Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance stallls of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US chizcn parents, nevertheless is a British
In
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-fl11her, Lolo Soctoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Atut Soetoro; and thereafter as an. Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Bany Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmothci" wbo obtained foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long FormCerlificateofBirth as If of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship StatUs of Barack Obama, Affirmant contends tha! Baracli Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive alicgillllce to the United Stales, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies ai-Qalda, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas. Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphnte from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, Is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Robert Duffy and Joseph Morelie who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office ofPOTUS is no less than guilty of misprision
of felony, sedition and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving thai the Aprii2S, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that wm any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after tho fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as suchAffirmant provides due notice hereby asamatterofstanding guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 u.s.c. 2381 through 2390 BOd related law, including but notlimited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any poblic officer misapplication and administration oflaws; the same Is true to
my own knowledge, cx:ccpt as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The



Cc: Robert DullY 164 Croydon Road- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morello of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924412.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbfit Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.ws
STATE OF IIEW YORK I
I
COUl'fTY OF KJIIIGS I
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Francis D. Phillips District Attorney
Office of the Orange County District Attorney
40 Matthews Street
Goshen, NY I 0924
Based upon information and belief, Mario Cilento of3 Isabel Road- Orangeburg, NY- 10962 is the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part
of the slate for Barack Obama and Soc Biden at the State of New York Novcmber-6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's cimdidate for the
office ,of President and Vice President of the United States(POTUS) by thelrvotecastby December 1$, 2012; and thai such Public Officers are to
paniclpate as a member of the State of New York electoral college intending to vole for Barack Obama as If mandated by the State ofNew York
legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with use of New York State Election Law and related rules,
McPhmqn v lflqdtq 146 U.S. I (1892), with the proviso that no Public Official may c;hange the eligibility and or quallflcatiOI). ofa
federal officer inCluding officeofPOTUS,U TermLimltr tw y Thorton SI4U.S.779(199SI.
That in addition lo the foregoing, Aff'umant based upon information and belief contends that Bamck Obama is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation of witnesses and racketeering In the matter of his alleged Common Lawcitizen status as If a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless Is a British
in
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-fl11her, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name according to the U.S. State Department record
affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian Citi7.cn SOEBARKAH (aka Bany Socloro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign studern funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, fo'l!ed a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and Inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as If of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the status of Barack Obama, Affirmant contends thai Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of the UnHed State; adheres to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, ijamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People oftlle United States to establish the caliphate fromThailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
Including Marlo Cilento who would aid and abet Barack Obama In usurpation of office ofPOTUS Is no less than guilty of misprision of felony, sedition
and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the Apri12S, 2011 "forged public document is for the purpose of
USID"Jling. the POTUS. and that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law l(i.JOO,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; tho same is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on loformation and belief, and as to those maucrs I believe it to be true. The
grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief arc as follows: 3,. parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
Sworn to :l}.._fn12

----- -f
: :-. -. ; ....; ,: ,..wfJIII!laG
.; .


Cc: Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road - Orangeburg, NY l 0962
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924450.
Christopher-pari: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email:
STATE 011' NEW YORK I
I
COUl'fTY OF KJIIIGS )
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECJ"ORS
Robert T. Johnson District Attorney
The Office of the Bronx County District Attorney
198 East 161st Street
Bronx, NY 10451.
Based upon Information and belief, George Greshamof 1313 East 233rd Street - Bronx, NY 10466 and Ruben Dlaz, Sr. of 820 Boyton Avenue, #60 -
Bronx. NY 10473 are the2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Bidcn at the State ofNcw York
November 6, 2012 General Electionfor choosing New York's candidate for the office of President and Vice President of the United States (POTUS) by
their vote cast by December IS, 2012; and that such t'!Jblic Officers are to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college intending
to vote for Barack Obama as If mandated by the Stale ofNew York legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S.
Constitution with use of New York State Election Law and related rules, McPherson v Blqpker. 146 U.S. I ( 1892), with the proviso that no Public
Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a federal officer including office otPOTUS. U $ r.,rm limltt 1Dqmwn
S14 U.S. 779 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affinnant based upon information and belief contends that Barack Obama is guilty offorgcty, spoliation, concealment
intimidation of witnesses and racketeering in the matter of his alleged Common Lawcitizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status ofhis parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to married US citizen parents, neverthelcss.is a British


Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soctoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
alfumed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as II) Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Bany Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to livcwith his grandmother who obtained foreign studcntfimding. illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, fo'l!ed a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter allaln f)utherancc of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
Aprii2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate ofBirth as If of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affirmant contends that Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an Oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hczbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate fromThailand thrcugh
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including !}eorge Grasbam and Ruben Dlaz, Sr. who would aid and abet Bamck Ohama In usurpation of office of POTUS Is no less than guilty of
misprision of felony, sedition and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 2S, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
USID"Jling the POTUS, and that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 thrcugh 2390 and related Jaw, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law Jfi.IOO,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
giounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief arc as follows: parties, books and records, and personal knowledge.
Cc: George Gresham 1313 Bast233rd Street- Bronx, NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Sr. of 820 Boyton A venue, #6D - Bronx, NY I 0473
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 195 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924474
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk,ws
STATE OF fiEW YORK I
I sa.
COUBTY OF KINGS I
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATI'EMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Charles J. Hynes District Attorney
Kings County District Attorney's Office
350 Jay Street
Brooklyn, New York, NY 11201
Based upon infonnation and belief, Bill DeBlasio of 442 lith Street- Brooklyn, NY 1121S, Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooklyn, NY I 1232 and
Hakeem Jeffiies 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A- Brooklyn, NY are the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector as part ofthe slate for Barack
Obama and Joe Blden at the State ofNew York November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate for the office of President and
Vice President of the United States {POTUS) by their vote cast by December IS, 2012; and that such Public Officers an: to participate as a member of
the State ofNcw York electoral college intending to vote for Barack Obama as If mandated by the State of New York lcgislaturc with exclusive power
afforded by Article 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with usc of New York State Election Law and related rules, McPhmqn B!gc!w. 146 U.S. 1
with the proviso that no Public Official may change die eligibiJity and or qualification requirements of a federal officer including office of
POTUS,l.! TmaLimits In y l'hwtoa, 514 U.S. 779(1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon infonnation and belief contends that Barack Obamals guilty offorgery, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation ofwltnesses and rac:kctectlng in the matter of his alleged Common Lawcitizen staDJS as If a Natlve-bom Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Naturalbom Citizen bomon soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless Is a British
In
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen step-father, Lolo Soctoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" aecording to the U.S. State Department record
affinned on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as 1111lndonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barry Soetoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Soeial Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and Inter alia In furtherance ofusurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
April 2S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Fonn Certificate of Birth as if ofHawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBarack Obama, Affinnant contends that Barack Obama has multiple allegiances taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against thei'Cople of the United States, adheres to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere. is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Bill DeBlasio, Felix Ortiz and Hakeem Jeffiies who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office of POTUS is no less thatr
guilty of misprision offelony, sedition and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is o preponderance of evidence proving that the April25, 2011 forged public document Is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS. and that were any New York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote aiding abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affinnant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 thrcugh 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election La:w 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same Is lrueto
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on infonnation and belief. and as to th03c matters I believe it to be true. The
grounds of my beliefS as to all matters not stated upon infonnation and belief are as books and rcco..J!!.s. and personal knowledge.
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924405
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn New York 11238
Email: chris@strunk.ws
STATE OF l'fEW YORK )
laa.
COUNTY OF KINGS I
Accordingly,!, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
Richard A. Brown District Attorney
Queens County District Attorney's Office
125-01 Queens Boulevard
KewGardens,NewYork 11415
Based upon infonuatlon and belief, Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 113S4, Anne Marie An20lone of2827 48th Street- Astoria,
NY 11103 and Archie Spigner of 11210 17Sth Street- Jamaica, NY 11433 are the 2012 Democratic Party candidate forEiectoraspartoftheslate for
Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State of.New York November 6. 2012 General Election for choosing Now York's candidate for the office of
President and.Vicc President of the United States (POTUS) by their vote cast by December 15, 2012; and that such Public Officers an: to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college to vote for Barack Obama as if mandated by the State of NewYork legislature with
exclusive power afforded by Anicle 2 Section I of the U.S. Constitution with usc of New York State Election Law and related
l1l!W!&J:, 146 U.S. I with the proviso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualirtcation requirements of a federal officer
including office ofPOTUS, 11 Term Umits In; y Thofnton 514 U.S. 719 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Alfmnant based upon infonnation and belief contends that Barack Obama is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment
Intimidation of witnesses and racketeering In the matter ofhls alleged Common Law citizen staDJS as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen bomon soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British
in
Indonesia by his Indonesian Clti= step-father, Lolo Soctoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. Stele Department record
affinned on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thercaller as an Indonesian Citizen SOEBARKAH(aka Barry Soctoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 atone without a US Passport to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student 1\mding, 111egally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
Apr112S, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Fonn Certificate of Birth as If of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status ofBamck Obama, Affinnant contends Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of tho United States, adheres to their enemies al-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamss, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United States to establish the Caliphate fromThailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and com(ort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that anycandidateelcctorand or public officer
including Grace Meng, Anne Marie Anzalone, and Archie Spigner who would aid and abet Barack Obamaln usurpation of office ofPOTUS is no less
than guilty of misprision offelony, sedition and treason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April25, 2011 forged public document Is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and were any NewYork Stale Public Officer Electors to casta vote aiding abetting each crime the clvU servant would be an
accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affinnant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law lOS as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of taws; the same is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on infonnation and belief. and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon knowledge.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk
Cc: Arnie Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street -Astoria, NY 11103
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
Archie Spigner of 11210 17Sth Street- Jamaica, NY 11433
CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT# 70101870000042924429
STATE OF KEW YORK I
I
COUNTY OF KINGS I
Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
593 Vanderbilt Avenue- 281
Brooklyn N:ew York 11238
Email: chris@strunk..ws
Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty ofpeijury:
COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO
REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS
William J. Fitzpatrick District Attorney
Onondaga County DA 's Office
Criminal Courts Building- 4th Floor 505 South State Street
Syracuse, NY 13202
Based upon information and belief, Stephanie Miner of 102 Woodside Drive- Syracuse, NY 132241s the 2012 Democratic Party candidate for Elector
as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe B.iden at the State ofNew York November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate
for the office of President and Vice President of the United States {POTUS) by their vote cast by December 15, 2012; and that such Public Officers arc to
participate as a member of the State ofNcw York electoral college intending to vote for Barack Obama as if mandated by the State of NewYork
legislature with exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section I oftbe U.S. Constitution with usc of New York State Election Law and related rules,
MoPiwEon - 8/m:he 146 U.S. 1 ( 1892}, with the pnlvlso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a
federal officer including office ofPOTUS, !l Tma limjtr 11711 Thorntpn 514 U.S. 779 (1995).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affinnant besed upon infonnation and belief contends that Barack Obama Is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment
intimidation of witnesses and racketeering In the manor of his alleged Common Law citizen Sl8DJS as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-hom Ckizen bomon soil to married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British
In
Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen Slop-father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department record
affinned on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an lndonesi811 Citizon SOEBARKAH (aka Barry Soctoro) reentered the USA
in 1971 alone without a US Passport to live with his foreign student funding, illegally obtained a stolen Social Security
Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1980, and inter alia in furtherance of usurpation of the office of POTUS no later than
April25, 2011, according to more than three experts, forged a Long Fonn Certificate of Birth as if of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama, Alfmnant contends thal Barack Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath
owing exclusive allegiance to the United States, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies aiQalda, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the Unked States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through
Morocco, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere. is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or public officer
including Stephanie Miner who would aid and abet Baraek Obama in usurpation of office of POTUS is no Jess than guilty of misprision of felony,
scdition8J1dtreason.
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that theApri125, 2011 forged public document is for the purpose of
usurping the POTUS, and that were any NewYork State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote abetting each crime the civil servant would be an
accessory after the feet to a felony under NewYork Penal Law; and as such Affinnant provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution, NYS Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 thrcugh f2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S. Election Law 16-100,
N.Y.S. CPLR fi7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 105 as applies to any public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the siune Is true to
my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The
.......
Christopher-Earl: Strunk
Cc: Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive-- Syracuse, NY 13224
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY REGULAR FIRST CLASS MAIL
STATE OF NEW YORK )
)ss.
:: !S .. !@4!!1
On 2012, _ _" . . . . 1.0 A INC copy each o the respective
affidavits entitled COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH
NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY
RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS affirmed November 9, 2012 with and each properly addressed to the District Attorney of
the reepective county of residence or those Electors listed below, and in the same envelope, a Notice of Petitioner's intent
to me an order to show cause application at the Kings County Supreme Court BuJtding at 10 AM on the 1000 Floor intake
at 360 Adams Street on Monday November 19, 2012 de!Nery by USPS for service upon those public oflicera listed below.
d. On NoTember 2012,1 cauocd each copy with proper postage for service by regular mail of listed Elec(ors and where
each envelope was properly addressed with the Notification Personal & ConlidcntiaJm the lower left hand cam..- of the
envelop that was tlien deposited with the USPS for service upon:
I. Andrew M. Cuomo 138 Eagle Street- Albany, NY 12202
2. GoraldD.JC!UiiDpof1135 NewScotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
3. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street- Bronx, NY 10466
4. RabenDiaz,Jr. of82013oytoo!Avenue,o!Q>-Bronx,NY 10473
S. Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street- Buffillo, NY 14208
6. FelixOrtiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooldya, NY 11232
7. Hakcern Jeffiies 3S UnderbiD Avenue, f2A- BrooklyD, NY I 1238
8. BD1DeBlasioof44211thStrect-BrootlyD,NY 11215
9. Robert Dull)' 164 Croydcn Road- Roc:beste<, NY 14610
10.
11. TomDINapoli IOOGrea!NeckRoati-GreaiNect.NY 11201
12. &ic Sclmeidennan 64S West Eod A-I!IF- New Yoot. NY 10025
13. WaltcrCooperJSOWest961hStre<t,#12G-ScwYCIIt.NY 10025
14. SbeldonSilverof550 GroodSU....IISA-NewYad:.I\'Y 10002
15.
16.
17. William 1bompsonofl06 West
18.
19. Emily<lisbof440West2<1thSiroet-SewYad;.!o'Y1001-4'
20. ScottAdamsofll PoplarA--Ordoril'od:.!o'YJ4L.'7'
21.
22.
23. Anne Marie AnDiooe 28274Sth Seoot -.ASIIOiio.5'! Ill'S
24. Groce :Meagof14714 JUst
25. ArdUe Spiporofl1210 ........ !o'YII-03
26.
27.
28. ..
2$1. ........ NYU'ne '
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 196 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 197 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 198 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
STATE OF NEW YORK
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Clerk of Court
Supreme Court, Kings County
360 Adams Street
_ __1 t __ _
Re: Christopher Earl Strunk
Dear Sir or Madam:
KENT T. STAUFFER
EXECUTIVE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
DIVISION OF STATE COUNSEL
LISA R. DELL
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL IN CHARGE
LITIGATION BUREAU
November 16,2012
I write because Christopher Earl Strunk has stated in the attached that he intends to file an
Order To Show Cause against, inter alia, Governor Andrew Cuomo, Attorney General Eric
Schneiderman, and Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, regarding their casting votes at the Electoral
College for President Barak Obama. The attached Order enjoins Mr. Strunk from filing any
further actions in the Unified Court System against any ofthese three people. Moreover, the
subject matter of Mr. Strunk's threatened new litigation is precisely the same as that of the
previous litigation that resulted in the attached Order. ThU:s, Mr. Strunk should not be permitted
to file his Order To Show Cause.
Respectfully submitted,
Joshua Pepper
Assistant Attorney General
120 BROADWAY, NEW YORK N.Y. 10271-0332 PHONE (212) 416-8610 FAX (212) 416-6075 *NOT FOR SERVICE OF PAPERS
HTTP://WWW.AG.NY.GOV
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 199 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 3
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 200 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
.q-2008 0S:<\0P FROM:IOI GEAA\.0 fEI..D . 7186'137845
?P: lfe. ..
. rt4><. # ..
/iftP>(.'
&." I"
/';jJ)<.-#- .:1?6f'0R

7186'137845
T0:'312123070247
T0:'3121230702<17 P.3'8
Upon the foregoing papers, pro se petitioner Christopher Earl Strunk (petitioner)
moves, by order to show cause, dated October 30, 2008, for an order, pursuant to CPLR
Anicle 78, prohibiting respondents New York State Governor David A. Paterson, New York
State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, New York State Senate President Pro Tempore
Dean Skelos and New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli from serving as electors
of president and vice president of the United States
1
pursuant to Election Law 121 00.
Background
Petitioner has annexed a verified petition dated October 27, 2008 (bearing index
number 29641108) and verified complaint dated October 27, 2008 (bearing index number
29642/08) to the order to show cause herein. The gravamen of the allegations set forth in
both the petition and complaint challenge the 2008 New York Presidential Electoral
College. In this regard, petitioner specifically alleges that the respondents New York
State Governor David A. Paterson, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo,
New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli and New York State Senate President
Pro Tempore Dean Skelos, who were among the designated electors of President and
Vice Presidenr2 chosen in the general election on November 4, 2008, violate the New
'Petitioner acknowledges in paragraph 4 of his verified petition that mpondcnt New
York State Secretary of State Lorraine A. Cortez-Vazquez is "not an elector candidate ... "
2
The offices of President and Vice Pre.ident of the United States, under our
constitutional fonn of government, are chosen by electors selected by the voters in each State
(U.S. Const., art. I!, I; see N.Y. Consl, an. n. 9). A review of the Election Law reflects this
indirect system of voting for President and Vice President, wherein the provisions consistently
refer to the electors of president and vice president as the offices being chosen by the electorate
of this State (Election Law 6-1 02; see Malter of Mahoney v LomenZD, 21 AD2d 971 (1964],
ajjdl4 NY2d 952 [19641).
DEC4201i18 05:401' FROMIIOI GERALD HEI..O 7186437845 TO: 912123070247
At an lAS Term, Special Election Pan of the
Supreme Court of the State of New Yotk, held in
and for the County of Kings, at the Courthouse, at
Civic Center, Brooklyn, New York, on the 4., clay of
December, 2008.
PRESENT:
HON. DAVID l. SCHMIDT
Justice.
-X
CHRISTOPHEREARL S11UJNK,
Petitioner,
against
DAVID A. PATERSON{NYS GoVERNOR),
ANDREWCUOMO{NYS ATTORNEY 0NBRAL),
DEAN SKJ!LOS (PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE
NYS Sl!NATE AND IN LINE TOSUCCEED THEGOVERNOR),
THOMAS P. DINAPOL.t (NYS COMPTROLLER), AND
LoRRAINE A. CoRTI!Z VAZQUEZ (SECRETARY OF lHE
STATE OFNEW YORK),
Respondents.
---X
The following papers number I to 3 n;ad on thj motjon:
Notiee of Motion/Order to Show Cause/
Petition/Cross Motion and
Affidavits (Affinnations) Annexed, ______ _
Opposing Affidavits (Affinnations) ______ _
Reply Affidavits (Affirmations) _______ _
____ Affidavit(Affirmation), ______ _
Other Papers'--------------
DEC-<1-2009 BS: 41P FROM:f(IN GEM..O 11..1) 71864378<\5
lndexNo. 29641/08
Pppcrs Nurobered
13
T0:912123e7B247
York State Constitution by simultaneously holding two public officer positions and
receiving compensation for both. it is petitioner's contention that the New York State
Constitution bars the designated respondents ftom holding more than one public officer
position for which he or she receives compensation. Additionally, petitioner argues that
respondents, as duly elected public all have a direct and substantive conflict of
interest in also serving as electors in that "each are required to certifY and or participate in
their COrPOrate duties in defending themselves and or approving their certification for
employment as an elector and certification for payment. of compensation and expenses"
(Strunk Affidavit at 3, 7). The October 30, 2008 order to show. cause therefore seeks a
temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction directing those respondents with
more than one public officer position to resign as an elector.
Discussion
Petitioner raises the issue regarding an alleged conflict of interest (incompatibility)
in respondents' simultaneous holding of two public offices. However. one person may
hold two offices simultaneously unless (a) they are incompatible or (b) a constitutional or
statutory prohibition exists against dual office holding.
It is a well-settled common law rule that a public officer cannot hold two
incompatible offices simultaneously (Matter of Smith v Dillon. 267 App.Div. 39, 43
[1943]). This rule seeks to prevent offices of public trust from accumulating in a single
individual. Two offices are incompatible if one is subordinate to the other or there is an
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 201 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
OEC-4-aaBS B5:41P FRQM:HOH GERALD HELO 7L86437845 TO: 912123070247
inherent inconsistency between the two offices (see People ex ref. Ryan v Green, 58 NY
295. 304-0S (1874]: O'Malley v Macejko, 44 NY2d 530, 535 [ 1978]: Matter of Dupras v
County ofCiinron. 213 AD2d 952, 953 [1995]; Matter of Dykeman v Symonds, 54 AD2d
159, 162 [1976]; Fauci v Lee, 38 Misc.2d 564,567 [1963],qffd. 19 AD2d 777 [1963]).
Incompatibility ''has been said to exist when there is a built-in right of the holder of one
position to interfere with that of the other "(O'Malley, 44 NY2d at 535). Where one
person holds both such posts then "the design that one act as a check on the other would
be frustrated" (id.).
Here, the coun has not identified any per se constitutional or statutory prohibition
on an individual simultaneously serving as a public officer while also serving as an
elector of president and vice president. As an initial matter, the coun notes that electors
of president and vice president are not classified as "public officers" under New York's
Public Officers law. Section 2 of the Public Officers Law classifies public officers as
either "state officers" or "local officers." However local officers include just those
chosen "by the electors of a poriion only of the state . ,"thereby making such category
inapplicable herein.
Under the portion of the provision defining "state officer," electors of president
and vice presideni are expressly excluded from such definition and therefore cannot be
deemed a "public officer" under the statute. Section 2 provides, in pertinent part, that;
DEC-4-21i!B9 es: 42P FR!J1:HON GER!l..O HEL.O ?1EI6431S45 TO: 912123018247
increased during such time" (emphasis added). Article III. 7 further provides that
acceptance of a permissible appointment thereunder "shall vacate his or her seat in the
legislature" (emphasis added).
This constitutional provision expressly precludes a member of the legislature from
accepting cenain appointed as opposed to elected positions. Election Law 12-100,
makes it clear that presidential and vice presidential electors are candidates for office and
therefore elected to said position, not appointed. Consequently, New York State
Constitution Article [)[, 7 is inapplicable herein.
Additionally, the court rejects petitioner's argument that Anicle XIU, 7 of the
ConstitUtion bars respondent public officers fiom holding more than one public office for
1
Election Law 12-100 specifically states as follows;
"At the general election in November preceding the time fixed by
law of the United States for the choice of president and vice
president of the United States, as many electors of president and
vice president of the United States shall be elected, as this state
shall be entitled to. Each vote cast for the CliDdidates ofany party
or independent body for president and vice president of the United
States and each vote cast for any write-in candidates for such
offices shall be deemed to be cast for the candidates for elector of
such party or independent body or the candidates for elector named
in the certificate of candidacy of such write-in candidates."
The section remains equally inapplicable even considering the electors as appointed.
Indeed, petitioner has failed to show that any legislative member serving as an elector herein
gained such position by receiving a "civil appointment from the governor, the governor and the
senate, the legislature or from any city government . , ." In addition, petitioner has failed to show
that the position of presidential and vice presidential elector constitutes, as specified in the
section, "an office which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been
increased during [the time for which he or she was elected]." The constitutional section in all
respects therefore has no application herein.
7186437845 TO: 912123070247
"The tCfT!l 'state officer' includes every officer for whom all
the electors of the state are entitled to vote, members of the
legislature, justices of the supreme court, regents of the
university, and every officer, appointed by one or more state
officers, or by the legislature, and authorized to exercise his
official functions throughout the entire state, or without
limitation to any political subdivision of the state, except
United States senators, members of congress, and electors far
president and vice-president of the United States" (emphasis
added).
Electors of president and vice president arc thus specifically excluded from the
state officer definition set forth in the Public Officers L11w. Hence, the designated
respondents, contrary to petitioner's claims, violate no New York State Constitutional
provision by holding public officer positions while also serving as electors.
The court funher concludes that the New York State Constitutional provisions
raised by petitioner do not prohibit the designated respondents from holding their
respective public offices as well as simultaneously serving as electors even assuming that
electors of president and vice president are public officer positions. In this regard, the
coun finds that petitioner's reliance upon Article III, 7 of the New YorK State
Constitution as b!Ul'ing the respondents from serving as public officers while also serving
as electors of president and vice president is without merit.
Article III, 7, in pertinent part, provides that: "No member of the legislature
shall, during the time for which he or she was elected, receive any civil appointment from
the governor, the governor and the senate, the legislature or from any city government, to
an office which shill I have been cre11tcd, or the emoluments whereof shall have been
OEC-4-2008 05:42P FRQM:HON GERAJ) HELO 718643'1134$ TO: 912123070247
which he receives compensation. Article xm, 7, entitled ''Compensation of officers,"
provides as follows:
Each of the state officers named in this constitution shall,
during his or her continuance in office, receive a
compensation, to be fixed by law, which shall not be
increased or diminished during the term for which he or she
shall have been elected or appointed; nor shall he or she
receive to his or her use any fees or perquisites of office or
other compensation.
This constitutional provision governing compensation for state officers and
legislative members prohibits an officer from receiving extra (increased) compensation
beyond his or her regular salary for performing their duties as said officer, and further
bars any decrease insalary during his or her current term of office. This provision does
not expressly forbid a public officer from receiving additional compensation attributable .
to simultaneously holding another public office. Clearly, petitioner has failed to establish
that there is any constitutional prohibition against respondents holding their respective
public offices as well as simultaneously serving as electors of president and vice
president. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the order to show cause is denied, and the petition is hereby
dismissed.
The foregoing constitutes the decision and order of the court.
: : 2 ~
'ft1llf. DAVId I, IC9UIO
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 202 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in s_upport ofOSC
Exhibit 4
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 203 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
,..
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEii YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS - CIVIL TERM: PART: 1
---------------------X
CHRISTOPHER STRUNJ<,
-against-
IND. NO.
29641/08
6 DAVID A. PATERSON{NYS GOVE;NOR), ANDREW CUOMO(NYS
ATTORNEY GENERAL), DEAN SKELOS (PRESIDENT PRO
TEMPORE OF THE NYS SENATE AND IN LINE TO SUCCEED THE
GOVERNOR), THOMAS 1?. D:Ni'.POLI (NYS COMPTROLLER), AND
10 LORRAINE A. CORTEZ-VASQUEZ (SECRETARY OF THE STATE
11 OF NEW YORK),, Defendants.
12 ---------X
360 Adams
13 Brooklyn, New York 11201
14 November 3rd, 2008
15 B E F 0 R E:
16
17
DAVID SCHMIDT,
Justice
18 A P P E A R A N C E S:
19 CHRISTOPHER STRUNK
Appearing .Pro Se
20
21
22
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
OFFICE OF TJIE ATTORNEY GENERAL
120 Broadway
New York, New York 102"71-0332
Assistant Attorney General
BY : JOEL GRABER, ESQ
Deputy Attorney General
-- -ay: cr;EONA1unr.- coHEN";-Eso:-- ---
Jennie Fantasia,
Senior court Reporter
PROCEEDINGS
Legislature.
Now, as far as pay, there is a question of
whether it s diminimous. The pay was, when
they rewrote the e:ection law in the 70's,
they carried over the same amount of money
:.hat was previously paid in the 60's.
Now I worked as a soda jerk for one dollar
an hour, minimum pay, and certainly Sl5 an hour
is twice minimum pay so that's more diminimous
in terms of 1960, '62.
The question of being a federal officer
under the cor.stitution, which is in
Article two, section one, clause two, which
can be found in the memoranda of law on page
three, on page three of -- four of five on
the back, all the way in the .back ori the
memorandum of law, all the way in the back,
four of five, four of five, states that the
United States Constitution, article two,
section one, clause two, each State sha:l
appoint in such --
THE COURT: Where are you?
MR. STRUNJ<: Right here.
!Indicating.)
MR. STRUNK: Each State stfall appoint in
3
5
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
THE CLERK: Index number 29641 of '08,
Christopher Earl Strunk against David A,
Patterson, et al.
MR. GRABER: Joel Graber, Assistant
Attorney General, Special Litigation CounseL
Litigation Bureau. 120 Broadway, New York New
York.
MR. COHEN: Leonard A cohen, Deputy
At:t:orney General, Division of State Counsel,
120 Broadway.
THE COURT: You made the motion, now
talk.
MR. STRUNK: You had tasked me to answer
what a public officer was. The Public
Officer's Law, ir. :act, does exclude -- State
Public Office Law does exclude the electorate
once they're elected from the -- :'rom being a
public officer.
That's also-- we agreed that's the case.
The fact though is that once they're elected
and they're certified on, I think, December
1st, :.hey' re federal officers under the Federal
Constitution, they are holding a federal job
for compensation paid for by the State
PROCEEDINGS
a manner as the. legislature thereof may direct
a number of elec:.ors equal to the whole number
of senators and representatives to which the
State may be entit:led in Congress, bu:: no
senator or representative or person, which
I'm saying is an electorate once they've been
certified and it becomes federal officers,
holding an office of trust: or profit under
the United States and they're paid by
the State $15 per diem shall be appointed an
elector.
They are a -- this is all carried over
from the 60's on the diminimous question
when they rewrote the law in the 70's and that
there are a series of constitutior.al cases
regarding the relationship of party involvement
to State, public_ interest and State action.
That being submitted 1944 in which the
Jaybird Democratic Party as a select insider's
group were fixing the process of who ended up
to be candidates in the primary so they were
excluding others.
In 1953, again the Jaybird Democratic
Party was, that's exhibit number 11, was held
that they could not, they had to have an open
2
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 204 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10
11
12
13
14
15
. 16
17
18
.19
20
21
22
25
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCE:<:DINGS
primary, they had to not have the inner circle
of. the party control that which the people
themselves were being excluded from in terms of
competing for t;he internal positions,
And that s what has been carried forward
in State Law in that the inner circles have
controlled the Electoral College.
It's changed in the primary. The
people, the common man who are party
members, run on a co by co basis, delegates
at the convention and the party insiders
take over to control the vote. Because they
are, it's to their benefit to control it
because they have the most to. gain by
patronage, by being on_ the insider to
vote whoever they've agreed to vote for
no matter what and that those who are on
the outside who can t get on the inside who
were in the primaries, who went to the
convention, who did cast their votes, they
are not allowed to participate.
So I'm comparing it to the Jaybird
Democratic Party in this case in 1953. It's
- - excTi..isionary. - Tf-5-a v.ioiation-6TequaT
protection for party :nembers as an
PROCEEDINGS
who worked with F::>R, who was the SEC boss
after Joseph Kennedy, certainly u::derstood
and profited in going into that process
in 1933 when the Security Exchange Commission
was set up.
He, in a concurrence in Baker v. Carr
made a very important presentation which
brings the issues that I m referring to into
consideration on the question of politica2.
questions and whether or not the Court can
intervene.
And, in other words, if the Court
can't intervene on something as important as
election law, this is like -- election law
is different than sitting in the back of a bus
and certainly that is the fundamental that we
are moving ahead on.
. .And certainly notwithstanding what
Churchill had to say when he said you
measure democracy based upon a ten minute
conversation with an American, that's our
education system.
You can t blame the fact that we have
a:: education system which would almost prompt
the inner circle, the Jaybird sort of party
,..

2
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
association.
There is two classes within the party
structure. 1\nd that so, that's the
consideration which I think is extremely
important to bring us up into the 21st
century and in the same way as the per diem
would be brought up.
I mean a juror, you asked me to answer, is
the juror a public officer? I say
unequivocally absolutely not.
The whole process of a jury, of
checking excesses of goverrunent, is to
make sure that the citizen is the check
against excesses and overreaching by public
officers. At the point that a juror becomes
a public officer, we're in deep trouble
So certainly jury nullification is a
serious ongoing problem, but you asked me
if I thought a juror was a public officer,
I say absolutely not. It's against the
fundamentals of the constitution to even
consider. a juror as a public officer.
Furthermore, Justice Douglas who,
although I don t agree with many of the
things he did as a very level mason
PROCEEDINGS
structure which as an autocracy and plutocracy
and controls public policy from --
THE COURT: What statute deals with how
the electors are elected?
MR. STRUNK: In the convention or in
the -- this is election law, specifically. In
the primary process?
THE COURT: Forget the primary.
MR. STRUNI<: That's article 12.
THE COURT: In the vote for the
president.
MR. STRUNK: Article 12. They are
candidates.
THE COURT: Article 12 of?
MR. STRUNK: The Election Law.
THE COURT: ll.ight.
MR. STRUNI<: That they are seated under
12 -- 12-100, they are getting certified.
THE COURT: liow are they picked?
MR. STRUNK: They are picked by the --
at large. This is a State -- we go from
a primary, which is a co by CD basis, and
at large basis which 31 electors are chosen
at large so you have no choice to say .I don't
want that elector, but ! '11 take that elector .
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 205 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
19
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
It's winner take all and we have no choice
whatsoever when the --
THE COURT: How do you pick the electors?
MR. STRUNK: At the general election on
a general -- on a ballot by party that the
party has their electors slate. We vote for
that and they may vote -- once they're elected
the majority vote cones from the elector.
Once they get certified and get in that room
on December 15th, they can vote for whomever
they like. So that there is no bargains.
THE COURT: So, in other words, the
voters on election day vote for the
electors ..
MR. STRUNK: For the elector's slate,
yes.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. STRUNK: But they have no choice.
In other words, those who ran in the primary,
in other words, they' z:e exc:uded and the
party insiders take it over and that's the
comparison I am making to the Jaybird
Democratic Party structure which was found
by the Supreme Court to be a violation of the
15th Amendment.
PROCEEDINGS
it, Jaybird'?.
MR. STRUNK: It was brought by a --
referring to a negro voter who was of the
same party and that he was -- he was saying
that he was unab:e to put somebody on the
ballot other than the insiders who were told
ir. '44 to stop doing it.
This is the same party coming back
nine years later to :::ontinue on this sort
of inner sanctum of the plutocracy which
continued to pack the general election
ballots.
Whether or not a Black man can be
included to vote in a primary, that's '4 4,
they were prevented from voting even though
they were Democrats.
THE COURT: The question was whether a
Black man can vote in the primary.
MR. STRUNK: In the primary to which
he is a member and that there was an inner
grouping within the party that were
controling the overall direction of the party
in genera:.
THE COURT: I heard enough.
What do you have to say'?
-,...- --
11
,...
,...
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: It was -- the Jaybird case
was regarding what, the primary or regarding
the general election?
MR. STRUNK: Regarding the general
election.
They controlled the primary. They
controlled who appeared on the ballot in
the general election. There was no process
that would allow competition and that the
common party members were not allowed to
compete because it was all done on the
inside and then by the time, in other words,
there was nobody on the ballot which was,
from a party standpoint, which was
representative of the vast majority of the
common party members.
THE COURT: Jaybird is the one who the
suit was brought against'?
MR. STRUNK: Terry v. Adams in Texas.
Texas' a Republic and still has the ability
to secede. It's a Republic constitution and
it was, next to Georgia, the most --
THE COURT: Just a minute. I'm sti:l at
Jaybird.
What was the lawsuit there, who brought
PROCEEDINGS
MR. GRABER: Thank you, Your Honor.
Nothing Mr. Strunk has said so far
has anything to do with the special
proceedings, with the motion that is before
Your Honor.
The premise o:: the motion is that
electors are public officers and that for
those electors who are public officers in
some other capacity, there is a conflict of
interest as between their two roles.
The. problem with this premise is that
it's false. Electors are not public officers.
Section two of the Public Officer's Law defines
who is a public officer.
THE COURT: lie agreed to that. He said
that it excludes electors.
However, he is pointing to the Federal
Constitution in four of five of his motion.
MR. GRABER: that's not the contention
on this motion or in this proceedings as a
whole as to whether they're Federal Public
Officers. We haven't briefed that because
it isn' t in the moving papers.
MR. STRUNK: Your Honor, have it in my
affidavit in support.
10
12
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 206 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
. 20
21
22
23
24---
25
1
2
3
5
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P:IOCE::DINGS
May I read it?
THE COURT: Just a minute before you reaci
it.
Has any case dealt with what is considered
an office of trust or profit'? What does it
mean, an office of trust or profit?
MR. STRUNK: somebody who is in a
position to speak !or the interest of the
State or for --
THE COURT: Why didn't it just say
holding an office, holding a public office?
What s an office of trust or profit? What
does it mean?
No one has defined that ever? Was
there any commentaries at the time they wrote
it?
MR. STRUNK: : can't speak to that.
THE COURT: I don' t even know basically
what it means per se.
You.' re saying that that means any
officer of the State who gets paid, but I
don't know that it means that.
That's the number one.
-MR-;- -sTRUNK: ---But- it'scertain1y-
position of trust, they are -- although they
PROCEEDINGS
persons, members of the public that he
designated as electors.
THE COURT: Then Senator McCain has
different electors.
MR. GRABER: Yes, and the other
candidates that are going to be on the
ballot tomorrow have their own designated
electors.
MR. STRUNK: My rebuttal to that,
certainly if you can find anybody who was
in the original pr_imary slate on the ballot,
I would agree with the gentleman except for
the fact these are insiders who have taken
over the process. They're not longer taken
forward from the primary. They are a
different set of people. It's a bait and
switch.
THE COURT: Is it a different set of
people?
MR. GRABER: Nc, it's not, Your Honor.
It s for the candidates, the primary,
presidential primary candidates designate
their electors and what they have before
Your Honor this morning are the electors who
were designated by the candidates who
13
15
2
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
- _ffll" -- -- 24--
25
6
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
can vote for whomever they like, some
electors are under contract to vote
specifically as under contract with the
State per se.
As the State of New York, they re not
under contract. There is an element of trust
because they are basically party members.
And although they are State officers as well
as a party member, t:.his is a system run by the
two major parties.
THE COURT: I understand that. So what
do you have to say about that?
MR. GRABER: It's not a position of
trust with respect to the people as a whole
because the electors are designated by
candidates.
And in connec-.:.ion with the primary that
was held in September, the various
presidential candidates designated slates
of electors who were going to represent them
in the New York Electoral if that candidate
should prevail in the primary.
That s the source of the delegates.
The designated
the Democrats, Senator Obama, it's 32

prevailed in their respective party
primaries. The 31 electors designated by
Senator Obama are the 31 electors that we
are talking about this morning. They were
Senator Obama' s cho:.ce and Obama was the
Democratic voter's choice in September.
MR. STRUNK: Your Honor, the party
rules really are -- you can write and state
law based upon the actual rules of the party
and the rules of the party are inconsistent
with the -- with that switch from whoever
gets elected in the primary and who ends up
into the final slate of candidates.
THE COURT: I think basically there are
three points you're making, okay.
One point is that there is a conflict.
The other poin':: is that they re public
officers and therefore they can t have two
offices.
And the third point is that there is a
bait and switch.
Is that correct?
MR. STRUNK: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Just a minute.
MR. STRUNK: Sc --
14
16
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 207 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
PROCEE:DINGS
THE COURT: Let's assume that there is
a conflict. Does it say anywhere that
that conflict prohibits him from votir.g?
Where does it say that that person
with a conflict can't vote?
- note that there are other cases
with conflicts, but I'm sure that it deals
with some sort of law. Where does it say
that a person with a conflict can't vote?
MR. STRUNK: The problem comes in that
who are they voting for.
In other words, somebody becomes a
Democrat per se so that they can vote in the
primary. And that it's the majority party
as a State function since they're controling
the Government that put forward the slate.
THE COURT: You're mixing the arguments
again. There is three, maybe four possible
arguments.
One, there is a conflict. I pressed you
on the conflict.
The other one is that the State Law
states you can't have -- hold two public
17
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
,...--- -----24 ------ ----
---- - -- ------------------ ----- - --- ----- ------- -- ----,-.-- ------- 24
25
10
11
,.. 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The third one is it was a bait and
PROCEEDINGS
assume there is a conflict as you say.
MR. STRUNK: The question of public
policy, in the same way, it's specifically
singled out, that a notary cannot notarize
his own signature.
THE: COURT: It says by a notary,
doesn't say it ar.yplace else. And
obviously .if they say that you could certify,
then they couldn't prohibit: so maybe they
prohibit by a notary and didn't prohibit in
election law.
MR. STRUNK: It would be an interpretation
of the law as --
THE COURT: I understand that.
Then the other argument about the
Jaybird, if they can appoint whoever they
feel like, each State appoints and each
legislator may direct so there may not
have to be an election as to the electors,
all they have to do is appoint.
This would be seem to similar to the
Lopez Torres case in which they tried to
Jr.nock out the way they picked Supreme Court
Justices in which the_ Court stated they
don't understand what the argument is, if
19
25
3
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
lB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
switch in the sense that the people who
were elected originally are not the same
people and it violates the Supreme Court
of United States Jaybird case. That s the
third one.
You possibly have a fourth or.e, that
electors can't be, according to the Federal
Constitution, can be someone who holds an
office. That's basically it.
That's probably -- it's similar to
the argument that the State Law doesn't
allow. That's where I see your argument.
Who says there is a conflict, it can't
be done?
:.et 's assume, : see it more as
ministerial. Let's say it s a Republican
who has to certify the election results of
a Democrat. Let's assume that for a minute.
There is a conflict. :.et' s say there was
one.
MR. STRUNK: We are on the second
question, we are on to the question of
whether or not somebody who is an elector. can
certify himself.
THE COURT: Who says he can' t? :.et' s
PROCEEDINGS
you can pick him, if the party leader can
pick it directly, then why can't they make
the election in a way that they want.
So, I'm down t.o your last argument
which we are talking about is that no
senator or representative or person holding
an office of trust or profit under the United
States shall be appointed an elector.
MR. GRABER: I:' s not clear to us how a
State Public Officer is a person holding
an office of trust or profit under the
United States. That sounds like the
definition of a federal officer rather than a
state public officer, Your Honor.
MR. STRUNK: The governor serves as the
Commander in Chief of the State military.
THE COURT: Not the National Guard
is federalized, he doesn't.
MR. STRUNK: Well --
THE COURT: Just a minute.
You know I buy that argument. It says,
it says office of t::ust or profit under the
United States. The governor does not serve
as the officer of trust or profit under the
United States. And so this federal thing
18
20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 208 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
...
..
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
--2-4--
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
lB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
would not outlaw it so the question here
is, you stated there is in the State
Constitution that you can't hold ;:wo public
offices.
MR. STRUNK: In the legislative section
of article three of the State Constitution,
specifically, and then under article 13
which --
THE: COURT: You want to show it to me.
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
(Pause.)
MR. STRUNK: This is the legislative
portion.
On the following page under article ::.3,
seven in regards ::o shall have been elected
nor shall he or she be paid or receive, o:!
the third line, any other extra compensation
which goes to what --
THE COURT: Where is the next one?
MR. STRUNK: Next page over. Right
here.
(Indicating.)
THE COURT: Neither -- okay.
M R ~ - STRUNK-: -The -pub::.ie--of-ficer which-
would cover the governor.
PROCE:EDINGS
other office which entails compensation, it
doesn't concern the status of electors because
elector is not a pub::.ic office.
And, of course, the second point, the .$15
doesn't constitute legally cognizable
compensation. It's diminimous.
MR. STRUNK: Where article 12 of the
Election Law deals with after -- before
and after they've been certified, so it's
dealing with the question of the behavior and
the job of the certified elector as a federal
officer at that poin;: which the
comptroller says how much they're to be
paid and the Secretary Of State certifies that.
That's 110.
So this is the State paying the elector
who is covered as a federal officer at that
point, the payment c: money. It's digitated.
It's a pass off from the State to the
official position as the federal -- as the
assemblage of the Electoral College which
is presented to the House.
THE COURT: What else?
Is it important that this thing be done
before the election that I have to make a
21
-,...
23
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
- 24 -
25
3
5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: I don't know what you're
referring to. Neither the salary --
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
(Pause.)
MR. STRUNK: As a federal, as a federal
officer, the elector is paid, the Government
would be -- the governor would be paid and
it's in violation of that specifically
because he's receiving money t;hat he wouldn't
normally be getting as part of his governor's
job, whether it be a dollar, diminimous, or
2008 per diem.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. GRABER: The electors are not
receiving the $15 as public officers
because the Public Officers Law states that
they're not public officers. They are
receiving the money' solely as electors.
so it can't implicate any provision of the
State Constitution pertaining to public
officers.
When article three, section seven,
article three being the legislature article
of tne st-ate constrt\itlorl"; tnat-- r.'.emoers-- or
the legislature can't be appointed to any
PROCEEDINGS
decision before the election or can this be
made after the election?
MR. STRUNK: WelL certainly the question
as to whether or no-: the governor -- it goes
to the Jaybird par;:y situation.
General public, I tried to get the
legislator list. They have these insiders
publish addresses, their home addresses,
they didn' t want to publish it and make it
available to the general public, we don t
know who we' re voting --
THE COURT: My question is, does it
have to be done before the election? That's
the question.
MR. STRUNK: There should have been
absolutely, the election s halfway over.
It's absentee ba:.lo: for two weeks.
THE COURT: Can this be decided before
the elector's vote or does it have to be done
today?
MR. STRUNK: It should be decided now.
THE COURT: Why?
MR. STRUNK: Because the general
population should know who the electors
are.
22
24
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 209 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
-r---
2
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
In previous electio!)s, they voted for
the slate of electors. Ar:d it is absolutely
not the case that -- it is a bait and switch
absolutely. To th!nk. that they're voting
for McCain or Biden, they're not, in fact.
It is absolutely m:.s:.nformation to
the general populat:.on and promotes the
position of the Democratic Party
insiders.
That s what this is really all about.
And the fact that they d!dn' t publish the
names separate from the addresses, I take
THE COURT: Now let's contrast it.
Assuming I decide it today and before
November 15th where would the -- where would
the difference be'? ::: I decided today,
what would happen? I decided for you,
let's say, hypothetically, what would
happen?
It would be too late to change
anything. You did until the last
second so nothing wculd change. And if
I would decide it before November 15th,
25
you know, whatever l::appened, it's too late
---- --- --- --- -- -- _,... _________
to do anything.
27
PROCEEDINGS
December 15th'?
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
THE COURT: You can?
MR. STRUNK: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: If you can fill it till
December 15th, you just answered :ny question.
So then, in essence, there is no urgency
to this because, assuming that you're
right, then the vacancy can be filled
afterwards.
MR. STRUNK: :ts up to the legislature
according --
THE COURT: Assuming that bait and switch
is found --
MR. STRUNK: I did this, I was
essentially thrown in the barrel eight years
ago on a totally unrelated matter. A11d :
was told that I had to come back before the
election for it to l::e properly considered.
THE COURT: Let's asstune that you had to
come back before the election.
The decision doesn t have to be before
the election because it s not going to make
any difference.
MR. STRUNK: I think it s essential to
. 4
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2
5
9
10
1!
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
Let's asswne that you claim that it s
a bait and switch.
MR. GRABER: With all due respect, it s
December
THE COURT: Yes, I made an error. So
now I agree with you, it's bait and switch,
hypothetically, Jayb!rd Supreme Court
decision is on all :our s hypothetically.
Now what?
Are you going -co change the election
poll, the polls. They're going to -- they
have time to do that'? They don t have time to
do that.
In essence, !t's really whatever I do
doesn't make a difference today.
MR. STRUNK: Your Honor, the eight days
ago or eight days tomorrow was the last
date which you can fill vacancies and --
THE COURT: You can t fill vacancies
anyillore.
MR. STRUNK: That's not true.
According to the federal law the filling of
any vacancy up to the point that they're to
-----vote -..:;;. -
THE COURT: . You can fill a vacancy
PROCEEDINGS
give a Justice of the Supreme court
jurisdiction over the matter and I think
THE COURT: so : have jurisdiction.
MR. STRUNK: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: The question is when the
decision has to be made.
Does it have to be made .in a rush
manner just off the cuff, seat of the
pants?
So it can be :uade in a more
deliberate inanner so that if there is no
difference as to vthether it s w.ade today
or not being that the electors can be changed
afterwards --
MR. STRUNK: I agree. That s absolutely
correct.
THE COURT: What do you have to say'?
MR. GRABER: Certainly the machines
have already been delivered to the polling
places.
THE COURT: You can t change anything,
so it doesn t make a difference. I may not
make a decision today, although I may.
just want -- there is a little more
argument on what s cons ide red.
26
28
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 210 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
2
.. 10
11
12
13
l.4
J.5
J.6
J.7
J.8
J.9
zo
21
22
23
. -2-4--
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
:1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
Is a Commissioner of Deeds a public
officer?
MR. STRUNK: Yes, according to --
THE COURT: A Commissioner of Deeds is a
public officer?
MR. GRABER: I don't know if it does or
doesn't, Your Honor.
MR. STRUNK: The state article 13 --
legis:ative law considers a
(Pause. J
MR. STRUNK: Back under article three,
section seven, no member of the legislature
shall, and it says however the member of
legislature maybe appointed Commissioner of
Deeds.
Now Commissioner of Deeds is a public
officer position because they actually take
tests under the public officer law, per se.
So that Commissioner of Deeds and Notary,
which are two different positions, are public
officers. They're State Officers as a matter
of fact.
MR. GRABER: One thing is clear from the
-defini-tion--section of.- the -Publi.c-Of.ficer-'s
Law, that Commissioner of Deeds. are no.t
PROCEEDINGS
electors. No argument can.
THE COURT: He is saying that the
Constitution trumps that section under the
Public Of::icer Law.
MR. GRABER: There isn't --
MR. STRUNK: Bo:h constitutions.
MR. GRABER: There isn't anything in
the New York State Constitution that
prohibits --
THE COURT: wEl tell you his
argument because I want to get it clear
so I hear your argument, that's why I'm
debating his argument.
If a member of the legislature be
elected to Congress or appointed to any
office, civil, I guess this is a civil
office, or military under the Government
of the United States, which it's not, or the
State of New York, so we have talked about
legislator appointed to a civil office in
the Sta::e of New York, or under any City
government, his or her accepting that shall
vacate his or seat in the legislature and
they specifically exclude Commissioner of
Deeds or any office that he or she receive
29
_r ..
31
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
mentioned, but that electors for president
and vice president are specifically mentioned
and excluded.
MR. STRUNK: Un::ler article two, section
two, which is exhibit number eight on the
declaration.
MR. GRABER: :n sect.:.on two of the New
York Public Officer's Law, commissioners of
Deeds are not mentioned as public officers
or not, but electors of president and vice
president are specifically excluded by the
legislature.
THE COURT: That's the point.
Assuming they are excluded, you would
think that the Commissioner of Deeds, being
that it's not mentioned, is also excluded
and then the question is why does it mention
the Commissioner of Deeds here, which is, in
essence, not a public office.
If it's not a public office, then that
sort of cuts into your argument that it's
not a public office.
MR. GRABER: There isn't any argument
- secn-on-l:wcn,-r--tne
Public Officer s Law, the exclusion of
PROCEEDINGS
no compensation. That's the questior:.
He is saying, in essence, that it is,
there is a legislator. It is a civil office
and they're getting paid under the s-.:.ate of
New York.
MR. GRABER: First of all, this argument
would only apply to t:he members of the
legislature. Second, this --
THE COURT: Hang on, but there are
members of the legislature on it.
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
MR. GRABER: There are?
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
THE: COURT: Just hang on.
So, I hear his argument. I don':: know
which electors you are talking about.
Let's talk abou: the governor. The
governor is not a member of the legislature.
MR. STRUNK: He was the President of ':he
Senate.
THE COURT: He but he isn ' t Who
else is a member of the legislature'?
MR. STRUNK: Of:: the top of my head, the
Speaker of the Assembly, Minority Leader of the
Assembly, Tedesco.
30
32
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 211 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
,.. ____ _
2
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: You have it there. What are
you showing me there?
MR. GRABER: A close reading of the
sect::on seven, article three, talks about
members of the legislature who receive an
appointment from the governor, the senator,
the legislature of any City government. And
really ari elector doesn't fall into any of
those categories.
MR. STRUNK: The appointment of
governor --
MR. GRABER: The governor doesn't
certify anything, Your Honor. The results
of the election tomorrow are certified by the
State Board of Elections.
THE COURT: You see the point as follows,
let's go a little further, on the fourth
line, if a member of the legislature be
e:ected to Congress or appointed to any
office, it doesn't say by the governor.
MR. GRABER: Okay.
THE COURT: You know, you mentioned that
it's only the governor, it's not.
MR. GRABERi As we --
THE COURT: ':'he question is, what is
PROCEEDINGS
compensation.
MR. STRUNK: Reimbursement, 13 cents a
mile, wh:.ch is part of ar-.:icle 12' s, 110 is
the separate reimbursement from compensation
per diem, it's 13 cents a mile.
THE COURT: Who separates it, the
Constitution?
MR. STRUNK: The Election Law.
THE COURT: The Election Law separates
it, but I don't know if the Constitution --
we're not going under the Election Law.
Under the Election Law it says an
elector is excluded. We' r.e doing it Scalia,
we're going right into the Constitution
itself.
Who says what's considered compensation?
Would a dollar be?
okay, taking your argument, with
Bloomberg, you would say a dollar is
compensation'?
MR. STRUNK: Absolutely.
THE COURT: Possibly a dollar would not
be compensation if, in a sense, that they' !:e
really taking a loss because whatever it's
going to cost hi:n, I could take judicial
33
- ____,.._ -----
35
,..
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
3
5
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
considered compensation, to define
compensation?
MR. STRUNK: According to Bloomberg,
he had to take a dollar in lieu of the actual
salary that he was to be paid. If he were
not to take the dollar, it would be an
unfulfilled contract.
THE COURT: It may be a contract without
consideration. You are citing to Bloomberg
and I' :n sure he would be happy to hear that,
the question is, what is -- who says that
Bloomberg needed to take the dollar, number
one.
Let's assume that he needed take the
dollar. If he wants to take the dollar's
compensation, what s :onsidered compensation'?
If it cost them a lot more than $15 to
serve in that office, you know the gas and
whatever, would expenses be compensation,
reimbursement of compensation, would that
be compensation?
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
THE COURT: Where would it state that
--wouTCI- -be. cor.ii)ensadoni- 'that -could be ii: s--
re::mbursement. : m not serving for
PROCEEDINGS
notice it's going tc cost them more than
$15. $15 may not be compensation.
MR. STRUNK: . Well, the word shaH, this
is not may or can, it says shall. The law
essentially says shall.
THE COURT: Shall has nothing to do with
it. Shall receive no compensation and don t
know what corrpensation means.
Does it mean reimbursement'? Does it
mean a compensation that l get money over
and above :ny expenses or even if they pay
my expenses, is that considered
compensation'?
MR. STRUNK: Well, the general reading
of compensation, you're getting something in
return for services or -- it's a contract.
Something is returned;
There can be no claim as long as there
is something traded, whether it be a subway
token or whatever, that would be considered
compensation, generally.
But. they, under Election Law, they
specifically delineate, from an accounting
standpoint, that which is expenses and that
which would show up as income or wages.
34
36
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 212 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
-- -24-
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
!6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
_ Expenses are not wages. This is where
the comptroller comes in under the Election
Law. The comptroller is brought in to audit
the difference between eKpenses and per diem
per se.
THE COURT: Do you. have under the Income
Tax Law, do they get a 1099 for it?
MR. STRUNK: When I do jury duty,
do.
THE COURT: You get a 1099 tor jury
duty?
MR. STRUNK: Well, it's a -- I d:.d
two years ago. I got something in return.
It s been a long time. I did get -- no, I
can't speak to that.
THE COURT: Okay.
Anything else?
MR. GRABER: No, Your Honor.
MR. STRUNK: Yes.
There is an underlying matter which I
would like to- have heard on the 15th of
November.
THE COURT: December or November?
MR.- S'l'RUNK:---Novembe-r-.-- ---- - ----------------
It s going to a controversy which is now

restraint on who the electoral college, i!'
he's not qualified, a natural born citizen,
we can t permit a --
THE COURT: You maybe in the wrong
forum. If the Federal -- if the Feds don t
stop him and are not enforcing that portion
of the law that requires him to be a citizen
or at least proving :hat he is a citizen or
was born in the Uni:ted States that you know,
a State judge will not be able to, in a
back way, not al.:.ow the electors to vote --
MR. STRUNK: Certainly the Federal
Constitution would require that anybody
unless -- electors are not private
individuals, they re public officers, and
therefore must take an oath, at least be
willing to take an oath to support the
Constitution of the State of New York and
the US constitution and part of that --
because there is no statute that says
somebody, somebody is going to collect this
certificate of birth; no where in any
Federal Law does it say a senator must
submit his certificate of birth or anywhere,
it's something where if a citizen doesn't
37
39
2
3
5
10
11
12
!3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
- -- -- 24-
,...
25
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2!
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
before the Supreme Court on the matter of -:-
it s up before Justice Souter this morning
as to whether or not Obama should prove that
he's born --
THE COURT: I thought he proved that he
was born in Hawaii yesterday.
MR. STRUNK: There was no proof.
THE COURT: thought he released the
birth certificate.
MR. STRUNK: It was not a birth
certificate. It was a certificate of live
which Hawaii could accept from any
country, a certificate of registration of a
live birth. It s just different than a --
THE COURT: Was it accepted the same
day he was born?
MR. STRUNK: That according -- there is
an exhibit 16 which goes to ::hat issue.
THE COURT: What does it have to do with
me?
MR. STRUNK: Well --
THE COURT: This is a Federal question
as to whether or not he can serve as the
-!ires.lcfent :- -- - -
MR. STRUNK: I would like to get a
PROCEEDINGS
have standing to say, who has
THE COURT: You may have standing in
the wrong court though. I would think this
would be a Federal Court issue as to whether
or not he is born in the United States per
se.
If they, if they validate it, then I
would think that, you know, we can, they can
vote for him --
MR. STRUNK: The electors, the voters
on the fourth do not vote for any candidate
except for the electoral slate and that's
plain and simple. The re(ll election occurs
starting the 15th and it s got to be
completed by the 24th of December so there
is a possibility of seven, eight, nine days
of per diem for the Electoral College to
deal with these questions.
And based upon the_ winner take all
process, we may have to eliminate the
public officers who have now become Federal
Officers eight or nine or ten from the
Democrats, which brings it down to 20
Democrat electors, and then the next
highest number would come out of the
38
40
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 213 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
,. ___
24
25
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
vote getters, so there would be 15
Republican electors quite a battle for
maybe nine days who -- it s up to them. They
are the ones elected to solve those problems
so that I m interested in a judicial subpoena
of travel records from 1960, 1963.
THE COURT: You asked for that in your
papers?
MR. GRABER: No.
MR. STRUNK: That is in my affidavit.
Let's see.
I'm asking that in my suppor-ting
affidavit which it says on page -- paragraph
16 of my supporting affidavit, page five
of seven, furthermore that preliminary
i:1junction hearing with New York State
Board of Elections and its agent, including
the Director of Elections and New York State
Secretary of state who must show why they
should not perform due diligence to
ascertain whether or not Barack Hussein
Obama is a natural born citizen and
affected by the allegations in the
aforementioned case.
On paragraph 15, where the mother
PROCEEDINGS
THE COURT: Just a minute.
What do you have to say about that'?
MR. GRABER: This is not part of the
order to show cause that we're heari:Jg this
morning. The State was not noticed that
Mr. Strunk was making an application with
respect to Senator Obama' s citizenship.
It seems as though Mr. Strunk's
concerns with .Obama's place of origi:1s
are mainly the focus of a separate action
which is under a separate index
He provided a summons and corr.plaint
in that action, but it's not a matter before
Your Honor.
Of course, everything that Mr. Strunk
has just said and everything that he's put
in his papers with respect to Senator Obama
is derived from the Internet.
MR. STRUNK: That's not true.
MR. GRABER: Internet gossip.
1-lR. STRUNK: Not true.
MR. GRABER: Particularly from a lawsuit
that was filed in the Eastern District of
Pennsy:Lvania which was dismissed on
OCtober 24th.
41
43
6
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
5
10
l1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
PROCEEDINGS
is is where the birth occurred. And that
the United States State Department has
those records which are prima facie whether
she was inside or outside the country.
And there is testimony recorded of Sarah
Obama, who is -- was present at
the birth in Mombasa and that there was a
restriction on airplane flight which, did
not permit a pregnant woman to enter back
into the country because of the pregnancy
and the near giving birth.
And therefore, in Hawaii the actual
original full certificate of birth showing
Mombasa Hospital presence is on record in
Hawaii right now and that there is only a
registration, which is how Hawaii worked in
1961, they just become a state. They were
essentially a protec:orate of the United
States. It was entirely structured of
how people registered under a us protectorate
so that a registration of a live birth is
what was issued and what was shown by the
Ennenberg Fou:Jdation who had a conflict of
-:rnt:.ei: ..est: i:leln9 one-oCiliei.r .attorneys in tne
first place --
PROCEEDINGS
That case is entitled Berg, B-E-R-G, v.
Obama. And the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania dismissed the case for lack
of standing, same thing is true here.
Mr. Strunk doesn't have any interest
in whether Obama is the Democratic candidate
or whom the electors are with respect to
Obama from the standpoint of Obama' s
citizenship. He has a generalized interest
that as any other person. That's not
sufficient for standing.
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania
shouldn' t be in this Court either.
MR. STRUNK: The only thing that we
have in this Country that holds us together
is the constitution, a social contract, and
that fundamental of that social contract
is whether or not we're going to elect a
man who would run this country for four
years who is alleged to be a foreigner,
illegal, illegal alien who is improperly
in this country, according to his reentry
after coming back with an Indonesian
passport when he entered back at age 16,
that's covered in exhibit 16.
42
44
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 214 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
2
3
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
PROCEEDINGS
Rather than getting details, I believe,
I'm the only one in the country whose
really, through my own experience, through
the Department of Health, through my own
tracking down birth certificates and
affiliations, all sorts of skullduggery
that I went to court for a year and half, two
years over in Manhattan, I think it s
absolutely essential that we see the travel
records of . the mother from 1960 to 1963
even in camera, even in camera i: there
is a privacy issue, this woman and her
record is essentially the linchpin to
whether or not we re going to have a man
who, according to the past Deputy Attorney
General of Pennsylvania, a man of good
standing with many courts, that somehow we
should throw him --
MR. GRABER: It:'s simply not before
20 'lour Honor.
2l THE COURT: How is it before Justice
22 Souter today?
23 MR. GRJI.ER: According --
.24-- _______ .... MR.-S'l'RUNK:--.According-to .. Mr .. Berg, ..
25 who was interviewed last night, he had
45
r
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
PROCEEDINGS
submitted five days ago to Souter, who is
the justice, single justice who deals with
the Third Circuit, to order Obama to deliver
a certificate of birth. That s what it s
asking for.
THE COURT: Okay. Decision reserved.
MR. GRABER: T-hank you, Your Honer.
THE COURT: Be well. Have a good day.
I don t think I m going to issue a
decision today because it's really-- it's
not urgent.
MR. STRUNK: I'm not an attorney, the only
way I can get any documents that would be the
basis for a November 15th hearing would be if
there is going to be a restraint issued before
the certification o: the electors that all we
need to see is dates and the dates are
THE COURT: ::: understand that. Decision
reserved.
Certified to be a true and accurate transcript of
the foregoing proceedings.
- 2 4 ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - -
25 JENNIE FANTASIA, oc{)
23
46
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 215 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 5
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 216 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
-

DEPUTY CLERK
NOTICE OF RELEASE WITHOUT CONSIDERATION
TO STATE OF NEW Releasee
IN RE: USUFRUCT "CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK," cHRISTOP..HER.E. E. Strunk"
ueorg1a, ronar- county . . .
I hereby certify the Within and foregoing to be
FROM: Christopher Earl Strunk, in esse Releasor .
a true, correct complete copy of the original
STATE OF NEW YORK ) office. .
1
,.,
Th1s - day:. of. E5'il e.. ,20..=
J ss. .
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ?PI!!Tef'e)7:P-
. d' Ch h Strunk . (R
1
) bein Dep.uty Clerk,
Accor mgly, I, nstop er-Earl: m esse e easor gamy sworn. depose say under penalty
of perjury:
Releasor until further notice is located for service at 593 Vanderbilt Avenue -281 Brookbn, New York
11238 within the State of New York subdivision of the city of New York. -
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, absolutely release all personal propel ty interests, 1repi andfoc
equitable, in the pubUc United States Citizen cHRIS'JI'OPHER EARL STRUNK:' Jan.ti&iY 24,
194 7, upon the filing of the trust instrument in the State of New York sulxliftsicm Coum!u:y .Sew York
witbin _t,b,e __ Ci_ty_ of.New:_York, the_ U.SUFRU_CT .Deed _Certificate No..: 03766 Jrit1Ltbe_ CafiiliUIJn cl'Birth----
N00232437 (see Exhibit A).
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, resetve all personal property rights. Legal ta"ed or
secured by the Constitution of the United States. the Constitution oftthe State m ...,........ ,,
I, Cfu1.stopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, intend no longer to be the Surety tor tbe 1 '=
States Citizen cHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, :It ccHRIISTOPHER E.. STRO!\"K,,. . . r
any <Jerivative of the "nom de guerre* thereof:t such as CCHRI.STOPRE R.. ...... ........... _...__._
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, presently a residelllt of the State Ycsk, iDII=-1
former natural-born Citizen status conf'eued at my ' at 11irUt. cn..laatii21.!' 23... !Gfil:=:::::se:
that status being a private iadiriclual Unired Stales c:a:::!lb:ta:! SN n- M : c .. 1ililllr ........
Amendment to the United States and flllliut5e' ed in F.:* r .&:.!Ll.lllll! t:S
I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse" inteod to be II!' tnis e!leae e
accordance with Chapter 17-B ofthe StateorSew'!"J:kC'!Sf2D's. ill ----saa!ll!!
Release of a power of appointtment
This Release renders null and void any pltiioos :8 I _
State of New York and or subdiw:isionfsJ. ./"" -,-,
- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 217 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
.....
....
.......
p
I
. ... .... . .. .: .,
./
Look for the followfnQ HCUJ'ity befonrec:eepting ... doc&lnR:
... Blue engraved border and saals With raised intaglo printing
Mu16-mlcnd , "'
of the words New YOftc of Heallh and Menial \ .
Hyg(ene lmmedlatety above the bottom bc!rd&!"_,-nd visible using a
magnifyln9 glass . ?
Thl$ watermaik In OW paper. which d be visible when held lght:
I I'll
Health
.'.
VITAl RECORD
;.... Tho _.witt\ hDat Sens11iwJ.4*.l ..:.
chlnsN dor Y4hen w#nnod with a ... lf9:r
\IA.titJIMWfM.ltiiM--
/ /
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 218 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
COPY
STATE OF NEW YORK
SUBDIVISION COUNTY OF NEW YORK
WITHIN THE CITY OF NEW YORK .
TO : STATE OF NEW YORK, Releasee
C/ 0 THE CLERK OF THE COUN"'Y OF NEW YORK
with Chapter 17-B New York State Estates- Powers and Trusts
Article 10 Section 9.2 Release ofapowerofappointment
IN RE : USUFRUCT "CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, cHRISTOPHER E. S1'R1.JMK..
FROM: Christopher Earl Strunk, in esse Releasor
.Exhibit A-
. . .
.. . ... . .
Dated:
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 219 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
COPY
STATE OF GEORGIA
SUBDIVISION COUNTY OF LAMAR -
TO : STATE OF NEW YORK, Releasee
CJO THE CLERK OF THE COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA liiiE
TOWN OF BARNESVILLE, GEORGIA with Chapter 17-B
State Estates, Powers and Trusts Article 10 Section 9.2 Releaseflftr.-.er.fl!f
appointment Sub-Section (c) Such may be delivered to any
person, other than the donee, who might be adversely affected by an
IN RE : USUFRUCf "CHRlSTOPHER EARL "CHRRSTTPHER. E. ST.It:li:!CK
FROM: Christopher Earl Strunk, in esse Releasor
... . ............... .
. - . . . . . ' . . . .
of the October lOJ2
Dated: Brooldyu, lfew York
. October
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 220 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit6
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 221 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Cbristopber-Earl: Strunk in esse "7 l a fA Jll...
S93VandorbiltAvonue-281 Brooklyn New York 11238 Index No.: l,.-1..: \., ..
.
Petitioner,
Petitioner designate
-against- The County of Kings as the
Place of trial.
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A- B!(>Oklyn, NY 11238
Gnce Meng of 14714 34th Avenue- Flushing. NY 11354
Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooklyn, NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio of442 lith Street- Brooklyn, NY 1121S
Walter Cooper ISO West 96th Street, #120- New York, NY 10025
KeltbLT. Wrlghtof222SFifthAvenue-NewYork,NY 10037
Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A- NowYork, NY 10001
William Thompson ofl06 West !21st Street- NewYork, NY 10027
S(ott Stringer of ISS West 71st Street, #3A- NewYork, NY 10023
Emily Gbkeof440Wcst24th S11<et- NewYorlc, NY 10014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Stn:et- Astoria, NY 11103
An:hie SpignerofiiZIO 17Sth S11<et- Jomak:a, NY 11433
George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street- Bronx, NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #6D- Bronx, NY 10473
Ken Jenklml08 Bushey Avenue- Yonkm,NY 10710
Mario Cilento ]Isabel Road -Orangeburg, NY 10962
. Genld D. Jennings ofl 13S New Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Roed- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morello of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
Seott Adams of!! Poplar Avenue-On:bardParlc, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Symcuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive -Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street - Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Respondent(s).
X
To the above-named Respondent(s):
The basis of venue is the
Petitioner's place to vote
NOTICE OF PETITION
YOU ARE HEREBY PETITIONED to answer the petition in this action and to serve a
copy of your answer, or, if the petition is not served with this notice, to serve a notice of
appearance, on the Petitioner within 20 days after the service of this Notice, exclusive of the day
_ i!l fll_ilure to_ ap_pear or be by
default for the relief demanded in the petition.
Strunk v JefFries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ;
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS Index No.: 2 Cj lf 8 2. 0 I '2.
New York 11238
Petitioner, VERIFIED PETITION
-against-
Hokeem Jeffries 35 Underltill Avenue, N2A- Brooklyn, NY 11238
GnoeMongofl4714 34thAvenue-Fiushing.NY113S4 FOR EQUITY RELIEF BY
Felix Ortiz 189833rdStreet-Brooklyn,NY 11232
BIIIDeBiasloof44211thStreet-Brooklyn,NY 1121S WRIT OF PROillBITION WITH
WalterCooper150West96thStreet,N12G-NewYork,NY 10025
Keith LT. Wrightof222SFifthAvenue-NewYork,NY 10037 TRO STAY, INJUNCTION AND
Christine C. Quinaof263WuttltAvenve,#3A-NewYork,NY 10001
Wftliam Tboinp5on ofl06 West !21st Street- NowYork, NY 10027 DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Seott Stringer of ISS 10023
Emily Gl!ke of440 West 24th Street- NewYork, NY 10014 .AS TO ELECTOP.AL COLLEGE
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY 11103
An:bleSplperofll210175thStreet-Jamaica,NYII433 . PUBLIC OFFICERS WITH U.S.
George Gresham 1313 East233rdStreet-Bronx,NY 10466
Raben Dlaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, Bronx, NY 10473 CONSTITUTION ART;l I Cl. Z
Kea Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonkers, NY 10710
Mario Cilento 31sabel Road- Orangeburg, NY 10962 AND VOID US SENATE ELECTION
Genld D. JeDaiap of 1135NewScotland Rood- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Browa 14 Blaine Stn:et- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Dany 164 Croydon Road- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Moreno of 133 DeerfieldDrive- Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adams of! I Poplar Avenue- Ordlard Parle, NY 14127
Stepb!lnie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bolioae J07Vanderbi11Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein I OJ Brandywine Drive -Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar29 Depot Stn:et- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Respondents.
-------------------------------x
Petitioner, Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse, a non-surety private natural-born U.S. Citizen self
represented without an attorney, as and for his Petition for a writ of prohibition with Temporary Restraining
Order {TRO) and pcnnanent injunction with a declaratory judgment as to U.S. Constitution Article 2 1
Clause 2 (A2S I C2) exclusive power the State legislature fonnation oft he New York electoral college that
under CPLR Article 78, the New York State Election Law Article 16-100 jurisdiction over Election Law
Article 12 and related law as applies to twenty-nine (29) U.S. Citizens to serve as Public Officer members of
the New York Electoral College after the November 6, 2012 General Election thru December 25, 2012; and
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETmON Page I of20
0
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
November IJ_, 2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk, in esse, Petitioner
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238.
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: chri!@struok we
To: Respondents as foUows:
Hakeem JefFries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A- Brooklyn, NY 11238
Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue-- Flushing, NY 11354
Felix Qrtiz 189 B 33rd Street-:- Brooklyn, NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio of 442 11th Street -- Brooklyn, NY 11215
Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #120- New York, NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue- New York, NY 10037
Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, #3A- New York, NY 10001
William Thompson of 106 West !21st Street- New York, NY 10027
Scott Stringer of I 55 West71st Street, #3A- New York, NY 10023
Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street- New York, NY I 0014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street- Astoria, NY Ill 03
Archie Spigner ofll21 0 I 75th Street- Jamaica,' NY 11433
GeorgeGresbam 1313 East 233rd Street- Bronx, NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #6D- Bronx, NY 10473
Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonkers, NY I07iO
Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road -Orangeburg, NY I 0962
Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road - Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adams ofll Poplar Avenue-- Orchard Park, NY 14127
Stephanie Miner I 02 Woodside Drive - Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY 11704
Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
2
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
that this Petition requests expedited emergency equity relief wilh a CPLR 7805 injunction with a stay of
New York Electoral College vote due by December 15, 2012 until the Court renders a declaratory judgment
on the issues of law under CPLR 7806 regarding U.S. Constitution: Article 2 in its entirety, especially
Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 3 (A2S1C3) as amended by the Article 7 Amendments the 12'", the 14'"
especially sections 3 and 4, the 20'", and the 25'" ; further, especially as to the U.S. Constitution Article 2
Section 1 paragraph 5 (A2S1C5) term of art "natural born Citizen" (NBC) natural law issue versus the Idiom
"born a citizen" positive law created by the New York Stale Board of Elections (NYS BOE); further, the
U.S. Constitution: Article 3 Section 3; Article 4; Article 6; and furthermore, related New York State law and
regulations as applies to the public officer oath, duties and obligation as applies with use of NYS Civil
Service Law 105, and that Petitioner seeks equity relief on six (6) issues of Law with Facts to the
misapplication and misadministration of Public Officer acts as relate to the December 5, 2008 Order and
Decision as a matter of State Law heard by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at I.A.S. Part 1 in the
Article 78 Petition with Kings County Index No.: 2008-2g641, and Complaint with Index No.: 2008 29642;
and also, Petitioner challenges the New York U.S. Senate Election as void ab initio with U.S. Constitution
Amendment 17 and NYS Constitution Article 3 7 grounds; and that based upon information and belief and
at all times hereinl\fter mentioned, with Imminent irreparable harm as time is of the essence and without
another forum for relief, alleges of captioned Respondents and related persons as follows:
1. Petitioner Christopher Earl: Strunk in esse, is a duly registered voter of the 64'" Election District
of the 57"' Assembly District (AD) and within the New York 8'" U.S. House District at 593 Vanderbilt
Avenue- 281 Brooklyn New York 11238 for ten years with email: chris@strunk.ws and cell phone 845-901
6767, and an enrolled member of the Republican Party who participaled at the November 6, 2012 General
Election there voted entirely for the Republican Party line of candidates with Wendy Long for US Senate.
2. On November 9, 2012, Petitioner duly served his COMPLAINT OF ATTEMPT TO COMMIT A
CRIME BY A PUBLIC OFFICER WITH NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST AN INJUNCTION IN
KINGS COUNTY WITH DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS (hereinafter the "COMPLAINT")
upon the respective County District Attorney (DA) withjurisdiction over the domicile of residence of the
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 2 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 222 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
respectilte Public Officer member of the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle Electoral College for a
total of 29 members variously domiciled in Fourteen (14) Counties that are now duly elected without
challenge on November 6, 2012, pending the NYS BOE final tally I canvassing by the end of November, all
serve as public officer electors to cast their votes by December 1S, 2012 and that then will be transmitted to
the U.S. Senate President Joseph Biden In a joint seating of the new Congress on January 3, 2013 take their
oath of office in the new Congress that there will select the next President I vice President of the United
States (POTUS) according to the 12th and 20th Amendments of A2S1C3.
3. That the criminal COMPLAINT affirms of each Public Officer in each domicile therein quote:
[each] Elector as part of the slate for Barack Obama and Joe Biden at the State of New York
November 6, 2012 General Election for choosing New York's candidate for the office of President
and Vice President of the United States (POTUS) by their vote cast by December 1S, 2012; and that
such Public Officers are to participate as a member of the State of Nei.v York electoral college
intending to vote for Barack Obama as if mandated by the State of New York legislature with
exclusive power afforded by Article 2 Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution with use of New York State
Election Law and related rules, McPherson v. Blacker 146 U.S. 1 (1892), with the proviso that no
Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification requirements of a federal officer
including office of POTUS, U.S. Term Limits Inc. v. Thornton S14 U.S. 779 (199S).
That in addition to the foregoing, Affirmant based upon Information and belief contends that Barack
Obama is guilty of forgery, spoliation, concealment intimidation of witnesses and racketeering in the
matter of his alleged Common Law citizen status as if a Native-born Citizen notwithstanding the
allegiance status of his parents rather than a Natural Law Natural-born Citizen born on soil to
married US citizen parents, nevertheless is a British Subject with dual allegiance at birth wherever
that was to the minor US Citizen mother In wedlock to a m'!jority aged British subject foreign alien
student were duly divorced on March 20, 1g64; and then when in the mother's custody
during her 2 marriage Barack Obama was adopted in Indonesia by his Indonesian Citizen steP"
father, Lolo Soetoro, who gave the name "SOEBARKAH" according to the U.S. State Department
record affirmed on the August 13, 1968 by Stanley Ann Soetoro; and thereafter as an Indonesian
Citizen SOEBARKAH (aka Barry Soetoro) reentered the USA in 1971 alone without a US Passport
to live with his grandmother who obtained foreign student funding, lllegally.obtained a stolen Social
Security Number no later than 1980, forged a Selective Service filing dated 1gao, and Inter alia in
furtherance of usurpation of the office of POT US no later than April 2S, 2011, according to more
than three experts, forged a Long Form Certificate of Birth as if of Hawaii.
That notwithstanding the citizenship status of Barack Obama, Affirmant contends that Barack
Obama has multiple allegiances despite taking an oath owing exclusive allegiance to the United
States, levies war against the People of the United States, adheres to their enemies ai-Qaida, Muslim
Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah, GOLEN Movement and Iran against the People of the United
States to establish the Caliphate from Thailand through Morocco, giving them aid and comfort
within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason; and that any candidate elector and or
public officer including ... who would aid and abet Barack Obama in usurpation of office of POT US
Tsnooessthan.giinty orm.sprfsioil'oHeJOny, sediiTonanCf - -- -- - -- - - --
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 3 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
6. On November 9, 2012; Petitioner had a person nota party to this suit serve a copy of the
COMPLAINT and NOTICE upon the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle Electoral College
Members for a total of 29 members in Fourteen (14) Counties individually as follows:
1. Andrew M. Cuomo 138 Eagle Street Albany, NY 12202
2. Gerald D. Jennings of 113S New Scotland Road-- Albany, NY 12208
3. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street-- Bronx, NY 10466
4. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of 820 Boyton Avenue, #6D Bronx, NY 10473
5. Byran Brown 14 Blaine Street Buffalo, NY 14208
G. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street-- Brooklyn, NY 11232
7. Hak.eem Jeffries 3S Underhill Avenue, #2A Brooklyn, NY 11238
B. Bill DeBlasio of 44211th Street-- Brooklyn, NY 1121S
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road Rochester, NY 14610
10. Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive .. Rochester, NY 14609
11. Tom DINapoli 100 Great Neck Road Great Neck, NY 11201
12. Eric Schneiderman 64S West End Avenue, #BF New York, NY 1002S
13. Walter Cooper 1SO West 96th Street, #12G-- New York, NY 1002S
14. Sheldon Silver of SSO Grand #SA New York, NY 10002
1S. Keith L.T. Wrightof222S Fifth Avenue- New York, NY 10037
16. Christine C. Quinn of 263 Ninth Avenue, #3A -- New York, NY 10001
17. William Thompson of106 West 121stStreet New York, NY 10027
18. Scott Stringer of 1S5 West71stStreet, #3A-- New York, NY 10023
19. Emily Giske of 440 West 24th Street .. New York, NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of 11 Poplar Avenue Orchard Park, NY 14127
21. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road Orangeburg, NY 10962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street Astoria, NY 11103
24. Grace Meng of 1.4714 34th Avenue .. Flushing, NY 113S4
2S. Archie Spigner of 11210 17Sth Street Jamaica, NY 11433
26. Steve.Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue West Babylon, NY 11704
27. I renO! Stein 101 Brandywine Drive .. Ithaca, NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street-- Middle Granville, NY 12849
29. Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue Yonkers, NY 10710
7. That Petitioner has been barred from filing any further suit without leave by the Order of Arthur M.
Schack J.S.C. in the fraud complaint Strunk v NYS BOE et al Index No.: 2011-6500 under penalty of
contempt against Public Officers:
Andrew M. Cuomo of 138 Eagle Street .. Albany, NY 12202
Tom DINapoli of100Great Neck Road Great Neck, NY 11201
. Eric Schneiderman 64S West End Avenue, #BF New York, NY 1002S
Sheldon Silver of S50 Grand Street, #SA New York, NY 10002
; and therefore, such named Public officers are not included herein unless by leave to do so.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 5 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
Based upon the foregoing subject there is a preponderance of evidence proving that the April 2S,
2011 forged public document is for the purpose of usurping the POTUS, and that were any New
York State Public Officer Electors to cast a vote a_iding abetting each crime the civil servant would
be an accessory after the fact to a felony under New York Penal Law; and as such Affirmant
provides due notice hereby as a matter of standing guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, NYS
Constitution, 18 U.S.C. 2381 through 2390 and related law, including but not limited to N.Y.S.
Election Law 16-100, N.Y.S. CPLR 7202 and N.Y.S. Civil Service Law 10S as applies to any
public officer misapplication and administration of laws; the same is true to my own knowledge,
except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters
I believe it to be true. The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and
belief are as follows: 3'' parties, books and records, and personal knowledge. "
4. That the respective County DA with jurisdiction over crimes of electors in each of fourteen counties
are: P. David Soares Albany District Attorney; Robert T. Johnson The Bronx District Attorney; Frank A.
Sedita, Ill Erie District Attorney; Charles J. Hynes District Attorney of Kings; Sandra Dooriey District
Attorney of Monroe; Kathleen M. Rice District Attorney of Nassau; Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. District Attorney of
New York; William J. Fitzpatrick District Attorney of Onondaga; Francis D. Phillips District Attorney of
Orange; Richard A. Brown District Attorney of Queens; Thomas J. Spota District Attorney of Suffolk; Gwen
Wilkinson District Attorney of Tompkins; Kevin C. Kortright District Attorney of Washington; Janet
DiFiore District Attorney of Westchester; and act Independently of this civil action.
S. On November 9, 2012, Petitioner duly served a NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78
PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
PENDING A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS (hereinafter known as
the "NOTICE'') upon the respective County District Attorney withjurisdiction over the domicile of
residence of the respective Public Officer member of the New York 2012 Presidential Election Cycle
Electoral College of 29 members in Fourteen (14) Counties got Notice that stated quote:
"Please take notice of Petitioner's intent to file an order to show cause application at the Kings County
Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the 10th Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday November
19, 2012 for a preliminary injunction relief pending a declaratory judgment on issues of law; e.g., Are
public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of POTUS and Ballot
access? Are public officers presented. with the facts of Barack Obama ineligibility able to change
qualifications before the Electoral ColiegeVotescheduled December 1S, 20127"
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 4 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
AS AND FOR THE FIRSTOUESTION THE NEW YORK ELECTION OF KIRSTEN
GILLIBRAND TO US SENATE IS VOID AB INITIO AS THE ELECTOR
QUALIFICATIONS ARE NOT EQUAL TO THAT OF THE NEW YORK ASSEMBLY
8. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 7
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that as and for the first question
the New York election held November 6, 2012 of Kirsten Gillibrand to the U.S. Senate from New
York is void ab initio as to elector qualifications are not equal to that of the New York Assembly .
9. Petitioner seeks to overturn New York's U.S. Senate election with U.S. Const. Amendment 17
"The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the
people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The elet;tors in each State shall
have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State
legislatures "
as the November 6, 2012 election for U.S. Senator from New York between Democrat Candidate
Kirsten Gillibrand and Republican Candidate Wendy Long was conducted for electors not meeting
the qualifications of a member of the Assembly with State Constitution Article 3 Section 7:
".No person shalf serve as a member ofthe.legi.<lature unless he or she Is a citizen of the United
States and has been a resident of the state of New York for five years, and, except as hereinafter
otherwise prescribed, of the assembly ... district for the twelve months immediately preceding his
or her election; .. or member of assembly at the first election next ensuing after a rea<!justrnent or
alteration of the . assembly districts becomes effective, a person, to be eligible to serve as such,
must have been a resident of the county in which the senate or assembly district is contained for
the twelve months immediately preceding his or her election . ... " (Emphasis added by Petitioner)
10. In addition to the above listed State Officers, Petitioner has also been barred from filing any further
suit without leave by the Order of Arthur M. Schack J.S.C. in the fraud complaint 5trunk v NYSBOE et al
Index No.: 2011-6SOO under penalty of contempt against other Public Officers and State entities:
The New York State Board of Ellection and its agents
The New York Secretary of State
City of New York among many other persons;
as such named Public officers and agencies are not included herein unless by leave to do so, Petitioner
wishes the Court to void the U.S. Senate Election and ask the Governor set a special election, because a
significant number of the electors casting their respective vote were domiciled in New York for less than
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 6 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 223 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
fives years and had not lived in their respective county of domicile for at least twelve months and there is no
way to determine the votes cast on Novemebr 6, 2012 of those qualified what candidate was voted for.
11. That Petitioner's right to suffrage, a republican form of govemement, Freedom and Liberty; are and
would be infringed were the election of US Senator not held void ab initio and that a new special election
held; and therefore, public officers yet name along with Respondent Kirsten Gillibrand of 15 West 26th
Street, Suite 4R, New York, NY 10010 with her present place of business at Washington, DC Office
478 Russell Washington, DC 20510, as a public officer has infringed my rights and acted contrary to the law
of the land with those yet named as each Respondent must either be sanctioned and barred from office and a
new special elelction arranged for qualified elelctors as soon as possible.
12. In addition to the US Senate Election, regarding the POTUS Election there are five _(5) categories of
elector public officers who are the respondents herein that each of whom have separate and or combined
issue questioned specifically as to each member of the respective categrory or jointly, and that based upon
information and belief and at all times hereinafter mentioned, Petitioner respectfully alleges a question of law
issue as to the captioned Respondents within each category of those public or quasi public officers with
fiduciary duty who were notified of an accessory crime in which each participates in, especially if their
respective vote is cast as an elector are:
a. The Electors who are Public Officers elected to Congress duty as to matter of law and facts.
b. The Electors who are Public Union trustees have fiduciary duty as to matter of law and facts.
c. The Electors who are Registered Lobbyists have fiduciary duty as to matter of law and facts.
d. All the Electors as Public Officers when notified of crime have duty as to the law and facts.
e. The Elector private person as an Elector Public Officer duty as to matter of Jaw and facts.
13. That Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR _7801 as to the nature of proceeding for relief
by writ of mandamus or prohibition that shall be obtained in a proceeding under this article is made for a writ
or order of prohibition, in which such reference shall, so far as applicable, be deemed to refer to the
. _ __ _
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 7 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et a f. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
17. Other than U.S. Constitution Article VI it does not specify the fonn of oath a Congressman is to take
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State
Legislatures, and all executive andjudicial Officers, botli of the United States and of the several
States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test
shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
and was a function of the respective state and federal law as in New York State Public Officer Law 10
requires every public officer to take and file an oath or affirmation prior to the discharge of any of their
official duties and to be certified to the clerk of the respective body . The form of the oath or affirmation Is
set forth in Article XIII, Section 1 of the New York State Constitution II)
18. That Petitioner's understanding of the Decision and Order of Justice Schmidt referenced above Is
that a New York Electoral College Elector is merely a private person not required to take an oath in New
York or elsewhere to uphold the State or Federal Constitution and as such may vote as a private person.
19. That Petitioner's New York State Assembly Representative of the 57"' AD Is presently Respondent
Hakeem Jeffries of 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A Brooklyn, NY 11238 and pending the final tally and
canvassing by the end of the month of November will also be the Elected member of the United States House
of Representatives from the New York 8"' House District
20. That Respondent Hakeem Jeffries intends as a House member to take his oath to uphold the State
and US Constitution on Janaury 3, 2013, intends to sit in the joint session of Congress thereafter to review
his own and other votes as an elector as a second bite of the apple despite the prohibltition by A2S1C2 to do
so; and intends so despite that Respondent has been given notice by Petitioner.
1
NYSCARTICLE XIII Public Officers [Oath of office: no other test for public office) Section 1. Members of the
legislature, and all officers, executive andjudicial, except such inferior officers as shall be by law exempted, shall,
before they enter on the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: "I do
solemnly swear (or affirm) that! will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of
New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of ...... , according to the best of my ability;" no
other oath, declaration or test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust, except that any
committee of a political party may, by rule, provide for equal representation of the sexes on any such committee, and a
state convention of a political party, at which candidates for public office are nominated, may, by rule, provide for equal
representation of the sexes on any committee of such party. (Amended by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and
. approved by vote _of the people November 8, 1938.)
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 9of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
14. That Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 7802 as to captioned Parties of electors listed
herein in part Is in keeping with the definition of "body or officer", and the expression "body or officer" that
includes every court, tribunal, board, corporation, officer, or other person, or aggregation of persons, whose
action may be affected by a proceeding under this article; and that Petitioner contends that Respondent
Electors have maliciously acted contrary to the prohibition in favor of another and where thiS proceeding is
brought to restrain the Electors Individually and as a body or officers from proceeding without or in excess of
jurisdiction in favor of another, the latter shall be joined as a party; and that Petitioner understands that other
interested persons In adequately represented by Petitioner actions herein by order of the court may direct that
notice of the proceeding be given to any person, and may allow other interested persons to intervene were it
not to pr'!,judice the emergency nature of this action.
15. In addition to the above question Petitioner pursuant to the requirements of CPLR 7803
raises Questions that may be raised in a proceeding under this article that are as follows:
AS AND FOR THE SECOND OUEST ION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS HAKEEM
JEFFRIES AND GRACE MENG AS TO NEW U.S. HOUSE MEMBERS AND
ELECTORS WITH A DUTY AS TO A MATTER OF LAW AND FACTS ARE IN
CONFLICT WITH A2S1C2 AS SUCH PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED ARE
BARRED ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE REVIEW AFTER JANUARY 2, 2013.
16. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained In the Introduction and para-graphs 1 thru 15
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers Respondent
Hakeem Jeffries and Respondent Grace Meng as to new U.S. House members and Electors with a duty as to
matter of law and facts are In conflict with U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 2, i.e. A2S1C2
states "Each Stale shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Nzimber of
Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be
entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of
Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector." as such persons
similarly situated are barred Electoral College vote review after January 2, 2013.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 8 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
21. Respondent Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue Flushing, NY 11354 Is a American lawyer
holding an office of trust and profit and Is a member of the New York State Assembly, representing the 22nd
assembly district in Flushing, Queens, New York, and pending the final tally and canvassing by the end of
November will also be the Elected member of the United States House of Representatives from the New
York 6"' House District.
22. That the Respondent Grace Meng as a House member takes her oath to uphold the State and U.S.
Constitution before Janaury 3, 2013, and then intends to sit in the joint session of Congress thereafter to
review her own and other votes as an elector as a second bite of the apple despite the prohibitition by
A2S1 C2 .to do so; and intends so despite that Respondent has been given notice by Petitioner.
23. That arguendo re A2S1C2, "hut no Senator or Representative. or Persall holding an Office of
. Trust or Profit under the United States shall he aPPointed an Elector" use is still with the original meaning
and intent despite the addition of the 12"', 14"', 16"' and 20"' Amendments notwithstanding; and that the
original use before ratification of the 14"' amendment considered each State of the several States was
sovereign and not subservient to the USA in regards to the enforcement of the Bill of Rights applied to the
Federal entity that was properly tanned ..1liJ!g United States not as now tenned after ratification of the '14"'
Amendment (1868) became the singular United States, as each State of the several States beeame and now
remain subservient along with every state citizen therein placed under USAjurisdictlon per se; and
24. Further arguendo re original use of A2S1 C2, "but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding
an Office ofT rust or Profit under the United States shall he aPPointed an Elector" includes any state
officer and or public officer accordingly, and that the same meaning for "Senator" who was appointed by the
respective State legislature before the 17"' Amendment as the representative of the respective State is then
and now intended to equate that relationship to every House member even though elected by State Citizens
privileged to vote, and therefore also equates to every "Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit" too,
and therefore includes every Public officer, in any state or federal jurisdiction, all except a private person per
se; and .
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 10 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 224 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
25. Furthermore arguendo re the issues of law with Facts pertaining to the misapplication and
misadministration of Public Officer acts in 2012 as relate to the December 5, 2008 Order and Decision as a
matter of State Law heard by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at I.A.S. Part 1 in the Article 78
Petition with Kings County Index No.: 200829641 as amatter of the Federal law of the Land A2S1C2 still
un-amended is that the only interpretation of State law involved in the Order and Decision of Dec.ember 5,
2008 by the Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. must be In keeping with the exclusive power, McPherson v.
Blacker 146 U.S. 1 (1892), of the New York State Legislature in its plenary formation of the New York
electoral college may not change the meaning of A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 at best would have to be a retiring
public officer to serve as an elector but make any "Person holding an OUics of Trust or Profit" after
January 2, of the year following the general election of the POTUS ineligible and as such the member of the
respective Electonil College is to be a private U.S. Citizen under Federal jurisdiction as an elector is a public
officer per se who votes by no later than December 25, 2012 every four years and when the joint seating of
Congress convenes on January 3, 2013 the next year and every four years thereafter until there is a
amendment to the quasi Federal officer status of an elector means that without an amendment, no State and
or Congress may change the eligibility requirements of a Federal officer includes the elector as well as that
of POTUS with A2S1C5, U.S. Term Limits Inc. v. Thornton 514 U.S. 779 (1995).
26. A State Officer and local officer as public officers hold an office of trust, and that persons registered
with a privilege from the State such as an attorney, union trustee, lobbyist hold an office of trust for profit.
21: That were Respondents Grace Meng, Hakeem Jeffries and or anyother person similarly situated
according to A2S1C2 who are officers of the State while acting as electors and as persons holding an office
of trust or profit to review their own vote in Congress after Janaury 2, 2013 and also be an elector would
infringe Petitioner's right to suffrage, a republican form of govemement, Freedom and Liberty; and
therefore, Respondents_ acts as public officers is and would be contrary to the law of the land as each
Respondent must either be barred from voting or office and or if done be referred for criminal action.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 11 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
as an elector despite the prohibltition by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 to do so; and Intends to proceed as an elector
to vote by December 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
33. That Respondent Scott Adams is a incumbent elected director of UAW Region 9 with Local 686
Local 774 Local 1069 Loca11097 Local 2300 Local 3303 to participate as a member of the State of New
York electoral college
34 .. That Respondent Scott Adams is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as a
quasi Public Officer as a "Person ltolding an 0/lice of Trust or Profit" who has a conflict of interest
as an elector despite the prohibitition by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elector
to vote by December 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
35. That were Public Union Fiduciary Respondents and any other similar representative similarly
situated to cast a vote a POT US candidate that Is not eligible for POTUS would infringe Union member trust
and similarly private US citizens like right to suffrage, republican form of govemement,
Freedom and Liberty; and therefore, their action as public officers is contrary and should lead to removal
from their office and or disbanning the respective union and return of alii union member funds.
AS AND FOR THE FOURTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO ARE
THE ELECTORS WHO ARE REGISTERED LOBBYISTS HAVE FIDUCIARY
DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW AND FACTS ARE QUASI PUBLIC OFFICERS
WITH A FIDUCIARY DUTY ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE POTUS ELIGIBILITY
QUALIFICATIONS OF A2S1C5 AND ARE IN CONFLICT WITH A2S1C2 AND
ARE BARRED FROM SUCH VOTE AS A BREACH OF A FIDUCIARY DUTY TO
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
36. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 35
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers who are the
electors 111/ho are registered lobbyists have fiduciary duty as to matters of law and facts are quasi
public officers with a fiduciary duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications of
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 13 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
AS AND FOR THE THIRD QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO ARE THE
ELECTORS WHO ARE PUBLIC UNION TRUSTEES WHO HAVE A FIDUCIARY
DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW AND FACTS ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE
POTUS ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATIONS OF A2S1C5 AND ARE IN CONFLICT
WITH A2S1C2 AND ARE BARRED FROM SUCH VOTE AS A BREACH OF A
FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THEIR MEMBERSHIP AND PEOPLE OF NEW YORK
28. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 27
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers who are the
electors who are public union trustees have a fiduciary duty as to matters of law and facts attempt
to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications of A2S1 C5 are in conflict with A2S1 C2, are
barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to their membership and People of the State of
New York.
29. That Respondent George Gresham is a incumbent elected President of 1199 SEIU United
Healthcare Workers East to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college.
30. That Respondent George Gresham is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as
a qusai Public Officer as a "Person holding an Offlce of Trust or Profit" who has a conflict of interest
as an elector despite the prohibitition by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elelctor
tovote by Decmber 15, 2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
31. That Respondent Mario Cilento is a incumbent elected President of the New York State AFL-CIO
by the organization's Executive Council to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral
college.
32. That Respondent Mario Cilento is a registered fiduciary operating with the state of New York as a
qusai Public Officer as a "Person Ito/ding all Offlce o(Tmst or Profit' who has a conflict of interest
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 12 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
A2S1 C5 and are in conflict with A2S1C2, are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary
duty to the People of the State of New York
37. That Respondent Emily Giske is a incumbent government affairs specialist based in New York with
extensive experience In Albany and New York City. She has lobbied for corporations, financial institutions,
not-for-profit entities and local municipalities including Las Vegas gambling interests lobbyist to participate
as a member ofthe State of New York electoral college.
38. That Respondent Emily Giske is a lobbyist with the state of New York as a qusai Public Officer as
a "Person holding an Offlce of Trust or Profit" who has a conflict of interest as an elector despite the
prohibitition by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 to do so; and intends to proceed as an elector to vote by Decmber 15,
2012 despite Notice to Respondent by Petitioner.
39. That were a Lobbyist registered in New York and any other similar representative similarly situated
to cast a vote a POTUS candidate that is not eligible for POTUS would infringe the trust due the People of
New York as similarly to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom and Liberty.
And therefore their action as public officers is contrary and should lead to removal of Respondents license,
order fines levied under State Lobbying law, and crimnal investigation.
AS AND FOR THE FIFTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO also are
AN ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFICER ALSO HAVE DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF
LAW AND FACTS ABSENT A VIOLATION OF LAW MAY NOT VOTE FOR
WHOM THEY WISH BY CHANGING THE ELIGIBILITY OF POTUS.
40. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the Introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 39
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that all public officers holding more
than one public officer job for pay excluding a commissiol]er of deeds or notary public with a fiduciary
duty attempt to change the POTUS eligibility qualifications are in conflict with A2S1C2 and
A2S1 C5 and are barred from such vote as a breach of a fiduciary duty to the People of the State of
New York; and
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 14 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 225 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
41. That each Elector is mandated by the State of New York legislature with exclusive power afforded
by A2S1C2 and A2S1C5 with use of New York State Election Law and related rules, McPherson v. Blacker,
146 U.S. 1 {1892), with the proviso that no Public Official may change the eligibility and or qualification
requirements of a federal officer including that of office of POT US, U.S. Tenn Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514
U.S. 779 (1995) as apply to each respondent below:
42. That Respondent Robert Duffy is the incumbent 76th Lieutenant Governor of New York to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
43. That Respondent Keith LT. Wright is a incumbent Member of the New York State Assembly
from the 70th district to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
44. That Respondent Stephanie Miner is a incumbent53rd Mayor of the city of Syracuse New York to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
45. That Respondent Sheila Comar .is a. incumbent elected Executive committee chair of the New York
State Democratic Committee to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
46. That Respondent Joseph Morelle is a incumbent member of the New York State Assembly
representing the 132nd Assembly District, which includes eastern portions of the City of Rochester and the
Monroe County suburbs of Irondequoit and Brighton to participate as a member of the State of New York
electoral college
47. That Respondent Christine C. Quinn is a Speaker of the New York City Council
representing District 3 to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
48. That Respondent Ruben Diaz, Jr. is a incumbent President of the Borough of the Bronx in New
York City to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
49. That Respondent Ken Jenkins is a incumbent Westchester County 16th District legislator, and was
elected again Chairman of The Board of Legislators to participate as a member of the State of New York
electoral college
member of the State of New York electoral college
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 15 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
b. That Tom DiNapoli is a incumbent 54th Comptroller of the state of New York to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college and was notified of POTUS ineligibility as
the NYS Attorney General and an elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded to vote.
c. That Sheldon Silver is a incumbent Member of the New York State Assembly from th.e 64th
district and speaker of the assembly to participate as a member of the State of New York
electoral college and was notified of POTUS ineligibility as the NYS Attorney General and an
elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded anyway to vote.
d. That Eric Schneiderman is a incumbent 65th Attorney General of New York to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college
60. That all the above named Public Officer Respondents as the body and or its officers with
the expressed exception of private US Citizens as electors that failed or are about to perform a duty
enjoined upon it by the law of the land as to the requirement to conform to U.S. Constitution Article
2 Section 1 Paragraph 5 as to the eligibility requirements for any candidate for the office of the
POTUS;and
61. That the named Respondents as the body and or its officers that proceeded, and is
proceeding or Is about to proceed without or in excess of jurisdiction to allow violation of NBC
Eligibility; and
62. That the named Respondents as the body and or its officers that proceeded, and is
proceeding or is about to proceed despite the warning of the misprision of felony sedition and
treason are to be referred for criminal investigation and removal from office under New York Civil
Service Law Section 105;
63. That Respondent public officers as Elector Public Officers have duty as to matter of law and facts
and when in violation of law must be held accountable or would infringe the trust due the People of New
York as simi lariy to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom and Liberty.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 17 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
51. That Respondent Felix Ortiz is a incumbent representing New York's 51st Assembly District to
participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
52. That Respondent Anne Marie Anzalone is a incumbent appointed Chief of staff to Representative
Joe Crowley of the 7th New York Congressional District to participate as a member of the State of New
York electoral college
53. That Respondent William Thompson is a incumbent selected by the NYS Governor to head NYC's
Battery Park City Authority to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
54. That Respondent Scott Stringer is a incumbent 26th Borough President of Manhattan to participate
as a member of the State of New York electoral college
55. That Respondent Bill DeBlasio is a incumbent New York City elected official, holding the citywide
office of New York City Public Advocate to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral
college
56. That Respondent Byron Brown is a incumbent mayor of Buffalo, New York to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college
57. That Respondent Gerald D. Jennings is a incumbent mayor of Albany, New York to participate as
a member of the State of New York electoral college
58. That Respondent Archie Spigner is a incumbent District Leader for the 29th A.D. - Part A, and
Executive Member of the Guy R. Brewer United Democratic Club to participate as a member of the State of
New York electoral college
59. That although the following public officers are being questionably protected by the enormity of
Justice Schack invidious Infringement of Petitioner basic rights otherwise protected by the US Constitution
and 14'" Amendment guarantees and related State law with an order and decision taken on appeal case 2012-
5515 filing pending, the following public officers would be effected by a Court decision herein as follows:
a. That Andrew M. Cuomo is a incumbent 56th Governor of New York to participate as a member
__ o!_!he New ineJigi_l>iiity a_s__th_!!__NY_?_
Attorney General and an elector in the 2008 Electoral College proceeded to vote.
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 16 of 20
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
AS AND FOR THE SIXTH QUESTION AS TO PUBLIC OFFICERS WHO AS THE
ELECTOR PRIVATE PERSON WITHOUT ANOTHER PUBLIC OFFICE AS AN
ELECTOR PUBLIC OFFICER ALSO HAVE DUTY AS TO MATTERS OF LAW
AND FACTS BUT ABSENT A VIOLATION OF LAW MAY VOTE FOR WHOM
THEY WISH.
64. Petitioner repeats each and every allegation contained in the introduction and paragraphs 1 thru 63
with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length; and that public officers who as the
Elector private person without another public office as an Elector Public Officer also have duty as to matterS
of law and facts but when absent a violation of law may vote for whom they wish.
65. That Respondent Irene Stein is a candidate past super delegate in the 2008 Democratic presidential
nomination and wife of Peter Stein the Tomkins County legislator for the 11th District to participate as a
member of the State of New York electoral college
66. That Respondent Walter Cooper is a candidate in an individual capacity as a citizen of New York
to participate as a member of the State of New York electoral college
67. The Elector private person as a US Citizen without another public office as an Elector Public Officer
also have duty as to matter of law and facts and when in violation of law must be held accountable or would
infringe the trust due the People of New York as similarly to Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of
govemement, Freedom and Liberty.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner wishes a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction
hearing, and Declaratory judgment under CPLR 7806 and permanent injunction against the
Respondents of each category and such other relief as the Court deems just including a TRO Order:
a. A hearing on the legal issues as to the void ab initio US Senate Election in New York ..
b. A hearing on the issues of facts as to forgery, sedition and treason.
c. A hearing on the issues of the actual historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen held by
the State of New York from before and after the 1776
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 18 of 20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 226 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
d. That Public Officers elected to Congress and as a public officer electors be barred from
reviewing the elector votes in keeping to the mandates of the law of the land
e. That based upon a review of the facts associated with the forgery of public documents to
facilitate usurpation of the office ofPOTUS that Electors be given notice of their being
held as an accessory after the fact to a forgery crime that would be referred for criminal
proceeding.
f. That based upon a review ofthe facts associated with the allegation of misprision of
felony sedition and treason that Electors be given notice of their being held as an
accessory after the fact to a felony, sedition and warned of treason per se crime that
would be referred for criminal proceeding.
g. That electors be instructed as to the actual historical meaning of Natural Born Citizen
held by the State. ofNew York from before and after the 1776 issuance of the
Declaration oflndependence and with the proviso that were a Public Officer other than
an independent elector per se to attempt to change the eligibility of a federal officer
would be held in civil contempt in breach of public officer duties.
lt. And for further and different relief as the Court may deem necessary herein.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
November /g-t 2012
{))!_____
Christopher-Earl: Strunk, in esse, Petitioner
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238.
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: chris@strunk.ws
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 19 of20
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Christopher-Earl : Strnnk in esse
593 VanderbiltAvenue-281 BrooklyJiNewYork 11238
-against-
'
Petitioner,
Hakeem Jeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, t2A- Brooklyn. NY 11238
Grace Meng ofl4714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
Ftli1t Ortiz 189B33n1St=t-Brooklyn.NY 11232
Bill DeBlasio 11thSt=t- Brooklyn. NY 11215
WolterCooper1SOWest96th Street,#l2G-NewYortc,NY 10025
Keith L.T. Wright of2225 Fifth Avenue- NewYortc, NY.10037
Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue, fJA- NewYortc, NY 10001
WUiiam Thompson ort06 West I 21st Street- NewYork. NY 10027
Scott Stringer oft 55 West #3A -New York, NY 10023
Emily Glske of440 West 24th Street- NewYortc, NY 10014
Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th St=t- Astoria, NY I I 103
ArtbieSpignerof 11210 I 75th Street-Jamalca. NY 11433
Geor&eGresham 1313 East233nl St=t-Bronx,NY 10466
Ruben Diaz, Jr. of820 Boyton Avenue, #6D- Bronx. NY 10473
Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonkers, NY 10710
Mario CDcnto 3 Isabel Road- Orangeburg, NY 10962
Gerald D. Jenninga of 1135 NewScotlond Road- Albany, NY 12208
Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street- Buffalo, NY 14208
Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road- Rochester, NY 14610
Joseph Morelle of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
Scott Adomsofll Pop1arAvenue-On:hardPartc,NY 14127
Stephanie Miner I 02 Woodside Drive - Syracuse, NY 13224
Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue- West Babylon, NY I 1704
Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive- Ithaca, NY 14850
Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849; and
Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washiligton, DC 20510


NOTICE OF PETIDON
PETITION
PETITION VERIFICATION AFFIDAVIT
Index No.:
Ch 18tbt,.ldttl: Stntnk. in"- PotitiD!Wt
self-represent without being an attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281,
Brooklyn, New York 11238.
(845) 901-6767 E-mail: cbrir@strunk ws
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County
PETITION VERIFICATION AFFIDAVIT
STATEOFNEWYORK )
)ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Accordingly,l, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of
perjury:
I have read the foregoing Petition with six (6) questions at issue against each category of
Respondent Public Officers and Elector$ in their official capacity and or individually as against the
unlawful misadministration and misapplication ofNew York Public Officers in the conduct of the
General Election ofNovember 6, 2012 in the election of US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand that is void
ab initio, and in which Petitioner wishes a writ of prohibition with Temporary Restraining Order
and permanent injunction with a Declaratory Judgment equity relief under jurisdiction of the CPLR
Article 78 in conjunction with the New York State Election Law Article 16-100 requires
emergency equity relief with a CPLR 7805 injunction with stay ofNew York Electoral College
vote due by December 15,2012, and a declaratory judgment under CPLR 7806 as time is of the
essence with irreparable harm; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters
therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.
The grounds of my beliefs as to all matters not stated upon information and belief are as follows: 3rd
""'"'"""""""""''"""'"""'""""''"' % E
Chriatopher-Earl: Strunk
ARNOLO I. TISHFIELD ... "" .......
Notary Public State Of New York:
No.41-4611662
Owillfied In .Ouaens County
Certified In KJngs County
__ _ ___ _
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's PETITION Page 20 of20
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 227 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 7
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 228 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
NEWYORK STATE SUPREME COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
Christopher Earl Strunk in esse
Petitioner
v.

Zt"1'i8/Jz
I. HakeomJeffries 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A --Brooklyn, NY 11238
2. Bill DeBlasio of 442 lith Street- Brooklyn, NY 11215
3. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street- Brooklyn, NY 11232
+ J tte.mnw nf!lli'!Ri5wu idlmh x .U.OO:
5. Gerald D. Jennings of 1135 New Scotland Road - Albany, NY 12208
6. George Gresham 1313 East233n1Street--Bronx, NY 10466
7. RubenDiaz,Jr. of820BoytonAvenue,#6D- Bronx, NY 111473
8. Byron Brown 14BiaineStreet-Bufl'alo,NY 14208
9. Robert Duffy 164CroydonRoad-Rochester,NY 14610
10. Joseph Monolte of 133 Deerfield Drive- Rochester, NY 14609
.11. 'fomDimpoh IWGteatNeCiR6dd-Gil!&tNetk;ln 11201
liJik;Mt J(l(t!j
13. 10025
J4. &lclduaSHvCJofSSOGiin.asuaa;sA lfevc ldfk,Ni J\1002
IS. KeithL.T. Wrightof2225FifthAvenue-NewYork,NY 10037
16. Christine C. QuiM of263 Ninth Avenue,II3A- NewYork, NY 10001
17. WilliamThompsonoft06West 121stStreet- NewYork, NY 10027
18. ScottStringerofiSSWest7tstStreet,#3A-NewYork, NY 10023
19. EmilyGiskeof440West24thStreot-NewYork,NY 10014
20. Scott Adams of !I PoplarAvenue-OtchardPark, NY 14127
21. Stophanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive- Syracuse, NY 13224
22. Mario Cilento 3 Isabel Road- prangeburg, NY 10962
23. Anne Marie Anzalone 2827 48th Street - Astoria. NY Ill 03
24. Grace Meng ofl4714 34th Avenue- Flushing, NY 11354
25. ArehieSpigneroft1210 17SthStreet-Jamaica,NY 11433
26. Steve Bellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue:.. West Babylon, NY 11704
27. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive -lf!laca, NY 14850
28. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street- Middle Granville, NY 12849
29 . Ken Jenkins 108 Bushey Avenue- Yonker>, NY 10710 < trr;) n. L
3e- l<tP.<i"'"e'l" c;n ... t'COf'l"leG' .,..10 ,.v.cret.
Respondents w /ISHrNGTOl.J '()L
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ARTICLE 78 PETITION WITH AN ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING A
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ON ISSUES OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
Please take notice of Petitioner's intent to me an order to show cause application at the Kings
County Supreme Court Building at 11 AM on the 10"' F1oor intake at 360 Adams Street on Monday
November 19, 2012 for a prelimimuy injunction relief pending a declaratory judgment on Issues of
law; e.g., Are public officers to be held liable as accessories to felonies in usurpation of Office of
POTUS and Ballot access? Are public officers presented with the facts of Barack Obama ineligibility
able to change qualifications before the Electoral College Vote scheduled December 15, 2012?
A 'PJ>F .$te? !
For further information Contact :
----
I'' Brooklyn New York 11238
Cellphone: 845901-6767
Email: cbris@strunk.ws
Felix Ortiz
189 B 33rd Street -
Brooklyn, NY 11232

... J
U.S. Postal S!!rviee
:CER'l'IFIE:D MAIL,. RECEIPT
U..a.WOtrJ)It N'Dior.t.ln10P<"
U.s. Postal s;rvlcf!,. - - <- - '
CERTIFIED 'MAIL,. RECEIPT

Slrunk" lll.Articlc 78 NYSSC lorKif\!!.5 Cc11nty liii!Jex No.; 2194S 12012
STATROFNEWYORK )
)ss.
COUNTY )
. .
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
r, H. Willimn Van Allen, being duly sworn, Wld lillY under pellli.tty of petjury:
a. J\lnt!NU ..
!:



roP}' of thor NOTI<m or
PETI'l'ION, PETITlOH wJth AFPIDAVIT OF VERIFlCATIOlf iillirmed N""''mtbtlr .13, 2002 wang 1\itba
NOTJCEOFINTf'..NT TO FILRAN ()RJlERTO SHOW CAUSE AI'I'Ll(::.\TlON' FOR A J'RELI.MINAR\'
INJUNCTION l'tNOilSlw A DECL\IUTOR\' lNJIJNC.,"TTON ON ISSU OF LAW AS 1'0 F.I.RCTORS
- Dt(:J.AMTOR\" lltt..J.:F ,\$TO NQtiee intttn tt> rile,,. i!ttll!t' 1" !>bllW
llPII1icatJonl!lt.lhe Ki"l!!I.Ct>l!nl}' Cal.>ttBilildi:ng At 10 A'Mon to lill.<illt .M::)(iUAdNM
Momtny 1'!9...mll<lr 19, :Wic2 J)lad1111 a (9t'tlf!ltte In a p!ijf>Orly l!ddrmilid ro Molt ll!MdlJ<tlow fur
dcl;Yi!l)l D> Oiii'S tl)1.:nlt\l:d m.n.l! "ilh l'f"Mt fui m:d"t forproor <>I . . ,
.t :;:d
in tl!<>_l_o\\""'lrlt Wjlb
l,
2, <:'MfAA:NoJtlllUHIIOO(lllt14!ffll9
:\
4. NY 1111'
WalttrOooj>e.r 9qlh Sltlilit, !1120- N<!w 1002$ t.oMIIII. No
<i. !!JI}J'i Nii
7.
It 10021
.,, 1002>

U.
H, UH\ CMIRRNv'rolli1Ultl(l006t;:r4.Y'J6)
14, Rubc!g Dlu.Jr.l>!'IOO NY tCII'iJ: CMfilii Nu
t5. &!UJI!fttdlli: 103 NY 1071!} CMi
.t6.
!7, lUll!! CMERRN<>11llllniO!IOOIISi-4
1
.1'rnl
IS, -ll)'mtr NY CMt RRXQ l'lll.ll'l!OOO!Y;B14\ll!!t1.
W. llt1bm Dall)' ltili Rl>all- l\'Y I46Jn C::\1 t ltR so
2tJ.
ll.. Hlt1
112$1


eM:IiltN<>.wt:lttimoooo&-;4ms
2$. Slltll# Ulmat29 Dqli>!Si!M- Mfa& firntw:llit, NY l;!&tll; t:tli I RRIW 'nll21fil001l0!1111-t911.U
26. h:lmtttGmlbl'ilad wl!b!JC Ollic;;4'1ltllulli0ll Wl!lllll.;a:.m. OC ,05W
- "-
Sworn t(}bcforemc Wllfll.llli Vli!lAlten
-:>ffiovemtwr
C\.11.,...e,. Q

Emily Giske ----=:J
440 West 24th Street ...... - ..
New York, NY 10014
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 229 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Robert DuffY
164 Croydon Road-
Rochester, NY 14610
=-u.s. Servic<H.
'CERTIFIED MAIL,. RECEIPT

U:s: Postal Servlce,.
'CERTIFIED MAlt.:, RECEIPT
(/JQmnti<JMtllt7trfr;#<>lmw-C"'''O'!P< fll'klil
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed: 01/07/2013 Page 230 of 314
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

o
f

T
h
e
F
o
g
b
o
w
.
c
o
m
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012
Christopher-Earl: Strunk's AFFIDAVIT in support of OSC
Exhibit 8
USCA Case #13-5005 Document #1413882 Filed