Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 276

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Petitioner,
Versus Case # 2014-05468


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF AN

and ORDER TO SHOW

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State CAUSE WITH TRO
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.
AND STAY
Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )
Accordingly, I, Christopher Earl Strunk in esse Sui juris secured beneficiary agent for
debtor trust transmitting utility CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK Plaintiff and as the
Executor public officer for the Express Deed in Trust for the United States of America,
being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:

1. That Petitioner subscribes to this affidavit in support of his CPLR Article 78
Petitioner under CPLR 506(b)(1) to be initiated by application for an Order to Show Cause
with TRO and Stay as time is of the essence with irreparable harm in the matter of the
Honorable David I. Schmidt J.S.C. refusal to sign a subpoena in preparation for trial with
the pre-trial-conference scheduled for 13 June 2014 for the Case with Index 29642-2008 and
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 1 of 12
delayed in any decision on motions taken on submission on 28 March
( ) 1
to allow completion
of service nunc pro tunc, inclusion of the constitutional issue of the Board of Elections
outrageous change for qualifications for a candidate to run for the Office of President or
Vice President of the United States (POTUS), and that both related cases be combined at
the Trial scheduled for June 18, 2014 for the Petition with Index No.: 21948-2012.
2. That on 13 May 2014, I filed Judicial Notice
( ) 2
, for among other things, required of
CPLR 3101(d) provision of expert testimony of Michael Shrimpton (see Exhibit A); and
3. As such on May 30, 2014, I appeared on the Motion shown as Exhibit A, with the
Assistant NYS Attorney General and the Attorney for the NYC BOE before the Honorable
David I. Schmidt J.S.C. at PART 47 inter alia in the matter of the requirement under CPLR
3101(d) to establish the "EXPERT" qualifications of a person called to testify to give
evidence at trial at least 20 days before the pre-trial hearing June 13, 2014. The Justice
Schmidt discussed the merits of the nature of the Expertise of Mr. Shrimpton and no
opposition was given by opposing counsels; and I emphasized that Mr. Shrimpton's expert
uniqueness as a world expert for the United Kingdom relates to use of HIS DNA process;
and that the Justice asked the opposing counsels to comment and there were no comments.
4. To emphasize the urgency to take testimony, I also stated to the Court in summary
what Donald Trump said on Tuesday 27 May 2014 at the National Press Club
( ) 3
about
there being three (3) scenarios for which Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) was (1) born in

1
http://www.scribd.com/doc/212515572/CES-NOM-and-Aff-in-Support-of-2nd-NOM-to-
Renew-and-Reargue-Service-w-Exhibits-and-Supplement-to-the-Complaint-29642-2008

2
http://www.scribd.com/doc/223842372/CONFORMED-Plaintiff-s-NOM-for-Judicial-
Notice-With-CPLR-3101d-and-Status-w-Exhibits-NYS-SC-for-Kings-County-Index-no-
29642-2008-FILED-5-13

3
http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/05/video-trump-unloads-3-reasons-obama.html

Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 2 of 12
Africa, or (2) born in Hawaii, and or (3) BHO decided to claim birth in Africa (as done in his
autobiography DREAMS FROM MY FATHER of 1995 and used by his publisher in book
sales for 16 years) so gaming the system and supposedly so a US Citizen could get a foreign
student loan; and further, being polite, I did not comment on how vulnerable Mr. Trump is
in regards to his offshore accounts with Medium Term Notes Trading - that sometimes goes
by the name of Private Placement Programs or High Yield Investment Programs or
Debenture Trading Programs; and furthermore, that being so, Mr. Trump will ONLY go so
far in his statements because his large investments are at risk just as those of many
Congressmen similarly situated with offshore investments as with Romney in 2012; and
5. That Petitioner contends there is a fourth scenario that neither Mr. Trump nor his
counterparts on the Central Committees of the Democratic and Republican Party will
discuss, is that a foreigner born in 1960 in Africa without a birth certificate of record from
the tribe where he lived was adopted by a sham marriage for political convenience between
Barack Hussein Obama Senior and Stanley Ann Dunham in February 1961, done in
preparation to bring over to Seattle Washington the African bastard child of the Mau Mau
ambassador without portfolio Barack Hussein Obama Senior who was fawned over by the
American subversive elite, and who by September 1961 BHO Junior lived with Mrs.
Stanley Ann Obama then attending the University of Washington before returning to
Hawaii; and most certainly I firmly reject BHO's assertion that his mother was Ann
Dunham as there is no doubt BHO failed the DNA test and is NOT related to any member
of the Dunham family.
6. In regards to the Judicial notice motion of May 13, 2014, Justice Schmidt issued a
slip order that stated "Plaintiff filed this motion to give notice that he has an expert. He does
not seek other relief. Notice is taken." (see Exhibit B);
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 3 of 12
7. Further I did challenge Justice Schmidt while there in court, and hereby challenge
based upon the actual relief requested in the Motion page 4 shown in Exhibit A, quote
Wherefore, Plaintiff wishes an order of the Court granting the pending
motions; and with the importance of the herewith Judicial Notice that it grant
other and different relief as the Court deems necessary for justice herein in
sufficient time to allow preparation for the June 13, 2014 Pre-trial conference
and June 18, 2014 non jury trial.

8. And as such, I challenge the Judges contention that there was no other request for
relief, and that I did request before opposing counsels, that Judge Schmidt sign my
subpoenas to prepare for trial on June 18, 2014 and to wit Judge Schmidt flatly said he
would not sign a subpoena without even requesting the nature of each (see Exhibit C).
9. However notwithstanding the narrow nature of the notice taken with this decision
by Justice Schmidt shown as Exhibit B, my expert witness Michael Shrimpton, for whom I
have sponsored with the United States State Department for a temporary visitors visa from
June 17 thru June 21 to testify here at trial, is using the signed order during his VISA
interview at our U.S. Embassy in London on Monday 2 June 2014 to obtain his visa before I
am able to file my Note of Issue by June 13, 2014 to coincide with the June 18, 2014 trial.
10. That I emphasize herein that the usurper BHO administration and his treasonous
Jesuit coadjutor John Brennan down at Langley are opposing a visa be issued for Mr.
Shrimpton and we got such intelligence by unnamed parties in April, and in preparation for
such battle I wrote to several Congressmen among whom are shown in Exhibit D; and I
further urged Mr. Shrimpton repair the supposed rift as if there were one between he and
Lord Christopher Monckton, and on 1 May 2014 both appeared on a radio TRUNEWS
interview together to announce their agreement and need for justice to prevail
( ) 4
.

4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pSFyk2A8eco and featured
on http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/05/blockbuster-huge-crime-committed-senior.html
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 4 of 12
11. The Honorable David I. Schmidt has two (2) motions taken on submission since 28
March 2014 for the request for amended complaint as to 29642-2008 by an intervener with
renewal of completion of service nunc pro tunc in that regard, and that 29642-2008 have a
combined trial with 21948-2014 to be held on June 18, 2014;
12. I give deference to Justice Schmidt with duties in I.A.S. Parts 1 and 47, who is
applauded a fair judge, even were he to have voted for candidate Barack Hussein Obama,
unlike Justice Arthur M. Schack of I.A.S. Part 23 to the contrary who does not have the
temperament for the bench, and Justice Schmidt stated during my appearance in open
court on January 24, 2014 for 29642-2008 when he issued the Order to Show Cause by 28
March 2014 (see Exhibit E) that he now wishes he HAD given me my relief back in 2008,
but warned me that now no matter how much I may dislike the behavior of attorneys, this
point forward He, Justice Schmidt, would have to treat me as if I were an actual attorney
who must make informed decisions as a matter of law; and as such, it is in this context that
I appear here for relief in this Court, for if I have missed something that an attorney would
have missed to be done I am here to do what I have missed as if I were an attorney; and
13. Because there is a bar against my further action issued on the April 11, 2012
decision and order of Arthur M. Schack (see Exhibit F) from the case Strunk v NYS Board
of Elections et al. with Kings County Index No.: 6500-2011 for a case directly related to the
29642-2008 case that on or about 22 August 2011 when Judge Schack left the Courtroom
during the hearing and claimed when he returned to have spoken with Judge Schmidt
regarding whether or not the active case 29642-2008 was a related case based upon the
perjured RJI purchased and filed by the Attorney for John Sidney McCain III, that had
claimed as if there was no related case, somehow must bar a continuously active prior case
as an outrageous pain and penalties ex-post facto taking with rights infringement using the
instrument shown as Exhibit F, as a scarlet letter in violation of my 1
st
, 4
th
, 5
th
, 9
th
, 14
th

Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 5 of 12
amendment rights, that nevertheless seemingly as a matter of comity, is now honored by
Judge Schmidt; and that I contend despite the Decision and Order of 6500-2011 and having
an ongoing active set of appeal cases 12-5515, 13-6336 and 14-00927 with its brief due on
July 6, 2014, that the 29642-2008 earlier case must be precluded and barred from litigation
as Justice Schmidt by his actions appears to contend as a bar against me that relates to the
2008 case, appears as an invidious corruption of blood precluding due process of law.
14. It is my wish to have Justice David I. Schmidt perform his duty to provide for justice
and adherence to the provisions of our Federal and State constitutions that bind us all
despite the outrageous decision and order by Justice Schack barring me from any further
legal action now in 2014 for a 2008 case nearly six years after the blatant and outrageous
ongoing sedition and treason in Congress, the Executive, Federal Judiciary and in State(s)
courts around the country without one peep of a word heard from any public officer mice for
fear of their own personal political self interests, or even perhaps offshore accounts and
pension fund greed destine our posterity to hell and slavery to a global financial elite;
15. That notwithstanding whether or not we have been frozen for 81 consecutive years
under martial process with 12 USC 95 and 50 USC 50 App. 5(b) with related law, such fact
has been recognized by the Honorable PETER B. SKELOS, J .P. THOMAS A. DICKERSON,
J OHN M. LEVENTHAL, PRISCILLA HALL, J J . in regards to their Decision and Order of 4
March 2014 accordingly denying provision for civilian due process of law (see Exhibit G).
16. WE now have a foreign national without any US Citizen natural parent who
absolutely is ineligible to be the Commander-in-chief in charge of the executive orders for
annually the renewed state of war or national emergency with 12 USC 95 and 50 USC App.
5(b) in compliance with the National Emergencies Act of 1976 and International Emergency
Economic Power Act of 1977; and
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 6 of 12
17. That the 2008 usurpation of the office of POTUS was aided and abetted by State
Officers with the Democratic and Republican Parties et al with a lock over all elections as it
is by their rubber stamp that the slate of treasonous Electors in 2008 and 2012, now under
the pen of the Gubernatorial usurper Andrew Cuomo has eliminated the electoral college by
law so that winner take all will not reoccur again in the future 2016 election; and when
such prior slates of electors in 2008 and 2012 included State public officers holding dual
offices as electors, even then when suspected in the best of all possible worlds that those
state public officers would not cross the line of impropriety did so by using their office to
seize the POTUS as an act of treason and or misprision of treason that as this Honorable
Court knows New York condones treason and sedition without any statute for punishment
unlike some states that otherwise despite the conflict of interest by a public officer that
holds two jobs of public trust should have been closely scrutinized in an even more
restrictive fashion by the Court in 2008 and 2012 to avoid the appearance of impropriety
18. But such expectation of close scrutiny was not to be with Andrew Cuomo when then
Attorney General in 2008 and then in 2010 as Governor assisted the usurper POTUS who
threatened blind Governor David Paterson, then having been put under the watchful eye of
a Jesuit Priest as his personal secretary to read his paperwork, ordered not run against Mr.
Cuomo, who as an insider player to mammoth financial crimes as Clintons HUD Secretary
caused the collapse of the nonperforming mortgage market for his interest and with the
Usurpers organization ACORN to extort the mortgage banks and the financial industry,
19. It is alleged that the 2008 Attorney General actively conspired with the current
Commissioners and Chairmen members of the NYS Board of Elections to change the
qualifications for a candidate seeking to run for the Office of President and Vice President
from natural-born Citizen to Born a Citizen as an act of sedition outlawed under
Election Law and then Elector Governor Cuomo further undermined the election process.
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 7 of 12
20. That Judge Schmidt ordered the March 28, 2014 hearing at the request of Mr. H.
William Van Allen to Justice Prudenti (see Exhibit H) motivated by the fact that the
29642-2008 case remains active for more than five years and as a result Petitioner and Mr.
Van Allen have been pre-empted the ability to appeal interlocutory orders and barred from
suing parties accordingly from seeking remedy elsewhere as if frozen in amber.
21. That at the heart of the reason for Petitioners instant action is that Mr. Obama by
his own admission, notwithstanding who his natural mother is, in his autobiography
Dreams From my Father (1995) by the actual legal definition is not a Natural-born
Citizen because his natural father was both a British subject and then subject of the
Sultanate of Zanzibar, and now appears that Mr. Obama is not a citizen of the United
States at all based upon evidence that would be presented at a trial on June 18, 2014, and
nevertheless based upon his own admission that Mr. Obama is not eligible to be the
President of the United States (POTUS) Commander-in-chief with direct authority over
the martial law defacto executive Federal and States Court system accordingly; and as such
Mr. Obama has been properly served as the POTUS Commander-in-Chief with direct
authority over the martial process in the defacto executive Federal and State Courts, with
service by Certified mail with return receipt and by regular first class mail as a matter
Personal and Confidential by service upon a State official of the New York State Unified
Court System and also with service upon the Honorable Judge Prudenti, Chief Judge of the
Office of Court Administration (OCA) is under Mr. Obamas authority accordingly and who
by service upon the OCA and Mr. Obama as a matter of notice to agent is notice to principle
and notice to principle is notice to agent as State Officers and includes Mr. Obama.
22. Further, that at the time this case was filed Obama as a candidate was not POTUS
Commander-in-chief, notwithstanding his admission of a natural British subject father.
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 8 of 12
23. That Petitioners bar disability as shown in Exhibit F was created after the present
29642-2008 case was filed, and was a result of the wrongful use of the Individual
Assignment System (I.A.S.) of the Unified Court system resulting in assignment of Judge
Schack to 6500-2011 as if this active case 29642-2008 were dismissed / inactive and or
unrelated and has resulted in Petitioners disability and bar from not only speaking for all
those surety-indentures wedded to their respective Public U.S. Citizens, for which Mr. Van
Allen proposes to speak for as a class in general, also may not speak for Private Citizens of
the United States and all citizens as does Petitioner as a public officer from 29 April 2014
shown as Exhibit A-4, and as the Appellate Court panel addressed shown with Exhibit G.
24. That the Exhibit F bar effecting Petitioner has been confirmed by the Appellate
Court with their 4 March 2014 order denying me provision for civilian due process of law
and that Barack Hussein Obama II as Commander-in-chief, based upon the continuing
state of war or national emergency under 12 USC 95 and 50 USC App. 5(b), has direct
executive authority over the provision for martial due process of law provided by the de
facto NYS Unified Court System and thereby is of a direct interest of this court to prove to
Petitioner that Mr. Obama is eligible accordingly; and among other relief requested may be
easily done by ordering that any State records under State Court jurisdiction as done with
the denial of the FOIL to the NYS Higher Education Services Corporation (see Exhibit I)
may only be done by subpoena to be produced and thereby prove Mr. Obamas eligibility or
else be obligated to provide Petitioner a determination that for civilian due process of law
has been returned along with actual use of the New York and Federal constitutions because
all of Mr. Obamas acts are void ab initio as the national emergency statutes annually have
expired civil Courts system on June 3, 20014 under penalty of law (see Exhibit J) and I
want to court to know that I have no problem with serving on a jury as is my duty as a
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 9 of 12
citizen; however the preparation for trial takes precedent and I request an adjournment
until after the trail.
25. That as Judicial Notice herein because of the gravity of the constitutional question
of first impression before this Court, that were Mr. OBAMA declared unable to fulfill the
duties of the Commander-in-chief with direct authority over the State Court system that
this has far ranging consequences to the presiding Justice of the State Supreme Court in
this matter, as there is a duty to investigate and issue a declaratory judgment on the
finding(s) as is associated with the following Judicial responsibility under the following
Federal statutes accordingly, quote:
18 U.S. Code 2381 Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to
their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is
guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years
and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding
any office under the United States.
18 U.S. Code 2382 - Misprision of treason
(Pub. L. 113-86, except 113-79.)
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the
commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be,
disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United
States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is
guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than seven years, or both. (emphasis by Petitioner) (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807;
Pub. L. 103322, title XXXIII, 330016(1)(H),Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., 3 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, 3,35 Stat. 1088).
Mandatory punishment provision was rephrased in the alternative.
Amendments 1994Pub. L. 103322substituted fined under this title for fined not
more than $1,000.
18 U.S. Code 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection
Current through Pub. L. 113-86, except 113-79.
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 10 of 12
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against
the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall
be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
18 U.S. Code 2384 - Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force
the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force
the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of
the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States
contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than twenty years, or both.
18 U.S. Code 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government
Current through Pub. L. 113-86, except 113-79.
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity,
desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United
States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the
government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the
assassination of any officer of any such government; or

Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government,
prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any
written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity,
desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United
States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or

Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of
persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such
government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any
such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and
shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency
thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be
ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for
he five years next following his conviction. t
As used in this section, the terms organizes and organize, with respect to any
society, group, or assembly of persons, include the recruiting of new members, the
forming of new units, and the regrouping or expansion of existing clubs, classes, and
other units of such society, group, or assembly of persons.
Petitioners Affidavit in support of an OSC Page 11 of 12















SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x




Exhibit A

David A. Paterson
45 West 132
nd
Street Apt. 7N
New York NY 10037

NYS BOE General Counsel
New York State Board of Elections
40 NORTH PEARL STREET, SUITE 5
ALBANY, NY 12207-2729

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney
General of New York State
by: JOSHUA PEPPER, Esq. AAG
120 BROADWAY 24th Floor
New York, New York 10271-0332

Thomas P. DiNapoli
Office of the State Comptroller
110 State Street
Albany NY 12236 ,
Hakeem Jeffries
445 Neptune Avenue
Amalgamated Warbasse #2
Brooklyn, NY 11224

Andrew Cuomo, Governor
of the STATE OF NEW YORK
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224

Sheldon Silver,
The New York State Assembly
The Capitol
Albany New York 12224

Dean Skelos,
The New York State Senate
The Capital Room 501
Albany New York 12224

New York City Board of Elections
Executive Office
32 - 42 Broadway, 7 Fl
New York, NY 10004

The Honorable Gail Prudenti, J .S.C.
Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts
New York State Unified Court System
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street, Room 852
New York, NY 10004
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II
POTUS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF
The WHITE HOUSE
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W.
WASHINGTON D.C. 20500-0003

H. William Van Allen
351 North Road
Hurley, New York 12443

Courtesy copy to attorneys of 21948-12:

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney
General of New York State
by: JOSHUA PEPPER, Esq. AAG
120 BROADWAY 24th Floor
New York, New York 10271-0332

STEVEN C. FARKAS, ESQ.
COLLERAN, O'HARA & MILLS, L.L.P.
1225 Franklin Avenue, Suite 450
Garden City, New York 11530

Courtesy copy for attorneys of 6500-2011:

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney
General of NYS by: CLAUDE PLATTON,
Esq. AAG Assistant Attorney General
120 BROADWAY 25th Floor
New York, New York 10271-0332

Representing: NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF
ELECTIONS: JAMES A. WALSH, DOUGLAS A.
KELLNER, Co-Chairs; EVELYN J. AQUILA /
Commissioner, GREGORY P. PETERSON /
Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D.
VALENTINE, Deputy Director STANLEY
ZALEN; ANDREW CUOMO, ERIC
SCHNEIDERMAN, THOMAS P. DINAPOLI,
RUTH NOEM COLN, in their Official and
individual capacity; DEMOCRATIC STATE
COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK;
STATE COMMITTEE OF THE WORKING
FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW YORK STATE;
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;


Todd E. Phillips, Esq. of
CAPLIN & DRYSDALE, CHARTERED
One Thomas Circle, N.W., Suite 1100, TODD A. BROMBERG ESQ. of
Washington, DC 20005 WILEY REIN LLP -
1776K Street, NW
Representing: Washington D.C. 20006
JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III; MCCAIN
VICTORY 2008; MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY
2008;

Representing: JOHN A. BOEHNER;

Christopher J. Latell Esq. and Daniel S.
Reich Esq. of RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN,
STANDARD, KRINSKY & LIEBERMAN, PC
THOMAS J. GARRY, Esq. of
HARRIS BEACH, PLLC
45 Broadway, Suite 1700 The OMNI 333 Earle Ovington Blvd.,
New York, New York 10006-3791 Suite 901
Uniondale, New York 11553
Representing: RGER CALERO; THE
SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY Representing:
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR.; SOEBARKAH
(a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Hussein
Obama II, a.k.a. Steve Dunham); NANCY
PELOSI; PENNY S. PRITZKER; OBAMA
FOR AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND
Erica Burke, Esq. of
SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York. New York 10017-3954

Representing: PETER G. PETERSON JAMES C. DUGAN Esq. of
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
MICHAEL CARDOZO Corporation Counsel
of City of New York By: CHLARENS
ORSLAND, Esq. Assistant Corporation
Counsel New York City Law Department
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10019-6099

Representing: GEORGE SOROS;
100 Church Street
New York, New York 10007 MARSHAL BELL, Esq. of
McGUIRE WOODS LLP
Representing: Fr. JOSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J.;
Fr. JOSEPH P. PARKES, S.J.; FREDERICK
A.O. SCHWARZ, JR.;
1345 Avenue of Americas, 7th Floor
New York, New York 10105

Representing: ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ
BRZEZINSKI; MARK BRZEZINSKI; IAN J.
BRZEZINSKI;

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

---------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against- (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of PLAINTIFFS AFFIDAVIT IN
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD), SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller), MOTION with CPLR 3101(d)
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their and JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official PLAINTIFFS STATUS
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------x

STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse being duly sworn, depose and say
under penalty of perjury:

1. Affirmant is the Plaintiff herein with two (2) Motions on taken on submission by
the Honorable David I. Schmidt JSC on 28 March 2014 with decisions pending for the
Notice of Motion to renew the proposed intervention by H. William Van Allen, with
supporting affidavit exhibits, Memorandum and proposed Verified Supplement to the
Complaint annexed; and the Plaintiffs Notice of Motion to complete service Nunc Pro
Tunc and Consolidate the Non-jury Trial with that scheduled for June 18, 2014 with a
pre-trial conference scheduled for 13 June 2014.
2. That Plaintiffs obligation under CPLR 3101(d) is to duly notify of his intentions
to bring expert testimony to the non-jury trial were it consolidated with that of the
1 of 4
document expert Paul Edward Irey already submitted as notice with the Note of Issue
pending an order on June 13, 2014 for the testimony to be presented on June 18,
2014 for the Petition 21948-2012 also.
3. That I have obtained the expert testimony of the Honorable Michael Shrimpton
British Barrister and esteemed member of the Queens Court in the matter of
Immigration Appeals from 1993 through 2005 and who on May 12, 2014 has sworn
his affidavit as to his expertise in compliance with Plaintiffs understanding of the due
process notice required with CPLR 3101(d) (see Exhibit 1) at least twenty days prior to
the appearance at trial and completion of the note of issue pending herein;
4. That at trial Mr. Shrimpton will testify to facts that contend Barack Hussein
Obama II was born in Mombasa Kenya on or about August 4 1960 not in Hawaii on or
about August 4, 1961, and that Mr. Obama Junior has no DNA relation to the
adoptive mother Stanley Ann Dunham who married Obama Senior on or about
February 1961, and that Barack Hussein Obama II has never been a U.S. Citizen and
or naturalized, and as such is not a Natural-born Citizen eligible for the Office of
President of the United States duties as Commander-in chief under the present
annual renewed national emergency with direct executive authority over the de facto
Federal and State(s) court operating with Martial due process of law only.
5. That Plaintiff requests that if any of opposing counsel wish to depose Mr.
Shrimpton such will have to be done by closed circuit video link from Britain; and
despite the prior ease of obtaining renewal of his expert visa status, since April
renewal has been thwarted by the Obama Administration, and as such we are seeking
a visitors short term visa for the period of June 17, thru June 21 and have a visa
interview with the United States Embassy in London scheduled for June 2, 2014.
6. That Mr. Shrimptons Testimony will coincide with that of Document Expert
Paul Edward Irey as to the forged document proffered by Mr. Obama and his agents
2 of 4
in the White House on or about 25 April 2011 at the Press conference as if the forged
instrument were a long form Birth Certificate from Hawaii, which it is not and that the
Note of Issue having already been filed for the Petition 21948-2012 (see Exhibit 2).
7. That Plaintiff as a courtesy to the Court provides herewith the conformed
Appellants Brief combined with Appendix (see Exhibit 3) having been filed for the
Appeal 13-6335 taken from the related case with Index 6500-2011 having been
dismissed by Arthur M. Schack JSC at Part 23; and
8. As additional Judicial Notice as to a change in Plaintiff status germane before
this Court, that on April 29, 2014 at 1:20PM the Clerk of Superior Court of Georgia for the
County of Lamar recorded the notice of acceptance of appointment of Christopher Earl
Strunk as the Executor / Settlor of The Express Deed in Trust to The United States of
America in BPA BOOK 32 PAGES 716 thru 754; and that the acceptance by Christopher
Earl Strunk in esse Sui juris private citizen of the United States the secured beneficiary
agent of the Debtor Trust transmitting utility CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, is
appointed to perform the public duties of Executor and Settlor for the Express Deed In
Trust To The United States Of America With Beneficiary Discretion For Private Citizens Of
The United States Who Are True Natural-Born Citizens Under The United States
Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 And Not Surety-Indentures For Their Respective
Debtor Trust Entity Under 12 USC 95a and 50 USC App. 5(b) Martial Government with a
Continuing National Emergency (Express Deed in Trust) responsible for the beneficial
claim by its Beneficiaries, with Settlor duty to the Express Deed in Trust shall guarantee
that all incumbents and future candidate(s) for the Office of President or Vice President of
the United States (POTUS) shall be a bonafide Natural-Born Citizen (NBC) private citizen
of the United States agent who is surety no more to the Debtor Trust Entity in compliance
with the United States Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5, either under 12 USC 95
3 of 4


SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

---------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against- (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of PLAINTIFFS AFFIDAVIT IN
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD), SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller), MOTION with CPLR 3101(d)
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their and JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official PLAINTIFFS STATUS
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------x
















Exhibit 1





SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS
___________________________________________________ Index No.: 29642 / 08

Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

H. William Van Allen, Intervener Plaintiff. (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

-against-

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD),
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller),
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants,

New York State Unified Court System Office of Court
Administration by the Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI, J.S.C.,
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II and NEW YORK CITY
BOARD OF ELECTIONS and its commissioners.

Supplemental Defendants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS Index No.: 21948 / 2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse Petitioner,



-against-

Hakeem Jeffries , Grace Meng, Felix Ortiz, Bill DeBlasio,
Walter Cooper, Keith L.T. Wright, Christine C. Quinn,
William 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.
Page 1 of 15

____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________


A F F I D A V I T O F E X P E R T W I T N E S S

M I C H A E L S H R I M P T O N

C P L R 3 1 0 1 (d)


_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________


Accordingly, I, Michael Shrimpton, Esquire, being duly sworn, depose and say
under penalty of perjury:

1. I, Michael Shrimpton, Esquire, am a British Subject and a British Citizen, born on
the 9
th
day of March 1957, with my place of business located at 8 Jusons Glebe,
Wendover, in the County of Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom HP22 6PF.
2. I am a barrister in independent practice, called to the Bar by Grays Inn at
Michaelmas 1983. I am also an independent intelligence consultant and author,
formerly a member of the Adjunct Faculty of the American Military University
(AMU), which is accredited to the Department of Defense. I taught at AMU on the
Masters in Strategic Intelligence program (since this affidavit is being used in an
American court, as a courtesy, I am using American English, or what I fondly
imagine to be American usage). My book Spyhunter: A Secret History of German
Intelligence was published in England by June Press (Totnes, in the County of
Devonshire) on April 15
th
2014. Spyhunter is a 711 page intelligence text (see the
annexed blurb). I also write a weekly intelligence column for
www.VeteransToday.com and have had a peer-reviewed article published in the
Journal of International Security Affairs, published by the reputable Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). I have participated in JINSA
Page 2 of 15
expert panels on counterterrorism in Washington and at the Simon Wiesenthal
Center in Los Angeles. I was a speaker at both the Intelligence Conference at
Crystal City, VA in 2005 and the Intelligence Summit, at the same venue, the
following year. Shortly after the Summit concluded the United States Navy were
gracious enough to fly me out to the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS
Enterprise (CVN-65) at sea, in a Northrop Grumman C-2A Greyhound, as part of
their Distinguished Visitor Program. I am a member in good standing of the
Royal United Services Institute and the United States Naval Institute. I was
invited to join British Mensa in 2012 and am SIGSec of their Intelligence and
National Security Special Interest Group. I attended the launch of the United
Kingdom National Defence Association in 2007, am a founder member and a
member of their advisory council, which has gone through various guises since
being set up (it is a largely honorific post and the council does not meet as a body).
A number of former Chiefs of the UK Defence Staff are Patrons of UKNDA, whose
main aim is to encourage support for our fighting services and press for an
increase in their lamentably low budget, even lower than the Pentagons, I am
sorry to say.
3. In 1992 I was appointed a part-time Chairman of the Immigration Appeal
Tribunal (IAT) by the then Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, Lord Mackay of
Clashfern. The IAT heard immigration appeals from all over the United Kingdom,
including Scotland, and the Islands. It was both an appellate and first instance
tribunal, with legally qualified chairmen sitting with lay members, usually two.
The lay members tended to have military, intelligence or colonial experience, but
they came from all walks of life and had varied backgrounds. First instance cases
were heard under s.3(5)(b) of the Immigration Act 1971 (Imp.) and consisted of
appeals against decisions to deport on the ground that it was conducive to the
public good, usually following a sentence of imprisonment for a serious crime, such
as narcotics trafficking.
Page 3 of 15
4. In 1995 I was appointed additionally to serve as an Immigration Adjudicator and
Special Adjudicator. Special Adjudicators, now known as Immigration Judges,
heard appeals against refusal of political asylum in the United Kingdom. The IAT
was abolished not long after I retired from it in 2005. It is right to say that I was
prevented from sitting after November 2003 and that when I resigned I was in
dispute with the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain and Secretary of State for
Constitutional Affairs, Lord Falconer of Thoroton QC. This is not the place to go
into the rights and wrongs of that dispute, but it flowed from my intelligence work
and followed a bad faith complaint in June 2002 to my professional body, the Bar
Council, by a Citizen of the Islamic Republic of Iran, whom I was advised was
connected to their intelligence service, VEVAK. That complaint in turn followed
my successful representation of an officer of the US Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) who had been instrumental in expanding the CIAs network inside Iran
after the 1979 Iranian Revolution. VEVAK, working with the Iraqi Mukhabarat,
were involved in the prosecution of this officer, indeed it transpired that VEVAK
had an asset inside the Crown Prosecution Service, E. I was partially responsible
for the exposure of E, who was thought to have an Iraqi background but whose
family in fact came from Iran. My former client had a distinguished CIA career
and was formerly a Lockheed U-2 pilot, indeed he was on the U-2 shakedown
program.
5. I understand that Plaintiffs intent is to call me as an expert witness, with the
leave of the court. I have been asked to make myself available to give evidence in
New York on June 18
th
and 19
th
2014. As a courtesy I have supplied copies of my
legal and national security resumes to the Plaintiff and they can be made
available to the court and other parties. After the failure of an assassination
attempt upon me in 1999 I have been subjected to a volley of bad faith accusations,
both professional and criminal. These have all either failed or are sub judice at
this time. I am content to supply further details if asked, but would respectfully
Page 4 of 15
caution all parties that each accusation has involved hostile intelligence agencies,
usually GO2, the covert German operation in London set up at the end of World
War II, and some have involved fabrication of evidence and tampering with my
computer equipment.
6. At the behest of Plaintiff Christopher Earl Strunk, I understand that I am
swearing this affidavit under New York State Civil Practice Law Rules Section
3101(d) as to my expert witness qualifications to testify at the hearing scheduled
to be heard before the Honorable David I. Schmidt, Justice of the Supreme Court
for the County of Kings, in the above Caption tentatively as consolidated cases.
7. I am also of the understanding that there is a related case with orders from the
New York State Supreme Court for the County of Kings with Index No.: 6500-2011
now with active consolidated appeal cases with Nos: 2012-05515, 2013-06335 and
2014-00297 in the Appellate Division for the Second Department with submission
pending the outcome of this matter herein. There is clearly some procedural
complexity here and I will not pretend to the court that I have fully understood
how the various cases relate to each other, nor the procedural basis for the hearing
in June. I comprehend at least this much, that each of the cases turns in part on
the question of fact as to whether or not President Barack Hussein Obama Junior
was born in either of the hospitals in Honolulu in the State of Hawaii in which he
claims to have been born and the mixed question of fact and law as to whether or
not President Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States within the
meaning of Article II of the United States Constitution. For the avoidance of
doubt, whilst I hold myself out as a constitutional lawyer, I do not pretend to be an
expert on the United States Constitution.
8. To a limited extent I accept that I am also a witness of fact, limited to the specific
issue of advice I gave in late 2007 to the Central Intelligence Agency and the
Defense Intelligence Agency in London, also made available to those very nice
people with respect, the National Security Agency, concerning the advisability of a
Page 5 of 15
DNA test on then Senator Obama. I also passed on concerns in the UK
intelligence community about the Senator's eligibility for the office of President of
the United States. The CIA with respect seemed to recognize my expertise within
the field. At any rate my opinion was sought, and as an ally I gave it freely,
although they paid for the lunch.
9. In addition to my intelligence and immigration law expertise I had specific
expertise in DNA fingerprinting. I believe that I was only the second lawyer in
the world to make use of it, in 1985, in an immigration case, consulting Dr. Alec
Jefferies, as he then was, by telephone at the University of Leicester (I was
practising as a barrister in Leicester at the time, as a poor persons lawyer in a
law center). As the court will be aware DNA or genetic fingerprinting had only
recently been discovered, by Dr. Jefferies, now Sir Alec, the previous year. I was
aware that he had used it successfully in a relationship as claimed immigration
case. There were many such cases and by the late 1990s the IAT and Immigration
Adjudicators had built up a considerable body of expertise in the field. I was well
used to considering DNA fingerprinting reports judicially by the year 2000.
10. I understand of course that ultimately these are matters for the proper U.S.
judicial authorities and, if so advised, the United States Congress under the 25
th

Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which of course has power to
impeach any President who has misled state electoral authorities, Congress itself
and the American electorate as to his or her eligibility for office. It would also be a
matter entirely for the House of Representatives or the Senate as to whether they
appointed special counsel to inquire into the issue of whether or not President
Obama fulfills the eligibility requirements for the office of President and require a
DNA test if so advised.
11. As the issue may have political ramifications it is right that I should disclose my
membership of the Conservative and Unionist Party in Great Britain, although I
am not presently an office-holder within the Party. I was formerly a member of
Page 6 of 15
the Labour Party and stood for Parliament in the Labour interest, for the Division
of Horsham in the County of West Sussex, in 1987 and the European Parliament
for the European Division of West Sussex in 1989. I defected to the Tory Party,
largely but not solely on the issue of UK membership of the European Union,
shortly after the 1997 General Election in Britain.
12. For the avoidance of doubt it is possible in England to be both an active member of
a political party and a judicial officer at the same time, indeed at one time it was
quite common for Members of Parliament to sit as Recorders (part-time judges) in
the Crown Court. I well recall a particularly pleasant jury trial before the late Sir
Peter Archer QC MP at the then Crown Court at the Middlesex Guildhall, e.g., in
the late 1990s, after I had left his party for the Tories. He was if I may say so a
deeply honorable man and would not have dreamt of allowing such political
differences as we might have had to influence his conduct of the trial. Similarly,
when I sat as an immigration judge, I did not allow such opinions as I had on the
issue of British membership of the European Union to affect the exercise of my
judicial discretion when I was asked to refer questions of community law to the
Court of Justice of the European Communities under Article 177 of the Treaty of
Rome, indeed I became the first immigration judge to refer questions of law to the
ECJ in Luxembourg, and went across to Europe to observe the proceedings.
13. I cannot conceive that the requirements on an expert witness in New York State
are any less onerous than they are in England. I have not given evidence in an
American court before, nor prepared an experts report for use in an American
court, although I count a number of American lawyers as friends and a friend who
is a Superior Court judge in Los Angeles was kind enough to invite me to watch
proceedings in his court. I have also been privileged to have met with a small
number of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States over the years,
including that nice man with respect the late Chief Justice Rehnquist. Whilst I
am not an officer of the New York State Supreme Court, as a matter of comity and
Page 7 of 15
out of respect for the court, I would not regard my duties to an American court to
be any less onerous than my duties to a court in my own country.
14. I respectfully adopt the observation of Tomlin J. in Graigola Merthyr v. Swansea
Corporation [1928] 1 Ch. 31 that an expert witness has a special duty to the
court. I also respectfully adopt the statement by Hodgkinson in Expert Evidence:
Law and Practice (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1
st
ed., 1990), at page 90, that the
expert witness has a principal and overriding duty, not to the party by whom he is
retained, but to the court.
15. For the avoidance of doubt, bearing in mind my own political beliefs and President
Obamas ethnicity, I accept the cardinal importance of avoiding any political or
racial bias in coming to my conclusions as an intelligence expert. As it happens, I
came to the same conclusion as regarding his eligibility for the office of President
of the United States in respect of President Obamas white Republican opponent,
Senator McCain, as I did in relation to then Senator Obama. In relation to
Senator McCain that was by reason of his birth in the Republic of Panama. So far
as I know my conclusions as regards Senator McCain are in the public domain.
16. I deal firstly with my role in tendering informal advice to the CIA and the DIA. As
the court will understand, with respect, intelligence agencies work on a quite
different principle to courts and lawyers. Whereas the latter emphasize
transparency and rightly so, the intelligence community (INTELCOM) favors
deniability. When the CIA invite you to lunch they do not usually send out an
embossed invitation. By the time President Obama joined the 2008 presidential
race, on February 10
th
2007, I would like to think that I was well-known to the
CIA. It was not, I suspect, a secret inside INTELCOM that my opinion was that
Senator Obama, as he then was, was born in Mombasa in what is now the
Republic of Kenya. My success in relation to a paternity test on a British
politician was also probably widely known inside INTELCOM. The lunch was
held at Claridges Hotel in Brook Street, Mayfair, London on Wednesday October
Page 8 of 15
10
th
2007. A senior DIA officer was also present. Officially this was purely a
social occasion. I would not be offended were either the CIA or the DIA to deny
that the lunch had ever happened, or that I had tendered advice on the
desirability of a DNA test and how best to conduct it, indeed that would be
standard operating procedure. In fact however, although the advice I gave has
been in the public domain since 2008, there has been no denial from either the
CIA or DIA.
17. I do not name the names of Allied intelligence officers with whom I have had
dealings. There are several reasons for that. I could not function as an
intelligence expert if intelligence officers felt they could not repose trust in me not
to blow their identities. It is also discourteous and thoroughly bad practice and
can expose the officers with whom you are dealing to unnecessary risk. In relation
to American intelligence officers it might also involve a breach of the Intelligence
Identities Protection Act (IIPA). I am familiar with IIPA as the act was abused in
a with respect misconceived prosecution, United States v. Libby, during the Bush-
Cheney Presidency in relation to a CIA analyst, Valerie Plame, who was not in
fact protected by IIPA. As she had had dealings with the Secret Intelligence
Service (MI6) and I was aware that the prosecution was without foundation I
passed a warning on to attornies for Karl Rove, whom I believed was the primary
target for the operation, and Lewis Libby, the ultimate defendant. Just because a
CIA or DIA officer does not happen to be operating undercover when you have
dealings with them it does not follow that they are not undercover at the present
time. I would be most unwilling to name the officers and if I were to be asked that
question I would be grateful for the courtesy of notice, so that I might consult with
the offices of General Counsel to the CIA and General Counsel to the DIA. I am
known to a number of former General Counsel to US intelligence agencies,
including that very nice man with respect William Allard, formerly a
distinguished General Counsel to the DIA, and the excellent American Bar
Page 9 of 15
Association Committee on Law and National Security, who were kind enough in
2010 to invite me to one of their working breakfasts in Washington DC.
18. Some years prior to the lunch I had tendered informal advice to the Security
Service (MI5) after concerns arose that a senior member of the Labour
Government, B, might be a blackmail risk, as a result of claiming a child, L, to be
his. To preserve deniability, not least in circumstances where the advice was
politically sensitive, the informal advice was given over lunch at a military facility
to retired officers of the Service. I gave my analysis as to the true father and
suggested a means by which the intelligence might be verified, verification of
course being critical. A dinner was held to which myself, the mother, Mrs B, and
the suspected father, F, were invited. I believe that MI5 had an asset inside the
caterers, a Sikh. The operational concept was that this asset would secrete the
wine glasses used by Mrs B and F for DNA comparison with DNA retrieved from L
(the babys) saliva. I had a fair understanding of DNA testing by this time and
readily appreciated that you did not need to draw blood, which might be
distressing for baby and might amount to a criminal assault upon a minor,
something I advised MI5 against. So far as I am aware the test excluded B as a
candidate for the father of L. At any rate MI5s budget went up shortly thereafter,
two brief later encounters with the then Director-General of MI5 were surprisingly
amicable and I heard no more about it, except that F sought to cause me
professional difficulties and B did not place me on his Christmas card list.
19. I explained all this to the intelligence officers at the Claridges lunch. My
recollection is that the DIA officer was surprised and that the CIA officer just
smiled. The technique, which was non-invasive, lawful and quite simple, provided
not just sufficient DNA for a reliable test, but a chain of evidence, as the glasses
also had the users fingerprints. Senator Obamas purported mother, Stanley Ann
Dunham, sadly had died, aged 53, on November 7
th
1995. Maternity was of
greater interest then than paternity, as the claimed father, Barack Hussein
Page 10 of 15
Obama Senior had no claim to citizenship of the United States, that is to say then
Senator Obamas claim to be a US citizen rested on his claimed relationship with
Stanley Ann Dunham. My respectful suggestion, therefore, was to acquire the
DNA of Stanley Ann Dunhams mother, Madelyn Lee Dunham, along with that of
Senator Obama. That could most easily be done, in my opinion, by using the glass
technique successfully trialed by MI5. I also advised checking for photographs of
Stanley Ann Dunham, whom I believe was known to the CIA in any event from
her days in US AID, in particular from the summer of 1961, when she was
supposed to have been pregnant, and her medical records, and Madelyn Dunhams
FBI file, which I believed dated from 1944, and Boeing security file, if extant, in
connection with Abwehr sabotage activities on the B-29 Superfortress line at
Boeings Wichita, Kansas plant.
20. To the best of my knowledge and belief the DNA test was done and Senator
Obamas claim to be the son of Stanley Ann Dunham could not be supported. I
cannot say to the court that either CIA or DIA came back to me and said so in
terms. I would not expect them to and it would be contrary to good intelligence
practice. I would however expect to be told if my advice had led to either agency
wasting time or resources, not to mention the cost of a good lunch.
21. The outcome of the DNA test, as I understood it to be, was consistent with what I
knew of then Senator Obamas background. It was my understanding then, and
still is, that he was born in Mombasa in what was then the Kenyan Protectorate,
on or about August 4
th
1960. So far as I know that is the internal view of both
MI5 and MI6. The Presidents claimed father was known to British intelligence in
1960 due to his connection with the Mau Mau terrorist organization. There is no
evidence that Stanley Ann Dunham went to Kenya in 1960, that is to say she
cannot have been the mother, assuming the intelligence about the birth in
Mombasa to be correct.
22. I should explain to the court that in 1960 the Kenyan Protectorate was not part of
Page 11 of 15
the British Empire proper. It was not a British imperial possession, but formed
part of the territory of His Highness the Sultan of Zanzibar, who very sensibly had
placed his territory under British protection. His Highnesss subjects as a
consequence enjoyed the status of British Protected Persons. The Protectorate
was a narrow coastal strip, about ten miles wide, from the Ruvuman River in the
south to the Tana River in the north. Kenya Colony lay to the west. The two were
merged into modern Kenya by the Kenya Independence Act 1963 (Imp.),
citizenship of Kenya being conferred on former British Protected Persons by
reason of Section 1(1) of the Independence Constitution of Kenya.
23. I did not have cause to change my opinion when the White House promulgated a
purported long form birth certificate online in 2011. I am not a computer
specialist but I was not surprised when the document was questioned by forensic
computer experts. Long experience as an immigration judge caused me to
approach free-standing birth certificates, that is to say without a counterpart, with
caution. A genuine birth certificate should have a counterpart entry in the
register of live births. Of course any intelligence analysis must be reviewed in the
light of new developments, but the electronic facsimile copy of the birth certificate,
in my albeit humble expert opinion, was not a material development.
24. I am aware that the senior official of the Hawaii Department of Health, Ms.
Loretta Fuddy, who authenticated the facsimile birth certificate, purportedly died
in the crash of a Makani Kai Air Cessna Grand Caravan at or about 3.45 pm on
December 11
th
2013, on a short flight from Molokai to Oahu, allegedly following
engine failure. I cannot express a concluded view, as I have not made a detailed
study of the incident, but there are a number of anomalies that I should draw to
the courts attention. The engine is said to have failed, but the Grand Caravan is
powered by a Pratt and Whitney Canada PT6A turboprop, a highly reliable and
well-proven motor, nor is it clear why the engine failed. Modern engines do not
fail without a reason. No PT6A-engined airplanes were grounded as a result of
Page 12 of 15
the incident and I am unaware of any modification program to the airplane or
engine as a result of the incident. Makani Kai Air are a reputable company, with
a good safety record, going back many years. Moreover post-crash photographs of
the airplane do not appear to me to show damage consistent with ditching.
25. I should explain that it is essential when ditching an airplane to keep the nose up.
In a successful ditching the first part of the aircraft to make contact with the
water should be the ventral or lower rear fuselage. I have had some limited flight
experience, having flown first solo with the University of Wales Air Squadron
(RAFVR) in 1979 and hold myself out as an aviation sabotage expert. I was of
course trained in ditching procedure. A number of aviation incidents are covered
in Spyhunter. It is exceedingly rare for an airplane to ditch without causing some
airframe damage. As presently advised I do not accept the official version of
events, but I say no more than that.
26. I am aware that Stanley Ann Dunham later married an Indonesian citizen, who
appears to have adopted Barack Hussein Obama Junior. It would not be unusual
for a minor step-child to take the step-fathers nationality, in addition to that of
the mother, on re-marriage. Whilst I am not an expert on US nationality law I am
an expert in UK immigration and nationality law and am used to considering
other countries immigration and nationality law. Stanley Ann Dunham was a
minor when she allegedly gave birth to the president and the claimed fathers
alleged marriage to her was admittedly bigamous, as he had married a Kenyan
woman, Kezia, in 1954. I cannot take the court to a record of a divorce between
Barack Hussein Obama Senior and Kezia Obama. It would have been unusual in
1961 for an unmarried minor, applying the definition of minor then in force (21, in
Hawaii), to have been able to transmit her nationality to her child. That is a
matter requiring expert evidence on US nationality law and the laws of Hawaii on
majority, but it is right that I should flag up the issue. On the presidents own
account there appears to me to be a triable issue as to whether or not he was a US
Page 13 of 15
citizen at birth. To my knowledge he never naturalized, that is to say his claim to
US citizenship rests in its entirety on his claim to have been born to Stanley Ann
Dunham on US soil in 1961, and that claim may not be sufficient in any event
having regard to his claimed fathers subsisting marriage to Kezia Obama and the
age of his claimed mother at the material time.
27. In my opinion the nationality status of President Obama at birth was that of a
subject of His Highness the Sultan of Zanzibar and British Protected Person,
becoming a citizen of the Republic of Kenya on December 12
th
1963. In my further
opinion there was a subsequent acquisition of the nationality of the Republic of
Indonesia, following the marriage of Stanley Ann Dunham to an Indonesian
national. I am respectfully unable to support the presidents claim to be a citizen
of the United States. I express no view as to the claimed paternity, which is not
material to any issue which I believe to be before the court.
28. The following space is left blank deliberately, so that my verification statement
and the signatures of both myself and the notary public appear on the same page.













Page 14 of 15

Spyhunter: The Secret History of German Intelligence
Spyhunter, by the renowned
barrister and intelligence
specialist Michael Shrimpton,
is one of the most fascinating
books you will ever read.
Riveting to the end. Sex,
drugs, and rock & roll-with
prominent politicians chasing
their rent boys and girls across
London- some with fatal
consequences.
Drugs are in abundance, but
here they are used to
assassinate, or, as in the case
of Michael Shrimpton,
attempted murder-because he
knew too much; with the rock
and roll jazz provided by Hugh
Masekela-reminiscening back
to Michael's days as a
volunteer Steward with the
Anti-Apartheid Movement in
London.
His role, as a Barrister, in
assisting General Pinochet exit
his unlawful detention in the
UK was known to me at that
time as we often met up
socially for drinks and a chat.
His prediction to me in 2002 that the Euro would collapse the precise way that it did was so
incredible at that time, I thought he had 'lost it.'
The paedophile life of Chairman Mao and his use of under-age boys for sex to blackmail
political opponents is covered as are the honey traps his successors use to target prominent
individuals who shape political and financial opinions in Europe, America and Australasia.
His theories about Princess Diana's murder and the gay life of Edward Heath have yet to be
proved. 9/11 was a milestone for many-including Michael. Again, his theory has yet to be
proven.
The book covers spy rings through the centuries, blackmail, false flags, international leaders'
sexual proclivities and appetites-which made them vulnerable and compromised security
and the lives of troops and assets. KGB sex training schools for spies, gay and straight, to
1
make them lovers par excellence. Sleepers and deep cover agents with missions in
hibernation spanning decades, waiting to be activated, it's all there. Nothing can be
concealed from the Spyhunter.
An intelligence specialist with deep sources in the Pentagon, the CIA and elsewhere,
Michael was also consultant for the TV series 'Spooks'.
Most of his contacts
worldwide are vetted
through Washington and
Langley, at least that
element of Langley who
are, as Michael would say,
'the Good Guys and Gals'.
His life has been in danger
many times and checking
under his Bentley each
morning for bombs is a
regular occupation. A must
for every bookstore,
university and school
library-where sixth formers
and university under-
graduates are guaranteed
to be kept more awake
during history lessons by
Michael's titillating
revelations than any porn
page on the internet-or
dusty geriatric history
lecturer, whichever is the
greater. It's what history has
been waiting for-an
alternative wake-up book to
challenge the status quo-
and start a fierce debate.
Whether you agree or disagree, whether what Shrimpton says is so incredulous you are
stupefied in disbelief, anger, rage, or just on the floor with uncontrollable laughter, the 700-
page Spyhunter is a fascinating alternative look at the history of espionage from the 11th
century to the present day.
Spyhunter: The Secret History of German Intelligence, by Michael Shrimpton;
Publishers: J une Press
www.J unePress.com 2014
2




SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

---------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against- (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of PLAINTIFFS AFFIDAVIT IN
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD), SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller), MOTION with CPLR 3101(d)
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their and JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official PLAINTIFFS STATUS
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------x
















Exhibit 2



Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012

Christopher-Earl: Strunks Affidavit in support of Note of Issue Page 1 of 3
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FOR THE COUNTY OF KINGS Index No.: 21948 / 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

Christopher-Earl : Strunk in esse Filed November 14, 2012
593 Vanderbilt Avenue 281 Brooklyn New York 11238

Petitioner,

-against-

Hakeem Jeffries , Grace Meng, Felix Ortiz, Bill DeBlasio, PETITIONERS
Walter Cooper, Keith L.T. Wright, Christine C. Quinn,
William Thompson, Scott Stringer, Emily Giske, AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
Anne Marie Anzalone, Archie Spigner, George Gresham,
Ruben Diaz, Jr.; Ken Jenkins; Mario Cilento; NOTE OF ISSUE WITH
Gerald D. Jennings; Byron Brown ; Robert Duffy;
Joseph Morelle; Scott Adams ; Stephanie Miner; Steve Bellone; CERTIFICATE OF READINESS
Irene Stein; Sheila Comar; and Kirsten Gillibrand
FOR TRIAL OF ISSUES AND
Respondents.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------x FOR PARTIAL SEVERANCE

STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KINGS )

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 Petitioners affidavit in support of his 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 of the New York State Legislatures Electoral College and members of Congress before the deadline
to vote by December 17, 2012, and after J anuary 3, 2013 for candidates for the office of President of the
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 J ay Carney and Barack Obama who
during the 27 April 2012 White House Press Conference, see the transcript evidence herein (seeExhibit 1),
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 and other crimes.
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012

Christopher-Earl: Strunks Affidavit in support of Note of Issue Page 2 of 3
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 testimony 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
affirmed 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 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 to prove the forged
instrument is of current manufacturer, that the forgers use of the 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 Petitioners right to suffrage, republican form of government, Freedom
and Liberty, any elelctor who would commit a crimne 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 105A 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 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



































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue


Exhibit 1
Get Email Updates Contact Us
Home Briefing Room Press Briefings Search WhiteHouse.gov
For Immediate Release April 27, 2011
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
8:48 A.M. EDT
MR. CARNEY: Good morning, everybody. You can read the paperwork we just handed out in a minute. Let me
just get started. Thank you for coming this morning. I have with me today Dan Pfeiffer, the Presidents Director of
Communications, as well as Bob Bauer, the Presidents White House Counsel, who will have a few things to say
about the documents we handed to you today. And then we'll take your questions. I remind 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 now is a packet of papers that includes the
Presidents long-formbirth certificate fromthe state of Hawaii, the original birth certificate that the President
requested and we posted online in 2008, and then the correspondence between the Presidents counsel and the
Hawaii State Department of Health that led to the release of those documents.
If you would just give me a minute to -- indulge me a second to walk through a little of the history here, since all
of you weren't around in 2008 when we originally released the Presidents birth certificate, I will do that. And then
Bob Bauer will walk through the timeline of how we acquired these documents.
In 2008, in response to media inquiries, the Presidents campaign requested his birth certificate fromthe state of
BLOG POSTS ON THI S I SSUE
March 11, 2012 8:04 PMEDT
Call with President Karzai Following the
Report of Afghan Civilian Casualties
President Obama reached
out to President Karzai
Sunday following the
reported killing and
sounding of Afghan
civilians.
March 11, 2012 9:00 AMEDT
From the Archives: Tsunami in Japan
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
1 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
Hawaii. We received that document; we posted it on the website. That document was then inspected by
independent fact checkers, who came to the campaign headquarters and inspected the document -- independent
fact checkers did, and declared that it was proof positive that the President was born in Hawaii.
To be clear, the document we presented on the Presidents website in 2008 is his birth certificate. It is the piece
of paper that every Hawaiian receives when they contact the state to request a birth certificate. It is the birth
certificate they take to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get their drivers license and that they take to the federal
government to get their passport. It is the legally recognized document.
That essentially -- for those of you who followed the campaign closely know that solved the issue. We didnt
spend any time talking about this after that. There may have been some very fringe discussion out there, but as a
campaign issue it was settled and it was --
Q When you posted this did you post the other side of it where the signature is?
MR. PFEIFFER: Yes.
Q Because it is not here and that's been an issue.
MR. PFEIFFER: We posted both sides and when it was looked at it was looked at by -- the fact checkers came
to headquarters and actually examined the document we had.
That settled the issue. In recent weeks, the issue has risen again as some folks have begun raising a question
about the original -- about the long-formbirth certificate you now have in front of you. And Bob will 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 it went to -- essentially the discussion transcended fromthe nether regions of
the Internet into mainstreampolitical debate in this country. It became something that when both Republicans and
Democrats were talking to the media they were asked about. It was a constant discussion on mainstreamnews
organizations. And the President believed that it was becoming a distraction fromthe major issues we're having in
this country.
And he was particularly struck by the fact that right after the Republicans released their budget framework and
the President released his, we were prepared to have a very important, very vigorous debate in this country about
the future of the country, the direction were going to take, how were doing to deal with very important issues like
education, Medicare, how were going to deal with taxes in this country. And that should -- thats the debate we
should be having yet.
Facebook
Twitter
Flickr
Google+
YouTube
Vimeo
iTunes
LinkedIn
Alook back at the U.S. response to the devastating
earthquake and tsunami that hit Japan in March of
2011.
March 10, 2012 6:30 AMEDT
Weekly Address: Investing in a Clean
Energy Future
Speaking froma factory in Virginia, President
Obama talks about how companies are creating
more jobs in the United States, making better
products than ever before, and how many are
developing new technologies that are reducing our
dependence on foreign oil and saving families
money at the pump.
VIEWALL RELATED BLOG POSTS
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
2 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
What was really dominating a lot of discussion was this fake controversy, essentially, a sideshow, that was
distracting fromthis real issue. And 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 asked about
this. They were asked about what they thought about the controversy. They were asked if they believed the
President was born in the United States. And it was really a distraction.
That really struck the President, led himto ask his counsel to look into whether we could ask the state of Hawaii
to release the long-formcertificate, which is not something they generally do. And 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
this birther debate to dominate discussion in the Republican Party for months to come. But he thought even though
it might have been good politics, he thought it was bad for the country. And so he asked counsel to look into this.
And now Ill have Bob explain that, and then well take your questions.
MR. CARNEY: I just want to -- sorry, I meant to mention at the top, as some of you may have seen, the
President will be coming to the briefing roomat 9:45 a.m., making a brief statement about this -- not taking
questions, but just wanted to let you know.
MR. PFEIFFER: And he will use this as an opportunity to make a larger point about what this debate says about
our politics.
Go ahead, Bob.
MR. BAUER: Early last week the decision was made to review the 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 determined a waiver request could be made that we had the grounds upon which to
make that request.
And 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 Coie, and you have a copy of the letter she
subsequently sent to the department with the Presidents written request.
The department outlined the requirements for the President to make this request. He signed a letter 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.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
3 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
The department, as I understood it, after reviewing the law and reviewing the grounds asserted in the request,
came to the conclusion that a waiver could be appropriately granted. We were advised that the long-formbirth
certificate could be copied and made available to us as early as Monday, April 25th -- the day before yesterday. And
we made arrangements for counsel to travel to Honolulu to pick it up and it was returned to the White House
yesterday afternoon.
Let me emphasize again, there is a specific statute that governs 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 certificate of the President that would be used for all legal purposes that any resident of Hawaii would want to
use a birth certificate for.
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 the
mid-1980s, I understand. So while I cannot tell you what the entire history of exceptions has been, it is a limited
one. This is one of very few that I understand have been granted for the reasons set out in private counsels letter.
MR. PFEIFFER: We'll be happy to take some questions.
Q I guess I just want to make sure that were clear on this. Even though this one says certificate of live birth
on here, this is different than the other certificate of live birth that weve seen?
MR. PFEIFFER: Yes. The second page there is the one that was posted on the Internet.
Q Okay.
MR. PFEIFFER: And that is a copy of the one that has been kept at the Hawaii Department of Health.
Q Okay. And this is the one that would be referred to -- that people have been asking for that is the birth
certificate?
MR. PFEIFFER: They are both -- the second one is the birth certificate. The one on the top is what is referred
to as the long-formbirth certificate. As you can see -- and Bob can walk you through it -- it contains some additional
information that is not on the second page, which was the birth certificate which was released during the campaign.
If you could just explain the difference.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
4 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
MR. BAUER: Theres a difference between a certificate and a certification. The certification is simply a
verification of certain information thats in the original birth certificate. The birth certificate, as you can see, has
signatures at the bottomfromthe attending physician, the local registrar, who essentially oversees the maintenance
of the records. It contains some additional information also -- that is to say, the original birth certificate -- it contains
some additional information like the ages of the parents, birthplaces, residence, street address, the name of the
hospital.
The core information thats required for legal purposes and that is put into the actual certification thats a
computer-generated document, which we posted in 2008, that information is abstracted, if you will, fromthe original
birth certificate, put into the computerized short-formcertification, and made available to Hawaiian residents at their
request.
So the long form, which is a certificate, has more information, but the short formhas the information thats legally
sufficient for all the relevant purposes.
Q This first one has never been released publicly, correct?
MR. BAUER: Thats correct. It is in a bound volume in the records at the state Department of Health in Hawaii.
Q Bob, can you explain why President Obama let this drag on for four years? Was it Donald Trump that
prompted you to issue this?
MR. BAUER: Ill 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 dont think this dragged on for four years because this was a resolved -- for those of you who remember the
campaign, this issue was resolved in 2008. And it has not been an issue, none of you have asked about it, called
about it, reported on it until the last few weeks.
And as I said earlier, 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 for the
President politically. But despite that, the President, as I said, was struck by how this was crowding out the debate,
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
5 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
particularly around the budget, on important issues, and was an example of the sort of sideshows that our politics
focuses on instead of the real challenges that we have to confront as a country.
And so thats why he made this decision now, because it became an issue that transcended sort of this -- it
essentially was something that was talked about, as I said, fromthe nether regions of the 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
Presidents birth certificate in 2008. We did that. And then no one -- it never -- up until a few weeks ago, there was
never an issue about that that wasnt the birth certificate fromany credible individual or media outlet. And it hasnt
been until -- I mean, Jay was asked about this yesterday --
Q When you say that, you mean certification -- you released the certification?
MR. PFEIFFER: When any Hawaiian wants -- requests their birth certificate because they want to get a drivers
license, they want to get a passport, they do exactly what the President did in 2008. And thats what that is. And we
released that. And thats what any Hawaiian would do to release their birth certificate. And that was good enough
for everyone until very recently this became a question again. And so the President made this decision. Hell talk to
you more about his thinking on that.
Q And this is going to sound -- I mean, you can just anticipate what people are going to -- remain
unconvinced. Theyre going to say that this is just a photocopy of a piece of paper, you could have typed anything
in there. Will the actual certificate be on display or viewable at any -- (laughter.)
Q Will the President be holding it?
MR. PFEIFFER: He will not, and I will not leave it here for himto do so. But it will -- the State Department of
Health in Hawaii will obviously attest that that is a -- what they have on file. As Bob said, its in a book in Hawaii.
MR. BAUER: And youll see the letter fromthe director of the Health Department that states that she oversaw
the copy and is attesting to --
Q But do you understand that this could quiet the conspiracy theorists?
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
6 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
MR. PFEIFFER: There will always be some selection of people who will believe something, and that's not the
issue. The issue is that this is not a discussion that is just happening among conspiracy theorists. Its happening
here in this room; its happening on all of the networks. And its something that, as I said, every major political figure
of both parties whos actually out trying to talk about real issues is asked about this by the media. And so the
President decided to release this. And I'll leave it to others to decide whether theres still -- there will be some who
still have a different -- have a conspiracy about this.
Q Youve got two certified copies, according to this study. You have these physical --
MR. PFEIFFER: Yes. I showed you one. Just one.
Q You showed us a photocopy of one.
MR. PFEIFFER: No, I showed you --
Q Does that have a stamp?
MR. PFEIFFER: It has a seal on it.
Q Why does this rise to the level of a presidential statement?
MR. PFEIFFER: The President -- this in itself -- when you hear the President I think youll understand the point
hes making. That will be in not too long.
Q Did the President change his own mind about this? In other words, was he advocating during the campaign
lets just put it out there and get it over with, or was this an internal shift in thinking based -- in other words, was it
the President who steadfastly during the campaign said this is ridiculous, I don't want to give this any more ground,
and has now changed his mind? Or is this the --
MR. PFEIFFER: Lets be very clear. You were there for the campaign. There was never a question about the
original birth certificate during the campaign. It was a settled issue. I was there for the original decision to release
the birth certificate. I was there when we posted it online. I'mnot sure I even knew there was an original one that
was different than the one we posted online because it wasnt an issue. So it wasnt like -- lets be very clear. We
were asked for the Presidents birth certificate in 2008; we released the Presidents birth certificate; and it was
done. That was it.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
7 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
And so there hasnt been a discussion about this other document for years. Its only been in the last few weeks.
And so to your second question, the President decided to do this and he'll talk about this when he gets here --
decided to do it at the timeline that Bob laid out because it was a -- this was a sideshow that was distracting from
the real challenges that we're facing.
Its not just a sideshow for him; its a sideshow for our entire politics that have become focused on this.
Q Not to give Donald Trump more publicity than he has, but is he the person who sort of -- sort of that bridge
between what you're calling a fringe and the mainstream? Do you think that hes the reason why this tripped the
switch to a level where you now have to deal with something you thought was dealt with?
MR. PFEIFFER: Its not for me to say why mainstreammedia organizations began to cover this debate. Theyll
have to answer that for themselves.
Q How concerned were you about running against Donald Trump in a general election?
MR. PFEIFFER: I'd refer any questions on the election to the campaign.
Q Can you address the reports of Petraeus to the CIAand DOD --
MR. PFEIFFER: You get points for that, Carol. (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: Yes. I don't have -- but youll be disappointed to learn that I don't have a personnel
announcement for you. The President will be addressing this -- questions about personnel tomorrow.
Q Dan, was there a debate about whether or not this deserved being discussed by the White House, whether
or not -- and I'mgoing back to the birth certificate. I lose points, I understand. But was there debate about whether
or not this was worthy of the White House?
MR. PFEIFFER: The point I'd make is that we weren't the ones who -- we're not the first ones to bring this up in
this room. Jay has been asked questions about this; the President has been asked about it in media interviews.
And so that wasnt a decision that we made, and the President made the decision to do this and he made the
decision to -- and when he comes down here this morning he'll talk to you about why he thinks theres an important
point to be made here.
Q Getting back to the personnel announcements, does the President understand that these announcements
have been made and sourced satisfactorily for most news organizations before he speaks up and hes not letting his
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
8 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
White House corroborate?
MR. CARNEY: I don't have a comment on that for you, Bill. (Laughter.)
Q I mean, this is such BS. Its all out there and you guys are -- okay, the President is going to talk about this
tomorrow so we can't say anything.
MR. CARNEY: Bill, you're free to make phone calls everywhere you can. I'mjust saying that we don't have a
personnel announcement for you today.
Q And he'll tomorrow, he'll cover all the aforementioned switches?
MR. CARNEY: We'll have a personnel announcement tomorrow.
Q Jay, yesterday you talked about failsafe triggers as sort of a positive alternative to spending cuts. I'm
wondering if the White House has any openness to including that, because its a White House proposal, including
that in any legislation that would raise the debt ceiling limit.
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 ceiling, a vote on
raising the debt ceiling, to any other piece of legislation. The commitment this President has to moving aggressively
towards a comprehensive deficit reduction plan is clear. It will be clear again when the Vice 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 look like, I think the negotiators should do that, led by the Vice President,
Republicans and Democrats together. But again, explicitly linking or holding hostage the absolute necessity of
raising the debt ceiling to any other piece of legislation and declaring that we'll tank the U.S. economy and perhaps
the global 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 with the President, as I have said many times, that we do not have an alternative to raising the debt ceiling
because, as many have said, outside observers, economists and businessmen and women, the impact of that would
be calamitous at best.
Q So even though its your own proposal that you guys endorsed you don't want to see it as part of the final
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
9 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
package?
MR. CARNEY: I'mnot negotiating individual pieces of a package that we hope Republicans and Democrats can
come together around fromthis podium. But again, we believe its essential to -- the President believes -- that's one
of the reasons why we're doing this right now -- we believe that these are big debates that need to be had. They
can be contentious, argumentative, serious, comprehensive, detailed, because theyre important; theyre all about
Americas future. And theyre 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 he looks forward to having a debate on the real issues that Americans want us to talk about -- long-term
economic plans, deficit reduction, investments in the kinds of things that will help this economy grow and 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 there a concern that more and more people were actually starting to believe its sideshow -- I mean,
people have been asking about --
MR. CARNEY: I will let the President speak for himself, but what Dan was saying and I think is important is that
the issue here is that the President feels that this was bad for the country; that its not healthy for our political
debate, when we have so many important issues that Americans care about, that affect their lives, to be drawn into
sideshows about fallacies 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 pundits have said, you could say that it would be good politics,
smart politics, for the President to let this play out. He cares more about whats good for the country. He wants the
debate on the issues. He wants the focus on the issues that Americans care about.
Q Jay, the President yesterday said that he had been talking to oil exporters about increasing output. Who
specifically has he been talking --
MR. CARNEY: Well, I said -- I want to clarify. I said several times I believe fromthis podiumwhen asked
questions about our overall handling of the issue of high gas prices that we've had conversations with oil-producing
states and 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 Do you guys have any comment on the NATO soldiers that were killed in Afghanistan and any confirmation
on whether there were Americans?
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
10 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
MR. CARNEY: I don't 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. CARNEY: Well, as Dan said, again, it has been a settled issue.
MR. PFEIFFER: Froma factual point of view, its absolutely a settled issue. But the fact that it was a settled
issue did not keep it frombecoming a major part of the political discussion in this town for the last several weeks
here. So theres 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 excellent 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
Bob laid out.
Q Aside fromthe 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 clarify what this document is --
MR. PFEIFFER: This is the -- the letter first 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 How did it get here?
MR. PFEIFFER: As Bob said, it arrived by plane -- the Presidents personal counsel went to Hawaii and brought
it back and we got it last night.
Q Last night?
MR. PFEIFFER: Last night.
Q What time?
MR. PFEIFFER: Between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
11 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
Q When did you decide to do this gaggle?
MR. PFEIFFER: Whats that?
Q When was this gaggle put on -- when was this planned?
MR. PFEIFFER: Whatever time you received your guidance suggesting that it would be this time tomorrow
morning.
Q Are these letters supposed to demonstrate the legal steps that were involved in releasing it to the White
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: Right. The non-release of the long-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
request.
Q Well, isnt it true that anybody who was born in Hawaii can write this letter? I mean, that's all there is to the
waiver process?
MR. BAUER: No. Let me just explain 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 the 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 sits in a bound volume
in the State Department of Health.
The short fromis a computerized abstract, and that's the legal birth certificate 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 determine that there was
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
12 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
a legal basis for providing it, and then ask themto exercise their authority to provide us with the long form. The
steps required to accomplish 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 accompanying letter fromcounsel basically formalizing
the request. So the reason we included that is that those were legal steps we took to obtain the long formby way of
this waiver.
Q Do we have the letter fromthe President --
MR. BAUER: Its in the packet.
Q And you went to Hawaii?
MR. BAUER: I did not go to Hawaii. The counsel, Judy Corley, who signed the -- the Presidents personal
counsel at Perkins Coie, Judy Corley, whose letter -- signed letter of request is in your packet, traveled to Honolulu
and picked up the birth certificate.
Q 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 of the U.S. House. Paul
Clement has taken a lot of heat fromthe LGBT community for volunteering to take up defense of DOMA. Eric
Holder 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, I think he is doing that which lawyers do when
were at our best. That criticismI think was very misplaced. And Holder went on to compare the criticismof
Clement to attacks on the Justice Department lawyers for their past for detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Does the
President share Eric Holders views on this?
MR. CARNEY: We do share Eric Holders 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 administration to defend the
Defense of Marriage Act, that we would support efforts by Congress if they so chose to defend it. And so I have
nothing to add to the Attorney Generals comments.
Q Following Mondays Af-Pak Situation Roommeeting, what is the Presidents assessment of the situation in
Afghanistan and Pakistan? And does he think that July drawdown is still on?
MR. CARNEY: The Presidents policy, which included the beginning of a transition -- beginning of a drawdown
of American troops, is absolutely still on track. I dont have anything additionally fromthe meeting yesterday beyond
what weve said. But the policy remains as it was.
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
13 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM
MR. EARNEST: Jay, we should wrap it up here.
MR. CARNEY: Yes. Last one, yes.
Q Given the comments of the Pakistani official quoted in the Wall Street Journal, is Pakistan still a U.S. ally,
and to what extent?
MR. CARNEY: Pakistan is still a U.S. ally.
Thanks.
END 9:18 A.M. EDT
Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011 | The White House http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carne...
14 of 15 3/11/2012 11:00 PM



































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue


Exhibit 2


page 9 page 9

































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Paul Edward Ireys AFFIDAVIT


Exhibit A




































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Paul Edward Ireys AFFIDAVIT


Exhibit B





































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Paul Edward Ireys AFFIDAVIT


Exhibit C






































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Paul Edward Ireys AFFIDAVIT


Exhibit D
From:
To:
1051324 1051324 1051324
Re: binder 11 ...
Tuesday, December 4, 2012 11:26 AM
"Henry Wayland Blake" <hwblake@bellsouth.net>
"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)

DearPaul,

Ithinkyouhaveproposedthemostprobablescenariobasedonthecreaonandledatesofthe
associatedcourtdocuments.

1.ThepapercopyoftheTeppertoFuddy3pageleerwasdated05/26/2012.

2.Theelectronicversionofthis3pageleerappearedonScribdon06/06/2012

3.TheTepperfourpageelectronicdocument10513240131.pdf(sameas351.pdf)wascreatedon
06/04/2012andwaslastmodiedon06/06/2012.Pages13ofthisdocumentarethe3electronic
pagesoftheTeppertoFuddyleerthatappearedonScribdon06/06/2012.The4thelectronicpageis
theTepperpage4,LFCOLB.ThisfourpagedocumentwasledinMSon06/06/2012.

4.WereallydontknowwhentheTepperpage4LFCOLBwascreated.

5.ThepapercopyoftheonepageOnakatoTeppervericaonleerwasdated05/31/2012.

6.Theelectronicversion,whichiscourtdocument352,wascreatedon06/04/2012andwaslast
modiedon06/06/2012.ThisonepageelectronicdocumentwasledinMSon06/06/2012.

IbelievethatthemostlikelyscenarioisthatTeppercreatedapapercopyofhisthreepageleerto
Fuddyon05/26/2012.HeaachedapaperprintoutcopyoftheoriginalWHLFCOLBandmailedthis
fourpagepapercopytoFuddy.

TepperandOnakathencollaboratedtoaltertheWHLFCOLBtocreatetheTepperpage4LFCOLB.

On06/04/2012,Teppercreatedthedocuments10513240131.pdf(sameas351)and352.

Hethenledthetwodocuments351and352inMSon06/06/2012.

WereallydontknowtheindividualaconsofeitherTepperorOnakawithregardsthemodicaonsof
theWHLFCOLBPDFimageletocreatethealteredLFCOLBPDFimagele.Onakamayhavemodied
theWHLFCOLBandthensentthealteredPDFimagetoTepperasaonepagePDFimagele.Thereis
Re: binder 11 ... - Yahoo! Mail http://us.mc1257.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?sMid=12&filterBy=&...
1 of 3 12/4/2012 3:13 PM
nothinginhisvericaonleerthatindicatesthatheaachedthisalteredLFCOLBtohisvericaon
leer.However,hisleerdoesrefertotheLFCOLBcopythatwaspurportedlyaachedtothefourpage
requestleerfromTeppertoFuddy.

Alternavely,TeppermighthavehadsomeoneelsemodifytheWHLFCOLBPDFimagetocreatethe
alteredPDFimage.ThatmightexplainwhytheMETADATAwasnotenrelyerasedfromhisfourpage
electronicdocument.WeknowthatascannerwasusedsoTeppersforgerwouldhavehadtohave
somemeansofresizingascannedandalteredimageoftheWHLFCOLBbacktothecorrectsizeto
matchareal1961CercateofLiveBirthprintedform.

Iamnowcertainthatthe21addedobjectswhichareinvisibleinAdobeReaderpreexistedbefore
06/04/2012asaseparatePDFimage.The21objectsinclude12linesegements,2broadlinestrikeouts
and7Blackredaconrectangles.ThisredaconpageissmallerthantheLFCOLBimagepagesize.I
havesuccessfullyseparatedthissmallerredaconimagefromtheaenedandalteredWHLFCOLB
imageinbothAdobeIllustratorCS6andInkscape.IhaveaachedmylatestscreenshotsfromAdobe
Illustratorasproof.Thescreenshot[105132401131_ss3.jpg]aachedshowstheredaconpageslid
otheLFCOLBimagepagetotheright.Thebackgroundoftheredaconpageistransparent.

SoanalternavescenariowouldbethatTepperhadhisforgermodifytheWHLFCOLBandOnaka
providedtheredaconimagetoassistTeppersforgerresizehisscannedimage.Thiswouldlessen
OnakasinvolvementwiththecreaonofthefraudulentLFCOLBTepperpage4LFCOLB.

SoscenarioAwouldbethatOnakadidthedeedandscenarioBwouldbethattheycollaboratedtodo
thedeed.

EitherwaytheybothareguiltyofaempngtopulloabaitandswitchonJudgeWingate.They
substutedtheTepperpage4LFCOLBfortheWHLFCOLBanddidnttellJudgeWingateaboutthe
switch.

Icanprovideanotarizedcopyofmyswornadavitwheneveryouneedit.Also,Icanprovideanyofmy
screenshotsasrequired.Iwouldprefernottotesfybecauseofpersonalreasons.Ialsobelievethat.if
Iweretotesfy,thenIwouldquicklybecomeapunchingbagforthedefensebecauseIdonthavean
ITcercateandIhavenevertesedasaforensicexpert.

Sincerely,

Henry

From:PaulIrey
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 5:54 AM
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)
__________
Re: binder 11 ... - Yahoo! Mail http://us.mc1257.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage?sMid=12&filterBy=&...
2 of 3 12/4/2012 3:13 PM



































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue


Exhibit 3

Strunk v J effries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.; 21948 / 2012
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ULSTER )
Accordingly, I, H. William Van Allen, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
a. Amover 18years of age and not a party to this action.
b. Myplace of business is located at 351 North Road Hurley NewYork 12243.
c. On November 14, 2012, Christopher Strunk instructed me to serve a true conformed copy of the NOTICE OF
PETITION, PETITION with AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION affirmed November 13,2012 along with a
NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE APPLICATION FOR A PRELIMINARY
INJ UNCTION PENDING A DECLARATORY INJ UNCTION ON ISSUE OF LAW AS TO ELECTORS
DECLARATORY RELIEF AS TO ELECTORS, a Notice of Petitioner's intent to filean order to show cause
application at the Kings County Supreme Court Building at 10AMon the 10
th
Floor intake at 360 Adams Street on
Monday November 19,2012 placing a complete set in a properly addressed to each respondent listed below for
delivery by USPS by certified mail with request for return receipt for proof of service.
d. On November 14, 2012, I caused each copy with proper postage for service by certified 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 corner of the envelop that was then deposited with the USPS for service upon:
1. Hakeem J effries 35Underhill Avenue, #2A -- Brooklyn, NY 11238
2. Grace Mengofl47l4 34thAvenue -- Flushing, NY 11354
3. Felix Ortiz 189B33rd Street -- Brooklyn, NY 11232
4. Bill DeBlasioof 442 lith Street -- Brooklyn. NY 11215
5. Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #[2G -- New York. NY 10025
6. KeithL.T. Wright of2225 FifthAvenue -- New York. NY 10037
7. Christine C. Quinn of263 Ninth Avenue. #3A -- New York, NY 10001
8. WilliamThompson of 106West 121st Street -- New York. NY 10027
9. Scott Stringer of 155West 71st Street. #3A -- New York, NY 10023
10. Emily Giske01'440 West 24thStreet -- New York, NY 10014
11. Anne Marie Anzaloue 2827 48th Street -- Astoria. NY 11103
12. Archie Spigner of 11210 175thStreet -- J amaica, N'r' 11433
13. George Gresham 1313 East 233rd Street -- Bronx, NY 10466
14. Ruben Diaz, J r. of820 Boyton Avenue. #6D -- Bronx. NY 10473
15. Ken J enkins 108 Bushey Avenue -- Yonkers. NY 10710
16. Mario Cilento 3Isabel Road -- Orangeburg, NY 10962
17. Gerald D. J ennings of 1135New Scotland Road -- Albany. NY 12208
18. Byron Brown 14Blaine Street -- Buffalo, NY 14208
19. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road -- Rochester, NY 14610
20. J oseph Morelle of 133Deerfield Drive -- Rochester, NY 14609
21. Scott Adams of 11Poplar Avenue -- Orchard Park, NY 14127
22. Stephanie Miner 102 Woodside Drive -- Syracuse, NY 13224
23. SteveBellone 107 Vanderbilt Avenue -- West Babylon, NY 11704
24. Irene Stein 101 Brandywine Drive -- Ithaca, NY 14850
25. Sheila Comar 29 Depot Street -- Middle Granville, NY 12849;
26. Kirsten Gillibrand with DC Office 478 Russell Washington, DC 20510
Sworn to before me
This i day of November 2012
~<-Drl Q ~k.o-~
tary Pubhc
CM I RR No 7012101000068749741
CM I RR No 7012101000068749819
CM I RR No 7012101000068749758
CM I RR No 7012101000068749765
CM I RR No 7012101000068749956
CM I RR No 7012101000068749826
CM I RR No 7012101000068749833
CM IRR No 7012101000068749840
CM I RR No 7012101000068749857
CM I RR No 7012101000068749864
CM I RR No 7012101000068749901
CM IRR No 7012101000068750242
CM I RR No 7012101000068749963
CM I RR No 7012101000068749796
CM I RR No 7012101000068749949
CM I RR No 7012101000068749895
CM I RR No 7012101000068749970
CM I RR No 7012101000068749802
CM IRR No 7012101000068749772
CM I RR No 7012101000068749789
CM I RR No 7012101000068749871
CM I RR No 7012101000068749888
CM I RR No 7012101000068749918
CM I RR No 7012101 000068749925
CM I RR No 7012101000068749932
C" ! Rl ' N~' : ' 00006R7499R7
/#~
/;l.v~2r;;/
rlliam Van Allen ~
J UDITHS.MA YHON
NOTARYPUBUC, STAT; OF NEW YORK
NO.01MA60B5585
QUALIFIED INULSTER COUNTY/'(j
COMMISSION EXPIRES J UtY 14, 20__
Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 WSSC for Kings county Index No.; 21 948 / 2012
0
, - AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
TY OF KINGS )
Aecordingly, I, I
Rou&e efi ALL being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of pe jury:
over 18 year s of age a n d not a part y t o t hi s action.
6J5 f/& K 1 1 ZoG
place of busi ness i s located at
November 30, 2012, Christopher St r unk i nst ruct ed me t o serve a true conformed copy of t he PETITIONER'S
-- >OND AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF OSC with EXHIBITS annexed AFFIRMED November 30, 2012 al ong with a copy
of t he NOTICE OF PETITION, PETITION with AFFIDAVIT OF VERIFICATION affirmed November 13, 2012
placing a complete s et i n a properly addressed envelope t o each respondent listed below for delivery by USPS regular
mail.
d. On November 30, 2012, I caused each copy wi t h proper postage for service by first cl ass mail o n t he listed Electors And
where each envelope was properly addressed with t he Notification "URGENT LEGAL SERVICE" a n d PERSONAL 8a
CONFIDENTJAL" i n t he lower left h a n d c ome r of the envelop t ha t wa s 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 13 13 East 233rd Street -- Bronx, NY 10466
4. Ruben Diaz, Jr. of 820 Boyton Avenue, #6D -- Bronx, NY 10473
5. Byron Brown 14 Blaine Street -- Buffalo, NY 14208
6. Felix Ortiz 189 B 33rd Street -- Brooklyn, NY 11232
7. Hakeern Jeffi-ies 35 Underhill Avenue, #2A -- Brooklyn, NY 11238
8. Bill DeBlasio of442 1 lth Street -- Brooklyn, NY 11215
9. Robert Duffy 164 Croydon Road -- Rochester, NY 146 10
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, #8F -- New York, NY 10025
13. Walter Cooper 150 West 96th Street, #I2G -- New York, NY 10025
14. Sheldon Silver of 550 Grand Street, #5A -- New York,,NY 10002
15. Keith L.T. Wright of 2225 Fifth Avenue -- New York, NY 10037
16. Christine C. Quinn of 263 Ninth Avenue, #3A -- New York, NY 10001
17. William Thompson of 106 West 12 1 st Street -- New York, NY 10027
18. Scott Stringer of 155 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 11 103
24. Grace Meng of 14714 34th Avenue -- Flushing, NY 11354
25. 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 KLQ~TV CrfCtVrc/@(l VtWQ $f =f =I C@r LEqB E ~ ~ S ~ L ~ W H Wmy18
KAMAL P. SON1
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01 SO6089949
: .,
Qualified in Kings C0unly
Commission Expires March 31. 201 5


































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue


Exhibit 4


-QUEST FOR JUDICIAL INTERVENTION"
UCS-840 (31201 1)
Supreme COURT, COUNTY OF Kings
&V. rc/ 2012
Index No: 2 1 ?* Zo(a Date Index Issued:
I B Y m o n e n .
against-
For Court Clerk Use Only:
IAS tntry Uate
- JuageAssigned
CAPTION:
Enter the complete case caption. Do notuse et a1or et am. If mae space is
required, attach a caption nder sheet.
KJI Uate
- -
H~, <C?G&' I J C F * ~ ~ , G/~ALC mgNG, BI LL DEBWSa,uvryEZ
ICe~yfl b a T d VfltGc+s, CHRLTT~NE Cdu~ul j W~ L U P M 7kn.,mahl, seun J ~ ~ , ~ G ~ ~ ~
c m( c y GJSI CE, PUPIF )MANE ~ru&ddWt?, -)+&c,-rrG SRGNGR &wsk ~ ~ - e l y
f
RVDIN D f ~ 2 JQ. , ~ A ~ L C U CrLFWaf - & A J , ~ - 199- B M* ) ~ 2
1266'- Wf-py, J o ~ n u
s-~t~/yrq;repp~~~ n ~ . ~ . l r n ~ S ? F ~ ;E WK ~ r ;
I=& ~ WN 54GcW W P l ( l f i - m W ~ t ~ ~ / p p , ~ Q p o
Dhnch@$l ~ea; bf nI ent (s)
% ,, . . . , *. - ? ' . - - ,
NATURE OF ACTION 'OR-~OCEE~ING:" : Check.ONEbox-only andspecifywh6re iniicated. ' ' ' , ' - ; 3=, C" .-
Is this adionlproceedrng being filed post-judgment? 0 @ If yes, judgment date:
MATRIMONIAL
0 Contested
0 Uncontested
NOTE: For all Matrimonial actions where the parties have children under
the age of 18, complete and attach the MATRIMONIAL RJI Addendum.
TORTS
0 Asbestos
0 Breast Implant
0 Enmment al :
(SPem)
0 Medical, Dental, or Pediatric Malpractice
0 Motor Vehlde
0 products ~sbi l i ty.
(~PeclfY)
0 Other Neglglrgence:
(specrty)
0 Other Profess~onal Malpractice:
( s a w )
0 Other Tort
( ~pec~t y)
OTHER MATTERS SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
Certmcate of lncorporat~onlDissolut~on [see NOTE under Commerctal] 0 CPLR Article 75 (Arbltrat~on) [see NOTE under Commercial]
0 Emergency Medical Treatment CPLR Artlcle 78 (Body or Officer)
COMMERCIAL 3 2:; -
0 Buslness Ent~ty (including corporations, partnerships, L*S, et
0 Contract
d- -
z r
0 Insurance (where Insurer is a party, except arbitration)=
m
0 ucc (including sales, negotiable instruments) C a3 ?-
0 Other Commercial: a
(tpecity)
NOTE: For Commercial Div~sion assignment requests 122 NYCRR 5
202.70(d)]. complete and attach the COMMERCIAL DIV RJI Addendum.
REAL PROPERTY:
Haw many pmperbes does the application include?
0 Condemnat~on
0 Foreclosure
property Address:
S m Address CW State Zip
NOTE: For Foreclosure actions invdvlng a one- to four-family, omer-
occupied, residential property, or an owner-occupied condominium, '
complete and attach the FORECLOSURE RJI Addendum.
0 Tax Certiorari - Section: Block: Lot:
0 Other Real Properly:
(~peclty)
0 Habeas Corpus
0 Local Court Appeal
0 Mechanic's Lien
0 Name Change
0 Pistol Perrn~t Revocation Heanng
0 Sale or Finance of ReligiouslNot-for-Profit Property
0-
(spadfy)
9 ~l ect i on Law
0 MHL Article 9.60 (Kendra's Law)
0 MHL Arbcle 10 (Sex Offender Confinement-initial)
0 MHL Article 10 (Sex Offender Confinement-Rewew)
0 MHL Article 81 (Guardianship)
0 Other Mental Hygiene:
( ~ Wl t y )
0 Other Special ?peeding:
-/ . bpeuty)
STAfus <X ACTION OR.PROCCE~INU: ' . .Answer YES or NO for EVERY q&&on ~ ~ b e n t e i additional iiformation where indcafed
I YES I NO
Has a summons and complaint or suhmons wlnotice been filed?
8) 0 ' If yes, date filed:
l 2
ClAL INTERVENTION: Cheek ONE box onlyAND ~rdtl'iiljnformation where indicated.
nfmr's Cornwmtse
0 Note of Issue and/or Certificate of Readiness
0 Nobe of h4tdical. Dental. or Pediatric Malpractice Date lssue Joined:
0 Nobce df Motion Relief Sought: Return Date:
0 N o w of Petition Relief Sought: Return Date:
=order to show cause Relief Sought: m o . wf/% /PJ"paH pm. Return Date: 9 % 6 L z
0 Other Ex Parte Application Relief Sought: A@=.
0 Poor Persora Application
0 Request for Preliminary Conference
0 Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Settlement Conference
0 Wnt d Habeas Corpus
0 - (sPeafY):
RUATEDCASES:
List any r el at edact i : Fm IGl-Mlial actions, k;elude&y-m4ated'~drninal andhx Famlly Court cases. - , ; . ;- , , ,-.
If additional space is-required, complek and attach the R31 Addendum. %Ifmorre.'leave blank.
. - " C L - T
- . z 7 e 2 - -
Case Ti l e
S%WM~ Cf. wvfl
,krcr r k~ &%"lr36fl
%PI < v PYSBO Y
Court
Kt@J-svf
LC
1 1 .
IndexlCase No.
296' f f -
- z,EcjB
'I-q by E
Z ~ I - a a a
PARTIES:
'If addifionalspace isrequired, complete andattach the.RJMW.@dwi'. , & L A ; ;J , ; . : -
,
: - A- . S. ." , ,*$ *- . ' <'$ -$,' s'-.c
- ? * l h 4
For partieswthout an attorney, check"UnlRep- box AND entecparly address, Mane"Tiumberand&ailld&lrss&4n * ~ t t k ~ =$ace. . . ..-
Judge (if assigned)
S ~ H ~ L Q ~ J S C
1 I!
Y C H ~ ~ C ~ C -I sc
Relationship to Instant Case
r r - + - e 8 ~ m i e 4 mL-na& C J R ~ er J
k c rcL/F 2 m ~ ~ C T ( 6 ~
CG am - RP- 1 2 - s x -
Un-
Rep
Parties:
L~st parties in caption order and
Indicate pa* role(s) (e.g
3rd-party plaintiff).
'%U@It;
l ast Name
CMA IS ~9P-r Wk.
Attorneys:
Provide name, firm name, business address, phone number and e-mail
address of all attorneys that have appeared in the case.
, 5Tgl / r Jl K
Last Name
~,4&s7A@-H3C- LgPC
Flrst Name
~tl p - t v?NTt " -
Finn N me F ~ n t Name
NO
lssue
Joined
(YIN):
DYES
Primary Role:
Secondary Rde (tf any):
&~ ~ = FKI 6
LastNan?
Insurance Carrier(s):
37 vw-3 We Bmq$d - i t
Stred Address c b Stste
BW-QOL-~TA Phone 7 Fax - ~ f i R o r ~ z ~ @ emall
hat Name Mllms
THERE ARE AMD
D
I AFFIRM
HAVE BEEN NO RELATED ACTIONS OR PROCEEDINGS, NOR H UDfClAL m Y BEB(
FILED IN THIS ACTION OR PROCEEDING.
Dated: ( 0 / &, mlz-
22%- SIGNATURE
~F- RG~x~~MM
FE cfie (c~wjq px ac +* h d < F ~ E
ATTORNEY REGISTRATION NUMBER PRINT OR TYPE NAME
'..
M&E-J
F i i Name
pnnurV Rob: - p e r .
Sacaday Role (if any):
Last Name
Fbdllar*
Rimay Role:
secondary Rob (if any):
L.rt Name
Flmt Na m
Primary Role:
Secondary Role (It any):
UNDER THE PENALTY OF
YES
Finn Name
Stmt A d d m cftr st.b,
Phone Fax d
LatHrru Fhtltrac
Rml l m
Street Mdron car -
Phane k d
hst Name FiP'
OW
OYES
om,
Fkmthm
S W Address ctr &
Phone Fax .J
OW
PERJURY THAT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, OTHER THAN AS MUTED Asov+

































Strunk v Jeffries et al. Article 78 NYSSC for Kings County Index No.: 21948-2012


Christopher-Earl: Strunks AFFIDAVIT in support of Note of Issue


Exhibit 5







SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

---------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against- (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of PLAINTIFFS AFFIDAVIT IN
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD), SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller), MOTION with CPLR 3101(d)
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their and JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official PLAINTIFFS STATUS
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------x
















Exhibit 3

Plaintiff / Appellant

Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse
Appellant self-represented w/o attorney
593 Vanderbilt Avenue #281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
Ph. 845-901-6767 Email: chris@strunk.ws


Defendants / Respondents

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General of NYS
by: CLAUDE PLATTON, Esq. AAG Assistant Attorney General
120 BROADWAY 25th Floor
New York, New York 10271-0332
Telephone (212) 416-8020

Representing: NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS:
J AMES A. WALSH, DOUGLAS A. KELLNER, Co-Chairs
EVELYN J . AQUILA / Commissioner, GREGORY P.
PETERSON / Commissioner, Deputy Director TODD D.
VALENTINE, Deputy Director STANLEY ZALEN;
ANDREW CUOMO, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, THOMAS P.
DINAPOLI, RUTH NOEM COLN, in their Official and individual capacity;
DEMOCRATIC STATE COMMITTEE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK;
STATE COMMITTEE OF THE WORKING FAMILIES PARTY OF NEW
YORK STATE; 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;

Todd E. Phillips, Esq. of
CAPLIN & DRYSDALE, CHARTERED
One Thomas Circle, N.W., Suite 1100,
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone:

Representing:
J OHN SIDNEY MCCAIN III; MCCAIN VICTORY
2008; MCCAIN-PALIN VICTORY 2008;
i


THOMAS J . GARRY, Esq. of
HARRIS BEACH, PLLC
The OMNI 333 Earle Ovington Blvd., Suite 901
Uniondale, New York 11553
Telephone:

Representing:
J OSEPH R. BIDEN, J R.; SOEBARKAH (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack
Hussein Obama II, a.k.a. Steve Dunham); NANCY PELOSI; PENNY S.
PRITZKER; OBAMA FOR AMERICA; OBAMA VICTORY FUND


J AMES C. DUGAN Esq. of
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10019-6099
Telephone:

Representing: GEORGE SOROS;

MARSHAL BELL, Esq. of
McGUIRE WOODS LLP
1345 Avenue of Americas, 7th Floor
New York, New York 10105
Telephone:

Representing: ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI;
MARK BRZEZINSKI; IAN J . BRZEZINSKI;


TODD A. BROMBERG ESQ. of
WILEY REIN LLP -
1776K Street, NW
Washington D.C. 20006
Telephone:

Representing: J OHN A. BOEHNER;


ii

Christopher J . Latell Esq. and Daniel S. Reich Esq. of
RABINOWITZ, BOUDIN, STANDARD, KRINSKY & LIEBERMAN, PC
45 Broadway, Suite 1700
New York, New York 10006-3791
Telephone:

Representing: RGER CALERO; THE SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY


Erica Burke, Esq. of
SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
425 Lexington Avenue
New York. New York 10017-3954
Telephone:

Representing: PETER G. PETERSON


MICHAEL CARDOZO Corporation Counsel of City of New York
By: CHLARENS ORSLAND, Esq. Assistant Corporation Counsel
New York City Law Department
100 Church Street New York, New York 10007
Telephone: (212) 788-0904

Representing: Fr. J OSEPH A. O'HARE, S.J .; Fr. J OSEPH P. PARKES, S.J .;
FREDERICK A.O. SCHWARZ, J R.;


iii

APPELLANT BRIEF

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Parties...i

Table of Authoritiesvi

Introduction..2

Statement of the Case on Appeal.....3
J udicial Notices in regards to the Status of Appellant
First J udicial Notice: (A) that there is a pending decision herein on the
notice of motion filed with this court with a return date of April 25, 2014 for
enlargement of time (B) that there are active related cases before the
Honorable David I Schmidt in Kings Count Supreme with Index Nos:
29642-2008 and 21948-2012...4
Second J udicial Notice: that the trial for 29642-2008 and 21948-2012 will
prove fraud in the use of forged documents for Barack Hussein Obama II to
gain ballot access to USURP the Office of POTUS in both the 2008 and
2012 elections cycles as an act of treason and misprision of treason4
Third J udicial Notice: that on April 29, 2014 at 1:20PM the Clerk of
Superior Court of Georgia for the County of Lamar recorded the notice of
acceptance of appointment of Christopher Earl Strunk as the Executor /
iv
Table of Authorities

Pages
Cases

Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162 (1875) 8

U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) 9

Brown v Bernstein, DCPA 49 F. Supp 728 732 6

Federal Statutes

18 U.S. Code 2381 Treason 5

18 U.S. Code 2382 - Misprision of treason 5

12 USC 95a and 50 USC App. 5(b) 6,7

United States Constitution
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5
3,6, 9,
12
14th Amendment 14

Other sources

The Law of Nations, Section 212 (London 1797) 9

A Proposal For Printing in English, The Select Orations of Marcus Tullius
Cicero according to the last Oxford Edition 17 (Henry Eelbeck trans.
London 1720). 9

Politics, Book Three, Part II,
Aristotle, writing in 350 B.C.E., as translated by Benjamin J owett, 7

J .S. Reeves, The Influence of the Law of Nature Upon International Law
in the United States, 3 Am.J . Intl L. 547 et. seq. passim (1909) 10

Lee A. Casey, David B. Rivkin, J r. and Darin R. Bartram, Unlawful
Belligerency and Its Implications Under International Law, 10

R.G. Natelson, The Original Constitution 49 and 69 (2010) 10

Related cases:
Strunk v Paterson et al. NYS Supt Ct. Kings County Index 2,4
No.: 29642-08

Strunk v J effries et al. NYS Supt Ct. Kings County Index 2,4
No.: 21948-12


STATE OF NEW YORK )
} ss:
COUNTY OF KINGS )

Accordingly, I, Christopher-Earl: Strunk in esse Sui juris agent, being duly
sworn. depose and say:
Introduction
This is the Appellants Appeal Brief for Appeal 2013-6335 for consolidated
hearing together with Appeal 2012-5515 taken from the Order of April 11, 2012
filed J une 20, 2013, and Appeal 2014-00297 taken from the Order of December 9,
2013 as against all defendants accompanies the record subpoenaed for each of the
Orders for use by the Court in deliberation.
That this Appellants Brief for the appeal 2013-6335 taken within 35
calendar from the March 29, 2013 Order entered by McGuire Woods LLP on April
18, 2013 counsel to Defendants ZBIGNIEW KAIMIERZ BRZEZINSKI, MARK
BRZEZINSKI and IAN J . BRZEZINSKI in the total money amount of $75,600.00
for attorney fees and $2,446.74 for disbursements for a total of $78,156.74 resulted
from the alleged frivolous conduct of Plaintiff CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK
as would apply to all the Defendants (see the annexed Order and Notice of Appeal
with statement filed the court);


Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 2 of 20


Statement of the Case on Appeal
That were Plaintiff on the merits found not to be Delusional, Fanciful and
Frivolous as Plaintiff was adjudged by Arthur M. Schack J SC at the Trial court
level with Kings County Index no: 6500-2011 on April 11, 2012; and
That Plaintiff fraud challenge as to the New York States Board of Elections
et al is a result of the discovery of their willful misuse of United States
Constitution Article II Section 1 Clause 5 as to the merits of the eligibility
requirements for any candidate slate seeking ballot access and election to the office
of President and or Vice President of the United States (POTUS) along with each
of those entities or persons materially seeking to impose onto the New York State
ballot in 2008, 2012 and in 2016 as a continuing injury by state entities that despite
being warned of ineligibility in 2008 placed Barack Hussein Obama II aka Barry
Soetoro aka SOEBARKAH, aka Steve Dunham, aka Barry Allen Owens with
J oseph R. Biden as a slate, the J ohn Sidney McCain and the Palin slate and the
Roger Calero slate unto the ballot at the 2008 Presidential election cycle; and
when all three Presidential candidates slates were and are never to be eligible as
natural-born Citizens of the United States, and that all persons acted with intent
of committing misprision of treason in the commission of willful fraud against the
beneficial interest of Plaintiffs unalienable rights who along with voters have been
denied any remedy available under law.; and as such requires pure equity relief
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 3 of 20


under the maxims of equity here as it were a Bill particulars for the Appellate
Panel and Court embank to issue a decree for equity relief. In that the need for a
decree by reason of the lack of POTUS eligibility defines the very existence of the
Court in matter of such magnitude that has never been a more important case
involving grave national security with such constellation of parties now
represented by the nine attorneys quite unlike any prior time in case history.
Judicial Notices in regards to the Status of Appellant
Please take J udicial Notice that there is a pending decision herein on the
notice of motion filed with this court with a return date of April 25, 2014 for
enlargement of time herein to file this and the accompanying brief for the 2013-
6335 and 2014-00297 to be done after the trial for two (2) related electoral college
cases with Index Nos: 29642-2008 and 21948-2012 still before the Honorable
David I. Schmidt with motions taken on submission on 28 March 2014 awaiting
resolution for a consolidated trial for each schedule for J une 18, 2014 with a pre
trial conference scheduled J une 13, 2014.
Please Take Further J udicial Notice that the trial will prove fraud in the use
of forged documents for Barack Hussein Obama II to gain ballot access to USURP
the Office of POTUS in both the 2008 and 2012 elections cycles as an act of
treason and misprision of treason at the state and or federal level is J udicial Notice
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 4 of 20


that carries with it personal liability for this court according to Federal statutes
accordingly, quote:
18 U.S. Code 2381 Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or
adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United
States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be
imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than
$10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
States.
18 U.S. Code 2382 - Misprision of treason :
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of
the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon
as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some
judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a
particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under
this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both. (emphasis by
Appellate)

Please Take Further J udicial Notice that on April 29, 2014 at 1:20PM the Clerk of
Superior Court of Georgia for the County of Lamar recorded the notice of
acceptance of appointment of Christopher Earl Strunk as the Executor / Settlor of
The Express Deed in Trust to The United States of America in BPA BOOK 32
PAGES 716 thru 754; and that the acceptance by Christopher Earl Strunk in esse
Sui juris private citizen of the United States the secured beneficiary agent of the
Debtor Trust transmitting utility CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK, is
appointed to perform the public duties of Executor and Settlor for the Express
Deed In Trust To The United States Of America With Beneficiary Discretion For
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 5 of 20


Private Citizens Of The United States Who Are True Natural-Born Citizens Under
The United States Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 And Not Surety-
Indentures For Their Respective Debtor Trust Entity Under 12 USC 95a and 50
USC App. 5(b) Martial Government with a Continuing National Emergency
(Express Deed in Trust) responsible for the beneficial claim by its Beneficiaries,
with Settlor duty to the Express Deed in Trust shall guarantee that all incumbents
and future candidate(s) for the Office of President or Vice President of the United
States (POTUS) shall be a bonafide Natural-Born Citizen (NBC) private citizen of
the United States agent who is surety no more to the Debtor Trust Entity in
compliance with the United States Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5, either
under 12 USC 95 and 50 USC App. 5(b) with the Military Government authority
of renewed annual National Emergency or otherwise; and with the understanding
that in regards to what is a National Emergency, Blacks Law 5
th
Edition cites
Brown v Bernstein, DCPA 49 F. Supp 728 732 that the United States Congress has
not made a distinction between a state of war and a state of national emergency.

The Definition of natural-born Citizen did not derive from the term
natural-born Subject
That Settlors duty as a public officer is to enforce through the Express Deed
in Trust the actual definition of the Natural-born Citizen clause, that as stated in the
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 6 of 20


Appellants Brief filed with the Court on J une 20, 2013 for Appeal case 2012-
5515, the definition does not derive from the term of art natural-born Subject,
but instead was derived from ancient consideration of GODs Natural Law as
expressed in Greece by the works of Aristotle and carried forward for use in
Roman law by the works of Cicero.
Aristotle did not define citizenship like the English did in the English
common law in which they did not give any relevancy to the citizenship of the
childs parents, provided the parents were not diplomats or military invaders.
Aristotle included in the definition of a citizen a person of whom both the
parents are citizens.
(1)
It is this definition which was handed down through the

1
Aristotle also gave us a definition of a natural born Citizen. In Politics, Book Three, Part II,
Aristotle, writing in 350 B.C.E., as translated by Benjamin J owett, gave us his definition of
citizenship:
Part II
But in practice a citizen is defined to be one of whom both the parents are citizens;
others insist on going further back; say to two or three or more ancestors. This is a short
and practical definition but there are some who raise the further question: How this third
or fourth ancestor came to be a citizen? Gorgias of Leontini, partly because he was in a
difficulty, partly in irony, said- 'Mortars are what is made by the mortar-makers, and the
citizens of Larissa are those who are made by the magistrates; for it is their trade to make
Larissaeans.' Yet the question is really simple, for, if according to the definition just
given they shared in the government, they were citizens. This is a better definition than
the other. For the words, 'born of a father or mother who is a citizen,' cannot possibly
apply to the first inhabitants or founders of a state.

There is a greater difficulty in the case of those who have been made citizens after a
revolution, as by Cleisthenes at Athens after the expulsion of the tyrants, for he enrolled
in tribes many metics, both strangers and slaves. The doubt in these cases is, not who is,
but whether he who is ought to be a citizen; and there will still be a furthering the state,
whether a certain act is or is not an act of the state; for what ought not to be is what is
false. Now, there are some who hold office, and yet ought not to hold office, whom we
describe as ruling, but ruling unjustly. And the citizen was defined by the fact of his
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 7 of 20


millennia through the law of nations and which the Founders and Framers adopted
for the new republic. We also see that the then Supreme Court of the United States
(SCOTUS) in Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162 (1875) (Minor)
(decided after the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868) held that "all
children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves,
upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as
distinguished from aliens or foreigners" informed that a person who became a
citizen by being born in the country to citizen parents was known in common
law with which the Framers were familiar as a natural-born citizen. How do we
know that the Founders and Framers looked to Aristotles view of citizenship? We
learn from the historical record that Supreme Court J ustice J ames Wilson wrote in
1791: Generally speaking, says the great political authority, Aristotle, a citizen
is one partaking equally of power and of subordination. In Wilson's view, "a
citizen of Pennsylvania is he, who has resided in the state two years; and, within
that time, has paid a state or county tax: or he is between the ages of twenty one
and twenty two years, and the son of a citizen. J ames Wilson, 1st commentaries
on the Constitution. Here we clearly see Wilson referring to what could only be a
natural born Citizen as "the son of a citizen."

holding some kind of rule or office- he who holds a judicial or legislative office fulfills
our definition of a citizen. It is evident, therefore, that the citizens about whom the doubt
has arisen must be called citizens. http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.html .

Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 8 of 20


We also know that the Founders and Framers studied Roman law. The
Framers were well read in the Roman and Greek classics as is expounded upon in
their writings in the Federalist Papers. J efferson and other Founders had a love for
Roman history and education. The Founders and Framers were great admirers of
Cicero and read many of his works. It is not inconceivable that they would have
read this English translation of The Proposal
(2)
and seen the clause natural born
Citizen. This shows that they did not need to borrow the clause from English
common laws natural born subject. Rather, they had sources that they read
which contained the exact clause, natural born Citizen, which clause also had its
own meaning which was different from that of an English natural born subject
which allowed children born in the Kings dominion and under his allegiance to
aliens to be English natural born subjects.
A definition of a natural born Citizen was also provided by the world-
renowned, Emer de Vattel in his The Law of Nations, Section 212 (London 1797)

2
Roman law provided: Lex MENSIA, That a child should be held as a foreigner, if either of
the parents was so. But if both parents were Romans and married, children always obtained the
rank of the father, (patrem sequuntur liberi, Liv. iv. 4.) and if unmarried, of the mother, Uipian.
Alexander Adam, Roman antiquities: or, An account of the manners and customs of the Romans
10 (6th ed. corrected 1807). Cicero wrote in A Proposal: 2

The Colophonians claim Homer as their own free Denizen, the Chians challenge him as theirs,
the Salaminians demand him again for their own, but the Smyrneans assert him to be their
natural born Citizen; and therefore have also dedicated a Temple to him in their Town of
Smyrna. There are a great many besides at Daggers-drawing among themselves, and contend for
him.

A Proposal For Printing in English, The Select Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero, According to
the last Oxford Edition 17 (Henry Eelbeck trans. London 1720).
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 9 of 20


(1st ed. Neuchatel 1758). Vattel had a great influence on the Founders and Framers
in their constituting the new republic and writing the Constitution. See, for
example, J .S. Reeves, The Influence of the Law of Nature Upon International Law
in the United States, 3 Am.J . Intl L. 547 et. seq. passim (1909) (Vattel exerted
such a profound political influence that it is often pointed out that his theories
served as the backbone for American independence) Lee A. Casey, David B.
Rivkin, J r. and Darin R. Bartram, Unlawful Belligerency and Its Implications
Under International Law,
(3)
(concerning U.S. constitutional analysis, Vattel is
highly important. He was probably the international law expert most widely read
among the Framers). In fact, Vattel continued to be practically applied in our
nation for well over 100 years after the birth of the republic; F.S. Ruddy, The
Acceptance of Vattel, Grotian Society Papers (1972) (Vattel was mainstream
political philosophy during the writing of the Constitution. The Law of Nations was
significantly the most cited legal source in America jurisprudence between 1789
and 1820). The Founders and Framers studied and were greatly influenced by
Vattel. R.G. Natelson, The Original Constitution 49 and 69 (2010) (Vattel was
probably the Founders favorite authority on international law . . . . and his,
treatise, The Law of Nations, was their favorite).
What Minor said about a natural born Citizen was confirmed in U.S. v.

3
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/PubID.104/pub_detail.asp
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 10 of 20


Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) (acknowledging and confirming Minors
American common law definition of a natural-born citizen but adding based on
the English common law that since [t]he child of an alien, if born in the country,
is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the
same principle [birth in the country] (bracketed information supplied), a child
born in the United States to domiciled alien parents was a Fourteenth Amendment
citizen of the United States). This American common law definition of a natural
born Citizen has never been changed, not even by the Fourteenth Amendment
(only uses the clause "citizen of the United States" and does not mention "natural
born Citizen") or by Wong Kim Ark, and therefore still prevails today. Both those
U.S. Supreme Court cases define a "natural born Citizen" as a child born in a
country to parents who are citizens of that country.
That for the reasons expressed above, notwithstanding whether a natural
person is born within a State of the United States of married citizen parents or of a
single US Citizen parent, the Executor and Beneficiaries of the Express Deed In
Trust To The United States Of America are of a singular class separate and apart
from those who are either naturalized or born a citizen, and are unable to certify as
eligible for Office of POTUS one of the conquered people of the United States of
America since 4 March 1933 as long as any dejure citizen of the United States
remains the surety-indenture for the Debtor trust with beneficial interest in the
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 11 of 20


surety, for that natural person is the property of the United States and is a slave
unable to fulfill the duties of POTUS.
Therefore, the Executor/Settlor and Beneficiaries are bound by their
registered status as private citizens of the United States with their bonafide status
as a natural-born Citizen within the duties and obligations of the Express Deed in
Trust to only certify a candidate is eligible based upon the foregoing and shall seek
equity relief of a chancery or of pure equity court for relief against any person who
is a USURPER or attempts to USURP the POTUS to the contrary.

Bill of Particular Allegations for pure Equity Relief
1. That Barack Hussein Obama II admits that he was born in Kenya in his
Autobiography of 1996.
2. That J ohn Sidney McCain admits he was born in Panama during the assignment
of his married US Citizen Parents stationed in the Panama Canal Zone.
3. That Roger Calero was born in Nicaragua to parents who were not US Citizens.
4. That Barack Hussein Obama Senior is the natural and legal father of Barack
Hussein Obama II.
5. That there are no genuine official birth records known to exist regarding Barack
Hussein Obama Senior and or J unior in the British National Archives.
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 12 of 20


6. That Barack Hussein Obama Senior was the son of a member of the Mau Mau
terrorist movement in the Sultanate of Zanzibar and British Protectorate.
7. That Barack Hussein Obama Senior was an important asset of the Mau Mau
movement being followed by Intelligence agencies.
8. That Intelligence agencies following Barack Hussein Obama Senior confirmed
that he had an unmarried paramour and who when he impregnated in 1959 bore
his son Barack Hussein Obama II
9. That the natural mother of Barack Hussein Obama II is not an American Citizen
nor was she married to Barack Hussein Obama Sr.
10. That Madeline Payne Dunham was an asset of German Intelligence before.
during and after World War II.
11. That Stanley Dunham and Madeline Dunham worked with the Central
Intelligence agency after the War.
12. That the CIA considered Barack Hussein Obama Senior an essential lead to
networks associated with the Mau Mau Movement in the USA and employed
Stanley and Madeline Dunham in creating a legend for Barack Hussein Obama
II in order to facilitate Barack Hussein Obama Seniors ease of entry and
movement in the USA.
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 13 of 20


13. That a person born as a native of a tribe and or non-European in Kenya and or
the Coastal Protectorate were not recorded as born in records kept at the British
Home Office.
14. That the natural mother of Barack Hussein Obama II is not Stanley Ann
Dunham.
15. That the natural mother of Barack Hussein Obama II is an Indonesian citizen.
16. That Barack Hussein Obama II was born on or about August 4, 1960 not on or
about August 4, 1961.
17. That Barack Hussein Obama II was born a subject of the Sultanate of Zanzibar
not a British Subject.
18. That Barack Hussein Obama II entered by commercial Air carrier from Kenya
during the month of August 1961 in the custody of a woman according to U.S.
Customs entry records and statistics.
19. That Stanley Ann Dunham is the woman who married Barack Hussein Obama
Senior in Hawaii in February 1961
20. That neither Stanley Ann Obama or Stanley Ann Soetoro had a passport before
1965.
21. That Barack Hussein Obama II lived with Stanley Ann Obama in Seattle
starting in August 1961 where she was enrolled as a student and attended
classes at the University of Washington.
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 14 of 20


22. That a next door neighbor to Stanley Ann Dunham when interviewed confirmed
Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) was caring for a black child who was definitely
not a new born in August 1961.
23. That a person filed a Newspaper Notice in a Hawaiian newspaper announcing
the birth of Barack Hussein Obama II to Barack Hussein and Stanley Ann
Obama on August 4, 1961.
24. That within the period from 1979 thru 1983 Barack Hussein Obama II aka
Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Allen Owens received foreign student assistance in
order to pay tuition for Columbia University and that the records of such are on
file with the New York State Department of Education and or its repository of
records.
25. That Barack Hussein Obama II in his sworn application to obtain a license to
practice law from the Illinois Bar stated that he had never gone by any other
name other than Barack Hussein Obama.
26. That Barack Hussein Obama II voluntarily gave up his license to practice law
in Illinois for no expressed reason, an act that was not even done by Bill Clinton
in Arkansas when found guilty of perjury.
27. That in 2008 and again in 2011, Barack Hussein Obama II proffered two (2)
forged documents alleged by him to be the actual copy of the actual short and
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 15 of 20


then Long form Certificate of Live Birth (CoLB), proven by several
documents to be forged instruments.
28. That Barack Hussein Obama II proffered a forged Selective Service registration
form as if it were done in 1980, and proven by several document experts to be
forged instruments.
29. That Barack Hussein Obama II has no social security number under his entity
name, and it is alleged he is not a legally admitted US citizen or legal
documented immigrant able to obtain proper registration with the Social
Security Administration.
30. That Barack Hussein Obama II is using the Social Security number of a person
born in 1890 in Europe and who legally immigrated to the United States and
obtained social security registration in the State of Connecticut and when he
moved to Hawaii before he died without ever filing for benefits.
31. That Madeline Dunham was the Trust officer for the Bank of Hawaii, inter alia
with the duty to be in charge of accounts of those who had died intestate, and
that she obtained use of the social security number for Barack Hussein Obama
II.
32. That Madeline Dunham as the Trust Officer of the Bank of Hawaii for
investments in the Pacific rim by the Ford Foundation officiated by Thomas
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 16 of 20


Geithner the father of Timothy Geithner the Treasury Secretary appointed under
Barack Hussein Obama II.
33. That Stanley Ann Dunham was employed by the Ford Foundation while
working as a Micro Lending Program agent for both the Ford Foundation and
the Bank of Hawaii in the Pacific rim.
34. That the woman in charge of the Hawaii Department of Health in charge of
birth certificates an records died in a plane crash in 2013.
35. That the woman in charge of the Hawaii Department of Health in charge of the
alleged CoLB for Barack Hussein Obama II was the Hawaiian leader of
branch of the Indonesian SUBUD cult.
36. That Barack Hussein Obama II is a member of the Indonesian SUBUD cult.
37. That there is a DNA test of the Indonesian Soetoro half-sister of Barack
Hussein Obama II, and that the results show that she has no DNA shared with
Barack Hussein Obama II through Stanley Ann Dunham / Obama / Soetoro.
38. That there is a DNA test of Barack Hussein Obama II done while he was a U.S.
Senator by use of a water /wine glass(es) obtained at a public event by persons
posing as waiters, and the results show that he has no DNA shared through
Stanley Ann Dunham or the Dunham Family at all.
39. That based upon the above allegations, Barack Hussein Obama II is not NBC,
and therefore not eligible to annually renew the National Emergencies as the
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 17 of 20


commander-in-chief with executive authority over all defacto martial rule
Federal and State(s) courts.
40. That for there debtor entity person to be eligible to file income tax returns with
the Internal Revenue Service the named entity person must have a surety-
indenture obligated to pay the tax.
41. That when the debtor entity person does not have a surety-indenture to pay the
taxes calculated for the annual income tax return filed with the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) the debtor entity is a Non-taxpayer.
42. That Barack Hussein Obama II, J oseph R. Biden, J ohn Sidney McCain, Roger
Calero, J ohn Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo, sign the annual tax return
as surety-indenture for the debtor entity person filed with the Internal Revenue
Service.
43. That Barack Hussein Obama II, J oseph R. Biden, J ohn Sidney McCain, Roger
Calero, J ohn Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo, remain the surety-
indenture for the Debtor entity person tax payer.
44. That none of the Defendants, especially Barack Hussein Obama II, J oseph R.
Biden, J ohn Sidney McCain, Roger Calero, J ohn Boehner, Nancy Pelosi,
Andrew Cuomo, have ceased to be the surety-indenture for their respective
Debtor Trust with beneficial interest in the living being having been wed as the
surety-indenture to the debtor entity person that by operation of law when the
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 18 of 20


name of the entity was registered after the natural birth or naturalization with
the respective State registrant, is thereafter treated as abandoned property of an
absentee person by operation of the statutory scheme under 12 USC 95a and 50
USC App. 5(b) the Alien Property Custodian (i.e. the United States Secretary of
the Treasury, the United States Attorney General, and other agencies designated
by the POTUS Commander-in-chief).
45. That the Debtor Trust transmitting utility CHRISTOPHER EARL
STRUNK is a Non-taxpayer exempt from IRS filing.

Conclusion in support of Relief
Based upon the record subpoenaed and delivered to the Clerk of this Court as a
record associated with matters of elections law with willful fraud perpetrated upon
Plaintiff; and heretofore, there has not been any legal relief or remedy for Plaintiff
or anyone else in the Country either in Federal or State jurisdiction in the matter of
the usurpation of the Office of POTUS, and that this is a matter of grave national
security involving high crimes outrageously ignored by Federal and State judges
despite notice of misprision of treason.
That Appellant wishes pure equity remedy herein that would include sealing
this case and issuing subpoenas and testimony for a broad solution decree under
the maxims of equity and that Appellant wishes further and different relief as the
Brief for Appeal No.: 13-06335 Page 19 of 20
Mmhall Beil
Jacob Hildner
McGUEREWOODS LLP
1345 Avenue of the Americas, 7th Floor
New York, New k-ork 10105
(2 12) 54 8-7004
Attorneys for Defendant. Zbigniw B~ezi nski , Mark Rrrezinski, uandlm Brzezinskj
SUPEME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O K
COUhrTY OF KINGS
-------"---------h---+-h+h-*--------------*----m-----.--------------
X
CHRISTOPHER-EARL STRLNK,
Plninfi,fJ Index No. 6500120 1 1
v.
NOTICE OF ENTRY
NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ET-ECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
-r----fr---"--------*-------------*---------------------------------
X
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the attached is a true copy of the Decision and Order of
the Hon. Mhur M. Schack, J,S.C., dated March 29,2013, that was entered by the County Clerk
of Kings County on April 10,20 13.
Dated: New York, New York
April 18,2013
qz$r/~/
Marsh I1 Beil
Jacob Hildner L
I345 Avenue of the Americas, 7th Floor
New York, New York I0 105
(2 E 2) 548-7004
Attorneys for Defendants
Zbignimu Brzezin~ki~ +Mark Brzezinski, and
Icrn Erzezinskl
TO:
Christopher-Earl Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Avenue, ff2&1
Brooklyn, New York 1 1238
Phintix pro se
Eric T. Schneiderman
Attorncy General of the State ofNetv York
By: Joel Grabcr
Assistant Attorney Gcneral
Special Litigalion Counsel
Litigation I31weau
I20 Broadway - 24th Floor
New York, New Ynrk 1027 1
(21 2) 416-8645
Michael Cardoto
Corporation Counsel of Ithe City of New York
By: CI~larens Orsland
Assistant Corporation Counsel
New York City Law Dcpastmcnt
1 00 Church St.
Sew York, New York 10007
(2 12) 7&8-0904
Caplin & Drysdalc, Chnrtercd
James P. Wehner
One TI~omas Circle, N W
Nrashington, D.C. 26005
(202) 862-5000
And
Eta C. Tobin
375 Park Avenue, 35h Floor
New York, Ncw York 10 152
.
(212) 319-7125
A lforneys for Defenda~is McCain Vicfory
2008, iMcCain-Palin Victory 2005, and
John S. McCain
Harris Beach, PLLC
Thomas J. B q , Esq.
Kcith M. CorbM, Esq.
The 0;MNI:
333 Fade Ovington Blvd., Suite 901
Uniondale, New York 1 1533
Attorneys for Presidenr Barack Obama,
Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jp,,
Obarna for America, Obama Victory Fzmd,
ovld lcJnncy Pelmi
Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky, &
Liebeman, P.C.
Daniel S. Rcich
Cluistopher J. Klatell
45 Broadway, Suite 1700
Ncw York, New York 10006
Allorneys for Defendants Socialis! Worke~s
Purp nnd Roger Col'ero
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Paul C. Gluckotv
Sad1 L. Durn
425 Lexington Avenue
New Yo&, New York 10017-3954
(212) 455-2000
Affomeys for Defendcrnt Perer G. Peterson
WiIZkie Fan & Gallagher
James C. Dugan
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, New Ynrk 10019
(2 12) 728-8000
Attorneys for Defendant George Soros
At an IAS Tern, Part 27 of
the Supreme Court of the
State of New York, heid in
attd for thc County of
Kings, at the Courthouse,
at Civic Center, Rrooklyn,
New York, on the 29th day
of March 2013
Justice.
CI-IRISTOPHER-EAIII, STRUA'K, in esse
hFTV YORK STATE BOARD OT: Et ECnONS;
JAMES A. RriXSIUCo-Chair, DOUGLAS A.
KE1,LNER;Co-Chair, EVE1,W J. RQULN
Commissioner, GREGORY P. PETERSON
Co~nrnissioner, Deputy Director 'TODD Q.
V.+21TdF;NTINE, Deputy Director S'TtViYLY ZAZ,EN;
ANIISREW CUOMO, ERIC SCI-NEIIIERhZAN,
'I'ROMAS P. DWAPQLI, RUT1 I NOEMI COLON,
irr thcir Omcia1 and individual capacity? FR. JOSEPH A.
QqR4RE. S.J.; FI'I. JOSEPH P. PAKKES, S.3.;
FWDESUCK A, 0. SCHWARZ. JR.; P E E R Ci.
PB'fEltS13N; ZBIGNIEW KAI h! [ERZ RRZEZINSKI ;
MARK RRZEZNSKI; JOSFPFl R. BIDEN, R.;
SOEl3AKKATI (a.k.3 Barry Soeroro Lf!@@m$744~ EIOZ
I russein Oberna, a.k.a Steve Dunlzar
r A, C
PELOS[; DE.bj.IOCmTIC STATE C O ~ ~ F E E OF?'' ' '
THE STATE OF NEW Y O N ; STATE COT\ ~ ~ %! ! ~ E
OF THE JVOWhTG FAMILIES PARTY OF N E\lf
DEClSlON & ORDER
Tr~des No, 6500/11
award to any party of ahlorney in any civil action or proceeding before the court . . . costs
in the forin or reimbursemerat fix ackllal expcnscs rc~sollakly incuficd and reasonable
attorney's fees, resultiazg from frivolous conduct as detined in this Part." Xlrr analyzing
these billing records and affictavits or aflirm:itions: the Court Grids that these fees are
reasorlable in light of Bfrc: tirnc and labor required: novelty and difficulty ofthe questions
invotved; skiill reqtrisi~c tu perform the legal se~-vices properly; performance of these
servi ~es prcclrriting ernploynlcnt of attorneys ox1 other rraattcrs; fees customarily charged
for 3imilar Begrzl services; n;itrrrc of the irrstaixt action; resrrlts obtai~ed; nature arid length
of the profession:il re ii~tiirncilips with clients: and, exgserienee, repti tation azd ability uf
attorneys and s~mppum.b btofrperfc:clmliug services. Mtlrecrver, plairntirf SSTRtmK did not
crbject to the proposed costs prese~xred to the Co i ~ t .
McGrrire, tlioods U P , counsel for dek-ndarats ZBIGNIEpJkF KAIMTERZ
UJSEZINSKI, MARK If3X$%E:%INSKT and I AN S. RRZEZINSKF bilXed defenkt~tllts
2I3IGNIK'LY KAIXLTIEItZ BRItZEZINSKT, MARK MRZEZNSKI and IAN J.
UKZEZXNSKI $7S,CiI3(1 OCI for ;ittortxcy"s fees and $1,446.74 fix disbursements, f ~+r a total
of $78,156.74, "Therehre, the Court awards to det'etldants ZBIIGNIGtV IChIMTRW,
RRZEZINSKI; MARK BR2PZINSMI arid IAN d. R=G%INSKI $78,156.74 for ""costs in
the fbrtn uf relrnbrirstnlcrit for ~CTL~; BI C X ~ ~ I I S C S rcasonclbly iancurrcd and reasonal~lc
atton~cy's fees, resullifzg from Ckolouh conctuct" ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C H N S T C ~ P H E R - B A M ,
?; X'ISIINK.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS

---------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against- (Hon. David I. Schmidt J.S.C.)

David A. Paterson (NYS Governor), Andrew Cuomo
(NYS Attorney General), Thomas P. DiNapoli
(NYS Comptroller), Sheldon Silver (NYS Speaker of PLAINTIFFS AFFIDAVIT IN
the Assembly), Malcolm Smith (NYS Senator),
Hakeem Jeffries (NYS Assemblyman for the 57
th
AD), SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF
Christine Quinn (NYC Speaker of the Council),
William Thompson (NYC Comptroller), MOTION with CPLR 3101(d)
Jim Tedisco (NYS Assemblyman), Dean Skelos
(President pro tempore of the NYS Senate) in their and JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
Official Capacities and individually, the Democrat
Candidate Presidential Electors as a class, in their official PLAINTIFFS STATUS
Capacity and individually; The New York State Board
of Elections and John Does and Jane Does

Defendants.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------x
















Exhibit 4










SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x




Exhibit B














SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x






Exhibit C
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each of
you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, any legally certified proof of your place of birth and the citizenship status of
both parents at your birth now in your custody, and all other evidences and writings,
which you have in your custody or power.

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.



____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: TODD VALENTINE of the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each of
you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, all correspondence with the office of Attorney General and office of Governor
regarding the 2008 and 2012 General Election for President and Vice President, and
for all correspondence regarding the Board of Elections official Website documentation
and records for the posted notification of qualifications required for any candidate for
the Office of President and or Vice President of the United States for the period of 1
August 2008 through 30 May 2014 now in your custody, and all other evidences and
writings, which you have in your custody or power.

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.


____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: DAVID LOOMIS of the NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each of
you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, all Board of Elections official Website documentation and records for the
posted notification of qualifications required for any candidate for the Office of
President and or Vice President of the United States for the period of 1 August 2008
through 30 May 2014 now in your custody, and all other evidences and writings,
which you have in your custody or power.

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.



____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: ANDREW MARK CUOMO

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each
of you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, a certain official memorandums and correspondence with agents and or
members of the New York State Board of Elections covering the period from 1 August
2008 through 1 January 2010 while New York State Attorney General and the period
from 1 January 2010 through the 30 May 2014 while New York State Governor now
in your custody, and all other evidences and writings, which you have in your custody
or power, concerning the General Election of 2008, 2012 and legislation to enact a
winner take all election of president and vice president..

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.


____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: JOHN FRASER and NYS HIGHER EDUCATION SERVICES CORPORATION

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each of
you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, all index listings of any type of student loan applications and the actual
copy of the loan records for a student who either in preparation and or attendance at
Columbia University in New York City for the period from 1979 thru 1983 of the
person or persons using the names "BARRY SOETORO", "BARACK HUSSEIN
OBAMA", "BARRY ALLEN OWENS", "BARRY DUNHAM", "STEVE DUNHAM",
"SOEBARKAH" now in your custody, and all other evidences and writings, which you
have in your custody or power.

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.


____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF KINGS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x
Christopher Earl Strunk, Index No.: 29642 / 08

Plaintiff, I.A.S. Part 47

-against-

David A. Paterson et al. JUDICIAL SUBPOENA



Defendants. DUCES TECUM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------x

The People of the State of New York

TO: DAVID A. PATERSON

WE COMMAND YOU, that all business and excuses being laid aside, you and each
of you appear and attend before the Hon. DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C. at the New York
Supreme Court for the County of Kings at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York
11201 in Courtroom #541 on the 18
th
day of June, 2014 at ______ o'clock, in the
______noon, and at any recessed or adjourned date to give testimony in this action on
the part of Plaintiff and that you bring with you, and produce at the time and place
aforesaid, a certain official memorandums and correspondence with agents and or
members of the New York State Board of Elections covering the period from 1 August
2008 through 1 January 2010 while New York State Governor now in your custody,
and all other evidences and writings, which you have in your custody or power,
concerning the General Election of 2008.

WITNESS, Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT one of the Justices of said Court,
at 360 Adams Street Brooklyn New York 11201 the _________day of _______, 2014.




____________________________
Christopher Earl Strunk, Plaintiff
593 Vanderbilt Avenue PMB 281
Brooklyn, New York 11238
(845) 901-6767 chris@strunk.ws

















SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x




Exhibit D














SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x






Exhibit E










SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x










Exhibit F













SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x







Exhibit G
Bupreme Clhurt of the Btate of PQelu work
Appellate l i ui ~i nn: beranh luhirial Department
MI70416
Elsl
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
THOMAS A. DICKERSON
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
L. PRISCILLA HALL, JJ.
Christopher-Earl Strunk, appellant,
v New York State Board of Elections,
et al., respondents.
(Index No. 650011 1)
DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
Motion by the appellant pro se, inter alia, "for civilian due process of law" on appeals
from three orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 1 l , 20 12, March 29,20 13, and
December 9,201 3, respectively.
Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition
thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the appellant's time to perfect the appeal
from the order dated March 29,201 3 (Appellate Division Docket No. 201 3-06335), is enlarged until
May 5, 2014, and the record or appendix and the appellant's brief must be served and filed on or
before that date.
SKELOS, J.P., DICKERSON, LEVENTHAL and HALL, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Clerk of the Court
March 4,201 4
STRUNK v NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS












SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x








Exhibit H

H. William Van Allen
351 North Road
Hurley, NY 12443
hvanallen@hvc.rr.com
Phone 845-389-4366

Thursday, January 16, 2014

Via Fax, email, and Certified Mail with Return Receipt

To: The Honorable Gail Prudenti, J.S.C.
Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts
New York State Unified Court System
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street, Room 852
New York, NY 10004
Fax 212-428-2190

Re: NYS Supreme Court Kings County Index No.: 2008-29642, I.A.S. Part 1
STRUNK V. PATERSON ET AL. filed w RJI dated October 29, 2008

2008 POTUS ballot eligibility NYS Electoral College election Kings Civil
Supreme case remains active six (6) years later preventing further motion
intervention by petitioner-intervener at the Second Department Appellate
Division and/or direct appeal of constitutional language issue to New York
State Court of Appeals.
Please investigate the administrative status of this matter as soon as possible.
Subject matter is Presidential Electoral College Election Matter with
national security ramifications now having given your office personal notice
at Albany Empire State Plaza Office of Chief Administrative Judge Prudenti
NYSUC Office of Court Administration.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/
H. William Van Allen


WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail

Court: Kings Civil Supreme
Index Number: 029642/2008
Case Name: STRUNK,CHRISTOPHER EARL vs. PATERSON,DAVID A.
Case Type: Special Proceedings
Track: Standard
RJI Filed: 10/29/2008
Date NOI Due:
NOI Filed:
Disposition Date:
Calendar Number:
Jury Status:
Justice Name: DAVID SCHMIDT (PT. 47)


WebCivil Supreme - Case Detail

Court: Albany Civil Supreme
Index Number: 001787/2012
Upstate Index Number: 1787-12
Case Name: Van Allen vs. NYS Board Of Elections
Case Type: Spec Proceed-Election
Track: Standard
RJI Filed: 05/30/2012
Upstate RJI Number: 01-12-107051
Date NOI Due:
NOI Filed:
Disposition Date: 08/20/2012
Calendar Number:
Jury Status: Unknown
Justice Name: RICHARD M. PLATKIN


STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ULSTER )

Accordingly, I, H. William Van Allen, being duly sworn, depose and say under penalty of perjury:
I am H. William Van Allen, located at the above address and telephone number.
That I had previously filed a motion to intervene in the above referenced civil case as a plaintiff-intervener
dated November 22, 2011, as I still contend my interests were not properly represented by therein Plaintiff as to
the constitutional issue still before that court, and subsequently was denied my intervention attempt to appeal to
no avail as to the unsettled matter as a still ongoing injury to me personally; and I require at least as a matter of
case administration as the case still is held active needs an explanation in the record of the court accordingly.
That court administration there should show cause why the case should not be closed so that interlocutory
orders may be taken on appeal to second department for hearing on the merits as to why with a continuing injury
that started before the 2008 general election that it should not be remanded for amendment and hearing.
The case remains designated as active with no explanation, and as Your Honor is the Administrative Judge
with authority over that Supreme Court in Kings County this matter be resolved there. Thank you in advance for
your attention to my request, and if there is need for further information please do not hesitate to contact me; as
the above matter is true based upon the actual record of the court and my experience as such is an infringement
upon my personally right to a speedy and fair treatment in this unified court system. Respectfully submitted by:


____________________________
H. William Van Allen
Subscribed and Affirmed to before me
This ___ day of January 2014


_____________________
Notary Public

NYS Unified Court System
Office of Court Administration
4 ESP, Suite 2001
Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12223-1450
By E-Mail:
question@nycourts.gov
By Phone:
NYC Office: 212-428-2700
212-428-2190 fax
Albany Office: 518-474-3828
Hon. A. Gail Prudenti is the Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts. On behalf of the Chief Judge, the Chief
Administrative Judge supervises the administration and operation of the State's trial courts.
For further information call 212-428-2120.















SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x





Exhibit I
Print | Close Window
Subject: your original FOIL request
From: John Fraser <John.Fraser@hesc.ny.gov>
Date: Fri, May 30, 2014 1: 17 pm
To: CHRIS@STRUNK.WS
Attach: pic19169.gif
ecblank.gif
Attached below, as you requested.
J ohn W. Fraser, Esq.
Senior Attorney, Office of Counsel, Room 1350
New York State Higher Education Services Corporation
99 Washington Avenue | Albany, New York | 12255
T: (518) 473-1581 | F: (518) 486-6515
J ohn_Fraser@hesc.ny.gov | www.HESC.ny.gov
Cal Srvr/HESC@HESCNOTES
05/22/2014 11:15 AM
Please respond to
"CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK"
<CHRIS@STRUNK.WS>
To
foil@hesc,
cc
Subject
FOIL Request
To: FOIL Record Access Officer
From: CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK
Subject: FOIL Request
Documents Requested:
RECORDS ACCESS OFFICER,
I hereby request all index listings of any type of student loan applications and the actual copy of the loan records for a
student who either in preparation and or attendance at Columbia University in New York City for the period from 1979
thru 1983 of the person or persons using the names "BARRY SOETORO", "BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA", "BARRY
ALLEN OWENS", "BARRY DUNHAM", "STEVE DUNHAM", "SOEBARKAH"
And that it is my understanding that the complete record of attendance by any student including foreign students
whether having attained loan assistance is a requirement for there to be Federal or States funds assistance directed
to the respective school of attendance per se.
e-Mail Address: CHRIS@STRUNK.WS
Telephone number: (845) 901-6767
Address:
593 Vanderbilt Avenue
PMB 281
Brooklyn, NY 11238
---------------------------------------------------------------

Workspace Webmail :: Print https://email06.secureserver.net/view_print_multi.php?uidArray=27142|...
1 of 2 5/30/2014 4:32 PM
This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please destroy all copies of the message, whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments, and immediately
contact the sender by replying to this e-mail or by phoning. Thank you. Visit us on the Web at http://www.hesc.ny.gov
Copyright 2003-2014. All rights reserved.
Workspace Webmail :: Print https://email06.secureserver.net/view_print_multi.php?uidArray=27142|...
2 of 2 5/30/2014 4:32 PM
Print | Close Window
Subject: FOIL
From: John Fraser <John.Fraser@hesc.ny.gov>
Date: Fri, May 30, 2014 10: 48 am
To: CHRIS@STRUNK.WS
Cc: Sharon Forbes <Sharon.Forbes@hesc.ny.gov>
Attach: Strunk FOIL response 5-30-14.doc
(See attached file: Strunk FOIL response 5-30-14.doc)
J ohn W. Fraser, Esq.
Senior Attorney, Office of Counsel, Room 1350
New York State Higher Education Services Corporation
99 Washington Avenue | Albany, New York | 12255
T: (518) 473-1581 | F: (518) 486-6515
J ohn_Fraser@hesc.ny.gov | www.HESC.ny.gov
---------------------------------------------------------------
This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that any disclosure,
copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please destroy all copies of the message, whether in electronic or hard copy format, as well as attachments, and immediately
contact the sender by replying to this e-mail or by phoning. Thank you. Visit us on the Web at http://www.hesc.ny.gov

Copyright 2003-2014. All rights reserved.
Workspace Webmail :: Print https://email06.secureserver.net/view_print_multi.php?uidArray=27141|...
1 of 1 5/30/2014 4:33 PM

New york state higher education services corporation
99 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12255 www.hesc.org 888-NYS-HESC


May 30, 2014

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY

Christopher Earl Strunk
593 Vanderbilt Avenue
PMB 281
Brooklyn, NY 11238

Dear Mr. Strunk:

This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request that was
originally dated and received by the New York State Higher Education Services Corporation
(HESC) on May 22, 2014 and which you resubmitted to HESC on May 29, 2014.

Your request seeks access to information related to student loan accounts that may exist
for specific individuals listed in your request. The information requested is of a personal nature
related to the subjects of your request and is protected by federal and state law and regulation.

New Yorks FOIL Law is contained in the Public Officers Law Article 6. In pertinent part,
Section 87 addresses access to Agency records, including records that are exempt from
disclosure pursuant to FOIL. Section 87 (2) (a) and (b) reads:

Each agency shall, in accordance with its published rules, make available for public
inspection and copying all records, except that such agency may deny access to records
or portions thereof that:

(a) are specifically exempted from disclosure by state or federal statute;

(b) if disclosed would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy under the
provisions of subdivision two of section eighty-nine of this article;

In order for you to obtain records related to an individual student loan borrower, the
borrower would be required to authorize HESC in writing to release records related to their
account to you. In the absence of such written authorization, HESC is prohibited from releasing
any information related to the individuals. Upon receipt of such authorization from any of the
individuals listed in your request, HESC will undertake a review of its records to determine
whether any responsive records exist.

Based on the foregoing, HESC is unable to provide any information related to the
individuals listed in your FOIL request.

Pursuant to Section 89 (4) of FOIL, the person requesting records may appeal the denial
of access to responsive records that may exist. An appeal must be made within thirty days of
receipt of this written notice and submitted to Thomas Brennan, General Counsel and Records
Appeals Officer, HESC, 99 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12255.


Sincerely yours,

/s/ John Fraser

J ohn Fraser
Records Access Officer
(518) 473-1581














SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

CHRISTOPHER EARL STRUNK,
Petitioner,
versus


The Honorable DAVID I. SCHMIDT J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 47

In regards to Case Strunk v Paterson et al Kings
County. Index No.: 29642-2008 and Petition
Strunk v. Jeffries et al. Index No.: 21948-2012 PETITIONERS

The Honorable ARTHUR M. SCHACK J.S.C., I.A.S. Part 23 AFFIDAVIT IN

In regards the 6500-2011 Decision and Order of April 11, 2012 SUPPORT OF

and AN ORDER TO

The Honorable GAIL PRUDENTI J.S.C., New York State SHOW CAUSE
Unified Court System Office of Court Administration.

Respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x







Exhibit J