Memo form: Bob Schulz
January 19, 2008
Memorandum >From Bob Schulz

Dear friend:

Below is a memo regarding a new WTP initiative. Please read, act and
forward to your friends and acquaintances.

Thank you.

Bob Schulz

We The People Congress, Inc.

2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, NY 12804
Phone: (518) 656-3578   Fax: (518) 656-9724


TO:       Full WTP e-mail list
FROM:  Bob Schulz
DATE:  18 Jan 08 

Our beloved Republic is being assaulted. Election integrity is an issue of critical interest. 

Each of us has a duty to do everything possible to see that those to whom we have given the responsibility of conducting our federal elections (the States) eliminate election confusion, frustration, error and fraud. 

A pitched battle is underway over whom and what will count the votes. 

The Government wants -- and is well on its way, to having all votes counted in secret (by machines and computers).  However, the People have a Creator-endowed, unalienable Right to have their votes accurately counted in a recorded public forum. 

Ten days ago, a Presidential primary election was held in New Hampshire where all votes were cast on paper ballots. However, 80% of the votes were counted by computers that are manufactured overseas and controlled by software that is not available to those to whom the People have given the responsibility of conducting our federal elections (the States). Only 20% of the votes were hand-counted in a recorded public forum.  

Within minutes of the closing of the polls, the results were being broadcast by the National Election Pool, a consortium of the five TV networks and the AP.  Immediately, there was confusion and frustration and strong suspicion of machine error if not human fraud. 

The truth about the integrity of the New Hampshire primary election needs to be established.  NH was just the beginning of an electoral process that will involve many more primary elections and then the general election in November, all conducted by the Government and all using machines and computers to count the votes. 

Fortunately, some People have taken the initial steps toward getting to the truth about New Hampshire. Two of the presidential candidates on the ballot have arranged for a recount of all hand counted and machine counted votes, overcoming the objections of and surmounting every obstacle manufactured by the Government. 

In addition, highly competent and credible election integrity advocates like Bev Harris are on the scene with video cameras to record developments. Already, significant discrepancies in the recount are surfacing.  

The Government says the recount could take six weeks (to extend beyond Super Tuesday's primary elections - conducted in some 20 states representing about half of the American public. 

The dominant media is not attentive, paying no attention to the on-going developments in New Hampshire and putting no pressure on the State Government to complete the audit in less time. 

More "People Power" is needed to ensure that the recount process, itself, is transparent, effective and timely. 

We have decided to do what we can to help. We are in the process of transporting our full Liberty Hour studio set to New Hampshire. Beginning Tuesday morning, the day the Republican recount gets underway (the Democrat recount will resume on Tuesday), we will go live on the Internet with at least three scheduled interactive news conferences every day, in addition to breaking news announcements and interviews with key people.  The live conference process will use state of the art interactive conferencing capability. We will have 24/7 capability. We intend to be on the scene in NH for the duration of the recount. 

We have come up with a way to pay for our RECOUNT FORUM project. 

For a one-time donation of only $15, everyone will be able to tune in as many times as they want, at any time during the duration of the recount, to watch any and all of the live webcasts and proceedings - to stay up to date and to have their questions answered. Yes, the webcasts will be interactive.  

To participate, you will need to follow two steps.  

Make your $15 donation to the We The People Congress. To donate by PayPal go to and send your donation to .  

To donate by credit card, e-check, check or money order, go to    Sign in and obtain your WTP password. Allocate funds to We The People Congress, not to We The People Foundation. Make sure you click "one-time" only donation. Ignore the "Share Code" field.   

Obtain your Forum password at    Enter the information. Your Recount Forum instructions and password will be emailed to you prior to Tuesday morning, i.e., prior to the start of the Forum.  









DATE:   DECEMBER 23, 2007


SUBJECT: Status Report and Request For Approvals


  1. •  All States were served, not by Nov. 5 th as planned, but by Nov. 20 th .
  2. •  Judge Homer ordered all States to respond by Dec. 10 (20 days is the law).
  3. •  Judge Homer then granted a request to extend that date to Dec. 17, giving Plaintiffs until January 2 to respond, allowing the Defendants to reply to our response and setting the hearing date for Jan 18.
  4. •  About ½ of the States responded on or about Dec. 17.
  5. •  I have read the responses from all 50 states. All have filed motions to dismiss the case. While their arguments and case cites vary from state to state, collectively the States are asking the Court to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, sovereign immunity, failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted, the State is not a “person,” wrong venue and lack of standing.
  6. •  Upon receiving the first of the responses (from Oregon, Texas and South Carolina) I undertook the research and drafted a Memorandum of Law (copy attached) anticipating it would be used in support of our opposition to the States' motions to dismiss, in support of a motion by us for Summary Judgment and in support of a motion by us to temporarily and preliminarily enjoin, prohibit and restrict Iowa, New Hampshire and others from conducting caucuses and primaries that used machines to count the vote or that otherwise did not follow the voting procedures we proposed in our complaint. for use with could be.
  7. •  Nothing could have been done, however, until all the States had responded, especially Iowa .
  8. •  The toughest claim to overcome is the States' claim of lack of personal jurisdiction on the ground that there is not enough contact between the other 49 states and the New York State . You will see from the draft MOL that I was suggesting that we rely on that line of cases that show that the Court in New York has personal jurisdiction over the other 49 State Defendants if those states commit a tort within those states and the harm is felt by people in the New York. You will see that the from the draft MOL that I was suggesting we argue that legally required contact is established between the New York Plaintiffs and the other 49 states when those States use machines to count the votes for President of the United States. You will see that with respect to personal jurisdiction, I suggest we couple that argument to the federal rules of civil procedure that says, in effect: 1) all Plaintiffs can be joined in one case if their injury arises from the same series of occurrences and facts and all would be relying on the same law; and 2) that all Defendants can be joined in that case if the relief being sought from each is similar.
  9. •  However, the more I read from the States' motions to dismiss, the more convinced I became that we should do more to prove the Court in New York has personal jurisdiction.
  10. •  I came up with an idea that I believe will be conclusive – the extensive and institutionalized contact between each of the States and the New York City based National Election Pool (ABC News, CBS News, CNN, FOX NEWS, NBC News and the Associated Press). To develop this argument I needed to review the literature, especially the work by Lynn L. Landes, and devise a way to obtain additional documentary evidence as needed. With the help of Lynn Landes and Planitff John Liggett from New York City we have what I believe is a compelling argument with a facts showing more than minimal contact. I believe if you read the Affidavits by Landes, Liggett and myself (copies attached) you will understand the facts and the argument.
  11. •  Regarding Iowa, I believe we should ask the Judge to order the Iowa State defendants to: 1) obtain the approval from the Democrat and Republican Parties of Iowa, before the close of business on Thursday, December 27, 2007, that those Parties will immediately direct their “caucus captains” to and publicly announce during the 3800 caucus precinct meetings the results of all votes taken, including the vote of the Participants' preference for President and the vote that determines the delegate count; 2) direct the Democrat and Republican Parties of Iowa to post on their websites the results of the two votes mentioned above, caucus-by-caucus, immediately following the end of the counting of all votes taken at the caucus meeting; and 3) obtain the results of all votes, caucus by caucus, immediately following the end of the voting period and post those results on the State's website. I believe we should ask the Judge to order the Iowa State Defendants to prominently display on its website(s), and in full page ads in all the Iowa daily newspapers, a disclaimer, if the State Defendants fail to obtain said approvals from the Iowa Democrat and Republican Parties. The disclaimer would have the State clearly announcing that no unit of Government is involved in or has any supervisory control over the Iowa Caucus.
  12. •  In a related matter, I have also been working with Bev Harris on an affidavit, regarding developments in Iowa (copy attached).
  13. •  In light of the 72 hour requirement in the Plaintiffs' Agreement to Simplify Service and the rapidly approaching dates of the caucuses and primaries I hope to file the day after Christmas: 1) our Opposition to the States' Motions to Dismiss; 2) our motion for Summary Judgment; and 3) our motion (by Order to Show Cause) for temporary and preliminary injunctive relief.
  14. 14.   Between now and Wednesday, I will round out and strengthen theMemorandum of Law, particularly in the area of personal jurisdiction asdiscussed above.
  15. Please take notice that the 72 hour clock has begun. I will send you the final documents before I file them with the Court next Wednesday.

I would like to wish all a most pleasant and happy Thanksgiving.

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING COMMUNICATION: All Plaintiffs. If you wish to communicate to the court, please do this through me, not directly to the court. This will avoid unnecessary confusion and extra work for me not to mention the outcome of NCEL.

Go to our public NCEL web site and look at latest work flow screen and notice a few plaintiffs are still missing needed important documents. Everybody, please call these plaintiffs now to support them in getting these documents in today. If you need the latest plaintiff contact list just CLICK HERE.

There are TWO documents needed from each plaintiff to date and ONE document needed from each LEAD plaintiff to date. ALL documents need to be faxed then mailed as per instructions. See list below:

  1. The first "Individual Verification" document required your notarized signature
  2. The second "Plaintiff Agreement" document requires just your signature
  3. The Proof of service documents for each state are posted  next to the lead plaintiff.
We all need to work together in a most professional and efficient manner to submit these very important documents in a timely fashion. If you have completed all documents we thank you very much for your support. if you still need to submit documents please graciously accept support from the rest of the plaintiff team when offered.

NEW PRIVATE PLAINTIFF AREA: [password required]
The public NCEL web site is being enhanced. See new videos added. Go there often.  The new Private Plaintiff area  is now active [the new password is: lecn ] . This password is for NCEL plaintiffs only. Do not distribute. Please use this private area for all plaintiff business from now on. The documents page there has all documents discussed above for your review if needed.

NCEL Special OPS Teams:
W have started preparation for the next phase of NCEL. We already have many signing up for teams.Use this sign up FORM your support, talents and participation are greatly appreciated. You are participating in the creation of American history.

After Thanksgiving To be announced.....













Conference Call: 8 pm EST, Nov 13. 605-475-8500 - pin: 5092984.


The N-CEL rubber is now meeting the road. The case is heating up. For instance, the States have begun to file their responses and the Court is issuing orders that are binding on each of us.


On Friday, November 9 th , the Court mailed a package to every Plaintiff. You should all receive the package by Tuesday, the 12 th . The Package contains a formal Notice and Order from the Court, together with a Pro-Se Handbook. In addition, the Court has noticed each pro-se plaintiff that it has received pleadings from state defendants and has issued a scheduling Order .


REMINDER: Each of us, individually, is a pro-se Plaintiff that has sued his or her State and all other States, and each of us is representing him or her self, without assistance of an attorney. Each of us has taken on an enormous responsibility and we are responsible for our own behavior during the duration of the case.


Each and every Plaintiff must now pay strict attention to all matters relating to this case,

being especially attentive to ALL communications from the Court, from N-CEL “Headquarters,”

from their N-CEL Circuit Leaders and from the lead Plaintiff for their State.


As a pro-se Plaintiff, your failure to respond when a response is required by order of the Court

or by Court rules could result in serious repercussions, even sanctions against you. The Courts

do not tolerate tardiness or disrespect.


This Tuesday, November 13, 2007, there will be a conference call for ALL Plaintiffs, to discuss the meaning of last week's court activity, and to review where we each stand regarding compliance with our individual requirements to date – i.e., mailing of the “Individual Verification” and “Plaintiffs' Agreement to Simplify Service forms, and service of the Summons and Complaint.


Please be prompt. Please be at your computer for the call. Many thanks.