Information

GEORGIA TEA PARTY

TEA PARTY MEMBERS

Location: THOMSON, GA
Members: 35
Latest Activity: Mar 27, 2015

Discussion Forum

Where is Sec. Kemp when he is needed?

Started by davidfarrar. Last reply by davidfarrar Mar 3, 2012. 3 Replies

As I have just stated; all of Georgia has lost from the recent ruling of Georgia's Fulton County Superior Court Judge: Cynthia Wright, taking away the clear right of Georgia electors to challenge the…Continue

3ozt6gobts7m9

The soluton

Started by 3ozt6gobts7m9 Jul 29, 2011. 0 Replies

Solution: You want him out of the White House don't you? And you think you are going to get him out in the General? Think again! If you get him out in the Primary not the General then you have a…Continue

3ozt6gobts7m9

NO SHARIAH LAW REMOVE THE MOSQUE FROM THE CAPITAL

Started by 3ozt6gobts7m9. Last reply by 3ozt6gobts7m9 Nov 14, 2010. 1 Reply

   NO SHARIAH LAW REMOVE THE MOSQUE FROM THE CAPITALYour infidel taxpayer dollars at work! The dome on Capitol Hill will be gilded in no short order. Where is the separation of mosque and state? Head…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of GEORGIA TEA PARTY to add comments!

Comment by Gary Wayne Justice on January 7, 2015 at 11:21am

Hello, IS THERE ANY INTELIGENT LIFE OUT THERE!!!!!

If you are scared, then say you are scared!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought  for a moment, that we Ga. Patriots/REDNECKS, was not too much scared of nothing!!!!!

Gary

Comment by Darrin berry on May 5, 2014 at 8:28pm
Locked and loaded ready to help take our country back !
Comment by davidfarrar on January 20, 2014 at 4:21pm

Hi Mr. Brown,

Who are your state house reps in the senate and house...in the General Assembly, that is?

I live in Cedartown. 

Comment by davidfarrar on March 3, 2012 at 8:09am

We have not only suffered a setback in our Georgia case against Obama's name being placed on the March 6, 2012 ballot, but the entire state of Georgia has suffered a setback in its ability to insure candidates placed on a Georgia ballot are qualified to hold the office sought.

If the ruling is left standing, Georgia's electorate will lose their right to challenge the qualifications of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates as Georgia statute: O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5 (a)  Qualifications of candidates for federal and state office; determination of qualifications:


(a) Every candidate for federal and state office who is certified by the state executive committee of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought." clearly states we do have that right, as Judge Malihi recognized in his earlier ruling.

Now we have a Fulton County Superior Court judge telling us, "No, Judge Malihi was wrong. The political parties can place anybody they want on a Georgia ballot for either president of vice-president, Daffy Duck, it doesn't matter if they are qualified or not. The state of Georgia, even though its statute clearly says we do have that right, a Georgia judge, Judge Cynthia Wright, has now taken that right away from all Georgians. I don't think this decision should stand without at least a fight in the state Supreme Court as soon as possible.

What we need now to preserve this all important "legal standing" to bring Obama to justice in a Georgia court of competent jurisdiction is a few good Georgians willing to stand up and do more than talk about their rights.

If you want to respond to this call of freedom in Georgia,  drop me a line at david.naturalborn@gmail.com.

ex animo

davidfarrar

 

Members (34)

 
 
 

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

ALERT ALERT

 Judge Orders Mueller To Prove  Russia Meddled In Election 

Judge Dabney L. Friedrich

A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.

Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. – one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling, surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges. Mueller’s team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request – effectively telling prosecutors ‘well, they’re here.’

Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian ‘troll farm’ accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.

On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller’s prosecutors if she should assume they aren’t accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.

Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges – claiming that Mueller’s office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.

According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law. -Bloomberg

On Monday, Friedrich raised questions over whether the special counsel’s office could prove a key element of their case – saying that it was “hard to see” how allegations of Russian influence were intended to interfere with US government operations vs. simply “confusing voters,” reports law.com.

During a 90-minute hearing, Friedrich questioned prosecutor Jonathan Kravis about how the government would be able to show the Russian defendants were aware of the Justice Department and FEC’s functions and then deliberately sought to skirt them.

“You still have to show knowledge of the agencies and what they do. How do you do that?” Friedrich asked.

Kravis, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, argued that the government needed only to show that Concord Management and the other defendants were generally aware that the U.S. government “regulates and monitors” foreign participation in American politics. That awareness, Kravis said, could be inferred from the Russians’ alleged creation of fake social media accounts that appeared to be run by U.S. citizens and “computer infrastructure” intended to mask the Russian origin of the influence operation.

“That is deception that is directed at a higher level,” Kravis said. Kravis appeared in court with Michael Dreeben, a top Justice Department appellate lawyer on detail to the special counsel’s office. -law.com

Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier – a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as “make believe,” arguing on Monday that Mueller’s indictment against Concord “doesn’t charge a crime.”

“There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn’t,” said Dubelier, who added that Mueller’s office alleged a “made-up crime to fit the facts they have.”

Dubelier added that the case against Concord Management is the first in US history “where anyone has ever been charged with defrauding the Justice Department” through their failure to register under FARA.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service