justice (27)

4063456178?profile=original

The eligibility issue is not going away if the Supreme Court refuses to deal with it!

Posted on The Post & Email-By Sharon Rondeau-On February 17, 2012:

“(Feb. 17, 2012) — 11:49 a.m. ET – The Post & Email has just learned that the U.S. Supreme Court will be conferencing today to decide whether or not to hear the case of Purpura v. Sebelius, which challenges the constitutionality of the health care bill and Obama’s eligibility to hold office.

Plaintiffs Nicholas Purpura and Donald R. Laster, Jr. call their challenge the “We the People” brief.

Purpura stated that his case is “the best one” to challenge the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in March 2010 by the 111th Congress and signed by Obama.  He had submitted a Request for Reargument to the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case on January 17, 2012.

Purpura has stated that “the reason they don’t want to take the case and why they’re most frightened is Count 6,” which claims that if Obama is not eligible to serve as President, the bill is null and void.

A prayer request was put out by Purpura, and today he stated that he is “getting calls from all over the country” in response to it.  “People are praying at the Oklahoma Air Force base; people throughout the country…they’re even praying at the Supreme Court!  They want their lawsuit heard,” he said.

A new 17-page brief with 15 pages of argument sent to the Supreme Court was dated January 27, with Purpura representing himself.  “What I told them flat-out is that you have no choice but to hear this,” Purpura told The Post & Email.  “Count 6 is the most important.”

Purpura also said that “Sotomayor and Kagan cannot hear this case” because of their conflict of interest, having been appointed to the court by Obama.

{…}

Count 6 reads:

  • Count 6  Violation Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5; No Constitutional question before this Honorable Court surpasses the importance concerning this issue that must be adjudicated.  Petitioner has never stated Mr. Obama is not a citizen of the United States.  That being said, the Constitutional question exists:  is Mr. Obama a “natural born Citizen”, if not; how can he exercise the authority of the office of President?  Failure to address this Count would constitute a desertion from ones [sic] sworn fiduciary duty and betrayal of the United States Constitution.  (See Article 6, Paragraph 2).  The Court must consider during the years Mr. Obama was developing a power base and running for President Congress 8-times attempted to remove the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen,” suggesting an organized strategy…

19. Therefore, the question still exists whether Mr. Obama was eligible to sign “Act” in law, make appointments, institute regulations or hold the office of president?

Of this new development, Purpura told The Post & Email:

  • This is really important, because they’re disenfranchising the voters if they don’t hear it.  The first three pages, which are the opening statement, will tell you everything, and so will the last page.  The only count that really counts here is Count 6.  As you know, there are ballot challenges throughout the country, and what I told them flat-out is, “You have no choice but to hear this because we have a constitutional crisis.”  I’m believing, that if you read Count 6, because that’s the most important one in the whole brief, they’re sort-of trapped if they’re honest.  Kagan and Sotomayor cannot by U.S. statute participate.  So we’re in great shape in reality. But will they obey the statutes, or will they do what this administration is doing:  ignoring the law that are on the books in the United States.

Purpura then read from the third page of the brief:

  • It is incumbent upon this Court to settle the issue of ‘eligibility’ post haste to afford those in the Democrat Party an opportunity to choose an “eligible” candidate to be on the ballot in November.  To do otherwise disenfranchises all voters and continues the constitutional crisis that has been escalating since the Courts refused to address Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign’s challenge.  To ignore this constitutional challenge will have devastating consequence, which this Court bears full responsibility for failing to perform its fiduciary duty pursuant to your sworn oath taken by every Member of this Court.

Source:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/02/17/breaking-u-s-supreme-court-meeting-today-on-purpura-v-sebelius/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Obama Still Has A Lot Of Explaining To Do!-Posted on Western Journalism-By HIGHEST BRANCH-On February 18, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-still-has-a-lot-of-explaining-to-do/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=d88bccf140-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

II. Obama Ballot Challenge Filed in PA – A Nomination Petition Objection Was Filed in Commonwealth Court of PA Against Obama!-Posted on CDR Kerchner’s Blog-By CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)-On February 17, 2012:

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/obama-ballot-challenge-filed-in-pa-a-nomination-petition-objection-was-filed-in-pa-against-obama/

III. SUPERIOR COURT ASKED TO BOOT OBAMA FROM BALLOT: ‘At issue is nothing less than the enforcement or loss of constitutional rule of law!’-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On February 16, 2012:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/superior-court-asked-to-boot-obama-from-ballot/

IV. Appeal of Georgia Eligibility Ruling!-Posted on Liberty Legal Foundation-By Van Irion, Founder, LIBERTY LEGAL FOUNDATION-On February 16, 2012:

http://libertylegalfoundation.org/1777/appeal-of-georgia-eligibility-ruling/

V. SHERIFF JOE SETS D-DAY ON OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY: ‘Arpaio won’t release any of Cold-Case Posse’s conclusions in advance!’-Posted on WND.com-By Jerome R. Corsi-On February 6, 2012:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/d-day-set-for-sheriff-joe-on-obama-eligibility/

VI. OUR FRAUDULENT PRESIDENT CANNOT PASS AN E-VERIFY CHECK!-Posted on News With Views-By Frosty Wooldridge-On February 6, 2012:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Wooldridge/frosty738.htm

VII. Three reasons for Kagan’s recusal!-Posted American Vision News-By Joel McDurmon-On November 19, 2011:

http://americanvisionnews.com/314/three-reasons-for-kagans-recusal

VIII. JW Releases New Kagan Emails as Obamacare Heads to Supreme Court!-Posted on Judicial Watch-By Tom Fitton-On November 18, 2011:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/weeklyupdate/2011/46-jw-causes-supreme-court-furor

IX. Health case raises recusal questions for Kagan, Thomas!-Posted on The Washington Times-By Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times-On November 14, 2011:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/14/court-announcement-raises-recusal-questions-kagan-/

X. Kagan Cheered ObamaCare Passage!-Posted on CNSNews.com-By By Terence P. Jeffrey-On November 10, 2011:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/kagan-tribe-day-obamacare-passed-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

Note:  The following website reveals Health Care for America Now (HCAN), which is a George Soros funded organization that was established in early 2009, and describes itself as a “national grassroots campaign of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states representing 30 million people” who believe that “our government’s responsibility is to guarantee quality affordable health care for everyone in America and it must play a central role in regulating, financing, and providing health coverage …” Specifically, HCAN supports a “single payer” model where the federal government would be in charge of financing and administering the entire U.S. healthcare system.

HCAN’s strategy is to achieve such a system incrementally, first by implementing “the public option”—i.e., a government insurance agency to “compete” with private insurers, so that Americans will be “no longer at the mercy of the private insurance industry.” Because such a government agency would not need to show a profit in order to remain in business, and because it could tax and regulate its private competitors in whatever fashion it pleased, this “public option” would soon force private insurers out of the industry.

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean announced HCAN’s mission on the first night of the annual “America’s Future Now!” conference hosted in June 2009 by the Campaign for America’s Future, where Dean pledged to spend up to $82 million to advance the cause of socialized medicine.



Effective at mobilizing large numbers of demonstrators who share its healthcare ideals, HCAN rallied 15,000 people in Washington, DC in April 2009, another 10,000 there in June 2009, and—in collaboration with the Maine People’s Alliance—hundreds more in three Maine cities the month after that. In addition to organizing and funding local demonstrations such as these, HCAN devoted significant financial resources to such initiatives as advertising in regional and national television and print media, and to establishing a major presence in the new media world of the Internet, blogs, and text messaging.

Most of HCAN’s component organizations have no experience or expertise in health care, and virtually all have received large, tax-exempt grants from leftist billionaire financiers like George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry. The public demonstrations for health-care reform that HCAN has organized are largely Soros-financed operations. In August 2009, Soros pledged $5 million to HCAN.

The HCAN Steering Committee is composed of the following organizations: ACORN; the AFL-CIO; the AFSCME; the American Federation of Teachers; Americans United for Change; the Campaign for America’s Future; the Center for American Progress Action Fund; the Campaign for Community Change (the so-called "action center" of the Center for Community Change); the Children’s Defense Fund Action Council; the Communications Workers of America; the United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW); MoveOn.org; the NAACP; the National Council of La Raza; the National Education Association; the National Women’s Law Center; the Service Employees International Union (SEIU); the United Food and Commercial Workers Union; USAction; Women’s Voices, Women’s Vote; and Working America.

Health Care for America Now (HCAN)-Posted on DiscoverThe Networks.org:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7488

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Supreme Court to Strike Down Obamacare!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/supreme-court-to-strike-down-obamacare/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

Obama ballot battle continues!

4063452775?profile=original

This issue is not going away!

Posted on The Examiner-By Linda Bentley, Maricopa County Crime Examiner-On February 14, 2012:

“NAPLES, Fla. – Sam Sewell, the Obama Ballot Challenge Project manager for the state of Florida, announced last week that Attorney Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, has joined their team to file ballot eligibility challenges against Obama in both Florida and California.

According to Sewell, who has been working to expose Obama as a fraud since before the 2008 election, Obama cannot get reelected if he fails to qualify for the ballot in these two key states.

While at Judicial Watch, Klayman obtained a court ruling declaring President Clinton committed a crime, the first lawyer to ever accomplish that against an American president.

Klayman describes Freedom Watch (FW) as “the only political advocacy group that speaks through actions rather than just words.”

Freedom Watch’s website states, “We are dedicated to not only preserving freedom, but redefining its meaning, from protecting our rights to privacy, free speech, civil liberties, and freedom from foreign oil and crooked business, labor and government officials, to protecting our national sovereignty against the incompetent terrorist state-controlled United Nations, and reestablishing the rule of law in what has become a very corrupt American legal system, where justice is only as good as your lawyer and judge – most of whom are compromised ethically and otherwise.”

On Jan. 30, 2012, as counsel for FW, as amicus curiae in United Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Klayman has filed a motion for reconsideration to participate in oral arguments concerning the issue of the requested recusal or disqualification of Justice Elena Kagan in deciding Obamacare.

He argued, “This ‘greater’ issue is the integrity of the Supreme Court itself and whether or not it will adhere to and respect centuries old rules of judicial ethics, which require a judge to recuse herself when she has a conflict of interest and when to continue on the case would create even the appearance of partiality.”

Klayman said new evidence arose in a recent report on Fox News that shows, while she was solicitor general of the Obama Justice Department, Kagan advocated in favor of Obamacare in another case.

He said, “This act constitutes not only a conflict of interest, but creates more than the appearance of partiality, for which she must recuse herself or be disqualified by the court.”

With $5,000 on hand but little time to spare, the Article II Legal Defense Fund is seeking donations to proceed with the Florida Ballot Challenge, which may be made securely online at:  https://secure.piryx.com/donate/Owri7yAp/Article-II-Legal-Defense-Fund/FLor via check to Article II Legal Defense Fund, PO Box 940672, Simi Valley, CA 93094. Be sure to note on the check the donation is for the Florida Ballot Challenge or to the General Fund so it may be used to fund the most urgent project.

“We must raise $25,000 ($12,500 per state) for efforts in Florida and California,” said Sewell, adding, “Larry understands the threat to our country, rule of law, national finances and of course, an ineligible, hostile ‘President.’ He has very high visibility, key contacts, presence, visibility, reputation, experience, track record,” describing Klayman as a “heavy hitter.”

Sewell said, “Looming deadlines force us to act soon. This may be our last line of defense to help ensure Obama will not be in the White House four more years. Our line in the sand is here. Do you really want to count on Romney/Santorum to beat him, to just hope for a ‘fair’ election?”

Meanwhile, appeals are moving forward in the Georgia challenges while Attorney Mark Hatfield filed a Citation for Contempt on Feb. 1 with the Georgia Office of Administrative Hearings on behalf of Carl Swensson and Kevin Powell, relating to “the contemptuous behavior of the defendant before this court, for a determination of appropriate action, including a finding of contempt.”

Hatfield points out Obama was served through his defense counsel, Michael Jablonski, a notice to produce, requiring Obama to appear at the Jan. 26 hearing in Atlanta and to bring with him certain documents and other items to be used as evidence.

He argued Jablonski filed no response, noting he filed no motion for protective order, motion to quash or any other pleading objecting to the notice to produce.

And, despite being timely served with the notice, Obama failed to appear for the hearing on Jan. 26, as did his attorney.

Hatfield also notes Obama and Jablonski’s failure to appear was “knowing, intentional and deliberate,” as per Jablonski’s letter to Secretary of State Brian Kemp the day before the hearing.

On behalf of his clients, Hatfield requested Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi certify the foregoing facts to the Superior Court of Fulton County, as provided by the rules of the Office of State Administrative Hearings, for a determination of the appropriate action to be taken with regard to defendant’s contemptuous conduct.”

Source:

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-phoenix/obama-ballot-battle-continues?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Susan Daniels PI Discloses New Evidence Orly Taitz Refused To Allow Presented At Georgia Hearing!-Posted on CDR Kerchner’s Blog-By CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)-On February 14, 2012:

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/susan-daniels-discloses-new-evidence-orly-taitz-refused-to-allow-presented-at-georgia-hearing/

II. Video: Dr. Manning Interviews Private Investigator Susan Daniels! (Part 1)-Posted on YouTube.com-By ATLAHWorldwide-On February 13, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLsgQ8RIbTE&feature=player_embedded

III. Video: Dr. Manning Interviews Private Investigator Susan Daniels! (Part 2)-Posted on YouTube.com-By ATLAHWorldwide-On February 13, 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O90Crndu6v4&feature=player_embedded

IV. Did Judge Malihi Base Eligibility Decision On Sharia Law?-Posted on Western Jounalism-By SUZANNE EOVALDI-On February 13, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/judge-malihi-eligibility-sharia-la/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=a2e2dbb148-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

V. CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) and a Group of Citizens in Pennsylvania will File a Ballot Access Challenge/Objection to Candidate Obama Later This Week!-Posted on CDR Kerchner’s Blog-By CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)-On February 12, 2012:

http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/02/12/a-ballot-access-challengeobjection-to-candidate-obama-to-be-filed-in-pa-this-week/

VI. Existing US Law on INS .gov Website Says Obama is Ineligible!-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By GeorgeM-On February 12, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/existing-us-law-on-ins-gov-website-says-obama-is-ineligible

VII. Was Georgia Nuke Plant the price for Obama’s Ballot Access??-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By Pamela Barnett-On February 11, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/was-georgia-nuke-plant-the-price-for-obamas-ballot-access

VIII. Obama’s mother, Stanley A. Dunham, worked for Tim Giether’s Father Peter Geither at the Ford Foundation. Ford Foundation is partnered with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac!-Posted on Faith Freedom International-By piggy-On April 16, 2009:

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&p=29858

Note:  Americans continue to wake up!

Americans across the country continue to wake up to the fact that President Obama is constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of President, as substantiated by his newly released long-form Certificate of Live Birth, which shows that his father was in fact born in Kenya in 1936. At the time, Kenya was a British colony. Therefore Obama Senior was a British subject by birth (due to the fact that he was born within British-controlled territory). When President Obama was born in 1961, he acquired British nationality by descent, because his father was a British subject by birth. When Kenya gained its independence from Great Britain in 1963, President Obama became a citizen of the newly-formed nation.

Sources:

http://www.wnd.com/2011/12/375625/#f2cd597738

http://constitutionalreset.ning.com/video/atty-dr-herb-titus-obama-not-a-natural-born-citizen

http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/natural-born-citizenship-and-history-timeline

Additionally, Several new organizations, to include active websites, were established to educate and mobilize the American public on the significance of “natural born Citizen” and the 2012 Election, along with an initiative to assist ordinary registered voting citizens wishing to challenge President Obama’s constitutional eligibility and name placement on their state’s 2012 primary presidential ballot. The team that established and maintains this website is currently compiling election laws from all 50 states and in the near future will be providing forms, along with sample letters that registered voters can use to file a complaint. Also included is pertinent information regarding those lawsuits and/or complaints that have been filed by state, to include my own.

Sources:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/superpac-founder-explains-mission-of-natural-born-citizen-pac

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/obama-ballot-challenge-founder-interviewed-by-post-email

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/retired-marine-captain-files-obama-ballot-challenge-in-new-mexico

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/request-that-president-obama-be-removed-from-the-new-mexico-2012-presidential-primary-election-ballot

Word of Caution:  Although its great that many Americans are now beginning to wake up and are actively taking some action to have President Obama taken off the 2012 Presidential Election Ballots we need to keep in mind that those individuals with unlimited sources and/or resources, to include the deep pockets of anti-American George Soros, our own local and national elected officials and others, with the help of the MSM, who have spent years planning and successively perpetrating what I now believe could be the greatest fraud in American history are not going to go down without a fight and thus, as a result, I also believe that now more than ever we need to stick together as Americans (it's no longer Democrat or Republican) at this crucial time when our country and/or Republic needs us more than ever to see this thru. A Republic for which so many Americans have and continue to give their all to uphold and defend.

So the question isAre you going to be part of the problem by continuing to keep your head in the sand hoping this issue goes away by itself or are you going to be part of the solution by stepping up to the plate and doing what ever it takes to uphold and defend our Republic before its too late?-You Decide.

Continue Reading:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

CIA Columbia Obama Cover Up!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/cia-columbia-obama-cover-up/

Why did a black preacher from Harlem have a “hit” placed on his life?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/why-has-a-black-preacher-from-harlem-received-a-“hit”-on-his-life/

What do Obama, Tim Geithner, The Ford Foundation, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, China and Muslims have in common?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/what-do-obama-tim-giether-the-ford-foundation-fannie-maefreddie-mac-and-muslims-have-in-common/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

4063449779?profile=original

What’s disturbing about this picture?

Posted on The Patriot Post-By Mark Alexander-On February 9, 2012:

“Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression.”—James Madison (1788)

The FBI held a press conference this week on a terrorist alert bulletin, which it sent to every federal, state and local law enforcement agency across the country. Unfortunately, that bulletin continued a trend of “terrorist profiles” issued since Barack Hussein Obama has been in office. This particular alert identified such broad ideological characteristics that it can be construed to include the activities of tens of millions of law-abiding Americans.

The FBI counterterrorism division report concluded that those who believe that our government has exceeded its constitutional limits or are protesting for restoration of constitutional integrity might pose a threat. By that definition, anyone associated with the “Tea Party movement” is suspect, and that’s the problem with this sweeping and politically motivated “bureaucrap.”

Make no mistake: There are some deadly anti-government socialist and fascist radicals in America. For example, consider the man who launched someone’s political career in 1994 -- Obama mentor William Ayers, who was previously the leader of the Weathermen, a murderous group of radical “useful idiots.” They bombed the U.S. Capitol twice, the Pentagon, the Department of State, several federal courthouses, plus state and local government buildings—with intent to kill. Unfortunately, the FBI never assembled sufficient evidence to convict Ayers. (Lucky break for Obama’s career!)

Or how about Obama’s radical, racist, hate-spewing pastor, Jeremiah Wright? This is the man who married the Obamas and baptized their children; the same man who regularly sermonized about “the US-KKK-A” with assertions that “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color;” the man who said that the U.S. government “gives [black people] drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strikes law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, g-d d--- America!”

Does that constitute a threat to the government?

The aforementioned FBI alert focused on the so-called “sovereign citizen” movement, which the FBI believes may have more than 500,000 members—though it has no leaders, no membership roster, no organization at all. There is a “sovereign citizens” website which notes boldly, “We do NOT endorse non-payment of taxes or violence to achieve these changes. We do NOT endorse giving up a social security number and we do NOT endorse violence against the police or the government.”

According to the FBI, some of those associated with this movement are engaged in crimes like underpaying taxes and other fraud, none of which should be classified as terrorism. According to a Reuters report on the press release, “Legal convictions of such extremists, mostly for white-collar crimes such as fraud, have increased from 10 in 2009 to 18 in 2011, FBI agents said.”

We did the math, and that’s an increase of eight convictions.

Meanwhile, more than 5,200 of Obama’s Occupy movement radicals were arrested in 2011, many for violent offenses, and some of those directed at police.

This is not to say that the FBI didn’t have reason to warn law enforcement agencies. In May of 2010, two sociopaths, one of whom had mentioned “sovereign citizen” on a website, murdered two Arkansas police officers. But why wait almost two years to issue the warning?

Now, I spent some years in law enforcement, and some of those devoted to counter-terrorism. I still hold a reserve national security position with the Department of Homeland Security and, as such, maintain threat currency and contacts with domestic counter-terrorism folks. I mention this to say I can assure you that most federal, state and local law enforcement personnel abide by their oath to “support and defend the Constitution” and are steadfastly accountable to that oath. In other words, they understand that broadly labeling as “terrorists” those who support constitutional limits on government is offensive to that oath.

However, we now have an established Obama-era pattern of applying such broad labels, which began in 2009 when the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis issued a report on “Right-Wing Extremism.” It claimed that those who use terms including “patriot” or “constitutionalist,” and “link their beliefs to those commonly associated with the American Revolution,” are a threat. It even went so far as to identify returning war veterans as “potential threats.”

That report was so repulsive that it received a prompt rebuke from liberal Democrat Bennie Thompson, then chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, and Republican Peter King, its ranking member. Thompson wrote, “This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans. ... Freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans. ... I am disappointed that the Department would allow this report to be disseminated to its State and local partners. ... I am dumbfounded that I&A released this report.”

Thompson protested that the DHS report “blurred the line” between legal and illegal activity.

At the time, DHS spokesperson Amy Kudwa claimed the report was not finished and had been recalled: “This product is not, nor was it ever, in operational use.” That notwithstanding, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano defended the report and insisted, “We do not—nor will we ever—monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people.” (Trust her, she’s from the government!)

However, such monitoring is not the contiguous prerogative of DHS, but that of federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. This is why the latest national alert issued by the FBI should raise many red flags with overseers in the House and Senate.

Here are some excerpts from the FBI bulletin: “This ... domestic terrorist movement, which, scattered across the United States, has existed for decades. ... They do not represent an anarchist group, nor are they a militia. ... They operate as individuals without established leadership and only come together in loosely affiliated groups to ... socialize and talk about their ideology. They may refer to themselves as ‘constitutionalists.’ ... Several indicators can help identify these individuals. References to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments...”

Those clips are taken out of context, but the problem with such broad profiles is that by the time they filter down through the channels, there are, inevitably, those who are not able to distinguish good from evil, or those whose political bias blinds them from such distinctions.

For example, shortly after DHS released its “Right-Wing Extremist” profile, I was contacted by Patriot readers, both officers and enlisted personnel, about a security exercise scenario at Ft. Knox. That scenario identified attackers as “Tea Party members” among “white supremacists” armed with “military grade weapons” and “bomb making components.” (In fact, many military and law enforcement personnel identify with the Tea Party movement, which is why we were contacted by military readers.)

Within hours of posting that report, senior command staff at Ft. Knox contacted us and conceded that an officer in the security loop altered the scenario to include “the Tea Party in order to make it more realistic.” The commanding officer assured us, “an official investigation has been initiated to determine the manner in which this information was included in the exercise scenario.”

To make it “more realistic”? Every reader of this column can accurately profile the political views and racial/ethnic identity of the individual who “altered the scenario.”

So, given the current FBI profile, if these “terrorists” are members of an organization with no leaders, no membership and, in fact, no organization, how exactly are they to be distinguished from law-abiding political activists who believe our government has exceeded its constitutional authority? How are they to be distinguished from patriotic Americans who advocate for the restoration of constitutional integrity and proper limits on the role of government? There are plenty of us who, in the course of our objections to the erosion of the Rule of Law, might make “references to the Bible, The Constitution of the United States, U.S. Supreme Court decisions, or treaties with foreign governments...”

What purpose does this FBI memo really serve?

In October 2011, DHS attempted to make amends by publishing a training guide for “Countering Violent Extremism.” In that directive, Section 2 notes, “Training should be sensitive to constitutional values,” and it asserts, “training should support the protection of civil rights and civil liberties as part of national security. Don’t use training that equates religious expression, protests, or other constitutionally protected activity with criminal activity.”

Perhaps Obama’s executive appointees to the FBI should adopt a similar policy and—unlike DHS—abide by it. In the meantime, we are waiting for objections from oversight committee Republicans concerning Obama’s latest attack on Bible-citing, Constitution-abiding Patriots....”

Source:

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2012/02/09/fbi-terrorist-alert-beware-of-those-who-reference-the-constitution-or-bible/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts and videos relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. IS AMERICA SPIRALING TOWARD FASCISM?

Posted on News With Views-By Dr. Carl Parnell, Ed,D –On February 7, 2012:

“If the “man on the street” was asked to describe the type of government that the United States has, he would very quickly say “Democracy.” However, in reality, America has a constitutional republic, which is the “rule of law” through a written constitution. But, as America’s history evolves, America’s government is slowly but surely following a new governmental trend, a trend toward Fascism, which is a monopolistic, state-controlled government, which gains control through the economy. In essence, the government makes the private sector think that they own their businesses. But, in reality, the government through its many control mechanisms, taxation, legislation, and regulation, actually controls these businesses. Also, it is a trend toward usurpation of America’s “rule of law.” Unfortunately, this usurpation has been purported that Americans must lose freedoms in order to have security. Of course, this is a lie that should not be perpetuated in a nation where the blood of millions of America’s finest has given their lives on the battlefields around the world for these very freedoms.

Unfortunately, those leaders who would attempt to deny Americans their God-given rights and freedoms belong to all political parties. In other words, voters must really do their research before they cast their votes on Election Day. Each political party has people who are working toward a new day in America when the government that they represent turns on its on people by eliminating the U.S. Constitution and instituting a new government, which would be some faction of Fascism. Of course, if our politicians are successful, America would be positioned to eventually become one of the members of a one world government that has been prophesied in the Bible many centuries ago. Also, it should interjected here that, according to new whistleblower reports that have been come out of the White House, anyone who negatively talks about a one world government has been categorized as a “potential terrorist.” Therefore, those who conspire behind closed doors to make America a state-controlled fascist nation do not want it to be publicized, since Americans might finally wake up to the reality of their abominable game plan.

However, could America actually become a fascist nation? According to Thom Hartmann, an American radio host, author, and former progressive political commentator, America could very well become a fascist nation. In his article “The Ghost of Vice President Wallace Warns: It Can Happen Here,” Mr. Hartmann writes,

Fascism could very easily replace democracy in the United States. If his ghost could appear, he would say that “it can happen here.” However, it probably would not be a frontal attack. Vice-President Wallace believed that it would be more subtle. The dangerous American fascist is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist, the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.[1]

Also, in a 1944 New York Times article, the former Vice-President expressed his concerns of a future fascist state in America. Vice-President Wallace stated,

If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States. There are probably several hundred thousand if we narrow the definition to include only those who in their search for money and power are ruthless and deceitful.... They are patriotic in time of war because it is to their interest to be so, but in time of peace they follow power and the dollar wherever they may lead. Nonetheless, at that time there were few corporate heads that had run for political office, and, in Wallace’s view, most politicians still felt it was their obligation to represent We The People instead of corporate cartels. American fascism will not be really dangerous, until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate prisoners of public information.[1]

Mr. Wallace also believed,

American fascists would have to lie to the people in order to gain power. And, because they were in bed with the nation’s largest corporations - who could gain control of newspapers and broadcast media - they could promote their lies with ease. How would fascists then be recognized? The American fascists are most easily recognized by their deliberate perversion of truth and fact, Wallace wrote. Their newspapers and propaganda carefully cultivate every fissure of disunity, every crack in the common front against fascism. They use every opportunity to impugn democracy. They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.[1]

Ultimately, Franklin Roosevelt’s former Vice-President exclaimed, “The myth of fascist efficiency has deluded many people. ... Democracy, to crush fascism internally, must...develop the ability to keep people fully employed and at the same time balance the budget. It must put human beings first and dollars second. It must appeal to reason and decency and not to violence and deceit. We must not tolerate oppressive government or industrial oligarchy in the form of monopolies and cartels.”[1]

References:

  1. Hartmann, Thom. “The Ghost of Vice President Wallace Warns: “It Can Happen Here” Common Dreams. 19 July 2004.

A brewing pot of Christian persecution: America’s postmodern Anti-Christian crusade.

  • Carl Parnell retired from public school teaching in 1999. He taught history and other social science courses for over forty years. He taught middle school, high school, and college level. Carl was a Lead Teacher and Principal of the On-Campus School at Georgia Baptist Children’s Home in central Georgia. Presently, he’s teaching at a private, Christian high school.”
  • Carl served in the United States Army from 1968-1971. He also served in the United States Air Force Reserves from 1983-1986, was chosen Teacher of the Year in 1991. Carl was included in the 1993, 1994 and 2007 editions of Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers. He was selected Star Teacher at hes present school in 2007 and published his first book, “From Schoolhouse to Courthouse: Exposing America’s New Terror from Within” (ISBN: 1-58736-613-4) in July 2006.
  • Carl has completed his second book, which is in an eBook format, entitled “A Brewing Pot of Christian Persecution: America’s Postmodern Anti-Christian Crusade.” My eBook, as well as over 60 of my articles, can be viewed at FaithWriters. Com 


  • E-Mail: drcarlparnell@faithwriters.net

Source:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Parnell/carl100.htm

II. It’s Going To Take ‘We The People!’

Posted on News With Views-By Chuck Baldwin-On February 9, 2012:

“Writing for WorldNetDaily, Bob Unruh reports a refreshing story of how individual sovereign states are beginning to push back against federal overreach. Unruh writes, “State and local officials in surging numbers are telling Washington they simply won’t cooperate with any plans to detain Americans the federal government may choose to describe as ‘belligerents.’

“The issue centers on provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, signed by President Obama, for the indefinite and rights-free detention of those Washington cites as belligerents, whether American citizens or not.

“WND reported when Rep. Daniel P. Gordon Jr. immediately drafted a resolution in the Rhode Island legislature to express opposition to the sections of the NDAA ‘that suspend habeas corpus and civil liberties.’

“Now the Tenth Amendment Center confirms that the resistance to the federal bureaucracy is catching on.”

Unruh continues, “‘Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center say as many as 10 states will consider legislation or resolutions in response to the detention provisions in section 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA,’ the organization is reporting. ‘Lawmakers in Rhode Island and Washington will likely introduce resolutions authored by the Rhode Island Liberty Coalition within the next week. Additionally, local governments, including Fremont County, Colo. and El Paso County, Colo., have passed resolution condemning the detention provisions.’

“Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin commented that ‘federal politicians never seem to repeal federal law.

“‘It’s going to take “We the People” in our states to stand up and say, “No!” to this unconstitutional monster,’ he said.”

Unruh goes on to report, “Already, Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, R-Manassas, has introduced HB 1160, which would prevent ‘any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency or the armed forces of the United States in the investigation, prosecution, or detainment of a United States citizen in violation of the Constitution of Virginia.’”

“Mike Maharrey, communications director for the TAC, said the fight is shaping up like the conflict in the 1850s when northern states refused to cooperated with fugitive slave laws that required them to capture and return escaping slaves.

“‘It is clear to me, and I am far from alone in this view, that the detention provisions in the NDAA are vague, overbroad and open to interpretation,’ he said. ‘That leaves me to trust in the good character and moral clarity of Barack Obama, Rick Santorum or whoever happens to reside at the White House, to protect me and my fellow Americans from abuse of his power. No thanks.’

“Maharrey noted that during the latter days of slavery, ‘state and local governments in northern states stepped in and thwarted the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Acts, which allowed the federal government to arrest and detain black people, and send them back into slavery with little or no due process.

“‘We laud these men and women as heroes,’ he said. ‘I have no doubt that history will prove equally kind to those standing up for the most basic rights of Americans today.’”

See Bob Unruh’s report.

As I have said repeatedly in this column, the only hope for the preservation of liberty and freedom in America is for individual sovereign states to do what they were created to do: protect the rights and liberties of the citizens of their states from the overreach and despotic propensities of those miscreants in Washington, D.C. If freedom-loving people in the body politic truly intend to see to it that their rights and liberties are preserved, they will pay much more attention—and be much more attuned—to electing State governors, legislators, attorney generals, etc., than they are electing US congressmen, senators, and even electing the President.

With the exception of Ron Paul, there is not a major party Presidential candidate who will make a dime’s worth of difference in protecting the liberties and freedoms of the American citizenry. Both Republicans and Democrats in Washington, D.C., are all about empire-building, foreign interventionism, and expanding the Welfare and Warfare states. Furthermore, none of them (with the exception of Ron Paul) would do anything to thwart or reverse the burgeoning police state that is currently being rapidly constructed in this country. That means, as Michael Boldin said, “It’s going to take ‘We the People’ in our states to stand up and say, ‘No!’”

And quite frankly, that’s about the only thing that the power-elite in Washington, D.C., are worried about. They aren’t worried about Afghanistan, Iraq, or Iran. Those are all orchestrated conflicts to keep our troops fighting endless wars, to have an excuse to print more and more fiat currency, to satisfy the international bankers who are making trillions of dollars off the military-industrial complex, and to give them an excuse of “national security” in order to strip away more and more freedoms from the American citizenry. But State governors, legislators, and attorney generals who actually believe the Constitution and who have the courage to defend it, now THAT scares them to death! Why? Because they know that the real power in this country rests with “We the People” who, through their state governments, have the ability to actually stop their quest for globalism and feudalism.

America’s Founding Fathers clearly understood that the states are the ultimate guardians of the peoples’ liberties. James Madison (and even Alexander Hamilton) spoke to this eloquently in the Federalist Papers.

In Federalist #46, Madison said, “Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may fell an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the [states] would still have the advantage in the means of DEFEATING SUCH ENCROACHMENTS” (emphasis added). By “defeating such encroachments,” Madison included “opposition,” “refusal to cooperate,” “frowns of the [State] executive,” “obstructions,” and “plans of resistance.”

Did you see that? America’s third President and Father of the Constitution said that it was the duty of the states to obstruct, oppose, resist, and otherwise refuse to cooperate with any federal policy or mandate that runs counter to the principles of liberty. And, remember, this is from the man who authored the so-called “supremacy clause” of the US Constitution!

In Federalist #45, Madison said, “Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members.”

Did you get that? In the mind of America’s founders, the federal government would be dependent upon the State governments, not the other way around! But what do we hear today? Even these so-called “conservative” politicos and talking heads say just the opposite. They keep insisting that the states are dependent upon, and subservient to, the federal government.

Even the colonists’ biggest proponent of central government, Alexander Hamilton, had it right on the power of the states to resist federal encroachment. In Federalist #26, Hamilton said, “Independent of … the national legislature itself … the State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the voice, but, if necessary, the arm of their discontent.”

Wow! Did you catch that? Hamilton said that the states held the right and duty to resist federal encroachment with their “voice” and with their “arm.”

Does any of this sound like America’s Founding Fathers expected the states to be lap dogs for federal usurpation of power? They fully recognized that it would take the individual states standing against any potential federal overreach to protect and secure the rights and liberties of the American people.

I will say it again: it is far more important who is elected as your governor than who is elected President. It is far more important who is elected as your State attorney general than who is appointed US attorney general. It is far more important who is elected to your State legislature than who is elected to the US House and Senate. It is far more important who is elected as your sheriff than who is appointed as the Director of the FBI. But if all you watch is FOX News, CNN, NBC, CBS, and ABC, you will be mesmerized with national politics, and you will forget about that which is the most important defender of our liberties: our individual state governments. In fact, in many cases today, our State and local governments are as abusive of our liberties as is the federal government. This is mainly due to the inattention and misunderstanding of the People as to the importance of electing local and State leaders who will accept, as their first responsibility, the maintenance of liberty for the people they represent. And by nature, that means being a faithful watchdog to the incursions of the federal government against our freedoms.

It is encouraging to read that at least ten states are pushing back against the monstrously unconstitutional NDAA. If all fifty states would act as courageously as these tenacious ten—and not just against the NDAA, but also against EVERY assault of the federal government against our liberties—America could be restored to the “land of the free” very quickly. As it is, however, the protectors and guardians of our liberties (our State leaders and county sheriffs) are being bribed, coerced, cajoled, harangued, and intimidated into cowardly submission by these belligerent bullies in Washington, D.C.

Thank you Representative Daniel P. Gordon, Jr. of Rhode Island. Thank you Delegate Bob Marshall of Virginia. Thank you to all of you State legislators, State senators, and county sheriffs across our great land who truly understand the oath you took to the Constitution and who are willing to stand as the watchdogs of our liberties. It is a truism that if your tribe does not increase, our freedoms are surely lost.”

  • Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck’s complete bio here.


  • E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Source:

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin687.htm

III. A day of reckoning for Washington!-Posted on Laigle’s Forum-By Don Hank-On February 10, 2012:

http://laiglesforum.com/a-day-of-reckoning-is-coming/2936.htm

IV. NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges For Federal Agents!-Posted on Western Journalism-By BREAKING NEWS-On February 8, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/ndaa-nullification-tennessee-bills-propose-kidnapping-charges-for-federal-agents/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=6b25273157-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

V. State-Controlled Mainstream Media?-Posted on Western Journalism-By KRIS ZANE-On February 8, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/state-controlled-mainstream-media/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=6b25273157-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

VI. Dick Morris: Obama’s sneaky treaties!-Posted on The Hill-By Dick Morris-On February 7, 2012:

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/209283-obamas-assault-on-america

VII. Congress Calls for Accelerated Use of Drones in U.S.!-Posted on Secrecy News-By Steven Aftergood-On February 3, 2012:

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2012/02/faa_drones.html

VIII. Video: Obama Is Betraying America!-Posted on DickMorris.com-By Dick Morris –On February 3, 2012:

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/obama-is-betraying-america-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

IX. America’s Sheriffs Fight Barack Obama And Federal Government!-Posted on English Pravada-By Dr. Eowyn-On February 2, 2012:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/03-02-2012/120412-america_sheriffs_obama-0/

X. Obama the Chicken is Being Plucked!-Posted on English Pravada-By Mark McGrew-On January 30, 2012:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/30-01-2012/120356-obama_the_chicken-0/

XI. James Madison And The ‘Gathering Storm’ Prophecy!-Posted on News With Views-By Timothy N. Baldwin, JD.-On January 27, 2012:

http://www.newswithviews.com/Timothy/baldwin182.htm

XII. All Who Signed The NDAA Bill Should Be Impeached!-Posted on News With Views-By Dr. Laurie Roth, NewsWithViews.com-On January 20, 2012:


http://www.newswithviews.com/Roth/laurie307.htm

XIII. The Real 2012 Doomsday: U.S. Falls To Tyranny!-Posted on Personal Liberty Digest-By Sam Rolley –On January 18, 2012:

http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/the-real-2012-doomsday-u-s-falls-to-tyranny/?eiid

XIV. MAJOR NEW WEAPON IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE U.N.!-Posted on News With Views-By Tom DeWeese-On January 8, 2012:

http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom209.htm

Note:  The following videos, articles and/or blog posts reveal how our American Constitution faces a ‘progressive’ threat, with the help of the main stream media, along with a video regarding our Constitution and our Republic-if we can keep it-You Decide:

I. Video: Obama: People Are Frustrated I Can’t Force My Will On Congress–Founding Fathers Made It Difficult!-Posted on Western Journalism-By DANIEL NOE-On February 7, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-people-are-frustrated-i-cant-force-my-will-on-congress-founding-fathers-made-it-difficult/

II. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: U.S. CONSTITUTION INFERIOR!-Posted on WND.com-By Bob Unruh-On February 3, 2012:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/supreme-court-justice-u-s-constitution-inferior/

III. EXCLUSIVE—Mark Levin on ‘Ameritopia:’ ‘We Now Live in a Post-Constitutional Country!’-Posted on CNSNews.com-By Terence P. Jeffrey-On January 16, 2012:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/exclusive-mark-levin-ameritopia-we-now-live-post-constitutional-country

IV. Miss America: Obama Shirking the Constitution!-Posted on NewsMax.com-By Tom O’Connell-On Juy 13, 2011:

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/MissAmerica-BarackObama-Constitution/2011/07/13/id/403443

V. Florida D.A. Fired for Talking About Constitution Settles Case!-Posted on The Blaze-By Madeleine Morgenstern-On July 8, 2011:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/florida-d-a-fired-for-talking-about-constitution-settles-case/

VI. The Elite Are Not Even Trying To Hide How Much They Hate The U.S. Constitution Anymore!-Posted on InfoWars.com-By The American Dream-On July 5, 2011:

http://www.infowars.com/the-elite-are-not-even-trying-to-hide-how-much-they-hate-the-u-s-constitution-anymore/

VII. Exposing the Mindset of Modern Liberalism!-Posted on Commentary Magazine-By Peter Wehner-On July 5, 2011:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/05/exposing-the-mindset-of-modern-liberalism/

VIII. American Constitution faces ‘progressive’ threat!-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On July 3, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=316621

IX. The Constitution Matters: ‘A reply to Time magazine’s Richard Stengel.’-Posted on National Review Online-By THOMAS SOWELL-On June 28, 2011:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/270584/constitution-matters-thomas-sowell

X. Video: TIME Magazine Asks: ‘Does the Constitution Still Matter?’-Posted on The PatriotPost-On June 24, 2011:

http://patriotpost.us/perspective/2011/06/24/time-magazine-asks-does-the-constitution-still-matter/

XI. CNN Analysts Want Constitution Modernized; Bash Second Amendment Wording, Electoral College!-Posted on News Busters-By Matt Hadro-On June 27, 2011:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matt-hadro/2011/06/27/cnn-analysts-want-constitution-modernized-bash-second-amendment-wording-

XII. Obama Versus the Constitution!-Posted on American Thinker-By James Lewis-On April 25, 2011:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/obama_versus_the_constitution.html

XIII. George Soros assault on U.S. Constitution: ‘White House officials involved in rewriting nation’s founding document’!-Posted on WND.com-By Aaron Klein-On March 27, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=280277

XIV. Video: A Republic, If You Can Keep It – The American Form of Government!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGL8CiUtXF0

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

New World Order By Executive Order!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/02/13/new-world-order-by-executive-order/

It’s Getting Very Serious Now!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/it’s-getting-very-serious-now/

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Who owns our supposedly fair and balanced airwaves and news outlets?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/21/who-owns-our-supposedly-fair-and-balanced-airwaves-and-news-outlets/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide:

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/what-happened-to-free-speech/

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

 4063448147?profile=original

Was Judge Malihi bribed or threatened?-You Decide:

Posted on English Pravada-By Mark S. McGrew-On February 6, 2012:

“Friday, February 3, 2012, for some kind of a bribe or because he was threatened, Georgia Judge Michael Malihi sold out his country and defecated on the constitution of The United States of America.

As an Administrative law judge in the State of Georgia, a case was presented to him to have Barack Obama removed from the ballot to run for President in the State of Georgia.

His actions have set precedence in American law that if a person is charged with a crime, the best defense, is to not show up for court. Law schools may now offer a course in “The Obama Defense”.

Three separate legal teams presented evidence and witnesses to show that Obama is not eligible to run for President because he is not a natural born citizen. Obama produced no evidence, no witnesses and both he and his lawyer failed to show up for court in violation of a subpoena to do so.

Forget about what we think, whether he is, or is not a natural born citizen. Opinions don’t count. Only evidence and witnesses count. But we’re not dealing with rational minds in this case. We never have.

Judge Michael Malihi violated a basic rule of legal interpretation in his ruling. He violated our earliest Supreme Court ruling on how to interpret the Constitution. He ignored evidence. He ignored witnesses. He ignored earlier Supreme Court rulings establishing that the term “natural born citizen” means, one who is born in America to two American citizen parents.

The most telling sign that he was either bribed or threatened shows up in his own actions, of violating his own rulings, just four weeks apart, on the same case.

As attorney Leo Donofrio points out on his website: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com     

“His opinion holds that the 14th has the exact same effect as the natural-born citizen clause, while the 14th Amendment does not include the words “natural born Citizen”. Persons claiming citizenship under the 14th Amendment are deemed to be “citizens”. Malihi has added the words “natural born” into the Amendment. This is absolutely forbidden, according to Malihi’s own opinion in the Motion to dismiss, wherein he held: “In the absence of words of limitation, words in a statute should be given their ordinary and everyday meaning.’ Because there is no other ‘natural and reasonable construction’ of the statutory language, this Court is ‘not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.’ “

In other words, he claimed one thing on January 3, 2012 and on February 3, 2012 he wrote the exact opposite. Why would any sane man do such a thing?

The question of Obama being eligible is a legal issue. It is also a political issue. Since America is not a “Nation of Laws” as the politicians hype. It is a Nation of Establishment. The Establishment, through their corrupted politicians make the rules and the rules change according to who they are for. And in politics, anywhere in the World, all through history, the three most effective tools are bribery, extortion and murder.

It is impossible to believe, that Judge Michael Malihi, himself, believed, he was following the constitution and legal precedent. He knows he’s a crook. He knows he’s a liar. He knows, that in his ancestral home country, that unlike America, he would have his head chopped off for what he did.

He ignored the Constitution and at least three US Supreme Court rulings, defining Natural born citizen as one who is born in America to two citizen parents. He ignored the Law of Nations, that the founders of this country used to draft our constitution. He ignored the countless letters, written back and forth by our founders, defining natural born citizen and their reasons for why they would only accept a natural born citizen as their President.

IT IS BECAUSE THEY DID NOT WANT A SPINELESS, COWARDLY, TRAITOROUS, SATANIC SNAKE IN THE GRASS FROM ANOTHER COUNTRY TELLING US HOW TO LIVE!

The lawyers asking to keep Obama off the ballot presented evidence and witnesses. Obama showed nothing. Didn’t even come. Ignored a court order. And Judge Micahel Malihi ruled in the criminal’s favor.

Imagine a boy comes to his father and says his brother hit him. He has no bruises and no witnesses. The father confronts the brother, who proves that he was in school at the time. Friends and teachers vouch for his attendence and show the father a picture of him in class. The father punishes him anyway and takes the lying brother out for ice cream and toy shopping.

Judge Michael Malihi cited cases that have absolutley nothing to do with the subject matter and he totally disregarded any evidence or witnesses.

Attorney Mario Apuzzo thoroughly trashes this corrupt judge’s decision on his website: http://puzo1.blogspot.com

“But there is no evidence before the Court that Obama was born in the United States. The court can only rest its finding of fact on evidence that is part of the court record. The judge tells us that he decided the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims. But he does not tell us in his decision what evidence he relied upon to “consider[]” that Obama was born in the United States.

The judge “considered” that Obama was born in the United States. What does “considered” mean?

Clearly, it is not enough for a court to consider evidence or law. It must make a finding after having considered facts and law. The judge simply does not commit to any finding as to where Obama was born. Using the word “considered” is a cop out from actually addressing the issue.

Additionally, we know from his decision that neither Obama nor his attorney appeared at the hearing let alone introduced any evidence of Obama’s place of birth. We also know from the decision that the judge ruled that plaintiffs’ documents introduced into evidence were “of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiff’s allegations.”

Surely, the court did not use those “insufficient” documents as evidence of Obama’s place of birth. Nor does the judge tell us that he used those documents for any such purpose. The judge also does not tell us that the court took any judicial notice of any evidence (not to imply that it could).

The judge did find that Obama has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party. But with the rules of evidence of superior court applying, this finding does not establish anyone’s place of birth.

Hence, what evidence did the judge have to rule that Obama is born in the United States? The answer is none.”

Mario Apuzzo continues with well documented legal facts: “Presidential eligibility is a national issue. Under our Constitution, like the States do not have power to naturalize citizens, they also do not have power to change, add, or diminish the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen.”

The U.S. Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett (1875) already has told us that there was no doubt as to who could be a “natural born Citizen.”  In fact, there was absolutely no evidence before the court [Malihi] that Obama was born in Hawaii. And as we have seen, there was also absolutely no evidence before Judge Malihi showing the Obama was born in the United States.

The court never addressed the question of whether he was born in Hawaii. No evidence was presented to the court whether he was “born within the borders of the United States.” The court never even examined that issue.

Hence, its statement that “persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents” does not prove that Obama was, in fact, born within the borders of the United States” and that he is therefore a “natural born Citizen.”

I would like to interrupt at this point, but Mr. Apuzzo is on a roll,

“Judge Malihi has not made any findings of fact concerning the question of where Obama was born.

Obama the candidate wants to be President again. Under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, Obama has the burden of proof to conclusively prove that he is a “natural born Citizen.” As part of that burden, he has to conclusively prove that he was born in the United States.

Neither Obama nor his attorney appeared at the hearing to present any evidence on the issue.

Judge Malihi found the plaintiffs’ documentary evidence to be insufficient for whatever purposes it could have been used. Nor did he find that that evidence, which includes a paper copy of the computer scan of Obama’s alleged long form birth certificate, to be sufficient to prove that Obama was born in Hawaii.

We can see from the exact words used by Judge Malihi that Obama has failed to carry his burden to conclusively prove that he was born in the United States.

Judge Malihi said that he “considered” that Obama was born in the United States. We do not know what this means and it appears that Judge Malihi attempts to avoid the issue of whether he found that Obama was born in the United States.

Clearly, “considered” does not mean “found”.

Since Obama failed to carry his burden of proof as to his place of birth and Judge Malihi’s decision actually confirms that fact, the Georgia Secretary of State should reject Judge Malihi’s decision and rule on his own that Obama not be placed on the primary ballot.

Finally, Judge Malihi incorrectly reads [the case of] Wong Kim Ark and gives controlling effect to that incorrect reading.

The time-honored American common law definition of the clause is a child born in the country to citizen parents.

There is no dispute that Obama was born to a non-U.S. citizen father (his father was a British citizen) and U.S. citizen mother. Being born to an alien father, Obama also inherited his father’s British citizenship under the British Nationality Act 1948.

All this demonstrates that Obama was not born in the full and complete legal, political, and military allegiance and jurisdiction of the United States. He is therefore not an Article II “natural born Citizen” and cannot be placed on the Georgia primary ballot.”

Mr. Apuzzo’s brief biography: Listed in Who’s Who Among Students in American Universities and Colleges, 1978-1979. Graduated from: Wilkes University, B.A.; Temple University, J.D. Named: Outstanding Senior Scholar Athlete, Wilkes College, 1978-1979; Businessman of the Year, Italian American Police Society of New Jersey, 1996; Outstanding American of Italian Descent, Meritorious Achievement, Italian Tribune News, 1996. Pro-Bono Counsel for: National Police Defense Foundation, New Jersey, 1996-; Order Sons of Italy in America-New Jersey, 1994-.

Now I can intrude again.

Judge Michael Malihi issued his decision late in the day on a Friday. By doing this, he effectively isolates himself from any criticism, until Monday morning. Come Monday, I am sure that he will be hiding behind the skirts of his office staff.

He is not ignorant of what he has done. He turned his back on all that we cherish for a few bucks or because he is scared to death of whoever made him “an offer he can’t refuse”.

This weasel of a man betrayed his country, reneged on his oath of office, insulted the dignity of his profession, corrupted the legal system and by his conscious act of disloyalty to his associates, he has subjected them all to scorn and ridicule. If any of his co-workers have a conscience, they would hang their heads in shame and be embarrassed to frequent any of the businesses where they eat and shop.

Merchants in Atlanta should refuse to serve them. Businesses should refuse to sell them food, gasoline, clothes and should especially not sell them any tools of their trade such as pens, paper, computers or printers.

In his well thought out plans, setting his signature to that decision is nothing less than admitted treason.

Here is an interesting investigation into Judge Michael Malihi. NOTHING. Just like the man he broke his oath for, he is an invisible shadow. He has no history. http://intangiblesoul.wordpress.com

In the interest of public safety I would like to request of all who are aware of this stinking rotten judge’s actions, to please refrain from mugging the low down lying cockroach, throwing rocks at this dog’s house, slapping this treasonous corrupt scoundrel’s children, spitting on this disgusting animal’s wife, to just go directly to the whorse’s mouth. Give him a call or stop in to see him, for a polite civilized discussion, on why he chose to turn his back on the country that provided the means for him to be in the position he is in.

I am sure that he would want to hear from the people who pay his salary, who put food in his family’s stomachs and puts clothes on their backs. Naturally, he would want to thank you personally.

For conversing, socializing, bonding with his neighbors and undermining the American legal system, he lists his address as: 230 Peachtree Street NW, Suite 850, Atlanta, Georgia USA 30303 or feel free to call him. You pay for his office: 404-651-7595 or, people always love a good fax 404-818-3751

Why not? He faxed us good.”

Mark S. McGrew can be reached at McGrewMX@aol.com. More of his articles, published on over 900 websites, in 28 countries, in 8 languages, are on www.MarkSMcGrew.com . When reprinting this article, please include a link to the free press of www.english.pravda.ru And a special thanks to Pravda’s English editor, Dmitry Sudakov

Source:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/06-02-2012/120426-Georgia_Judge_Michael_Malihi-0/

Note: The following articles and/or blog posts relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

I. Obama Wins Georgia Ballot Challenge!

Posted on American Thinker-By Cindy Simpson-On February 4, 2012:

“President Obama’s name should appear on Georgia’s 2012 presidential ballot, in the official opinion of Judge Michael Malihi of Georgia’s Office of State Administrative Hearings (OSAH), issued on February 3.  Judge Malihi’s decision is the result of hearings held January 26 on three separate actions brought by several Georgia residents. Under Georgia law, Secretary of State Brian Kemp had referred the challenges, filed last November, to the OSAH for a recommendation. 

An earlier American Thinker article on the ballot challenges noted the absence of Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, from the hearings. Judge Malihi took note of the failure to participate in the opening page of his decision:

Ordinarily, the Court would enter a default order against the party that fails to participate in any stage of a proceeding...Nonetheless, despite the Defendant’s failure to appear, Plaintiffs asked this Court to decide the case on the merits of their arguments and evidence.  The Court granted Plaintiff’s request.

Based on the pre-hearing conference with the Judge, the plaintiffs expected an outcome of at least such a default judgment, and hoped that a ruling in their favor, based on the merits, was possible.

Two of the challenges, represented by attorney Van Irion of the Liberty Legal Foundation and Georgia Rep. J. Mark Hatfield, did not focus on Obama’s place of birth or the infamous birth certificate.  Rather, Irion and Hatfield contended that Obama, with his non-US citizen father, is not a “natural born” citizen according to the rule of statutory construction in the interpretation of the Constitution and existing Supreme Court precedent.  (Further explanation of those assertions is contained in a comprehensive amicus brief submitted to the court, prepared by attorney Leo Donofrio.) The third challenge, represented by California attorney Orly Taitz, also addressed the validity of Obama’s posted birth certificate and social security number.

Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, in his motion to dismiss the challenges, argued that the state had no authority to interfere in national elections. However, Judge Malihi, in his denial to Jablonski’s motion noted that Georgia law specifically requires that “[e]very candidate...shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought” and that “[b]oth the Secretary of State and the electors of Georgia are granted the authority under the Code to challenge the qualifications of a candidate.”

Judge Malihi’s denial to the motion to dismiss also emphasized the rule of statutory construction: 

Statutory provisions must be read as they are written...When the Court construes a constitutional or statutory provision, “the first step...is to examine the plain statutory language.”...”Where the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, judicial construction is not only unnecessary but forbidden.” ... [T]his Court is not “authorized either to read into or read out that which would add to or change its meaning.”

In his sweeping denial of the Plaintiff’s challenges, however, Judge Malihi did not mention the principle, and instead relied on the 2009 case of Ankeny v Governor, stating that “[t]he Indiana Court determined that a person qualifies as a natural born citizen if he was born in the United States because he became a United States citizen at birth.”

Interestingly, Judge Malihi footnoted that particular statement with the assertion:  “This Court recognizes that the Wong Kim Ark case was not deciding the meaning of ‘natural born citizen’ for the purposes of determining presidential qualifications; however, this Court finds the Indiana Court’s analysis and reliance on these cases to be persuasive.”

It must also be noted that the Indiana decision contains another similar and interesting footnote:  “We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a ‘natural born Citizen’ using the Constitution’s Article II language is immaterial.”

In other words, Judge Malihi found more persuasive than the long-established principle of statutory construction, a State’s Court of Appeals opinion and its unsupported contention that the Constitution’s language “is immaterial.”

In the 1898 case of Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court determined that Ark, born to non-citizen Chinese parents permanently and legally domiciled in the U.S., was a citizen (though it did not describe him as a “natural born” citizen). In its actual historical context, however, Ark’s situation was governed by a treaty in effect between the U.S. and China—a treaty that originally recognized the transfer of allegiance of Chinese making their permanent homes in America, but, as later amended, also prevented Ark’s parents from ever naturalizing as U.S. citizens.  In fact, as Donofrio explains, unlike other native-born children of alien parents of other nationalities, Ark was not born with the dual allegiance (i.e. dual citizenship) that many experts contend the 14th amendment’s “subject to the jurisdiction” language was meant to prevent.

And according to the principle of statutory construction, the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” would not be superfluous to the preceding phrase in the amendment’s citizenship clause: “born or naturalized in the United States.”

It was Obama’s dual citizenship, the result of his having a non-citizen father temporarily resident in the U.S., that the plaintiffs in the Georgia challenges asserted precluded his “natural born” eligibility. Obama may have been born in the country, but he was not born completely subject to its jurisdiction, or in the words of one of the framers of the 14th amendment, “not owing allegiance to anybody else.”

As to the specific claims in Taitz’s challenge, the Judge found that “the testimony of the witnesses, as well as the exhibits tendered, to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiff’s allegations.”

Both Irion and Hatfield had also asked the court to recommend a finding of contempt for Obama’s failure to appear in the proceedings.  Judge Malihi did not agree, and in his decision merely wrote:  “By deciding this matter on the merits, the Court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of Defendant’s attorney, Mr. Jablonski.”

Georgia represents 16 electoral votes, which Obama lost in 2008 with 47%, so an Obama win in the state was not expected, even though now he is assured of having his name included on the ballot. However, the eligibility issue is still a major concern to many citizens, and “is gaining traction in other states, too, including Alabama, Tennessee, Arizona, New Hampshire, and even Illinois,” as reported by WND. 

The rest of the mainstream media, though, seemed to have gone on total blackout the last couple of weeks, neglecting to report on either the quite extraordinary subject matter of the Georgia hearings or the failure of Obama and his defense team to respectfully respond and appear in court. 

Whatever one’s opinions on the constitutional definition of “natural born citizen,” the arrogance exhibited by this president and his defense attorney to the judiciary of a state, and the abject lack of reporting by the major networks and mainstream media, should trouble every citizen in the nation.

More remarkably, such behavior, especially when viewed as part of a disturbing pattern throughout this administration, should be of grave concern to members of Congress.

And the fact that Judge Malihi took note of and relied upon on the established rule of statutory construction in his earlier order, but then made assertions contrary to that principle in his final decision, should not go unnoticed by those versed in constitutional law

Opponents of the controversial birthright citizenship practice should also take note, since Judge Malihi’s opinion further entrenches the notion that every baby born on U.S. soil, regardless of the citizenship or domicile of its parents (presumably even an “anchor baby” or “birth tourist” baby) is a “natural born” citizen.  So would have been Anwar al-Awlaki.

I wonder if the founders of the Constitution, the framers of the 14th amendment, and the Supreme Court in the case of Wong Kim Ark, ever imagined that such an idea would be considered the rule of law.  The mainstream media calls those who dare to argue otherwise “crazy” and “racist” “birthers.”

Obama may have won the Georgia ballot challenge, but the rule of law and the Constitution suffered a crippling blow.”

Source:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/obama_wins_georgia_ballot_challenge.html#ixzz1ldSBTK2z

II. A Rat Called Tandem!

Posted on Natural Born Citizen-By Leo Donofrio, Esq.-On February 4, 2012:

“What happened in Georgia is what we refer to in poker as, “playing to a script”. It’s like something out of a Frank Capra movie. The citizens head to court to fix a Constitutional wrong, and the State court appears to be tough on the feds, standing up to them bravely flexing their muscles in the name of their citizens. Nice script. But it’s so very transparent.

Everyone needs to read Mario Apuzzo’s in-depth exposure of the blatant flaws in Judge Malihi’s holding, wherein you will experience a brilliant researcher exposing a truly defective legal opinion.

I only have a little bit to add. My remarks will be brief, and focused upon Judge Malihi’s sad failure to address the issue of statutory construction, which I explained thoroughly in my last report, The Dirty “little” Secret of the Natural-Born Citizen Clause Revealed.

Malihi’s opinion directly contradicts his own recent opinion denying Obama’s Motion to Dismiss, wherein Malihi relied exclusively on statutory construction. However, yesterday, Malihi held that the 14th Amendment had to be read “in tandem” with Article 2, Section 1.

But doing so would render the natural-born citizen clause to be inoperative, in that 14th Amendment citizenship, and nothing more, would be the requirement to be President. This would mean that the natural-born citizen clause is rendered superfluous. Here’s what Chief Justice Marshall said about this issue in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803):

“It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.” Id. 174. (Emphasis added.)

And here’s what the U.S. Supreme Court held as to statutory construction in the seminal case on this issue, Morton v. Mancari:

“Where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment. See, e. g., Bulova Watch Co. v. United States, 365 U.S. 753, 758 (1961); Rodgers v. United States, 185 U.S. 83, 87 -89 (1902). 

The courts are not at liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments, and when two statutes are capable of co-existence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed congressional intention to the contrary, to regard each as effective. “When there are two acts upon the same subject, the rule is to give effect to both if possible . . . The intention of the legislature to repeal ‘must be clear and manifest.’ ” United States v. Borden Co., 308 U.S. 188, 198 (1939).” Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 550-551 (1974).

There is no “clearly expressed intention” to deem 14th Amendment citizens “natural born”. Those words were intentionally left out of the 14th Amendment. And Judge Malihi has simply overruled the U.S. Supreme Court by suggesting that the general citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment governs the specific requirement to be President in Article 2, Section 1.

Both clauses are not given separate effect by Malihi. His opinion holds that the 14th has the exact same effect as the natural-born citizen clause, while the 14th Amendment does not include the words “natural born Citizen”. Persons claiming citizenship under the 14th Amendment are deemed to be “citizens”. Malihi has added the words “natural born” into the Amendment. This is absolutely forbidden, according to Malihi’s own opinion in the Motion to dismiss, wherein he held:

“In the absence of words of limitation, words in a statute should be given their ordinary and everyday meaning.’ Six Flags Over Ga. v. Kull, 276 Ga. 210, 211 (2003) (citations and quotation marks omitted). Because there is no other ‘natural and reasonable construction’ of the statutory language, this Court is ‘not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.’ ” (Emphasis added.)

Yeah, dude. Whatevah. Such lack of consistency, just weeks apart, from the same jurist… simply reeks. Now he’s putting words into the 14th Amendment, when just two weeks ago he said that was forbidden.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKARlWkLo_Y&feature=player_embedded

Leo Donofrio, Esq.”

Source:

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

III. Were FBI Agents Carrying Out Orders When They Said That Enforcing the Constitution Regarding Obama Would Cause a Civil War?-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By Pamela Barnett-On February 5, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/were-fbi-agents-carrying-out-orders-when-they-said-that-enforcing-the-constitution-regarding-obama-would-cause-a-civil-war

IV. Georgia Court Ignored Basic Rules of Interpretation in Obama Ballot Challenge!-Posted on Obama Ballot Challenge-By Pamela Barnett-On February 5, 2012:

http://obamaballotchallenge.com/georgia-court-ignored-basic-rules-of-interpretation-in-obama-ballot-challenge

V. Thanks A Lot Georgia, For Shredding Our Constitution!-Posted on Western Journalism-By MIKI BOOTH-On February 4, 2012:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/thanks-a-lot-georgia-for-shredding-our-constitution/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=67be742da0-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

VI. BREAKING NEWS: SHERIFF JOE SETS D-DAY ON OBAMA’S ELIGIBILITY: ‘Arpaio won’t release any of Cold-Case Posse’s conclusions in advance!’-Posted on WND.com-By Jerome R. Corsi-On February 6, 2012:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/d-day-set-for-sheriff-joe-on-obama-eligibility/

Question: Was retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely on target when he made the following eye-opening statement during an interview that aired on the Terry Lakin Action Fund Radio Show on June 13, 2011: “..the “Certificate of Live Birth” released, on or about April 27, 2011, by the White House as “proof positive” of President Obama’s Hawaiian birth was a forgery, but the FBI was covering the fraud and no one in Congress is willing to tackle the situation because of fears of a “black backlash” if the failings of the nation’s first black president are revealed.”

Source:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=311433

Note:  My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/the-greatest-fraud-perpetrated-in-american-history/

Could the President’s newly released COLB be a forgery?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/could-the-president’s-newly-released-colb-be-a-forgery/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts please copy web site and paste it on your browser. Be aware that some of the articles and/or blog posts or videos listed within the contents of the above blog post(s) may have been removed by this administration because they may have considered them to be too controversial.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may shed some negative light on this administration is being censored-What happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

God Bless the U.S.A.!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q65KZIqay4E&feature=related

Semper Fi!

Jake

Read more…

Three Republicans helped pass Financial Regulation, It's all hidden until after legislation is passed and signed into law?

This is deceitful and obstruction of information and justice. Call your Congress and Senate and ask; how did you voted? Did you read the bill? What are you thinking? Do you uphold truth and justice? Remind him/her, November is coming.....GrizzlyMama

H.R.4173 : Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
Sponsor: Rep. Barney Frank [MA-4] (introduced 12/2/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Committees: House Financial Services; House Agriculture; House Energy and Commerce; House Judiciary; House Rules; House Budget; House Oversight and Government Reform; House Ways and Means; Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
Latest Conference Report: 111-517 (in Congressional Record H4977-5202)
Latest Major Action: Became Public Law No: 111-203 [GPO: Text, PDF]

Voting results for Republicans - all voted Nay except the following.

Scott Brown (R-MA), Yea
Susan Collins (R-ME), Yea

Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Yea

SEC Says New FinReg Law Exempts It From Public Disclosure

By Dunstan Prial

Published July 28, 2010

FOXBusiness

So much for transparency.

Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

The law, signed last week by President Obama, exempts the SEC from disclosing records or information derived from "surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities." Given that the SEC is a regulatory body, the provision covers almost every action by the agency, lawyers say. Congress and federal agencies can request information, but the public cannot.

That argument comes despite the President saying that one of the cornerstones of the sweeping new legislation was more transparent financial markets. Indeed, in touting the new law, Obama specifically said it would “increase transparency in financial dealings."

The SEC cited the new law Tuesday in a FOIA action brought by FOX Business Network. Steven Mintz, founding partner of law firm Mintz & Gold LLC in New York, lamented what he described as “the backroom deal that was cut between Congress and the SEC to keep the SEC’s failures secret. The only losers here are the American public.”

If the SEC’s interpretation stands, Mintz, who represents FOX Business Network, predicted “the next time there is a Bernie Madoff failure the American public will not be able to obtain the SEC documents that describe the failure,” referring to the shamed broker whose Ponzi scheme cost investors billions.

The SEC didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Criticism of the provision has been swift. “It allows the SEC to block the public’s access to virtually all SEC records,” said Gary Aguirre, a former SEC staff attorney-turned-whistleblower who had accused the agency of thwarting an investigation into hedge fund Pequot Assett Management in 2005. “It permits the SEC to promulgate its own rules and regulations regarding the disclosure of records without getting the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, which typically applies to all federal agencies.”

Aguirre used FOIA requests in his own lawsuit against the SEC, which the SEC settled this year by paying him $755,000. Aguirre, who was fired in September 2005, argued that supervisors at the SEC stymied an investigation of Pequot – a charge that prompted an investigation by the Senate Judiciary and Finance committees.

The SEC closed the case in 2006, but would re-open it three years later. This year, Pequot and its founder, Arthur Samberg, were forced to pay $28 million to settle insider-trading charges related to shares of Microsoft (MSFT: 25.95 ,-0.21 ,-0.80%). The settlement with Aguirre came shortly later.

“From November 2008 through January 2009, I relied heavily on records obtained from the SEC through FOIA in communications to the FBI, Senate investigators, and the SEC in arguing the SEC had botched its initial investigation of Pequot’s trading in Microsoft securities and thus the SEC should reopen it, which it did,” Aguirre said. “The new legislation closes access to such records, even when the investigation is closed.

“It is hard to imagine how the bill could be more counterproductive,” Aguirre added.

FOX Business Network sued the SEC in March 2009 over its failure to produce documents related to its failed investigations into alleged investment frauds being perpetrated by Madoff and R. Allen Stanford. Following the Madoff and Stanford arrests it, was revealed that the SEC conducted investigations into both men prior to their arrests but failed to uncover their alleged frauds.

FOX Business made its initial request to the SEC in February 2009 seeking any information related to the agency’s response to complaints, tips and inquiries or any potential violations of the securities law or wrongdoing by Stanford.

FOX Business has also filed lawsuits against the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve over their failure to respond to FOIA requests regarding use of the bailout funds and the Fed’s extended loan facilities. In February, the Federal Court in New York sided with FOX Business and ordered the Treasury to comply with its requests.

Last year, the network won a legal victory to force the release of documents related to New York University’s lawsuit against Madoff feeder Ezra Merkin.

FOX Business’ FOIA requests have so far led the SEC to release several important and damaging documents:

•FOX Business used the FOIA to obtain a 2005 survey that the SEC in Fort Worth was sending to Stanford investors. The survey showed that the SEC had suspicions about Stanford several years prior to the collapse of his $7 billion empire.

•FOX Business used the FOIA to obtain copies of emails between Federal Reserve lawyers, AIG and staff at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in which it was revealed the Fed staffers knew that bailing out AIG would result in bonuses being paid.

Recently, TARP Congressional Oversight Panel chair Elizabeth Warren told FOX Business that the network’s Freedom of Information Act efforts played a “very important part” of the panel’s investigation into AIG.

Warren told the network the government “crossed a line” with the AIG bailout.

“FOX News and the congressional oversight panel has pushed, pushed, pushed, for transparency, give us the documents, let us look at everything. Your Freedom of Information Act suit, which ultimately produced 250,000 pages of documentation, was a very important part of our report. We were able to rely on the documents that you pried out for a significant part of our being able to put this report together,” Warren said.

The SEC first made its intention to block further FOIA requests known on Tuesday. FOX Business was preparing for another round of “skirmishes” with the SEC, according to Mintz, when the agency called and said it intended to use Section 929I of the 2000-page legislation to refuse FBN’s ongoing requests for information.

Mintz said the network will challenge the SEC’s interpretation of the law.

“I believe this is subject to challenge,” he said. “The contours will have to be figured out by a court.”

FOXBusiness.com - SEC Says New FinReg Law Exempts It From Public Disclosure: http://bit.ly/aY3u2Y

Read more…

Black Panther’s Atrocious Behavior Condoned
by Mainstream Media
and Obama’s Department of Justice
The president who refuses to put his hand over his heart when the Pledge of Allegiance is sworn seems to have forgotten the words and the meaning of the words “. . . with Liberty and Justice for ALL.” “Racism” in the Barack Obama lexicon is something natural that Whites (good Whites as well as bad Whites) do to Blacks and other minorities and nothing more. In other words “racism” is a political tool Obama can use and it clearly has absolutley no connection to ethical or unethical conduct. Only non-Democrats and non-liberals, non-progressives and non-Obama supporters can be guilty of racism. There’s Barack Obama’s highly-balleyhooed notion of “social justice” for you. Like Obama himself, the Left’s concept of social justice and civil rights is a one-way street that can only benefit Obama sycophants and not all Americans.
That is why Obama’s lead political appointee to the Department of Justice (DOJ), Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandez, an Obama heading up the DOJ for Mr. Obama has declared in front of fifty employees that . . . .
A) The DOJ is NOT interested in prosecuting cases of White victims’ civil rights being violated by Black perpetrators.
B) The DOJ is NOT interested in investigating violations of the Motor Voter Law (and thus clearing election rolls of dead, moved, duplicate, felon, illegal, out-of-area, and other irregular voters) saying that would only “dampen voter turnout.”
C) Why Ms. Fernandez dropped the voter intimidation case against the four New Black Panthers parading around in para-military uniforms with nightsticks and verbally abusing White and Black Voters and threatening a beating for a Black poll watcher. The Bush administration had the case won and then suddenly it was dropped. One of the intimidators with a nightstick was also caught on a separate video saying “. . . Black’s can never be free until we start killing some crackers . . . killing some of their cracker babies.” Ms. Fernandez doesn’t seem to want to enforce the hate crimes laws that Democrats were so keen to pass, when the hate is directed against Whites?
The liberal-news-only Washington Post reported that the case “riles the right.” Rajjpuut supposes the Post means it doesn’t rile them? It’s OK for civil rights violations to run against Whites? So civil rights is a Black’s only? Martin Luther King, Jr. would be very sad to hear that. Several times in their article on the subject, the Post pointedly used the words “White” and “Whites” which was a lie. In the Philadelphia voter intimidation case, Whites were intimidated. At least two old Black ladies were intimidated and the aforementioned Black poll watcher was intimidated. More importantly, aside from color . . . VOTERS were intimidated. Shame on the Obama-sycophant Washington Post, shame on them. And the fact that the DOJ only wants to protect rights of minorities is a huge story that all the media should be all over, shame on the liberal media for forgetting to put this one on page one – the Washington Post could at least hold its head up somewhat for putting that real news in their paper.
Let Rajjpuut add the obvious, the decision to drop a case that was already won when the facts (on video) of the case point out clearly that the case is truly just is absolutely UNPRECEDENTED, dare we say the decision was as corrupt as anything since Jim Crow laws in the segregated South. This week a Democratic video on the subject of similar shenanigans by Obama supporters that resulted in his stealing the nomination from Hillary Clinton has surfaced. Thus far a mere 32 ACORN employees have been convicted of voter registration fraud, but the pattern is clear, Mr. Obama only wants to win, he does not respect the American Traditions nor the rights of his opposition to their full rights and their due process. This is our Fearless Leader’s “hope and change?”
Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery,
Rajjpuut
Read more…