Thread: 41,000 Americans Want Dem Sen. Diane Feinstein Tried For Treason…

41,000 Americans Want Dem Sen. Diane Feinstein Tried For Treason…



Poor DiFi.

Via Red Alert:

The White House recently came to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) rescue, defending her 2013 assault weapons ban against a seething White House petition to have her tried for treason.

The petition, which was created on December 27^th, 2012 and has more than 41,000 signatures, opposed Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 assault weapons ban and called for the California Senator to be tried by a federal court for treason against the Constitution.

[...]

However the harsh words against the Democratic Senator were countered by an official response from the White House. The response appears to have been conveniently released over the Memorial Day weekend but Red Alert Politics is unable to determine the exact date of the response.

The response titled, “Where We Agree and Where We Don’t” states that the White House does not “believe that Senator Dianne Feinstein should be punished for championing legislation.” Rather, the White House is “going to continue to work with her and other likeminded Members of Congress to put in place commonsense reform to reduce violence.”


Keep reading…


http://weaselzippers.us/2013/05/30/4...d-for-treason/

White House defends Sen. Feinstein against citizen petition to try her for treason

The White House recently came to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-Calif.) rescue, defending her 2013 assault weapons ban against a seething White House petition to have her tried for treason.

The petition, which was created on December 27^th, 2012 and has more than 41,000 signatures, opposed Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 assault weapons ban and called for the California Senator to be tried by a federal court for treason against the Constitution.

“The Constitution was written to restrain government. No amendment is more important for this purpose than the second amendment,” the petition reads. “[It] was written so the power could be kept in the citizenry in the face of a tyrannical government.”

The petition also stated that Sen. Feinstein “has made it clear that she does not believe in the Constitution and the inalienable rights of Americans to keep and bear arms” and through her 2013 assault weapons ban, she is “actively working to destroy the second amendment.”

However the harsh words against the Democratic Senator were countered by an official response from the White House. The response appears to have been conveniently released over the Memorial Day weekend but Red Alert Politics is unable to determine the exact date of the response.

The response titled, “Where We Agree and Where We Don’t” states that the White House does not “believe that Senator Dianne Feinstein should be punished for championing legislation.”

Rather, the White House is “going to continue to work with her and other likeminded Members of Congress to put in place commonsense reform to reduce violence.”

The White House response goes on to explain that like many of the petitioners, President Obama believes in the second amendment and that “that’s never been in question with this discussion.”

“Now generally, it’s up to our courts to resolve matters of constitutionality,” the response stated. “But no less an authority than Justice Antonin Scalia has written, ‘Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose’ – so we’re pretty confident we’re on solid ground when we say we support Senator Feinstein’s legislation to that effect.”

The California Senator’s 2013 assault weapon ban was proposed in the wake of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown that killed twenty students and six adults last December.

The ban was removed from the bill before it reached the Senate, and even when it was introduced as an amendment, it subsequently failed when the gun control bill failed to pass the Senate.

By Arianne Talma /// May 30, 2013

http://redalertpolitics.com/2013/05/...r-for-treason/

Sluggo should be put on Trial in the Town Square with ALL ASSETS SEIZED

90 Million Gun Owners would Love to See this Corrupt Politician Put On Trial

http://www.alipac.us/f19/jews-lead-g...outube-271216/

http://www.alipac.us/f9/dianne-feins...1/#post1346947

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO,

Under RICO, a person who is a member of an enterprise that has committed any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within a 10-year period can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and sentenced to 20 years in prison per racketeering count. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of such an enterprise to file a civil suit; if successful, the individual can collect treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he or she has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to temporarily seize a defendant's assets and prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put up a performance bond. This provision was placed in the law because the owners of Mafia-related shell corporations often absconded with the assets. An injunction and/or performance bond ensures that there is something to seize in the event of a guilty verdict.

In many cases, the threat of a RICO indictment can force defendants to plead guilty to lesser charges, in part because the seizure of assets would make it difficult to pay a defense attorney. Despite its harsh provisions, a RICO-related charge is considered easy to prove in court, as it focuses on patterns of behavior as opposed to criminal acts.^[4]

There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers". The plaintiff must prove the existence of an "enterprise".

The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise: either the defendant(s) invested the proceeds of the pattern of racketeering activity into the enterprise; or the defendant(s) acquired or maintained an interest in, or control over, the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering activity; or the defendant(s) conducted or participated in the affairs of the enterprise "through" the pattern of racketeering activity; or the defendant(s) conspired to do one of the above. In essence, the enterprise is the illegal device of the racketeers. A civil RICO action, like many lawsuits based on federal law, can be filed in state or federal court.^[5]

Both the federal and civil components allow the recovery of treble damages.
Although its primary intent was to deal with organized crime, Blakey said that Congress never intended it to merely apply to the Mob. He once told Time, "We don't want one set of rules for people whose collars are blue or whose names end in vowels, and another set for those whose collars are white and have Ivy League diplomas."^[4]
RICO predicate offenses [edit]

Under the law, the meaning of racketeering activity is set out at 18 U.S.C. § 1961. As currently amended it includes:

• Any violation of state statutes against gambling, murder, kidnapping, extortion, arson, robbery, bribery, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in the Controlled Substances Act);
• Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18);
• Embezzlement of union funds;
• Bankruptcy fraud or securities fraud;
• Drug trafficking; long-term and elaborate drug networks can also be prosecuted using the Continuing Criminal Enterprise Statute;
• Criminal copyright infringement;
• Money laundering and related offenses;
• Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain);
• Acts of terrorism.

Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Courthas instructed federal courts to follow the continuity-plus-relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they "have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events." (H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.) Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.

More at the Link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rackete...anizations_Act

White House Freaks Out Over Online Petition To Charge Sen. Feinstein With Treason Reaching 50,000 Votes

Saturday, June 1, 2013 18:16



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fyqi...layer_embedded

(Before It's News) A petition to charge Dianne Feinstein with treason that has gotten nearly 50,000 signatures is causing a bit of heartburn in Obama’s White House forcing team Obama to come to Di Fi’s defense.
One of the somewhat silly things that team Obama did when it came to office was to set up a website where Americans could float petitions filled with ideas and issues that they want Obama to address. Now, in theory this idea sounds great. But in practice, Obama just ignores all these things. But they do offer an interesting story from time to time.
A recent petition offers one of those stories. It is the petition to charge California Senator Dianne Feinstein with treason for her constant attacks on the U.S. Constitution, the Second Amendment in particular.
The strength of the petition has caused Obama to come to Feinstein’s defense. Ah, schadenfreude.
The anti-DiFi petition was created in December of last year and only five months later it had gained nearly 50,000 signatures. The fifty thousand mark is where Obama’s perpetual political campaign/White House staff have said that they will publicly address an issue directly.
The Petition
Here is the text of the petition:

Try Senator Dianne Feinstein in a Federal Court For Treason To The Constitution
The Constitution was written to restrain the government. No amendment is more important for this purpose than the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment was written so the power could be kept with the citizenry in the face of a tyrannical government. It was well understood the Constitution acknowledged certain rights that could not be limited by government.
Senator Dianne Feinstein has made it clear she does not believe in the Constitution or the inalienable rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. She is actively working to destroy the 2nd amendment with her 2013 assault weapons ban. For this reason we the people of the united States petition for her to be tried in Federal Court for treason to the Constitution.

By the end of May the petition had 41,162 signatures. If you want to sign, see the petition HERE.
We all know how Feinstein hates guns, of course. Remember this…
Anyway, even though the petition has not quite hit the 50 Thou mark, team Obama felt compelled to answer to DiFi’s critics.
Here is what the White House said to petitioners:

Where We Agree and Where We Don’t
We don’t believe that Senator Dianne Feinstein should be punished for championing legislation. In fact, we’re going to continue to work with her and other likeminded Members of Congress to put in place commonsense reforms to reduce gun violence.
But we’re willing to have a reasonable debate about the steps we should take to make the country safer for our kids.
And it actually seems like we’re starting from a place of common agreement: Like many of you, President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms.
That’s never been in question with this discussion. What we’ve proposed are steps within the framework of that constitutional right to protect our communities from shootings and violence. If you want to see the specifics of our plan, you should visit WhiteHouse.gov/NowIsTheTime.
Now generally, it’s up to our courts to resolve matters of constitutionality. But no less an authority than Justice Antonin Scalia has written, “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose” — so we’re pretty confident that we’re on solid ground when we say we support Senator Feinstein’s legislation to that effect.
We also believe that there’s room for a civil discourse on matters of public policy — where we don’t try to silence our political opponents just because we disagree with them. In America, all of us, even those with whom you disagree, have the right to help to set our nation’s course.
Which is exactly why we created the We the People platform. Even if you disagree with everything you just read, we want you to walk away from this process with knowledge that we’re doing our best to listen — even to our harshest critics.

Apparently the White House feels that insulting our intelligence by claiming that Obama respects the Second Amendment and the U.S. Constitution is the way to go, eh?
But, Obama is just as bad a lair and demagogue about guns as DiFi, so it shouldn’t be surprising that he is running to her support.
It is also a bit disingenuous to claim that DiFi is just doing her duty as a lawmaker, too. She tried this failed gun ban business back in 1995 and dozens of times since. With as many times as she’s tried and failed to get the Second Amendment nullified with un-Constitutional federal laws one would think that her lawless agenda would be pretty clear by now.
But, maybe I’m wrong? Is Dianne Feinstein just doing her duty? You tell me below.
Read More at MrConservative.com


Source: http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/06/18249-white-house-freaks-out-over-online-petition-to-charge-sen-feinstein-with-treason-reaching-50000-votes/

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...s-2669224.html



Related Stories

• Obama Pays $700 Million of Your Tax Dollars To Russian Company To Build Afghani Air Force
• Maher Rants Bush Biking With Vets “Nauseating… Like Cleveland Kidnapper Having Pizza Party For” His Victims
• Marco Rubio Video: Parrating NWO Talking Points at CFR (Video)
• UN lashes out at Britain’s human rights record
• UK Lord embroiled in lobbying scandal
• ‘Iranian nation has weathered sanctions’
• Photo of the Month (June 2013):
• Russian torrent users may be punished for uploading pirated content
• American Muslim Who Claims He Was Tortured Abroad Sues FBI
• Auroras in the USA

Comments at the link

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Try Senator Dianne Feinstein in a Federal Court For Treason To The Constitution

The Constitution was written to restrain the government. No amendment is more important for this purpose than the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment was written so the power could be kept with the citizenry in the face of a tyrannical government. It was well understood the Constitution acknowledged certain rights that could not be limited by government.
Senator Dianne Feinstein has made it clear she does not believe in the Constitution or the inalienable rights of Americans to keep and bear arms. She is actively working to destroy the 2nd amendment with her 2013 assault weapons ban. For this reason we the people of the united States petition for her to be tried in Federal Court for treason to the Constitution.
An outline of her bill may be found here:
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public
Created: Dec 27, 2012
Issues: Firearms
TOTAL SIGNATURES

41,162

• Share this Petition
• Twitter
• Facebook

OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TOTry Senator Dianne Feinstein in a Federal Court For Treason To The Constitution
Where We Agree and Where We Don't

We don't believe that Senator Dianne Feinstein should be punished for championing legislation. In fact, we're going to continue to work with her and other likeminded Members of Congress to put in place commonsense reforms to reduce gun violence.
But we're willing to have a reasonable debate about the steps we should take to make the country safer for our kids.
And it actually seems like we're starting from a place of common agreement: Like many of you, President Obama believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms (he says so right here).
That's never been in question with this discussion. What we've proposed are steps within the framework of that constitutional right to protect our communities from shootings and violence. If you want to see the specifics of our plan, you should visit WhiteHouse.gov/NowIsTheTime.
Now generally, it's up to our courts to resolve matters of constitutionality. But no less an authority than Justice Antonin Scalia has written, "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose" -- so we're pretty confident that we're on solid ground when we say we support Senator Feinstein’s legislation to that effect.
We also believe that there's room for a civil discourse on matters of public policy -- where we don't try to silence our political opponents just because we disagree with them. In America, all of us, even those with whom you disagree, have the right to help to set our nation's course.
Which is exactly why we created the We the People platform. Even if you disagree with everything you just read, we want you to walk away from this process with knowledge that we're doing our best to listen -- even to our harshest critics.
Tell us what you think about this response and We the People.



https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...ution/TVq4dXPg

http://www.alipac.us/f19/dc-shooter-...5/#post1367949