Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Originally Posted by Sam Sewell

Obama Spurns Offer to Limit Discovery to His Birth Records

Jerry Collette, plaintiff in the Pasco County Florida Ballot Challenge case against Barack Obama, stated that attorneys for Obama have declined an offer from Collette to limit discovery to Obama’s birth records. Collette said, “My offer was very simple. If I survive the motions to dismiss, Obama would permit me access to the original and microfiche birth records in Hawaii and the copies he claims to have gotten from Hawaii last year, then I would waive all other discovery. They declined my offer.”

Sam Sewell, Director of the Florida Ballot Challenge said, “This is amazing. Collette was willing to give up access to Obama’s social security, draft, and college records, any of which could contain information very damaging to Obama, yet Obama is still unwilling to release his original birth records.”

George Miller, Assistant Director of the Obama State Ballot Challenge added, “Collette was also willing to give up his right to depose Obama. That was huge. Remember, the lie that led to Bill Clinton’s impeachment occurred during a deposition.”

Pamela Barnett, Director of the Obama State Ballot Challenge said, “Obama certainly must believe that there is something worth hiding in those original birth records.”

The Steady Drip: Florida Paralegal Checkmates Obama’s Lawyers

More likely, the attorneys for Mr. Obama consider their motions for dismissal to be slam-dunks, so why release anything?

A Western Journalism analysis of Voeltz v. Obama et al shows that Mr. Obama's attorneys do not consider the counterfeit LFBC released by the White House on April 27, 2011, to be the proof of the matter about eligibility for office. The plaintiff is Mr. Michael Voeltz (a lifelong Democrat), and his attorney is Mr. Larry Klayman, one of the attorneys who appeared previously before Florida State Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis, in Bush v. Gore in 2000. They are not basing their case on Barack Obama II's Kenyan birth so much as upon the irrefutable fact that Barrack Hussain Obama, Sr., was not a U.S. citizen when his purported son was born - neither then, nor ever.

Originally Posted by Alan P. Halbert for Western Journalism

Mr. Herron [attorney for Mr. Obama] was expecting a dismissal at the conclusion of the hearing, and now his legal strategy lays in shambles (as well as that of the state’s attorney Mr. Nordy, possibly their reputations as well.) Why they both went down this road is simply mind-boggling.

A simple reading of statutes 99.061, 101.252, and 103.101 shows the fallacy of their argument plain as day without any complicated legal analysis or gymnastics needing to be performed. Obama is indeed “nominated” per Florida law, and the “delegates” are pledged to him, which is the operative outcome of 103.101. Obama’s and the States attorney’s protests to the contrary is futile as far as Florida law is concerned.

At the end of the day, I am struck by one incontrovertible fact;
Obama chose to create phony technical grounds to dismiss this lawsuit rather than throw down his so-called long form birth certificate he released in April of 2011 and other bona-fides as absolute “proof” of his right to hold office.

(Complete trial videos and more at Obama-birth-certificate Recap Of Latest Obama Eligibility Hearing-Part 1.)

Forger Nailed in Obama Birth Probe

A crack team of law enforcement investigators has tracked down TWO men they're convinced played a part in the forgery of President Barack Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate - and the White House is reeling! Only GLOBE has blockbuster details about the probe into the President birth's papers - PLUS a stunning photo re-enactment of the moment investigators closed in on one of the two suspects.



Globe Magazine - Celebrity, Photos and News

Sheriff Joe to release more Obama 'shockers'

Just when you thought Sheriff Joe's probe of Barack Obama's presidential eligibility was cooling down, the no-nonsense Arizona lawman has scheduled another news conference to unveil brand-new information.

Read the latest now on WND.com.

Originally Posted by LAURA FIGUEROA for MiamiHerald.com

April, 2008, Tallahassee, Florida - The dozen bills being pitched in the [Florida] House and Senate would increase employer verification requirements, give local law enforcement agencies more authority to check for immigration status of people pulled over for DUIs, and ban county or city funding for day-laborer centers such as one that exists in South Dade [Co. (Miami)].

Florida lawmakers looking to pass bills targeted at curbing illegal immigration faced one major hurdle this session -- convincing South Florida legislators, who hold key leadership positions in the House and Senate, to support their cause.

Without the backing of House Speaker Marco Rubio, the first Cuban-American to hold the position, the bills failed to get any major play in their committees. Six weeks into the session, a three-hour workshop was held on the six House bills, but even that failed to produce its desired intent of combining the bills into one larger committee bill.

NOT ON THE LIST

''Speaker Rubio outlined the priorities of the session and this didn't fall under that list,'' said Rivera, one of Rubio's lieutenants.

Cities and states across the country have been passing a patchwork of immigration enforcement laws in record numbers -- 244 immigration bills were passed in 46 states in 2007 according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Original Miami Herald article deleted: ALIPAC archive copy is here.

"Immigration bills were passed in 46 states in 2007" - but not in Florida.

The above is a textbook example of why only a natural born Citizen
can be entrusted with the Office of President or Vice-President.

Originally Posted by Drew Zahn for WorldNetDaily

Judge [Lewis] issues ruling in Obama-eligibility case

The judge in a Florida lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president has dismissed the case “with prejudice.”

In his issued ruling Circuit Judge Terry Lewis agreed with White House attorneys that Obama’s eligibility could not be challenged under Florida election law because, technically, Obama hasn’t been nominated yet and furthermore, the judge said, Obama’s birth in the U.S. meets the Constitution’s requirements for being a “natural born citizen.”

The attorney challenging Obama’s eligibility, however, told WND the judge’s ruling is “intellectually dishonest” and so poorly written it makes an appeal “relatively easy.”

A fund has been set up for donations to cover legal expenses for the case.

As WND reported, Michael Voeltz, who identifies himself as “a registered member of the Democratic Party, voter and taxpayer in Broward County,” had challenged Obama’s eligibility, arguing that the “natural born citizen” clause was rightly understood in historical context to mean a child not only born in the U.S., but born to two American-citizen parents, so as not to have divided loyalties. Obama, however, readily admits to being born a dual citizen because of his father’s British citizenship.

Judge Lewis rejected Voeltz’s and attorney Larry Klayman’s arguments on three grounds.

First, the judge insisted, Obama’s candidacy cannot be challenged because he has not been nominated yet.

“The respective major political parties determine their nominee at a national convention [that hasn't occurred yet],” Lewis writes. “Thus, under Florida law, Mr. Obama is not presently the nominee of the Democratic Party for the office.

Second, the judge insisted, it’s not the Florida secretary of state’s job to determine a presidential candidate’s eligibility.

Quoting Florida law, Lewis writes, “The secretary of state has no affirmative duty, or even authority, ‘to inquire or pass judgment upon the eligibility of a candidate to hold office for the nomination for which he is running.”

Third, Lewis insisted, Obama should be considered a natural born citizen.

“The United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘every person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States,’” Lewis writes.

Then citing district and appellate court ruling from other states, Lewis adds, “Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of president of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”

As WND reported, Klayman had earlier suggested he would seek “declaratory relief” in the case, regardless of whether or not Lewis considered Obama “nominated” yet or not, a move Lewis appears to anticipate in his ruling.

“Plaintiff suggests the possibility of a declaratory judgment claim,” Lewis writes, “but I don’t see how Plaintiff, as an individual voter, would have standing to seek declaratory relief.”

Klayman, however, spoke with WND to break down what he says are glaring flaws in the judge’s ruling.

“The decision issued today by Judge Terry Lewis was poorly reasoned and written,” Klayman asserts. “It goes against prior Florida Supreme Court precedent in particular, thus making our chances on appeal great. … In any event, Plaintiff Micheal Voeltz filed a new complaint today for declaratory relief, which will, in addition to his appeal, now proceed forward. In short, we remain confidant that if the Florida courts ultimately decide to obey their own election law, we will prevail in the end.”

Specifically, Klayman objected first to Lewis’ assertion that Obama’s nomination is a matter for the Democrats’ national convention and not subject to Florida law.

“He basically said that a presidential candidate can never be nominated under Florida law, ever, and that’s just wrong,” Klayman said. “He made our appeal relatively easy, because he flies in the face of the Florida statute and also a Florida Supreme Court case. There’s nothing on which for him to come to this conclusion. The law is clear here that Obama was nominated for office.”

And as for the judge’s concession that Voeltz might have cause for an election challenge after Obama is elected president, Klayman scoffed, “That’s a disingenuous dodge.”

At the heart of the case, however, was the judge’s reasoning that a citizen born in the U.S. fulfills the U.S. Constitution’s “natural born” citizen requirement for the presidency.

“The judge equated being a ‘citizen’ with a ‘natural born citizen’ and cited no authority to conclude the two terms are the same,” Klayman continued in his analysis. “He quotes other state’s cases, where judges reached that conclusion, but that’s not precedent for him. What other courts said in lower cases means nothing to him.”

Klayman also bristled at the judge’s claim that the “burden of proof” fell upon Voeltz to demonstrate Obama’s ineligibility, despite denying Klayman’s team “discovery,” a process that may have allowed subpoena power of Obama’s identifying documents.

“How can you say we have the burden of proof, then not allow discovery?” Klayman asked. “He says we have burden, but doesn’t allow us to meet it. We’re entitled to discovery. That’s a very vulnerable part of this case going forward.”

Finally, Klayman marveled that the judge would declare his client doesn’t have “standing” for declaratory relief – a common argument many judges around the country have used to dismiss eligibility challenges without considering them on merit.

“That’s not true, we do have standing under Florida law,” Klayman said.

“The ruling is intellectually dishonest, from a Democrat judge who didn’t want to be put on the hot seat by his own party,” Klayman asserted. “We’re immediately appealing, and we’re confident on appeal. The main thrust of the judge’s decision is contrary to how the Florida Supreme Court has already ruled on when a candidate is nominated.”

Judge issues ruling in Obama-eligibility case

Two weeks ago, conservative Judge Terry Lewis was agreeing with Atty. Klayman's quotes from the Constitution and the interpretations by the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Lewis was openly impatient and not amused with the defense attorneys' weak and picayune technicalities.

Now Judge Lewis does this reverse 180° ... with two twists and a double back flip.
Look out, Shaun White! Here's comin' at you!



Has any one of these coerced judges so much as hinted about the nature of the threats and intimidation involved? At least this judge had the courtesy to include several blatant errors in his ruling that will make it easy for Voeltz and Klayman to appeal.

From Atty. Orly Taitz's website, orlytaitzesq.com :

Originally Posted by Terence Brennan

To save anyone interested in the Voeltz vs Obama case the expense of subscribing to ScribD, they can download this ZIP file with the following 4 documents:

(1) Voeltz’s original complaint
(2) First amended complaint by Atty Klayman
(3) Second amended complaint by Klayman
(4) Dismissal by Judge Lewis

http://hoodieinchief.com/voeltz.zip

There were many other papers filed, needless to say, but I only included the above four in this ZIP.

When the amended complaint was filed, the original complaint was discarded and disregarded.

Judge Lewis' dismissal of the case was nothing more than a kick up the ladder.
Any decision he made would be appealed, so there was no point in him taking heat.

Atty. Larry Klayman's 2nd amended complaint (file 3 of 4) was as clear as the water of Florida's Weeki Wachee Springs. Even a child could understand it, and only a lawyer could willfully misconstrue it.

Or a judge. Alice in Wonderland fans will be right at home in Judge Lewis (Carroll)'s dismissal of the case (file 4 of 4). His convoluted logic indicates that he may have intended for his decision to be overruled on appeal. Have a cup of coffee before you attempt to follow his reasoning.

LAWYERS AND JUDGES AT WAR WITH CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

By J.B. Williams
July 6, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

Last week’s Supreme Court rulings on ObamaCare, Arizona Immigration and Montana Campaign Finance, in which the high court acted beyond its own constitutional authority and against the Constitution, the States and the People at large, should leave no doubt in any mind that the judiciary is now operating as an elite oligarchy making up law and disregarding the U.S. Constitution and the will of the People free of any accountability.

In November of 1819, Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Judge Spencer Roane –

If the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de so. … The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent, is absolute also; in theory only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes. Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law …

In September 1820, Jefferson acknowledged in a letter to Thomas Ritchie –

The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet. … I will say, that “against this every man should raise his voice,” and, more, should uplift his arm …

It didn’t take long after the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights in 1787 before Jefferson would realize just how insidious and dangerous the judiciary would become -- That all of the Founders work to create and protect the Charters of Freedom for all posterity would soon be destroyed from within via an elite oligarchy known as the judiciary.

Today, it is no exaggeration to proclaim that true justice no longer exists in the United States. The government body created for the sole purpose of protecting and preserving freedom and liberty, upholding the Charters of Freedom as the Supreme Law of the Land, is the most insidiously corrupt and dangerous institution in America.

The current usurpations emanating from the Executive Branch and unconstitutional legislative acts by Congress could not persist without a corrupt Judicial Branch. Contrary to modern misrepresentations of law and history, the Founders created three co-equal branches of federal government, each with oversight and restraint powers over the other and all of them accountable to the States and the People of the United States.

Today, the three branches act as one, all in opposition to the States and the People, each providing a cloak of cover under which they all destroy the Charters of Freedom from within the halls of our own government, the most dangerous of them, the judiciary.

As Jefferson realized soon after the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, they had failed to tie the hands of the judiciary, preventing lawyers and judges with personal and political agendas from subverting the Constitutional Republic from the bench via precedent setting, broad ungrounded interpretations, new definitions of old language and court procedures designed to protect the evil cabal by denying public access to true justice.

Our Charters of Freedom are literally hanging by a thread today!

Our judiciary has become the most dangerous enemy of the Constitutional Republic and although the Executive Dictatorship and tyrannical Legislative body run close behind, it is the judiciary which must be reclaimed by the people first, or there is no peaceful forum within which to hold the other two branches accountable.

A Lawless Judiciary

Though I can write a book on literally thousands of cases of totally lawless injustice taking place across America today, I have chosen only a few examples for this piece. These cases demonstrate just how lawless our entire judiciary has become. As you will see, there is quite literally nothing within our judicial system worthy of salvation. The corruption reaches from the U.S. Supreme Court all the way down to your local traffic court, and exists at all points in between.

Even Divorce Courts across this country are being run by corrupt Judges like West Virginia Judge William Watkins, using the power of their bench to intimidate, threaten and incarcerate for personal reasons. Watch that video! This is not an isolated behavior from the bench…

Lawlessness on the High Court

It is no longer a secret to any informed person on earth that Barack Hussein Obama is not who he claims to be. It has been proven beyond any doubt that Obama issued three forged birth certifications (not birth certificates) for Hawaii in an effort to squash charges that he is ineligible for the office he holds, not a Natural Born Citizen under Article II. Where he was born is not even at issue. Who his Father is determines his Natural Born birth rights.

Barack Hussein Obama is in fact an imposter of unknown origin, illegally holding the office of President at present, all made possible by the corrupt Supreme Court that issued the oath of office to a known anti-American imposter and continuing to protect Obama still today. The court has refused to hear evidence regarding the imposter Obama on numerous occasions, knowing very well that we have an unconstitutional imposter in the people’s Oval Office. But there is much more…

The High Court was asked a simple YES or NO question regarding ObamaCare, is it Constitutional or not. Instead of performing its sole function of answering this simple fundamental question in the preservation of Constitutional Law, the court chose to assume the political position of legislative branch, altering and upholding a law that is blatantly unconstitutional on its face and in its entirety.

The High Court was asked the same YES or NO question regarding Arizona’s right to protect its sovereignty and security by enforcing standing immigration laws, is it constitutional? Once again, instead of answering that simple fundamental question, the court decided to play legislator, parsing the Arizona law to the liking of the Obama White House, which is standing down on enforcement of our immigration laws and even issuing amnesty by Executive order only days before the courts Arizona ruling. Obama has no such executive authority, but who is stopping him?

The High Court was asked whether or not a hundred-year-old Montana law preventing corporate corruption in state campaign funding was constitutional. The court struck down the hundred-year-old Montana law governing state election practices, an area of no jurisdiction or obvious interest for the Supreme Court.

A total disregard for the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law is present in the highest court in our land. This simply cannot stand…

Lawlessness in Lower Courts

Over a hundred cases have been brought in various local, state, district, military and federal courts attempting to present a mountain of evidence against imposter Barack Hussein Obama, all of them dismissed at the door, refusing to hear any evidence, denying the people access to a peaceful forum in which to fully expose the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. No wonder the courts have been fitted with metal detectors and armed guards to protect these judges from the people.

The most recent copy-n-paste Obama dismissal came from Circuit Court Judge Terrance P. Lewis in Tallahassee Florida. Judge Lewis dismissed the case on the bases that Barack Hussein Obama, the current occupant of the White House and presumed Democrat nominee for the 2012 election cycle running uncontested in Florida, is not yet officially the DNC nominee, and therefore, cannot yet be challenged on his eligibility for the office which he seeks re-election.

In addition, Judge Lewis, upon hearing no evidence at all, declared the following in his dismissal with prejudice –

No such stated rulings have ever happened. Yet, like several other judges, Lewis attempts to establish via precedent setting, the notion that “anchor baby” (anyone born on U.S. soil) is the proper definition of Natural Born Citizen of the United States, a claim which is laughable on its face. These judges are simply re-writing Article II of the U.S. Constitution from the bench while flatly refusing to hear any evidence at all on the matter from the people or the states.

On no less than eight occasions leading up to the swearing in of Barack Hussein Obama, members of congress attempted and failed to alter or abolish the Natural Born Citizen clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. But these judges are altering and abolishing Article II requirements from the bench, using the settled definition of “citizen” to define “Natural Born Citizen” as if there is no difference between true Natural Born Citizens as defined by the Founders and Vattel, and anchor baby, defined by 14th Amendment immigration and naturalization statutes. Nothing could be further from the truth.

On another front, the story of Retired Navy Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick began back in 2009 when Fitzpatrick attempted to deliver evidence against imposter Barack Hussein Obama to his local Tennessee Grand Jury, a practice allowed by Tennessee law but not by the terminally corrupt Monroe County system.

Of course, Fitzpatrick was denied access to deliver that evidence to the sitting Grand Jury of Monroe County Tennessee in 2009 and has since uncovered massive systemic corruption, fraud and abuse of power running wild in Monroe County Tennessee, a condition which now exists in nearly every county in the country.

Fitzpatrick has since proven that the Monroe County Grand Jury was illegally convened for more than twenty-years and remains illegally convened today despite getting Gary Pettway removed from his life-long career as jury foreman, a condition that could not legally exist under Tennessee law, but does exist across Tennessee.

Fitzpatrick has been arrested, had his home and property destroyed and confiscated, incarcerated five times, beaten by Monroe County Sherriff’s and falsely labeled a crackpot, a sovereign citizen, a violent potential domestic terrorist and worse.

Last week, Fitzpatrick attended a hearing on motions for new charges accusing him of tampering with and stealing official government documents. He picked up an information packet for new jurors found on a table at the court house and took it home to study jury procedures. I remind readers that every court house is the property of the people, as is every court produced document.


Monroe County SWAT hit his home with force again that night, seizing Fitzpatrick’s property and effects, arresting, brutalizing and incarcerating Fitzpatrick again.

His hearing on motions last week provided another look at the runaway judiciary.

Fitzpatrick presented evidence in his motions that the indictments against him were forged. The judge denied discovery to uncover who actually signed the indictments against him since the person named on the indictment did not sign the documents.

Fitzpatrick presented hard evidence that the Monroe County juries remain illegally convened, a fact which both the judge and the prosecutor had no choice but to admit in open court. However, the judge set trial for September, stating that they do things their own way in Monroe County and are in no way obligated to follow Tennessee law. They can essentially do whatever they want and Monroe County justice has been doing exactly that for decades now.

Fitzpatrick will once again face an unknown accuser, based upon a forged indictment, before an illegally convened jury and a judge who couldn’t care less. Of course the case will proceed…

Lawlessness in Your Local Traffic Court

Now for my personal story of crime and corruption at the lowest levels…

On the way to drop my sick dog at the vet and the kids at school one morning, I made a “legal” vehicular maneuver, cutting to the right of backed up traffic, emergency lights on, remaining on the road at approximately 5 MPH to turn into the veterinarians office and get my dog out of the car, stopping him from vomiting all over the back of my SUV.

A local officer was waiting in the backed up traffic, I saw him and he saw me. He followed me into the vet’s lot and proceeded to give me a traffic ticket for making a “legal movement” in the amount of $165.00

A few days later, I called the court to inquire about my options. I was told that the ticket was for a $5.00 fine and $160 court costs. I logically asked if I could simply pay the $5.00 fine and pass on taking up the court’s time, even though I was charged with making “a legal turn.” The court clerk advised that I owed court costs whether I appeared in court or not, so I might as well appear and fight the ticket. Astonished by what I had just learned, I agreed to appear in court.

In court, the ticketing officer presented his version of the story, perjuring himself with blatant lies as if he didn’t even remember the incident. He showed his dash-cam video of me making a “legal turn.” The judge then read Tennessee statute confirming that the type of maneuver, clearly seen on the dash-cam, was indeed “legal” according to Tennessee law.

And then, the judge found me guilty of making a “legal turn” and fined me $5.00 plus $160 court costs. I owed the city $165.00 for making a “legal” turn. When I asked the judge how this could be, he became notably frustrated. He said it was his opinion that I did not make the “legal turn” safely.


Note that the judge, now a witness, was not present at the incident.

Then the judge explained, “Just because I can drive down the highway at 100 MPH without wrecking does not mean I did it safely….” -- To which I reminded the judge that there are laws against driving down the highway at 100 MPH. The judge slammed his gavel, and I paid the city $165.00 for making a “legal” turn.

Lesson learned…. Judges are free to make up their own laws on the spot. They do NOT have to follow the law, or the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights or anything else. They are free to arrest, charge, fine and incarcerate anyone for any reason at all, usually motivated by money or politics. Jefferson’s fears had come full circle at even the lowest levels of the judiciary.

Us vs. Them

According to current government documents, there are approximately 874 Article III appointed judges in the United States at present and best I can tell, not one of them worth saving. Nine on the Supreme Court, 179 on the courts of appeals, 9 on the court of international trade and 677 for the district courts.

874 Article III judges are directly engaged in injustice, the subversion of the U.S. Constitution and Rule of Law and none of the destruction happening to our once great nation could happen without these 874 judicial criminals.

Those of you, who think the problem can be solved by any future election, fail to grasp the full gravity, the depth and breadth of the situation. Note that both Reagan and Bush appointed Supreme Court justices who later acted against the Constitution, just like the Democrat appointed justices. Further…

It is the judiciary which started dismantling the U.S. Charters of Freedom before the ink was dry on those documents and they have been destroying our Constitutional Republic every day since, via precedent.

Beware the lawyer, the judge and most of all, the self-proclaimed “constitutional scholar…” for it is they who have worked around the clock to destroy the Constitutional Republic, raising themselves up as an unchecked oligarchy free to rule over the people in all matters large and small.

Beware the American Bar Association, the leftist labor union of the legal system, which accounts for about 40% of our nation’s lawyers and 99% of our judges.

Beware the so-called constitutional think tanks that now spew the same anti-American subversive lies spewed by our illegal administration and corrupted legislature like Heritage Foundation, Eagle Forum and Wall Builders, all of whom are selling the lies that States lost their rights in the Civil War and that anchor baby is Natural Born Citizen. Once again, Jefferson has been proven right, more a visionary than Nostradamus.

In a letter to Mr. Jarvis dated September 1820, Jefferson wrote –

You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power [are] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves …. When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves.

Americas Nuremburg Moment

In Nazi Germany, it was the judges, the judiciary which played the most insidious role of sending Jews and Christians to Hitler’s ovens and gas chambers. Likewise, in America circa 2012, it is the judges who have done the most damage to the U.S. Charters of Freedom and who have instead of being the people’s protectors, have become the people’s worst enemies operating within at great taxpayer expense.

Just as the judges of Nazi Germany were brought to justice, so shall 874 U.S. Judges face justice for their actions one day.

The United States of America was born a Constitutional Republic of free people endowed by their Creator with certain fundamental rights that no man, including lawyers and judges, can alienate.

Our Founders told us what to do when we arrive at such a horrific moment in history…

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Jefferson was right here to - "The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them."

Like a worm eating our freedom and liberty from within, the judiciary must be stopped before there is no freedom or liberty left in America.

The illegitimate Obama administration has done more damage to the Constitutional Republic than any prior administration. But the damage done by Obama and Clinton is nothing compared to the ongoing assault on our Republic coming from the judiciary.

Our Founders took great care to write and ratify the Charters of Freedom is very simple English so that any citizen with a 5th Grade reading capacity and access to a dictionary could easily and correctly interpret those documents and protect their own rights.
The idea that anyone needs a lawyer or judge to interpret for them the content of the Charters of Freedom is both overtly silly and equally dangerous. If you do not know your rights without the help of lawyers and judges, you don’t have any rights.
The people can no longer entrust their constitutional rights to a runaway judiciary operating above and beyond the law. Without a legitimate judiciary, there is no peaceful forum in which to right any other wrong.
© 2012 JB Williams - All Rights Reserved

JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. He is also a Founder of Freedom Force USA and a staunch conservative actively engaged in returning the power to the right people in America.


Web site 1: www.PatriotsUnion.org


Web site 2: www.VeteranDefenders.org


E-Mail:JB.USPU@gmail.com


JB Williams -- Lawyers and Judges at War with Constitutional Law

Detective probes Obama Social Security mystery

An Ohio detective – who has done her homework on Obama's "fraudulently obtained Social Security Number" – is ready to unmask the president. And her effort to deny him a place on the battleground state's ballot may cause Obama more trouble than the Romney campaign. Click here to read the full article.