Friday, December 26, 2008
Who pays for it?
Obama is currently staying in Hi in a 9 million dollar mansion and flu on a chartered jet. Do you know who pays fo it? Who owns this house and this jet?
25th lawsuit against Obama and nobody in our government and media cares in the least
From: "SchnlJ@aol.com" Add sender to Contacts To: dr_taitz@yahoo.com Re: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Case No. 199 MM 2009, which seeks a writ of mandamus preventing transmittal of the certified electoral vote to VP Cheney, the National Archivist, et al. Greetings ! Obama and the PA Dept. of State just filed answers, and the PA Supreme Court awaits my reply, on an expedited basis. The docket is at http://www.superior.court.state.pa.us Even if PA officials send the certificates of the electoral vote, I will continue to claim that this was unlawful and will appeal this further. I'm copying here my most recent requests served on the Federal Government. I've served these on all US congressman and senators and numerous related officials, as seen in their text. WE MUST ENCOURAGE/CONTACT OUR REPRESENTATIVES BY FAX, E MAIL, AND VOICE MAIL TO DEMAND ACTION AT THE JOINT SESSION ON JANUARY 6TH ! Please contact me for any reason. James D. Schneller schnlj@aol.com 500 East Lancaster Avenue #111d Radnor, PA 19087 610-688-9471 _________________________________________ December 23, 2008 URGENT - BY FAX
President of the United States
President George W. Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500 Michael B Mukasey
United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001 Senate Majority Leader
Honorable Harry Reid
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510 Senate Minority Leader
Honorable Mitch McConnell
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510 President of the U.S. Senate
Vice President Richard B. Cheney
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500 United States Senate President Pro Tempore
Honorable Robert C. Byrd
311 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510 Office of the Speaker of the U.S. House
Honorable Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515 U.S. House - Office of the Majority Leader
Honorable Steny Hoyer
1705 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515 U.S. House - Office of the Republican Leader
Honorable John Boehner
1011 Longworth Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: Demand for Concerted Proceeding Regarding Eligibility of President-Elect Barack Obama Dear Mr. President and the Leaders of the United States Congress:
I am the concerned citizen who wrote Congress and the pertinent Committees last week, urgently requesting action on the crisis regarding the eligibility of the President-elect and the need for a formal proceeding, and I copied some of you on my letter to the acting Administrator of the General Service Administration protesting the distribution of interim funds and office space to apparent President-elect Mr. Barack Obama that has occurred since the election. I am writing to request extenuation of the January 6th Joint Session, where necessary; intervention by Congress in conjunction with or superceding to the Joint Session; and/or Presidential intervention, because of the urgency and extraordinary nature of this issue. I claim, in addition to my first letter's request for an exercising of authority, that such an exercising, including by our esteemed President and/or Vice President, is warranted, and may take place outside of the scope of Title 3 Chapter 1, or, if so circumscribed, there is regardless, avenue in Chapter 1 to adapt to these unusual circumstances. I demand this action. I keep my reasons herein to a minimum but they are plainly extraordinary, as any citizen is aware. Because the apparent President-elect has, under a reasonable probability standard, made fraud upon the voters and most State Directors of Elections, and, under that standard, has not shown himself to be eligible for office under Article II Section 1, not even the objection of a one (1) representative from each house, under 3 U.S.C.§ 15, is required to initiate a Congressional Inquiry or similar measure, because the circumstances are, in reality, a set of facts much more serious and Constitutional-basic than a State contest, which is the emphasis, if not the express scope of Title 3 Chapter 1. As stated by me in my letter initially broaching this issue, there are numerous state cases pending, any of which may prove catalyst for an opinion by a state Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court. The election has not mooted this issue, whereas an inauguration might. Naturally a resolution by the Joint Session is desirable to many. The matter, from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court perspective alone, is appropriate for objection under the letter of 3 U.S.C.§ 15, because it is an issue of validity of the certified canvass of electors, involving a lawful tribunal, namely, whether the certification of the electors is valid as transmitted (if it has been), or is overshadowed by a transmittal that awaits determination by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (the prior transmittal void pursuant to automatic stay under Pa.R.A.P. 1707) on my petition for writ of mandamus demanding quick investigation of qualification as a natural born citizen. For the reasons roughly stated in this letter, and under Chapter 1,you have every authority and duty to delay the counting of the ballot on January 6, 2008, or to extend the permitted recess or withdrawal for deliberations on any objections to the count, for the few days or more that would be needed for a simple investigation into the apparent President-elect's eligibility. The Bush/Gore 2002 ballot matter has shown recent implementation of such leeway. The directive in 3 U.S.C § 5 is inapplicable to some of the state challenges, including mine, Pa.S.C.199 MM 2008, because this issue is, in fact, not a matter of "appointment of electors." Pennsylvania law does not provide a process for a challenge of that sort, regardless, this ssue being as it is a matter of eligibility, or certifiability of the vote, rather than appointment of electors. Thus, §5 has established no time limit, because there is no state statute "for [a] final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State". The Attorney General has additional support to look into this issue because of the possibility of fraud upon the voters, and of intent to further such fraud, and intent to make fraud despite the resulting feasibility of citizen dissatisafaction with a near- or post-election investigation, and a resulting (and intended) trepidation on the part of leaders to foment this very investigation. It is noteworthy that Pennsylvania, like most states, has many different sections setting up penalties for violations of the election laws, including for false swearing in a candidate affidavit. Mr. Barack Obama’s unwillingness to cooperate with courts is additional support for said reasonable probability. Whether within or without the thresholds set up in Title 3 Chapter 1, the data required to be analyzed, and decision regarding eligibility, are simple and readily fomented and aquired. Numerous clear cut matters including the prior, unresolved claims in many states regarding ACORN and similar issues, require investigation by a centralized authority. In light of the Democratic members of the Houses' possible disagreement with these even handed means of resolution, it is my demand that both Leaderships must cooperate, and that Congress, and the Secretary of the Senate, act, with the most serious of demeanors. This is warranted especially because no state, and no or few electors, have taken the initiative despite the urgent nature of this issue. I demand that the Joint Session promulgate and enforce a resolution or other appropriate means causing an immediate investigation and resolution of this egregious issue. If Congress and the Vice President find themselves unable or unqualified, the President, under the extraordinary powers clearly available to him, and under the presently utilized National Emergencies Act, is authorized to initiate emergency action by the Department of Justice, for instance, and to place any number of temporary means of continuing a singular head of the executive branch, in the event that the process continued past January 6, 2009, and I demand this. This in fact overlaps or is warranted due to the present national emergency. These measures are additionally mandated because the process in Chapter 1, as seen in it's apparent focus on the mechanisms of the ballot , e.g. 3 U.S.C.§ 15, is too easily affected by politics. This is why I have copied my recent letter to Mr. James Williams, Acting Administrator of the General Servics Administration, claiming fraud as inhibiting to distribution of interim and inauguration funds, to the United States Attorney General. An urgent investigation by the Attorney General into the eligibility question and any resulting violation(s) is warranted under various statutes, and would demonstrate to the public that a legitimate and clear cut issue exists that is readily solved through existing government channels. Lastly, I believe that there is, in these circumstances, a clear mandate for reevaluation of the election and where appropriate, a new election. The directive that, upon vacancy, the office shall devolve on the Vice President, is inapplicable and/or irrelevant until after inauguration. The resulting prospect is not an overwhelming one in any sense. The amount of recent financial assistance granted various businesses suffering from the malaise of economic fluctuations, for instance, has well exceeded the relatively small amount of funds that might be expended for a new election. And as I have claimed in my petition in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the American People, including those who ardently supported Mr. Barack Obama, are not interested in any upwelling or disobedience. The election had a calm and civilized demeanor, and regardless, the reason for new election is a purely foundational requirement, and results from acts by the candidate himself, not an interloper.
I implore all members of all parties to keep the future of the nation in mind. There is here, including under the oaths sworn by you, a requirement to uphold the Constitution, that stands well above any needs of politics and idealism.
Thank you. Please contact me if I can be of any assistance or further information. Sincerely,
James D. Schneller
cc USPS First Class Mail : all recipients cc EMAIL and FAX : Chairpersons, all Congressional Committees, Honorable Chief Justice Yvette Kane, Chief Justice of the U.S. Middle District of Pennsylvania; Archivist of the United States; Acting Administrator James A. Williams; Federal Election Commission, Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee, Barack Obama Esquire, all plaintiffs in the stated pending litigation
President of the United States
President George W. Bush
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500 Michael B Mukasey
United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001 Senate Majority Leader
Honorable Harry Reid
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510 Senate Minority Leader
Honorable Mitch McConnell
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510 President of the U.S. Senate
Vice President Richard B. Cheney
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500 United States Senate President Pro Tempore
Honorable Robert C. Byrd
311 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510 Office of the Speaker of the U.S. House
Honorable Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515 U.S. House - Office of the Majority Leader
Honorable Steny Hoyer
1705 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515 U.S. House - Office of the Republican Leader
Honorable John Boehner
1011 Longworth Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: Demand for Concerted Proceeding Regarding Eligibility of President-Elect Barack Obama Dear Mr. President and the Leaders of the United States Congress:
I am the concerned citizen who wrote Congress and the pertinent Committees last week, urgently requesting action on the crisis regarding the eligibility of the President-elect and the need for a formal proceeding, and I copied some of you on my letter to the acting Administrator of the General Service Administration protesting the distribution of interim funds and office space to apparent President-elect Mr. Barack Obama that has occurred since the election. I am writing to request extenuation of the January 6th Joint Session, where necessary; intervention by Congress in conjunction with or superceding to the Joint Session; and/or Presidential intervention, because of the urgency and extraordinary nature of this issue. I claim, in addition to my first letter's request for an exercising of authority, that such an exercising, including by our esteemed President and/or Vice President, is warranted, and may take place outside of the scope of Title 3 Chapter 1, or, if so circumscribed, there is regardless, avenue in Chapter 1 to adapt to these unusual circumstances. I demand this action. I keep my reasons herein to a minimum but they are plainly extraordinary, as any citizen is aware. Because the apparent President-elect has, under a reasonable probability standard, made fraud upon the voters and most State Directors of Elections, and, under that standard, has not shown himself to be eligible for office under Article II Section 1, not even the objection of a one (1) representative from each house, under 3 U.S.C.§ 15, is required to initiate a Congressional Inquiry or similar measure, because the circumstances are, in reality, a set of facts much more serious and Constitutional-basic than a State contest, which is the emphasis, if not the express scope of Title 3 Chapter 1. As stated by me in my letter initially broaching this issue, there are numerous state cases pending, any of which may prove catalyst for an opinion by a state Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court. The election has not mooted this issue, whereas an inauguration might. Naturally a resolution by the Joint Session is desirable to many. The matter, from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court perspective alone, is appropriate for objection under the letter of 3 U.S.C.§ 15, because it is an issue of validity of the certified canvass of electors, involving a lawful tribunal, namely, whether the certification of the electors is valid as transmitted (if it has been), or is overshadowed by a transmittal that awaits determination by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (the prior transmittal void pursuant to automatic stay under Pa.R.A.P. 1707) on my petition for writ of mandamus demanding quick investigation of qualification as a natural born citizen. For the reasons roughly stated in this letter, and under Chapter 1,you have every authority and duty to delay the counting of the ballot on January 6, 2008, or to extend the permitted recess or withdrawal for deliberations on any objections to the count, for the few days or more that would be needed for a simple investigation into the apparent President-elect's eligibility. The Bush/Gore 2002 ballot matter has shown recent implementation of such leeway. The directive in 3 U.S.C § 5 is inapplicable to some of the state challenges, including mine, Pa.S.C.199 MM 2008, because this issue is, in fact, not a matter of "appointment of electors." Pennsylvania law does not provide a process for a challenge of that sort, regardless, this ssue being as it is a matter of eligibility, or certifiability of the vote, rather than appointment of electors. Thus, §5 has established no time limit, because there is no state statute "for [a] final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State". The Attorney General has additional support to look into this issue because of the possibility of fraud upon the voters, and of intent to further such fraud, and intent to make fraud despite the resulting feasibility of citizen dissatisafaction with a near- or post-election investigation, and a resulting (and intended) trepidation on the part of leaders to foment this very investigation. It is noteworthy that Pennsylvania, like most states, has many different sections setting up penalties for violations of the election laws, including for false swearing in a candidate affidavit. Mr. Barack Obama’s unwillingness to cooperate with courts is additional support for said reasonable probability. Whether within or without the thresholds set up in Title 3 Chapter 1, the data required to be analyzed, and decision regarding eligibility, are simple and readily fomented and aquired. Numerous clear cut matters including the prior, unresolved claims in many states regarding ACORN and similar issues, require investigation by a centralized authority. In light of the Democratic members of the Houses' possible disagreement with these even handed means of resolution, it is my demand that both Leaderships must cooperate, and that Congress, and the Secretary of the Senate, act, with the most serious of demeanors. This is warranted especially because no state, and no or few electors, have taken the initiative despite the urgent nature of this issue. I demand that the Joint Session promulgate and enforce a resolution or other appropriate means causing an immediate investigation and resolution of this egregious issue. If Congress and the Vice President find themselves unable or unqualified, the President, under the extraordinary powers clearly available to him, and under the presently utilized National Emergencies Act, is authorized to initiate emergency action by the Department of Justice, for instance, and to place any number of temporary means of continuing a singular head of the executive branch, in the event that the process continued past January 6, 2009, and I demand this. This in fact overlaps or is warranted due to the present national emergency. These measures are additionally mandated because the process in Chapter 1, as seen in it's apparent focus on the mechanisms of the ballot , e.g. 3 U.S.C.§ 15, is too easily affected by politics. This is why I have copied my recent letter to Mr. James Williams, Acting Administrator of the General Servics Administration, claiming fraud as inhibiting to distribution of interim and inauguration funds, to the United States Attorney General. An urgent investigation by the Attorney General into the eligibility question and any resulting violation(s) is warranted under various statutes, and would demonstrate to the public that a legitimate and clear cut issue exists that is readily solved through existing government channels. Lastly, I believe that there is, in these circumstances, a clear mandate for reevaluation of the election and where appropriate, a new election. The directive that, upon vacancy, the office shall devolve on the Vice President, is inapplicable and/or irrelevant until after inauguration. The resulting prospect is not an overwhelming one in any sense. The amount of recent financial assistance granted various businesses suffering from the malaise of economic fluctuations, for instance, has well exceeded the relatively small amount of funds that might be expended for a new election. And as I have claimed in my petition in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the American People, including those who ardently supported Mr. Barack Obama, are not interested in any upwelling or disobedience. The election had a calm and civilized demeanor, and regardless, the reason for new election is a purely foundational requirement, and results from acts by the candidate himself, not an interloper.
I implore all members of all parties to keep the future of the nation in mind. There is here, including under the oaths sworn by you, a requirement to uphold the Constitution, that stands well above any needs of politics and idealism.
Thank you. Please contact me if I can be of any assistance or further information. Sincerely,
James D. Schneller
cc USPS First Class Mail : all recipients cc EMAIL and FAX : Chairpersons, all Congressional Committees, Honorable Chief Justice Yvette Kane, Chief Justice of the U.S. Middle District of Pennsylvania; Archivist of the United States; Acting Administrator James A. Williams; Federal Election Commission, Republican National Committee, Democratic National Committee, Barack Obama Esquire, all plaintiffs in the stated pending litigation
Urgent! we need to get in touch with the governor Matt Blunt
Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri was totally disgusted by Obama's use of law enforcement to intimidate people. This governor has only a few more days on the job. we all need to get in touch with him ASAP
Letter from a reader, call for a criminal action
Orly,
Good morning. A gentleman who came to my site after reading yours left this message at mine just a short time ago. I though you'd want to read it:
From: MrTideman
Date: December 26, 2008 10:17:08 AM EST
To: andrea@shea-king.com
Subject: [The Radio Patriot] New comment on NYT SAYS "LET IT GO".
MrTideman has left a new comment on your post "NYT SAYS "LET IT GO"":
Forget the "Judicial intervention" (as mentioned in paragraph #1 of Orly's letter to Roberts) as it regards these CIVIL cases that keep getting the block, and go for some CRIMINAL cases, as in an Indictment against Obama for lieing on his Declaration of Candidacy form in all fifty (50) states writing that he is eligible for the office he seeks. And as Edwin Vieira wrote, as posted on the Devvy Kidd website: that case-law of that the burden of proof is upon the individual claiming the job. But in what forum? In the Grand Jury! Especially when the Prosecutor has evidence that he is NOT eligible, as in the proof in the Ron Polark documents of 100-pages that I did give to my New Hampshire Attorney General in Concord: the Capitol City to investigate, but that as of January 1st or 15 days before the next Grand Jury reconvenes on the 3rd Thursday of the month for Merrimack County on Jan. 15th = only 5 days before the Inauguration, we will have here a Democrat County Attorney AND a Democrat governor, and so need this information to go to for prosecution in #___ states where there is both a Republican prosecutor AND governor, so that when Obama is Indicted, then the governor's warrant for the arrest can be presented to that Republican state governor where his train stops on his way to Washington for THERE to be arrested, as in if he does not go peacefully with the arresting officer, then to put his hands in the handcuffs and feet in shackles! I'm serious! But then I've been told his federal Secret Service protection is to keep him away from any such state actions as in even though he has not been sworn in yet, this check is against the states!? The only way to find out is to help those citizens here reading this to get them the Polarik documents so that they can initiate this action in those #___ states hoping for at least ONE indictment. Yours truly, JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com over here from the www dot drorly.blogspot dot com website is HOW I got here. Thank you "very" much for allow me to post this. I truly do appreciate it, as in that "eager for the truth" enthusiasm as stated by one of the Cardinal's during the Christmas Eve Mass in Rome with the Pope that I saw on TV that night. Happy New Year! to you all.
Posted by MrTideman to The Radio Patriot at 10:17 AM, December 26, 2008
AND THEN THIS ONE -- MORE
P.S. Here's the list of Republican governors that I did find over at en.wikipedia dot org / wiki / List_of_ current_United_States_Governors (no spaces): Alabama, Alaska, Calif., Conn., Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Minn., Miss., Missouri*, Nebraska, Nevada, N.D., RI, S.C., S.D., Texas, Utah + Vermont = 22, *= the Republican governor for Missouri (The "Show Me" state, as in Show Me your Birth Certificate, not COLB) retiring, and the governor-elect a Democrat who takes office Mon., Jan.. 12th, and so to seek an Indictment in THAT state BEFORE then. Now to find out which Prosecutors in each capitol are Republican... I'll try to get the Polarik documents over to Vermont, as in my neighbor state here in New Hampshire. Yours truly, JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com
Good morning. A gentleman who came to my site after reading yours left this message at mine just a short time ago. I though you'd want to read it:
From: MrTideman
Date: December 26, 2008 10:17:08 AM EST
To: andrea@shea-king.com
Subject: [The Radio Patriot] New comment on NYT SAYS "LET IT GO".
MrTideman has left a new comment on your post "NYT SAYS "LET IT GO"":
Forget the "Judicial intervention" (as mentioned in paragraph #1 of Orly's letter to Roberts) as it regards these CIVIL cases that keep getting the block, and go for some CRIMINAL cases, as in an Indictment against Obama for lieing on his Declaration of Candidacy form in all fifty (50) states writing that he is eligible for the office he seeks. And as Edwin Vieira wrote, as posted on the Devvy Kidd website: that case-law of that the burden of proof is upon the individual claiming the job. But in what forum? In the Grand Jury! Especially when the Prosecutor has evidence that he is NOT eligible, as in the proof in the Ron Polark documents of 100-pages that I did give to my New Hampshire Attorney General in Concord: the Capitol City to investigate, but that as of January 1st or 15 days before the next Grand Jury reconvenes on the 3rd Thursday of the month for Merrimack County on Jan. 15th = only 5 days before the Inauguration, we will have here a Democrat County Attorney AND a Democrat governor, and so need this information to go to for prosecution in #___ states where there is both a Republican prosecutor AND governor, so that when Obama is Indicted, then the governor's warrant for the arrest can be presented to that Republican state governor where his train stops on his way to Washington for THERE to be arrested, as in if he does not go peacefully with the arresting officer, then to put his hands in the handcuffs and feet in shackles! I'm serious! But then I've been told his federal Secret Service protection is to keep him away from any such state actions as in even though he has not been sworn in yet, this check is against the states!? The only way to find out is to help those citizens here reading this to get them the Polarik documents so that they can initiate this action in those #___ states hoping for at least ONE indictment. Yours truly, JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com over here from the www dot drorly.blogspot dot com website is HOW I got here. Thank you "very" much for allow me to post this. I truly do appreciate it, as in that "eager for the truth" enthusiasm as stated by one of the Cardinal's during the Christmas Eve Mass in Rome with the Pope that I saw on TV that night. Happy New Year! to you all.
Posted by MrTideman to The Radio Patriot at 10:17 AM, December 26, 2008
AND THEN THIS ONE -- MORE
P.S. Here's the list of Republican governors that I did find over at en.wikipedia dot org / wiki / List_of_ current_United_States_Governors (no spaces): Alabama, Alaska, Calif., Conn., Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Minn., Miss., Missouri*, Nebraska, Nevada, N.D., RI, S.C., S.D., Texas, Utah + Vermont = 22, *= the Republican governor for Missouri (The "Show Me" state, as in Show Me your Birth Certificate, not COLB) retiring, and the governor-elect a Democrat who takes office Mon., Jan.. 12th, and so to seek an Indictment in THAT state BEFORE then. Now to find out which Prosecutors in each capitol are Republican... I'll try to get the Polarik documents over to Vermont, as in my neighbor state here in New Hampshire. Yours truly, JosephSHaas at hotmail dot com
Another of BO's dangerous insanities on the road to world Government
http://kilosparksitup.blogspot.com/2008/02/more-on-barack-obama-s2433-global.html
More on Barack Obama's S.2433 : Global Poverty Act
We know for a fact that this bill will cost America $845 billion above and beyond what America already spends on global aid in the next thirteen years. America will be locked in to giving .7 percent of the U.S. gross national product. That in itself is scary enough, but there is way more to Obama's bill. It also locks us into United Nations Millennium Summit. Cliff Kincaid from Accuracy in Media is all over this bill. He writes-(Underlined by me)
The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending.
"It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said.
Specifically, it would "declare" that the official U.S. policy is to eliminate global poverty, that the president is "required" to "develop and implement" a strategy to reach that goal and requires that the U.S. efforts be "specific and measurable."
Kincaid said that after cutting through all of the honorable-sounding goals in the plan, the bottom line is that the legislation would mandate the 0.7 percent of the U.S. GNP as "official development assistance."
"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child," he said.
Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims.
Kincaid also reported Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the "Millennium Project," confirms a U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP would add about $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already donates overseas.
And the only way to raise that funding, Sachs confirms, "is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels," Kincaid writes.
On the forum run by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one writer reported estimates of taxes from 35 cents to $1 dollar a gallon on gasoline would be needed.(LINK)
This ladies and gentleman is the Barack Obama vision for America . WND called Obama's office and the others who support this bill....No comments.
More on Barack Obama's S.2433 : Global Poverty Act
We know for a fact that this bill will cost America $845 billion above and beyond what America already spends on global aid in the next thirteen years. America will be locked in to giving .7 percent of the U.S. gross national product. That in itself is scary enough, but there is way more to Obama's bill. It also locks us into United Nations Millennium Summit. Cliff Kincaid from Accuracy in Media is all over this bill. He writes-(Underlined by me)
The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending.
"It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said.
Specifically, it would "declare" that the official U.S. policy is to eliminate global poverty, that the president is "required" to "develop and implement" a strategy to reach that goal and requires that the U.S. efforts be "specific and measurable."
Kincaid said that after cutting through all of the honorable-sounding goals in the plan, the bottom line is that the legislation would mandate the 0.7 percent of the U.S. GNP as "official development assistance."
"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that (U.N.) declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention of Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Convention of the Rights of the Child," he said.
Those U.N. protocols would make U.S. law on issues ranging from the 2nd Amendment to energy usage and parental rights all subservient to United Nations whims.
Kincaid also reported Jeffrey Sachs, who runs the "Millennium Project," confirms a U.N. plan to force the U.S. to pay 0.7 percent of GNP would add about $65 billion a year to what the U.S. already donates overseas.
And the only way to raise that funding, Sachs confirms, "is through a global tax, preferably on carbon-emitting fossil fuels," Kincaid writes.
On the forum run by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, one writer reported estimates of taxes from 35 cents to $1 dollar a gallon on gasoline would be needed.(LINK)
This ladies and gentleman is the Barack Obama vision for America . WND called Obama's office and the others who support this bill....No comments.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Post on Radio Patriot Andrea Shea King
"Obama's team, is the most investigated transition team in American history" by John Batchelor
John Batchelor's show is superb, you would like it.
Here's something interesting about BO (someone I know calls him 'Black Out') and Blago:
http://johnbatchelorshow.com/jb/2008/12/rahm-tapes-become-valerie-tapes-become-obama-tapes/
Rahm Tapes Become Valerie Tapes Become Obama Tapes
By John Batchelor on December 23, 2008 7:02 PM | 8 Comments
Greg Craig's Audit Clears Everyone of Everything in Every Season.
After we get past the thrill of a detail that the President-Elect has already been questioned by the prosecutors in the ongoing federal felony investigation of government corruption in the sale of the President-Elect's Senate seat, the first surprise of Mr. Craig's audit is that there are no hard facts about the communications between Rahm Emanuel and Rod Blagojevich himself not with Blago's bagman and chief of staff John Harris. In fact there are no useful facts at all. Not the number of communications, not their topics or times, not who called whom, not how many were Blago, how many were Harris, how many were messages left or picked up. And there is no attention or mention to other forms of communication, such as email, faxes, instant messages, or messages replied to, forwarded, copied or unread. In sum, we get a smoke-filled-room, faraway version of some information passed between the congressman of the 5th CD Illinois to the previous congressman of the 5th CD Illinois who is now governor. If this were all Patrick Fitzgerald possessed in the way of evidence that Blago and Harris were in a conspiracy for a crime spree to extort favors, then this case is weaker than a buy recommendation from Bernie Madoff. The Rahm tapes of 2008 are a flat disappointment. However, now for 2009 and the skill of Ed "Devil's Advocate" Jensen to leak the Rahm tapes and the testimony before the grand jury. This sudden, peculiarly hidden news -- not mentioned last week while it was happening Thursday 18, Friday 19 and Saturday 20 in Chicago -- that President-Elect Barack Obama (PEBO), Emanuel and Jarrett were questioned by Patrick Fitzgerald's team is just the beginning of this kerfuffle.
Valerie Jarrett and the Mysterious Union Cutout.
The second surprise of Greg Craig's audit is that the McGuffin at the center of the story, Valerie Jarrett of the Chicago Daley administration (right with PEBO on November 21), did not stay away from her hunt for the Senate seat but instead was directly in contact with a cutout who carried messages for the governor and to the governor. The cutout was Tom Balanoff, head of the virile Illinois chapter of the SEIU. The meeting was on November 7, within the time frame when Rahm Emanuel is said to have been in contact with Blago about the seat and when Jarrett was still a most active and eager Candidate No. 1 recommended by the president-elect. Tom Balanoff (below) has a reputation as an aggressive player from a potent union with "longstanding ties" to Blago. The prosecutor's complaint mentions a union job, an HHS cabinet seat, a foundation and board memberships all in possible exchange for the seat and all possibly within reach of the SEIU. The complaint also mentions that Bolanoff spoke twice with Blagojevich, including on November 12. A timeline starts to build. On November 4 after the election, Rahm Emanuel starts conversations with the governor with regard his own replacement in the event he resigns to become chief of staff. Between November 4 and 8, Emanuel communicates to Blago and/or Harris that PEBO wants Valerie Jarrett as his replacement in the Senate. On November 7, Valerie Jarrett speaks directly and in person to Tom Balanoff. On November 9, we are told, PEBO decides he wants Valerie Jarrett to serve in the White House as a special assistant for inter-governmental affairs. On November 12, Tom Balanoff communicates to Blago. The federal complaint says that Balanoff was an "emissary" of Valerie Jarrett. This is unclear logic. Was Balanoff representing Blago to Jarret to discuss the HHS seat, as Greg Craig's audit details; or was Balanoff representing Jarrett to Blago to discuss how she wouldn't go along with the schemes? Or both? We do not have the Balanoff/Jarrett conversations. What we do have here is Valerie Jarrett's "memory" of her conversation with Balanoff. And her memory does not include her suspicion that she was being solicited for a quid pro quo bribe. Is there a recording of that conversation? Are there emails beforehand or afterword in which Valerie Jarrett told PEBO that Blago wanted to be persuaded with a favor? We do know there is a tape of Blago's chat with Balanoff about the Jarrett exchange. There is much, much more for the prosecutor to seek and evaluate. The most mysterious detail right now is that Blago and Jarrett managed a face-to-face at the Governor's Conference in Philadelphia on December 2. There are no conspiracies. There are only coincidences. Why this coincidence? Six days before Blago's face-to-face with Jesse Jackson Junior and seven days before Blago's arrest? A fair guess is that questions about all these coincidences came up in the initial interrogation of Valerie Jarret last week by Patrick Fitzgerald's office. Same for PEBO and Emanuel. And where are those interrogation transcripts and when do we get them? And isn't PEBO still a private citizen? Those questions of Obama, Emanuel and Jarrett were under oath? FBI only? Or grand jury? Why over three days and not all at once and simultaneously? (And was Tom Balanoff also questioned as to his "memory" or has he hired an attorney to speak for him?) And will there be more questions for PEBO before the electoral college vote and his real election? The Rahm tapes morph into the Valerie tapes morph into the Obama tapes, making the Obama transition office into the most investigated transition in American history.
Here's something interesting about BO (someone I know calls him 'Black Out') and Blago:
http://johnbatchelorshow.com/jb/2008/12/rahm-tapes-become-valerie-tapes-become-obama-tapes/
Rahm Tapes Become Valerie Tapes Become Obama Tapes
By John Batchelor on December 23, 2008 7:02 PM | 8 Comments
Greg Craig's Audit Clears Everyone of Everything in Every Season.
After we get past the thrill of a detail that the President-Elect has already been questioned by the prosecutors in the ongoing federal felony investigation of government corruption in the sale of the President-Elect's Senate seat, the first surprise of Mr. Craig's audit is that there are no hard facts about the communications between Rahm Emanuel and Rod Blagojevich himself not with Blago's bagman and chief of staff John Harris. In fact there are no useful facts at all. Not the number of communications, not their topics or times, not who called whom, not how many were Blago, how many were Harris, how many were messages left or picked up. And there is no attention or mention to other forms of communication, such as email, faxes, instant messages, or messages replied to, forwarded, copied or unread. In sum, we get a smoke-filled-room, faraway version of some information passed between the congressman of the 5th CD Illinois to the previous congressman of the 5th CD Illinois who is now governor. If this were all Patrick Fitzgerald possessed in the way of evidence that Blago and Harris were in a conspiracy for a crime spree to extort favors, then this case is weaker than a buy recommendation from Bernie Madoff. The Rahm tapes of 2008 are a flat disappointment. However, now for 2009 and the skill of Ed "Devil's Advocate" Jensen to leak the Rahm tapes and the testimony before the grand jury. This sudden, peculiarly hidden news -- not mentioned last week while it was happening Thursday 18, Friday 19 and Saturday 20 in Chicago -- that President-Elect Barack Obama (PEBO), Emanuel and Jarrett were questioned by Patrick Fitzgerald's team is just the beginning of this kerfuffle.
Valerie Jarrett and the Mysterious Union Cutout.
The second surprise of Greg Craig's audit is that the McGuffin at the center of the story, Valerie Jarrett of the Chicago Daley administration (right with PEBO on November 21), did not stay away from her hunt for the Senate seat but instead was directly in contact with a cutout who carried messages for the governor and to the governor. The cutout was Tom Balanoff, head of the virile Illinois chapter of the SEIU. The meeting was on November 7, within the time frame when Rahm Emanuel is said to have been in contact with Blago about the seat and when Jarrett was still a most active and eager Candidate No. 1 recommended by the president-elect. Tom Balanoff (below) has a reputation as an aggressive player from a potent union with "longstanding ties" to Blago. The prosecutor's complaint mentions a union job, an HHS cabinet seat, a foundation and board memberships all in possible exchange for the seat and all possibly within reach of the SEIU. The complaint also mentions that Bolanoff spoke twice with Blagojevich, including on November 12. A timeline starts to build. On November 4 after the election, Rahm Emanuel starts conversations with the governor with regard his own replacement in the event he resigns to become chief of staff. Between November 4 and 8, Emanuel communicates to Blago and/or Harris that PEBO wants Valerie Jarrett as his replacement in the Senate. On November 7, Valerie Jarrett speaks directly and in person to Tom Balanoff. On November 9, we are told, PEBO decides he wants Valerie Jarrett to serve in the White House as a special assistant for inter-governmental affairs. On November 12, Tom Balanoff communicates to Blago. The federal complaint says that Balanoff was an "emissary" of Valerie Jarrett. This is unclear logic. Was Balanoff representing Blago to Jarret to discuss the HHS seat, as Greg Craig's audit details; or was Balanoff representing Jarrett to Blago to discuss how she wouldn't go along with the schemes? Or both? We do not have the Balanoff/Jarrett conversations. What we do have here is Valerie Jarrett's "memory" of her conversation with Balanoff. And her memory does not include her suspicion that she was being solicited for a quid pro quo bribe. Is there a recording of that conversation? Are there emails beforehand or afterword in which Valerie Jarrett told PEBO that Blago wanted to be persuaded with a favor? We do know there is a tape of Blago's chat with Balanoff about the Jarrett exchange. There is much, much more for the prosecutor to seek and evaluate. The most mysterious detail right now is that Blago and Jarrett managed a face-to-face at the Governor's Conference in Philadelphia on December 2. There are no conspiracies. There are only coincidences. Why this coincidence? Six days before Blago's face-to-face with Jesse Jackson Junior and seven days before Blago's arrest? A fair guess is that questions about all these coincidences came up in the initial interrogation of Valerie Jarret last week by Patrick Fitzgerald's office. Same for PEBO and Emanuel. And where are those interrogation transcripts and when do we get them? And isn't PEBO still a private citizen? Those questions of Obama, Emanuel and Jarrett were under oath? FBI only? Or grand jury? Why over three days and not all at once and simultaneously? (And was Tom Balanoff also questioned as to his "memory" or has he hired an attorney to speak for him?) And will there be more questions for PEBO before the electoral college vote and his real election? The Rahm tapes morph into the Valerie tapes morph into the Obama tapes, making the Obama transition office into the most investigated transition in American history.
More law suits against Obama, it is at least 24 now
Hoosiers challenge Obama's birth status
The Indianapolis Star • December 25, 2008
Read Comments(9)Recommend (2)Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up! As officials in Washington prepare for the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama, two Indiana men have filed a lawsuit asking a judge to throw out the election results.
The suit, filed in Marion Superior Court, is among five loosely coordinated challenges that question Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen."
Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Republican and Democratic national committees are named as defendants in the Indiana suit, filed by Steve Ankeny, New Castle, and Bill Kruse, Roselawn.
These new suits take a slightly different tack than earlier, unsuccessful suits that typically have been tossed by the courts and generally considered frivolous.
The new suits challenge the governor and political parties for failing to uphold the Constitution when they certified the results of the election.
Henry Karlson, professor emeritus at the Indiana University School of Law-Indianapolis, said he doubted the suit would have much traction. He said the plaintiffs lacked standing because there was no harm unique to them, as there may have been to another candidate. Karlson also said the challenge seemed to have been filed too late, and the suit targets the wrong people.
"They should be suing the electors," he said, "not the governor."
Ankeny — who is not an attorney and describes himself as a legal researcher and "interested citizen" — said similar suits were filed this month in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois and Michigan.
The Marion County suit contends neither Obama, a Democrat, nor Republican Sen. John McCain proved he was a "natural born citizen," a constitutional requirement to qualify for the presidency. They also claim neither candidate was eligible to be elected president because both were sitting U.S. senators at the time of the election.
"Our argument is that there has to be evidence that a candidate -- any candidate -- actually meets the qualifications," Ankeny said.
"Essentially, what we are asking of the governor and the two other defendants is that they not certify a vote for (Obama or McCain) unless the candidates were actually eligible."
Ankeny said he thought there are legitimate questions about the "natural born" status of both McCain and Obama, whose birth in Hawaii had been challenged several times during the campaign.
The U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, states: "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The problem is that there is not an explicit definition of a "natural born" citizen. Clearly qualifying is a person born on U.S. soil to parents who are both citizens. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. citizens while his father was stationed there in the service.
Obama was born in Hawaii, but his father was not a U.S. citizen. Some have even alleged Obama was not born in the U.S.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, refused to hear a challenge to Obama's citizenship.
The dispute about Obama's citizenship has been addressed by the nonpartisan group factcheck.org, which reports: "FactCheck .org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. . . . Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said."
During the campaign, Obama released a copy of his birth certificate, although not the original, and his birth was reported in The Honolulu Advertiser newspaper.
Jane Jankowski, spokeswoman for Daniels, confirmed the office had received a copy of the suit.
"We don't have a comment," she said Wednesday.
Judge David Dreyer, who will hear the case, said he could not talk about the specifics of the lawsuit.
"This is a very free country," he said, "and these parties will be given the full consideration and respect that all parties will get."
The defendants in the suit have until Tuesday to file a response or seek an automatic 30-day extension. Officials at the Indiana state Republican and Democratic parties refused to accept the summons. Hand-written notes on the summons forms state that officials refused because they were not the national committees. It was not clear Wednesday whether national party officials had been served.
Ankeny said the suit is not just about unseating Obama.
"This is about any candidate. We don't care who it is," he said. "We just want to make sure the Constitution of the United States is followed by the governor and the two parties who were responsible (for nominating the candidates)."
Ankeny acknowledged "some people will think we are crazy or nuts" because of the suit. He said he doesn't take offense to that, but he thinks there is a legitimate motive to bring the legal action.
"Our focus is to make sure the Constitution of the United States is enforced,'' he said. "That's all we are asking."
The Indianapolis Star • December 25, 2008
Read Comments(9)Recommend (2)Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Buzz up! As officials in Washington prepare for the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama, two Indiana men have filed a lawsuit asking a judge to throw out the election results.
The suit, filed in Marion Superior Court, is among five loosely coordinated challenges that question Obama’s status as a "natural born citizen."
Gov. Mitch Daniels and the Republican and Democratic national committees are named as defendants in the Indiana suit, filed by Steve Ankeny, New Castle, and Bill Kruse, Roselawn.
These new suits take a slightly different tack than earlier, unsuccessful suits that typically have been tossed by the courts and generally considered frivolous.
The new suits challenge the governor and political parties for failing to uphold the Constitution when they certified the results of the election.
Henry Karlson, professor emeritus at the Indiana University School of Law-Indianapolis, said he doubted the suit would have much traction. He said the plaintiffs lacked standing because there was no harm unique to them, as there may have been to another candidate. Karlson also said the challenge seemed to have been filed too late, and the suit targets the wrong people.
"They should be suing the electors," he said, "not the governor."
Ankeny — who is not an attorney and describes himself as a legal researcher and "interested citizen" — said similar suits were filed this month in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois and Michigan.
The Marion County suit contends neither Obama, a Democrat, nor Republican Sen. John McCain proved he was a "natural born citizen," a constitutional requirement to qualify for the presidency. They also claim neither candidate was eligible to be elected president because both were sitting U.S. senators at the time of the election.
"Our argument is that there has to be evidence that a candidate -- any candidate -- actually meets the qualifications," Ankeny said.
"Essentially, what we are asking of the governor and the two other defendants is that they not certify a vote for (Obama or McCain) unless the candidates were actually eligible."
Ankeny said he thought there are legitimate questions about the "natural born" status of both McCain and Obama, whose birth in Hawaii had been challenged several times during the campaign.
The U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, states: "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The problem is that there is not an explicit definition of a "natural born" citizen. Clearly qualifying is a person born on U.S. soil to parents who are both citizens. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. citizens while his father was stationed there in the service.
Obama was born in Hawaii, but his father was not a U.S. citizen. Some have even alleged Obama was not born in the U.S.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, refused to hear a challenge to Obama's citizenship.
The dispute about Obama's citizenship has been addressed by the nonpartisan group factcheck.org, which reports: "FactCheck .org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. . . . Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said."
During the campaign, Obama released a copy of his birth certificate, although not the original, and his birth was reported in The Honolulu Advertiser newspaper.
Jane Jankowski, spokeswoman for Daniels, confirmed the office had received a copy of the suit.
"We don't have a comment," she said Wednesday.
Judge David Dreyer, who will hear the case, said he could not talk about the specifics of the lawsuit.
"This is a very free country," he said, "and these parties will be given the full consideration and respect that all parties will get."
The defendants in the suit have until Tuesday to file a response or seek an automatic 30-day extension. Officials at the Indiana state Republican and Democratic parties refused to accept the summons. Hand-written notes on the summons forms state that officials refused because they were not the national committees. It was not clear Wednesday whether national party officials had been served.
Ankeny said the suit is not just about unseating Obama.
"This is about any candidate. We don't care who it is," he said. "We just want to make sure the Constitution of the United States is followed by the governor and the two parties who were responsible (for nominating the candidates)."
Ankeny acknowledged "some people will think we are crazy or nuts" because of the suit. He said he doesn't take offense to that, but he thinks there is a legitimate motive to bring the legal action.
"Our focus is to make sure the Constitution of the United States is enforced,'' he said. "That's all we are asking."
Why wasn't Obama indicted yet, another pay to play
The article below is from Citizen Wells, they have an Obama indictment petition going on.
In a nutshell State Senator Obama gets $100,000 from Robert Blackwell in exchange Blackwell's co, EKI, Electronic Knowledge interchange gets more then 3 times this amount in grants from the state.
Orly
The Case Against Barack Obama, Dan Shomon, Robert Blackwell, David Freddoso, Killerspin, Illinois State Grants, Legal retainer, Money Laundering, LA Times article
August 14, 2008 · 21 Comments
One of the least reported aspects of Obama’s past and his ties to
corruption and dubious business associations is the Robert Blackwell
“legal retainer” in conjunction with Dan Shomon. The LA Times broke
this story back in April 2008. They referred to Dan Shomon as an
Obama campaign aide. This blog, Citizen Wells, dug deeper into the
role of Dan Shomon. Dan Shomon was actually Obama’s Campaign Manager
at one time and he was also a lobbyist. Dan Shomon’s name is at
the top of an announcement of Robert Blackwell being on Governor
Rod Blagojevich’s team. Blagojevich was named often during the Tony
Rezko trial and has been the subject of a recall attempt in Illinois.
Robert Blackwell contacted this blog shortly after we presented
our article in April 2008.
David Freddoso has written a new book, “The Case Against Barack Obama.
Freddoso, to his credit, writes about the Dan Shomon connection. He
does not cover Shomon as well as this blog so we recommend that you
search on Shomon here and learn more. Here are some exerpts from
“The Case Against Barack Obama”:
“Perhaps the most surprising story about Barack obama and money is one that no one talks about at all. It involves ping-pong. it is the story of how state Senator Obama was paid more than $100,000 for legal work, then helped his client’s company get $320,000 in taxpayer grants.
For some reason, only the Los Angeles Times has examined the story of Robert Blackwell Jr. and the government grants he received after he invested in Barack Obama.
Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope that after his failed congressional run in 2000, he was “more or less broke.” His family would make $240,000 that year, but they had large debts, and he had just loaned his losing campaign $9,500 and maxed out his credit card. To keep his family afloat, he writes, he went back after the election to his law firm, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which he had neglected throughout 2000 (he received no income from the firm that year). He planned to do some legal work to supplement his modest $58,000 salary as a state senator.
In 2001, while serving as a state senator, Obama would earn $98,158 from his law practice. Of that money, $80,000 came from a single client - Electronic Knowledge Interchange (EKI)-which had put him on a $8,000 monthly retainer. This lasted fourteen months and netted Obama $112,000. The company was owned by one Robert Blackwell Jr., a friend of Obama’s since about 1995.
Months after Obama received his final payment from EKI, he wrote a request on Illinois Senate letterhead and sent it to state officials for a $50,000 tourism grant to a company named Killerspin. This company was also owned by Blackwell.
Killerspin runs ping-pong tournaments and sells ping-pong gear. After Obama’s original request, Killerspin received a $20,000 grant for a ping-pong tournament. Over the next three years, Obama’s aide Dan Shoman-who was working for the senator part-time and part-time for Blackwell-would help Killerspin get a $200,000 state grant for its 2003 tournament and a $100,000 state grant for its 2004 tournament, for a total of $320,000.
So Blackwell’s company paid Senator Obama a large sum of money. Blackwell’s other company received almost three times as much in state grants, with help from Obama and his aide.
The Times reports that Obama, in his required legal financial disclosures, buried his six-figure financial conflict of interest amid a list of hundreds of other clients represented by his law firm. He did not mention that the majority of his 2001 income came from EKI-nor was he required to do so under Illinois law. Moreover, the Times piece notes:
The business arrived at an especially fortuitious time because, as the law firm’s senior partner, Judson Miner, put it, “it was a very dry period here,” meaning that the ebb and flow of cases left little work for Obama and cash was tight.”
This corruption connection is listed on the Petition to Impeach, expel Senator Obama:
http://obamaimpeachment.org
In a nutshell State Senator Obama gets $100,000 from Robert Blackwell in exchange Blackwell's co, EKI, Electronic Knowledge interchange gets more then 3 times this amount in grants from the state.
Orly
The Case Against Barack Obama, Dan Shomon, Robert Blackwell, David Freddoso, Killerspin, Illinois State Grants, Legal retainer, Money Laundering, LA Times article
August 14, 2008 · 21 Comments
One of the least reported aspects of Obama’s past and his ties to
corruption and dubious business associations is the Robert Blackwell
“legal retainer” in conjunction with Dan Shomon. The LA Times broke
this story back in April 2008. They referred to Dan Shomon as an
Obama campaign aide. This blog, Citizen Wells, dug deeper into the
role of Dan Shomon. Dan Shomon was actually Obama’s Campaign Manager
at one time and he was also a lobbyist. Dan Shomon’s name is at
the top of an announcement of Robert Blackwell being on Governor
Rod Blagojevich’s team. Blagojevich was named often during the Tony
Rezko trial and has been the subject of a recall attempt in Illinois.
Robert Blackwell contacted this blog shortly after we presented
our article in April 2008.
David Freddoso has written a new book, “The Case Against Barack Obama.
Freddoso, to his credit, writes about the Dan Shomon connection. He
does not cover Shomon as well as this blog so we recommend that you
search on Shomon here and learn more. Here are some exerpts from
“The Case Against Barack Obama”:
“Perhaps the most surprising story about Barack obama and money is one that no one talks about at all. It involves ping-pong. it is the story of how state Senator Obama was paid more than $100,000 for legal work, then helped his client’s company get $320,000 in taxpayer grants.
For some reason, only the Los Angeles Times has examined the story of Robert Blackwell Jr. and the government grants he received after he invested in Barack Obama.
Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope that after his failed congressional run in 2000, he was “more or less broke.” His family would make $240,000 that year, but they had large debts, and he had just loaned his losing campaign $9,500 and maxed out his credit card. To keep his family afloat, he writes, he went back after the election to his law firm, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, which he had neglected throughout 2000 (he received no income from the firm that year). He planned to do some legal work to supplement his modest $58,000 salary as a state senator.
In 2001, while serving as a state senator, Obama would earn $98,158 from his law practice. Of that money, $80,000 came from a single client - Electronic Knowledge Interchange (EKI)-which had put him on a $8,000 monthly retainer. This lasted fourteen months and netted Obama $112,000. The company was owned by one Robert Blackwell Jr., a friend of Obama’s since about 1995.
Months after Obama received his final payment from EKI, he wrote a request on Illinois Senate letterhead and sent it to state officials for a $50,000 tourism grant to a company named Killerspin. This company was also owned by Blackwell.
Killerspin runs ping-pong tournaments and sells ping-pong gear. After Obama’s original request, Killerspin received a $20,000 grant for a ping-pong tournament. Over the next three years, Obama’s aide Dan Shoman-who was working for the senator part-time and part-time for Blackwell-would help Killerspin get a $200,000 state grant for its 2003 tournament and a $100,000 state grant for its 2004 tournament, for a total of $320,000.
So Blackwell’s company paid Senator Obama a large sum of money. Blackwell’s other company received almost three times as much in state grants, with help from Obama and his aide.
The Times reports that Obama, in his required legal financial disclosures, buried his six-figure financial conflict of interest amid a list of hundreds of other clients represented by his law firm. He did not mention that the majority of his 2001 income came from EKI-nor was he required to do so under Illinois law. Moreover, the Times piece notes:
The business arrived at an especially fortuitious time because, as the law firm’s senior partner, Judson Miner, put it, “it was a very dry period here,” meaning that the ebb and flow of cases left little work for Obama and cash was tight.”
This corruption connection is listed on the Petition to Impeach, expel Senator Obama:
http://obamaimpeachment.org
why are the birthdates keep changing?
Recently I saw reports about Madelyn Dunham dying at the age of 97. There is a problem with that. I remember reading about BO's family history that stated, that Madelyn Dunham eloped with her boyfriend Stanley Armour Dunham, when she was finishing high school and she gave birth shortly afterwords, in 1942 to her daughter (Stanley) Ann Dunham. This means that Madelyn Dunham was born sometimes in 1924, which means that she should be 84 years old now. Why do I see reports of her being 97, 96, 93.
Same thing happened when BO's mother, Ann Dunham died. There was a memorial, where it stated that she was 56, while in reality she was a little younger then 53.
What is wrong with these people? Normal people have a set birthdate, it is carved in stone, it is not something amorphous, that keeps changing on the daily basis. WHO are these people, where are they coming from, where are they going, with no set birth dates, no marriage licenses, hidden birth certificates, no medical or school records, no coroners reports, death certificates from wrong states with wrong dates???
I hope all of you patriots are reporting all od this to all of the authorities.
Orly
Same thing happened when BO's mother, Ann Dunham died. There was a memorial, where it stated that she was 56, while in reality she was a little younger then 53.
What is wrong with these people? Normal people have a set birthdate, it is carved in stone, it is not something amorphous, that keeps changing on the daily basis. WHO are these people, where are they coming from, where are they going, with no set birth dates, no marriage licenses, hidden birth certificates, no medical or school records, no coroners reports, death certificates from wrong states with wrong dates???
I hope all of you patriots are reporting all od this to all of the authorities.
Orly
Excerpt from Steve Diamond- $500 mln wasted
See below an excerpt from Prof Steve Diamond about the success of Barack Obama as chair of Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Initial grant was 49.5 mln from Annenberg, later mached 2-1 by other foundations: McArthur foundation 17.1 mln, Joyce Foundation 11 mln, Polk 6.8 mln, Woods -1 mln and so on. Total 160 mln raised. According to Steve Diamond with funds swap there was as much as 500 mln. Where did that money go? The program was a total failure. After 8 years (1995-2003) Chicago student's scores in Annenberg schools were not any better then in the the comparable schools all around. CAC was dissolved and remaining funds were transferred to Chicago Public Education Funds. 500 mln just down the drain. It looks like the only benefit was -connections BO developed with the wealthy donors. Can anybody check if any of these foundations donated to BO's campaign and how much?
At any rate it would give you an idea of the dimensions of failure we will have in store for us if god forbid he will be sworn in and will be in the office for a long time.
Orly
In 2003 the final technical report of the CCSR on the CAC was published. The results were not pretty. The “bottom line” according to the report was that the CAC did not achieve its goal of improvement in student academic achievement and nonacademic outcomes. While student test scores improved in the so-called Annenberg Schools that received some of the $150 million disbursed in the six years from 1995 to 2001,
“This was similar to improvement across the system….There were no statistically significant differences in student achievement between Annenberg schools and demographically similar non-Annenberg schools. This indicates that there was no Annenberg effect on achievement.”
The report identified the political conflict between the Local School Council promotion efforts of the CAC – such as the $2 million Leadership Development Initiative - as a possible factor hindering a positive impact on student achievement.
Conclusion: an academic failure but political success?
The Challenge allowed Barack Obama and Bill Ayers to work together, no doubt closely, in the heat of political battle to help disburse more than $100 million to allies, particularly in the LSCs, in the Chicago School system.
Under the circumstances, it seems more than a bit disingenuous of Senator Obama to dismiss Bill Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”
Posted by Steve Diamond
At any rate it would give you an idea of the dimensions of failure we will have in store for us if god forbid he will be sworn in and will be in the office for a long time.
Orly
In 2003 the final technical report of the CCSR on the CAC was published. The results were not pretty. The “bottom line” according to the report was that the CAC did not achieve its goal of improvement in student academic achievement and nonacademic outcomes. While student test scores improved in the so-called Annenberg Schools that received some of the $150 million disbursed in the six years from 1995 to 2001,
“This was similar to improvement across the system….There were no statistically significant differences in student achievement between Annenberg schools and demographically similar non-Annenberg schools. This indicates that there was no Annenberg effect on achievement.”
The report identified the political conflict between the Local School Council promotion efforts of the CAC – such as the $2 million Leadership Development Initiative - as a possible factor hindering a positive impact on student achievement.
Conclusion: an academic failure but political success?
The Challenge allowed Barack Obama and Bill Ayers to work together, no doubt closely, in the heat of political battle to help disburse more than $100 million to allies, particularly in the LSCs, in the Chicago School system.
Under the circumstances, it seems more than a bit disingenuous of Senator Obama to dismiss Bill Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”
Posted by Steve Diamond
More info on Hugo Chavez connection to US voting machines
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/washington/29ballot.html?_r=1&pagewanted
Please read this article from NY times about Smartmatic, voting machines software co that is partially owned by Venezuelans, about specialists from Venezuela being flown to Chicago as early as 2006 to deal with irregularities in the voting machines.
Please read this article from NY times about Smartmatic, voting machines software co that is partially owned by Venezuelans, about specialists from Venezuela being flown to Chicago as early as 2006 to deal with irregularities in the voting machines.
More food for thought for Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald
This attachment (see below) came from Huffington post. Interesting coincidence. Obama goes to Hi to vacation and spread grandma's ashes and Rahm Emmanuel goes to Africa to Safari (as in Kenya safari?).Let's see, last time these people paid visits, some interesting things happened. After Rahm paid a visit to Blagoevich, Blag ended up with a mountain of criminal indictments. Rahm suggested to Blag Valerie Jarrett. If you recall Valerie Jarrett was managing Habitat foundation, that was supposed to upkeep and refurbish low income apartments. After her management, apartments were so dilapidated, that the whole buildings had to be demolished. I wonder, what happened to the millions of dollars that were allocated to repair those apartments, where did that money go? At the same time Valerie Jarrett, Tony Rezko, David Axelrod were managing Obama's campaign, particularly areas of donations. There are no records on nearly half of the 750 million collected. Where did this money come from?
Last time Obama went to Hi, on Oct 24th, he said his grandma fell and had a broken hip. A few days later, on Nov 3, a day before the election, she suddenly died of cancer and BO is now spreading the ashes. I just hope that Bo's paternal grandmother doesn't contract some meteoric cancer after Rahm's Safari vacation (those metastasi spread relly fast). Same goes to Bo's half brother, half sister, baptist revered and baptist bishop, all of whom were talking about BO being born in Kenya. This family is really prone to diseases. Did you notice how everybody in the family is missing? Nobody can shed light on where BO was born, where did he come from? Rahm Emmanuel should be careful, he might end up contracting this cancer himself. Maybe he needs to start thinking about his own family, his wife and 3 children and instead of travelling to Africa, he needs to travel to Patrick Fitzgerald's office and cut a deal. Same goes to David Axelrod that managed campaigns of Obama, Blagoevich and Emmanuel himself. I hope he kept really good financial records. Keep in mind that one is allowed to give only $2,300 per political candidate per cycle. I hope he has really good explanations and traceable transaction records, how all of these 3 campaigns got millions of dollars from hedge funds. Does he have records of donations from Oprah Winfrey ( I hope Oprah keeps really good records as well). How about Annenberg foundation, Ford foundation, Rockefeller foundation, American Health foundation, Woods fund, Annenberg Challenge and the list goes on and on.
I hope Maya Soetoro Ng has her story straight, about what happened to her grandma, I hope she can present to Mr. Fitzgerald her grandma's medical records, death certificate, coroner's report and so on.
What about the attorney general of Hi (happen to be democrat). He fought tooth and nail to the the last drop to keep BO's original BC hidden? Why? Who gave donations to his campaign? How about the campaigns of a couple of judges that were ruling to keep the record hidden from American citizens and perpetrating this fraud? Who donated money for their campaigns?
I hope all patriots of this country are hard at work forwarding this info in the form of open letters and recorded videos to all congressmen, Senators, Mr. Fitzgerald, Att General Mike Mukasey, Director of FBI Robert Mueller, any and all law enforcement and any and all domestic and Foreign media. We can't allow all of this mess in the White House.
Orly
+ fflambeau See Profile I'm a Fan of fflambeau I'm a fan of this user permalink
Maxie, here's some info on "this poor man".
1) Emanuel succeeded Blagojevich in the lll 5th district;
2) He boasted a while back that he and Obama put together the playbook for Blagojevich's governor run;
3) He was named to the Board of Directors at Freddie Mac in 2000 and paid $231,655 p.a. During the time Emanuel spent on the board, Freddie Mac was plagued with scandals involving campaign contributions and accounting irregularities.
4) Open Secrets reported that Emanuel "was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry".
5) He made $16.2 million in his two-and-a-half-year stint as an investment banker.
6) Illinois Rep. R LaHood who said "He (Emanuel) legitimately can be called the golden boy of the Democratic Party today. He recruited the right candidates, found the money and funded them, and provided issues for them." This is the same LaHood who has just been appointed Secretary of Transportation in the Obama administration. Wonder why that happened?
7) Emanuel has been a staunch supporter of Bush's war in Iraq.
8) Emanuel has only been a congressman since 2003 and is already the 4th ranking Dem in the house. How did that happen ? Answer: $ & sleeze. This is Obama's right hand man. That is why both of them are dodging questions on who said what to Gov. Blago. Poor Rahm, indeed!
Last time Obama went to Hi, on Oct 24th, he said his grandma fell and had a broken hip. A few days later, on Nov 3, a day before the election, she suddenly died of cancer and BO is now spreading the ashes. I just hope that Bo's paternal grandmother doesn't contract some meteoric cancer after Rahm's Safari vacation (those metastasi spread relly fast). Same goes to Bo's half brother, half sister, baptist revered and baptist bishop, all of whom were talking about BO being born in Kenya. This family is really prone to diseases. Did you notice how everybody in the family is missing? Nobody can shed light on where BO was born, where did he come from? Rahm Emmanuel should be careful, he might end up contracting this cancer himself. Maybe he needs to start thinking about his own family, his wife and 3 children and instead of travelling to Africa, he needs to travel to Patrick Fitzgerald's office and cut a deal. Same goes to David Axelrod that managed campaigns of Obama, Blagoevich and Emmanuel himself. I hope he kept really good financial records. Keep in mind that one is allowed to give only $2,300 per political candidate per cycle. I hope he has really good explanations and traceable transaction records, how all of these 3 campaigns got millions of dollars from hedge funds. Does he have records of donations from Oprah Winfrey ( I hope Oprah keeps really good records as well). How about Annenberg foundation, Ford foundation, Rockefeller foundation, American Health foundation, Woods fund, Annenberg Challenge and the list goes on and on.
I hope Maya Soetoro Ng has her story straight, about what happened to her grandma, I hope she can present to Mr. Fitzgerald her grandma's medical records, death certificate, coroner's report and so on.
What about the attorney general of Hi (happen to be democrat). He fought tooth and nail to the the last drop to keep BO's original BC hidden? Why? Who gave donations to his campaign? How about the campaigns of a couple of judges that were ruling to keep the record hidden from American citizens and perpetrating this fraud? Who donated money for their campaigns?
I hope all patriots of this country are hard at work forwarding this info in the form of open letters and recorded videos to all congressmen, Senators, Mr. Fitzgerald, Att General Mike Mukasey, Director of FBI Robert Mueller, any and all law enforcement and any and all domestic and Foreign media. We can't allow all of this mess in the White House.
Orly
+ fflambeau See Profile I'm a Fan of fflambeau I'm a fan of this user permalink
Maxie, here's some info on "this poor man".
1) Emanuel succeeded Blagojevich in the lll 5th district;
2) He boasted a while back that he and Obama put together the playbook for Blagojevich's governor run;
3) He was named to the Board of Directors at Freddie Mac in 2000 and paid $231,655 p.a. During the time Emanuel spent on the board, Freddie Mac was plagued with scandals involving campaign contributions and accounting irregularities.
4) Open Secrets reported that Emanuel "was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry".
5) He made $16.2 million in his two-and-a-half-year stint as an investment banker.
6) Illinois Rep. R LaHood who said "He (Emanuel) legitimately can be called the golden boy of the Democratic Party today. He recruited the right candidates, found the money and funded them, and provided issues for them." This is the same LaHood who has just been appointed Secretary of Transportation in the Obama administration. Wonder why that happened?
7) Emanuel has been a staunch supporter of Bush's war in Iraq.
8) Emanuel has only been a congressman since 2003 and is already the 4th ranking Dem in the house. How did that happen ? Answer: $ & sleeze. This is Obama's right hand man. That is why both of them are dodging questions on who said what to Gov. Blago. Poor Rahm, indeed!
A word about the new Haloscan comment management system
Those of us on the Orly Team are all gratified that our blog has grown in popularity since it was begun a few weeks ago.
Originally, the blog was set to reject all anonymous comments, and require openID to post comments. I personally believe that is too restrictive, and I know it is frustrating.
Originally, the blog was set to reject all anonymous comments, and require openID to post comments. I personally believe that is too restrictive, and I know it is frustrating.
A couple of weeks ago, I changed our blog to allow anonymous posting of comments. This quickly started to get out of hand, with many abusive and otherwise inappropriate comments. We were spending increasing amounts of time dealing with anonymous commenters, and were unable to tell who was who.
A couple of days ago, I installed the Haloscan comment management system. In its current implementation, Haloscan is less onerous than the initial blogger/blogspot system we were using, since it allows js-kit, haloscan, openID and facebook logins for those wanting to comment. We have decided for time being to disallow anonymous comments on this blog.
Some report having trouble with the new Haloscan comment management system, but many have been able to log in and post comments with no problems. I tested some of the options personally and found it to be quite easy to use. If you find you are unable to log in for some reason, or otherwise unable to leave comments, I apologize, but please contact us and we will try to assist you.
Some report having trouble with the new Haloscan comment management system, but many have been able to log in and post comments with no problems. I tested some of the options personally and found it to be quite easy to use. If you find you are unable to log in for some reason, or otherwise unable to leave comments, I apologize, but please contact us and we will try to assist you.
Robert Stevens.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
More media bias
I was somewhat surprised by this MSNBC segment in which Johnathon Turley is interviewed by Keith Obermeier. Turley and Overmeier claim that World Net Daily inspected the original Obama birth certificate and declared it valid and asserted that Obama is a natural born citizen. This MSNBC broadcast was made one day after a World Net Daily program delivered 60,000 letters by express mail to the Supreme Court from citizens expressing their concern over the issue. The World Net Daily petition questioning Obama's birth certificate had over 160,000 signatures at that point (and now closer to 200,000 signatures). World Net Daily has at least one article on this controversy every day, and often several articles.
I used to dismiss the claims the media was biased or leftist. However, now I am just stunned when I see this sort of evidence of problems in the mainstream media.
Does anyone not think we are seeing an evidence of a problem here?
Obermeier and Turley even completely misinterpret the statements from the Hawaii health department. I have observed that the mainstream media makes one misleading report after another about the position of the Hawaii Health Department. It is outrageous and even shocking.
Now we have confirmation from the head of World Net Daily, Joseph Unruh, that the mainstream media was making incorrect statements. Farah denies the claim that World Net Daily has determined that the Obama birth certificate is authentic and that this demonstrates that Obama was born in Hawaii. However, I have heard this incorrect story repeated over and over and over in the mainstream media. It was not just MSNBC who incorrectly claimed that WND had decided that the birth certificate was valid and that Obama was born in Hawaii. This fraudulent assertion was repeated gleefully by the mainstream media, over and over.
Does anyone not think we are seeing an evidence of a problem here?
More on the Supreme Court-limiting the standin for ordinary citizens
This article talks more about environmental issues, but you can see that there is a tendency By Chief Justice Roberts and Supreme court in general to limit standing for ordinary citizens to bring legal actions.
Now we have a problem with Obama's lack of eligibility. If citizens have no standing and government and elected officials don't take a stand for political reasons, the public is left with opinions of partisan groups like factcheck.com, that are more interested in puting their guy in the White House then any pursuit of law and Constitution.
Judge Roberts Takes the Stand
CURWOOD: From the Jennifer and Ted Stanley Studios in Somerville, Massachusetts, this is Living on Earth. I'm Steve Curwood.
The Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate is expected to vote shortly on whether Federal Appeals Judge John Roberts should be the next Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. A vote by the full Senate is expected to follow.
Judge Roberts recently fielded Judiciary Committee questions for the better part of three days, and many of those questions had to do with the core legal issues underpinning environmental regulation and legislation.
John Roberts with President Bush, July 2005 (White House photo by Eric Draper)
We've asked law professor Jonathan Turley to help us better understand those issues and what—if anything—we learned about Judge Roberts on the environment. Mr Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and joins us from his office in Washington, DC.
Professor Turley, welcome to Living on Earth.
TURLEY: Thanks. Good to be back.
CURWOOD: You know, it didn't take long for Senators to get to the environment in this hearing. The ranking Senate Democrat on Judiciary, Pat Leahy of Vermont, had a question in his very first round with Judge Roberts concerning something called "standing" and whether ordinary citizens should be able to bring environmental lawsuits. Why do you think that Senator Leahy put such importance on this issue? And what is standing anyway?
TURLEY: Well, Senator Leahy asked the right question because many citizens don't understand that no matter how good your laws may be, no matter how pro-environment and protective they may be, they mean nothing unless people can actually get into court and bring lawsuits under those laws. That's a question of standing. A citizen has to show that she has a right to bring a case before a court. That requires a showing of some injury and this notion of legal standing to qualify her, essentially, as a bona fide litigant.
In the last twenty years, the federal courts and Congress, to some extent, has been narrowing the principle of standing. Chief Justice Rehnquist has been particularly aggressive in narrowing the definition of standing and, thereby, reducing the access to the courts of some citizen groups and individual citizens.
CURWOOD: And, of course, the environment is an issue where almost anyone can claim they might be affected by something. I mean, if air is being polluted somewhere, anyone could breathe that air and they might be justifiably concerned about it.
TURLEY: That's right. And we went through a period where citizens were given a much more liberal treatment in bringing cases. And there was, in fact, a very significant case called Sierra Club v. Morton where the court actually debated whether trees and animals have standing; whether you can bring a lawsuit essentially on behalf of a forest. But those times are long gone. One of the principle things that the Rehnquist court worked on so ardently was to reduce standing and reduce access to the courts. John Roberts appears to be cut from that same cloth as Chief Justice Rehnquist.
Now we have a problem with Obama's lack of eligibility. If citizens have no standing and government and elected officials don't take a stand for political reasons, the public is left with opinions of partisan groups like factcheck.com, that are more interested in puting their guy in the White House then any pursuit of law and Constitution.
Judge Roberts Takes the Stand
CURWOOD: From the Jennifer and Ted Stanley Studios in Somerville, Massachusetts, this is Living on Earth. I'm Steve Curwood.
The Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate is expected to vote shortly on whether Federal Appeals Judge John Roberts should be the next Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. A vote by the full Senate is expected to follow.
Judge Roberts recently fielded Judiciary Committee questions for the better part of three days, and many of those questions had to do with the core legal issues underpinning environmental regulation and legislation.
John Roberts with President Bush, July 2005 (White House photo by Eric Draper)
We've asked law professor Jonathan Turley to help us better understand those issues and what—if anything—we learned about Judge Roberts on the environment. Mr Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and joins us from his office in Washington, DC.
Professor Turley, welcome to Living on Earth.
TURLEY: Thanks. Good to be back.
CURWOOD: You know, it didn't take long for Senators to get to the environment in this hearing. The ranking Senate Democrat on Judiciary, Pat Leahy of Vermont, had a question in his very first round with Judge Roberts concerning something called "standing" and whether ordinary citizens should be able to bring environmental lawsuits. Why do you think that Senator Leahy put such importance on this issue? And what is standing anyway?
TURLEY: Well, Senator Leahy asked the right question because many citizens don't understand that no matter how good your laws may be, no matter how pro-environment and protective they may be, they mean nothing unless people can actually get into court and bring lawsuits under those laws. That's a question of standing. A citizen has to show that she has a right to bring a case before a court. That requires a showing of some injury and this notion of legal standing to qualify her, essentially, as a bona fide litigant.
In the last twenty years, the federal courts and Congress, to some extent, has been narrowing the principle of standing. Chief Justice Rehnquist has been particularly aggressive in narrowing the definition of standing and, thereby, reducing the access to the courts of some citizen groups and individual citizens.
CURWOOD: And, of course, the environment is an issue where almost anyone can claim they might be affected by something. I mean, if air is being polluted somewhere, anyone could breathe that air and they might be justifiably concerned about it.
TURLEY: That's right. And we went through a period where citizens were given a much more liberal treatment in bringing cases. And there was, in fact, a very significant case called Sierra Club v. Morton where the court actually debated whether trees and animals have standing; whether you can bring a lawsuit essentially on behalf of a forest. But those times are long gone. One of the principle things that the Rehnquist court worked on so ardently was to reduce standing and reduce access to the courts. John Roberts appears to be cut from that same cloth as Chief Justice Rehnquist.
Open Letter to John McCain from Petitioner, PAMELA BARNETT
My letter to Senater McCain-
Dear Senater McCain,
I am a 55yr old Viet-nam vet, and I have thought of you as a true American Hero for many years and it is now, with an aching heart, that I write to you. You sir, stand on a slippery slop, that once you go down it,you will tarnish that status of Hero and even your status as a good American! It is your sworn duty to uphold the Constitution and defend it with your life, just as it is mine and I sir do not take that charge lightly! You KNOW, and I truly mean KNOW,that Mr. Obama is not eligibile to hold the office of the Presidency under Article2 Section 1 of that very Constitution that you are sworn to uphold. Your campaign retoric that YOU and Gov.
Palin would clean up Washington has become nothing more than political JUNK speech. Is there no honor in your word? You truely do know that what I say is the truth and while you may not like the tone of this letter, I am being harsh because this is a Constitutional crisis of such great proportions that the very laws that give me and every American citizen our freedoms and rights is being shreded and trampled on!
While your fellow Senaters passed a worthless nonbinding resolution (511), not reflective of any legal stature, in an attempt to sanitize your own illeagle candidacy, which I am ashamed of you for allowing. They were realy trying to hide the fact that Mr. Obama was even more unfit as to eligibility than you. They blew smoke up your tailpipe sir! Your real test of true patriotism is what I put before you here now. I implore you to STAND UP AND FIGHT right there on the Senate floor sir. STAND UP and vehemently contest Mr. Obama's eligibility on the very grounds that resolution 511 uses to approve you. First denounce that resolution for it can not by any words used make you any kind of citizen other than a "CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES by STATUTE" and not to be cruel or visious, you can neverbe a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" without a change to the Constitution, that is just the fact. In resolution 511, they say you are eligibile because BOTH OF YOUR PARENTS were American citizens, and while I do not subcribe to that understanding, that does back up the assertion that Mr. Obama did not have BOTH OF HIS PARENTS holding American citizenship at the time of his birth. In fact Mr. Obama, in his own words states that his citizenship at his birth was governed by the 1948 British nationality act, His father was a British Subject and under that act his father's citizenship was confered on him at birth making him a British Subject and an American citizen.
Therefore under law Mr. Obama at birth was, and he himself does not dispute this, a "DUAL NATIONAL NATIVE BORN CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES" and can never be indowed with the status of "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN". He can not be eligible under the Constitution as it stands, and has stood for 232yrs. In resolution 511 they had stated that there is no clear understanding of the intent of the framers in the using of the term "natural born citizen" and that is just deliberate misinformation. I shall refer you to letters written during the drafting of the Constitution, by John Jay and Mr. Bingham that led to that phrase being used in only one place in the intire document and that being the UNIQUE status of citizenship required to hold to highest office in this great nation. If you do the research you will find that it is clear the a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" is a person BORN on UNITED STATES soil of TWO Parents that are American citizens which have no foreign loyalty nor under the jurisdiction of any foreign sovereignty. There are also Supreme Court cases that address the natural born citizenship issue and in none of them do the Justices ever confer NATURAL BORN status on any one other than a person that is born on American soil of two American citizes,NEVER!the closest that they come is to confer NATIVE (of the soil)BORN. Senater McCain,sir, it is time for you to muster all of the courage that you have displayed in the past and bring it to this most important fight. Sir, you must STAND UP AND FIGHT, COUNTRY FIRST, COUNTRY BEFORE SELF INTEREST, and go forth onto the Senate floor and contest mr. Obama's eligibility!
Senater McCain do what is right for this great nation and it's people before you dishonor youself and your office. If you would like someone with you at your side for this nobel act then all you have to do is say so and I will stand with you, I put my life on the line for this country before and I will gladly do it again, the unlawfull do not frighten me!
Thank You and I'll be waiting to hear from you if you are the man that I used to admire.
PAMELA BARNETT
Petitioner
Lightfoot v. Bowen
Dear Senater McCain,
I am a 55yr old Viet-nam vet, and I have thought of you as a true American Hero for many years and it is now, with an aching heart, that I write to you. You sir, stand on a slippery slop, that once you go down it,you will tarnish that status of Hero and even your status as a good American! It is your sworn duty to uphold the Constitution and defend it with your life, just as it is mine and I sir do not take that charge lightly! You KNOW, and I truly mean KNOW,that Mr. Obama is not eligibile to hold the office of the Presidency under Article2 Section 1 of that very Constitution that you are sworn to uphold. Your campaign retoric that YOU and Gov.
Palin would clean up Washington has become nothing more than political JUNK speech. Is there no honor in your word? You truely do know that what I say is the truth and while you may not like the tone of this letter, I am being harsh because this is a Constitutional crisis of such great proportions that the very laws that give me and every American citizen our freedoms and rights is being shreded and trampled on!
While your fellow Senaters passed a worthless nonbinding resolution (511), not reflective of any legal stature, in an attempt to sanitize your own illeagle candidacy, which I am ashamed of you for allowing. They were realy trying to hide the fact that Mr. Obama was even more unfit as to eligibility than you. They blew smoke up your tailpipe sir! Your real test of true patriotism is what I put before you here now. I implore you to STAND UP AND FIGHT right there on the Senate floor sir. STAND UP and vehemently contest Mr. Obama's eligibility on the very grounds that resolution 511 uses to approve you. First denounce that resolution for it can not by any words used make you any kind of citizen other than a "CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES by STATUTE" and not to be cruel or visious, you can neverbe a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" without a change to the Constitution, that is just the fact. In resolution 511, they say you are eligibile because BOTH OF YOUR PARENTS were American citizens, and while I do not subcribe to that understanding, that does back up the assertion that Mr. Obama did not have BOTH OF HIS PARENTS holding American citizenship at the time of his birth. In fact Mr. Obama, in his own words states that his citizenship at his birth was governed by the 1948 British nationality act, His father was a British Subject and under that act his father's citizenship was confered on him at birth making him a British Subject and an American citizen.
Therefore under law Mr. Obama at birth was, and he himself does not dispute this, a "DUAL NATIONAL NATIVE BORN CITIZEN of the UNITED STATES" and can never be indowed with the status of "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN". He can not be eligible under the Constitution as it stands, and has stood for 232yrs. In resolution 511 they had stated that there is no clear understanding of the intent of the framers in the using of the term "natural born citizen" and that is just deliberate misinformation. I shall refer you to letters written during the drafting of the Constitution, by John Jay and Mr. Bingham that led to that phrase being used in only one place in the intire document and that being the UNIQUE status of citizenship required to hold to highest office in this great nation. If you do the research you will find that it is clear the a "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" is a person BORN on UNITED STATES soil of TWO Parents that are American citizens which have no foreign loyalty nor under the jurisdiction of any foreign sovereignty. There are also Supreme Court cases that address the natural born citizenship issue and in none of them do the Justices ever confer NATURAL BORN status on any one other than a person that is born on American soil of two American citizes,NEVER!the closest that they come is to confer NATIVE (of the soil)BORN. Senater McCain,sir, it is time for you to muster all of the courage that you have displayed in the past and bring it to this most important fight. Sir, you must STAND UP AND FIGHT, COUNTRY FIRST, COUNTRY BEFORE SELF INTEREST, and go forth onto the Senate floor and contest mr. Obama's eligibility!
Senater McCain do what is right for this great nation and it's people before you dishonor youself and your office. If you would like someone with you at your side for this nobel act then all you have to do is say so and I will stand with you, I put my life on the line for this country before and I will gladly do it again, the unlawfull do not frighten me!
Thank You and I'll be waiting to hear from you if you are the man that I used to admire.
PAMELA BARNETT
Petitioner
Lightfoot v. Bowen
More food for thought for Mr. Patrick Fitzgerald or what really happened to grandma?
As you recall Obama went to HI to visit his ailing grandma on October 24, supposedly due to broken hip and she died Nov 3, right before the election on Nov 3. On campaign trail Michelle stated that she talked to Obama and grandma, while Obama was visiting her and grandma was fine and in good health.
Larry Sinclair has published on his blog that according to the death certificate the grandma passed away on October the 22, 2 days before BO's visit.
Please, everybody, write to the Attorney General of HI, governor Lingl, all of the liberal judges that were hiding BO's original birth certificate and demand that they go public and disclose the information essential to the public.
1. we need to see Madelyn Dunham's BC immediately
2. we need to know who pronounced her dead
3. who signed the dead certificate
4. what is the cause of death
5. we need to see the coroners report
6. we need to see the hospital records
7. who identified the body before cremation
8. where was she cremated
9. when exactly did she die
10. did she die of natural causes
We need answers to all of these questions in regards to BO's mother Stanley Ann Dunham, -Obama-Toot-Soetoro-Sutoro (and who knows what)
This should not be Chicago Mafia, Hi edition. This is United States of America that is built on law and order and Constitution. All of the law enforcement officials and judiciary should not be aiding and abetting commission of crime, but should be on the forefront with us, the citizens of this country, uncovering crimes and bringing criminals to justice
Larry Sinclair has published on his blog that according to the death certificate the grandma passed away on October the 22, 2 days before BO's visit.
Please, everybody, write to the Attorney General of HI, governor Lingl, all of the liberal judges that were hiding BO's original birth certificate and demand that they go public and disclose the information essential to the public.
1. we need to see Madelyn Dunham's BC immediately
2. we need to know who pronounced her dead
3. who signed the dead certificate
4. what is the cause of death
5. we need to see the coroners report
6. we need to see the hospital records
7. who identified the body before cremation
8. where was she cremated
9. when exactly did she die
10. did she die of natural causes
We need answers to all of these questions in regards to BO's mother Stanley Ann Dunham, -Obama-Toot-Soetoro-Sutoro (and who knows what)
This should not be Chicago Mafia, Hi edition. This is United States of America that is built on law and order and Constitution. All of the law enforcement officials and judiciary should not be aiding and abetting commission of crime, but should be on the forefront with us, the citizens of this country, uncovering crimes and bringing criminals to justice
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
