Archive for February, 2009

“Obama Not Investigated”- Limbaugh: Day 40 – Feb 28, 2009

February 28, 2009

“Obama has not been challenged. He has not been investigated. He has not been questioned. He’s not been doubted for going on two years, now. That’s a lot of solid time to propagandize people, and that’s where we are.”

(Rush Limbaugh, Feb. 27, 2009)

Unfortunately, Limbaugh was not referring to Obama’s eligibility problem, although it might have sounded that way at first hearing. Actually Rush Limbaugh, along with most of the other well known conservative talkers, has scrupulously avoided the issue. Some observers theorize that it’s the Bobby Jindal factor; so enamored are Limbaugh and others with the Louisiana governor that they will tolerate no discussion of the Obama eligibility problem.

RUSH:  (Feb 25) Let me just say it right out.  I love Bobby Jindal..   I respect Bobby Jindal; I have great enthusiasm for Bobby Jindal, the governor of Louisiana,…He’s brilliant.  He’s the real deal…

…no discussion of the Obama eligibility problem because Jindal too is not a “Natural Born Citizen”  having been born to Indian immigrant parents shortly after their arrival on these shores. Only later, after their son’s birth, did they become naturalized U.S. citizens.

Gov. Bobby Jindal

Gov. Bobby Jindal

Advertisements

Maj. General Says Proof Needed: Day 39 – Feb 27, 2009

February 27, 2009

Now three United States military members agree to participate in suit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Maj. Gen. Childers joins Lt. Easterling, and an as yet unnamed soldier, in a petition for declaratory judgment….Leo Donofrio warns against placing soldiers in jeopardy..

World Net Daily via Drudge Report:

On the heels of two active duty members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq calling for President Obama to prove his eligibility to be president, a retired major general has agreed to join the case, saying he just wants “the truth.”

Retired Major General Carroll D. Childers… (agrees) …”to be a plaintiff in the legal action to be filed by Orly Taitz, Esq. in a petition for a declaratory judgment (sic) that Barack Hussein Obama is not qualified to be president of the U.S., nor to be commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces, in that I am or was a sworn member of the U.S. military (subject to recall)”…General Childers minces no words here; he declares…

“What I really want is the truth; is Obama a natural born citizen of the United States. If not a natural born citizen, America has been defrauded and then we would be stuck with Joe Biden whose only redeeming attribute is that he is probably not a communist.”

The war of words concerning the Obama eligibility continues; the Childers remarks come after the Alan Keyes accusation (see previous post) that Obama is a “radical communist”.

A cautionary note to members of the U.S. military has been sounded by Attorney Leo C. Donofrio. Late last year Donofrio brought Natural Born Citizen actions before the Supreme Court. At his site Natural Born Citizen Donofrio says today:

The recent events chronicled in this blog pertaining to active military plaintiffs and the unnecessary jeopardy they have now been subjected to ANGERED me greatly. That doesn’t mean I believe the attorney (Orly Taitz) was operating with wrong intentions. Sometimes in ones zeal to fight, emotions cloud judgment and mistakes are made…..I feel a groundswell of opposition coming from the military regarding the well known issues of whether or not Obama is a natural born citizen Constitutionally eligible to be POTUS. And because I feel that the level of legal education being forwarded to our military as to this issue has been less than stellar, I have decided to present two educational legal templates to the military community via this blog…..Please note that I am NOT counseling any military as to whether they should join a law suit to challenge Obama’s Presidential eligibility. I would STRONGLY counsel against their doing so.

Ret. Maj. Gen. Carroll D. Childers

Ret. Maj. Gen. Carroll D. Childers

The Alleged Usurper by Alan Keyes: Day 34 – Feb 22, ’09

February 22, 2009

Three time Presidential candidate Alan Keyes gets right to the point in this video calling Barack Obama “a radical communist, an abomination, an alleged usurper who is occupying that office without the constitutional authority to do so….who is going to destroy this country…we are either going to stop him or the United States is going to cease to exist…”


h/t Count Us Out

Also see Manly’s Republic

A dispatch from Cullman, Alabama:

..(A) local resident asked Alabama Senator Richard] Shelby if there was any truth to a rumor that appeared during the presidential campaign concerning Obama’s U.S. citizenship, or lack thereof.
“Well his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven’t seen any birth certificate,” Shelby said. “You have to be born in America to be president.”

Well, he had many a chance to speak out but, like so many others who know, he did not. (see, Those Who Know, Day 28)

h/t Pat Dollard

Dr. Alan Keyes

Dr. Alan Keyes

State Sovereignty Asserted in Oklahoma: Day 33 – Feb 21, 2009

February 21, 2009

We reported earlier (Feb 6) on the movements in several states to reassert their 10th Amendment status of sovereignty and today where one state,

Oklahoma, “claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.”

According to Red Dirt Report, (Feb 17), an Oklahoma news site, the earlier passage of a sovereignty resolution in the  state’s lower body is now completed with its approval by the state senate judiciary committee.

OKLAHOMA CITY – Following last week’s unanimous vote in favor of Rep. Charles Key’s HJR 1003, calling for legislative support of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, it’s companion bill in the Senate, SJR 10, was supported Tuesday 6-1 by the bipartisan Senate Judiciary Committee.

And there were plenty of supporters on hand to watch the discussion and the subsequent vote. Many wore stickers on their lapel which simply read “10,” supporting Brogdon’s pro-states rights resolution.

And while it is not getting a whole lot of attention in the mainstream press, a number of states, including Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, California, and Georgia have all introduced bills and resolutions declaring sovereignty under the 10th Amendment.

Additionally, Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering such measures.

Introduced by its Senate author, Sen. Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, he explained that the “federal government has been putting the screws on (the states) a little tighter and tighter each year” along with unfunded mandates of varying sorts.

And each time this happens, Brogdon explained, “We lose a little bit of our freedom and liberty.”

Dr Walter E. Williams wrote a column titled  “Oklahoma Rebellion” last July where he noted:

Oklahomans are trying to recover some of their lost state sovereignty by House Joint Resolution 1089, introduced by State Rep. Charles Key.

The resolution’s language, in part, reads: “Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. … Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.”

State Sovereignty Asserted in OK

Eligibility Issue Ignored by Those Who Know: Day 28 – Feb 16, 2009

February 19, 2009

Who else knows about the Barack Obama ineligibility besides Obama himself? There are many influential people in media and politics who know, or at least believe that Obama is not constitutionally qualified for President. These people, and I will name a few, will not touch the issue: The list most prominently features Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity,Mark Levin, Ron Paul, and possibly the Clintons. Why?

Let’s start with Obama who knew, as a self-professed constitutional scholar that he was not eligible. His own campaign website acknowledged his dual citizenship. Then, there are the stories about his Indonesian citizenship:

An investigation into Indonesian citizenship law and a review of Obama’s biography and travels suggest the Illinois senator at one point may have been a citizen of Indonesia. That would not necessarily disqualify Obama to run for president, but it could raise loyalty concerns.

As for Limbaugh, Hannity, and others J.R.Dieckmann at Renew America writes:

… talk radio commentators are afraid to talk about it. Rush Limbaugh stated that he is not sure if it “passes the smell test,” and Sean Hannity has not even mentioned it as far as I know except when a caller brought it up. Hannity remarked that he didn’t know enough about it and moved to another topic.

Hannity may be restricted by his bosses, but Rush is the CEO of his own broadcasting network and has nothing to fear except the possible loss of some of his franchise radio stations across the country which carry his show. Rush is known for facing down any amount of political pressure or politician so he must have his own reasons for not giving it credibility on the air. Privately, I suspect Limbaugh takes this matter very seriously but he has two relatives on the bench; Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr., Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr. and other friends who may have advised him to avoid the subject until the issue is officially in the hands of the courts.

Turning to Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) we find an in depth article about his reluctance to speak out at Citizen Wells blog:

There are several reasons why Obama is not eligible to be president.
However, most if not all congressmen were aware of numerous lawsuits
challenging Obama’s eligibility beginning with Philip Berg’s on
August 21, 2008. Many mistakenly stated that the lawsuits were
dismissed for lack of merit. That is patently false. However, since
the congressmen were aware of the lawsuits, they were also aware
that obama had employed an army of attorneys and spent enormous
amounts of resources to avoid proving that he was eligible.

That is the real smoking gun.

This is the reason that minimally, Congress should have demanded that
Obama prove that he was qualified. A single congressman could have
initiated this query before or when Congress convened to certify the
Electoral votes.

Not a single congressman stepped forward.

Congressman Ron Paul knew that there were serious issues surrounding
Obama’s eligibility. Congressman Ron Paul, who speaks of upholding
the US Constitution.

Late in December of 2008, Congressman Paul was asked if he would
challenge the Electoral votes in Congress. Here is his response:

“If I did that, I would be laughed out of Congress.”

I believe Congressman Paul’s response is typical of the position
of the entire Congress. However, Mr. Paul, we expected more from
you.

Ron Paul on Patriotism

Ron Paul on Patriotism

We conclude with a quote for the day; this one from Citizen Wells on Twitter:

“Technically Obama will not have to be impeached since he will not be president.

Standard prosecution should suffice.”

Obama Eligibility Taboo in Media

It’s Not Only Republicans Enraged : DAY 27 – FEBRUARY 15, 2009

February 16, 2009

Reader Ted wrote yesterday:

Obama’s stealing the census from Congress has suddenly awakened and enraged the Republicans. Maybe this will arouse them as well to challenge Obama for stealing the Presidency itself. They surely know he is not an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (which is more than merely being a 14th Amendment “citizen”) by virtue of either Obama’s birth to a dad of Kenyan/British citizenship or birth in Kenya itself — as manifested by his unwillingness to supply his long form birth certificate now under seal.

We’re not all that certain about general Republican outrage but at least in The Congress the resistance to the Porkulus Bill was an indication of something approaching that condition. Certainly, conservatives across American are outraged by the betrayal of our Constitution that the present usurpation represents.The damage to the nation by the actions of this administration and The Congress is incalculable.

If allowed to stand the harm would take decades to undo, if indeed, it could be undone at all. The only solution left to patriotic Americans is to intensify the campaign to expose the fraud which leaves us with a usurper in the White House. Only exposure of the fraud, removal of the usurper, and the consequent nullification of all his actions will repair the damage. Perhaps there is hope, read on...

A new idea put forth yesterday is to convene a National Grand Jury ; its mission would be in part…

…. review and evaluate procedures, methods and systems used by federal governmental agencies to determine whether they comply with the stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended.

The National Grand Jury shall review the officers of the federal government to determine whether they are constitutionally qualified to hold office, and to determine if their actions and behavior are consistent with stated objectives of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution for the United States of America as properly amended, and the criminal law as recognized in any of the several states.

In a Jan 22, 2009 article Attorney Leo C. Donofrio discusses the history of the Federal Grand Jury System (The Grand Jury is the Fourth Branch of Government). The wonderful Federal Grand Jury system, created within the Fifth Amendment was a valuable tool for the citizens to exercise a check on their government and its functionaries and officers. However, the system was subverted in 1946 by a little little noticed change in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP) which attempted to “eliminate”,,..(excerpts from Donofrio follow)

The Constitutional power of “we the people” sitting as grand jurors…. Regardless, the power I am going to explain to you still exists in the Constitution, and has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court despite the intention of the legislature and other legal scholars to make our power disappear with a cheap magic trick…..

So, it’s clear that the Constitution intended to give the grand jury power to instigate criminal charges, and this was especially true when it came to government oversight. But something strange happened on the way to the present. That power was eroded by a lie enacted by the legislative branch. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution still contains the same words quoted above, but if you sit on a grand jury and return a “presentment” today, the prosecutor must sign it or it probably won’t be allowed to stand by the judge and the criminal charges you have brought to the court’s attention will be swept away. And the reason for this can be found in a legislative lie of epic proportions…..

The use of presentments had become obsolete because the grand jurors were not aware of their power. So the use of “presentments” became more and more rare, and then in 1946 the legislative branch seized upon the moment to make this power disappear by waving its magic wand over the Constitution…..

I submit to you that this (an Antonin Scalia opinion) sets the stage for a revolutionary new context necessary and Constitutionally mandated to “we the people”, THE FOURTH BRANCH of the Government of the United States. Besides, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches, I submit that there is a fourth branch, THE GRAND JURY, and “we the people” when sitting as grand jurors, are, as Scalia quoted in US v. Williams, ” a constitutional fixture in its own right”. Yes, damn it. That is exactly what the grand jury is, and what it was always intended to be…..

Donofrio concludes with:

The law is on our side. So please spread this knowledge as far and wide as you can. We the people have the right and power under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution to charge this government with crimes by returning presentments regardless of whether the US Attorneys or the federal judges agree with us. As the Supreme Court has so brilliantly stated, we are the “buffer between the Government and the people.”

National Grand Jury?


Four Questions Obama Has Yet to Answer: Day 26 – February 14, 2009

February 15, 2009

We assume that in fact no one would dare to run for and claim the Presidency if he/she didn’t meet the qualifications of the Constitution.

The above quote is from the TD Blog where Four Questions for the Trojan Candidate are posed. Since the questions have never been answered by B.H Obama, we may as well re-pose the rhetoric as Four Questions for the Trojan President Usurper. The Obama team has been moving heaven and earth to avoid having to answer these and scores of other questions about Obama’s eligibility for the presidency. The four questions are:

  1. Whether a citizen of the United States has standing to challenge the Constitutional qualifications of a Presidential nominee under the “natural born citizen clause” [Article II of the U.S. Constitution] when deprivation of the right to such a challenge would result in the infringement of a citizen’s Constitutional right to vote?
  2. Isn’t it true that no one has the responsibility to ensure a United States Presidential candidate is eligible to serve as President of the United States?
  3. Are there proper steps for a voter to ensure a Presidential Candidate is qualified and eligible to serve as President of the United States?
  4. Isn’t it true that there are not any checks and balances to ensure the qualifications and eligibility of a Presidential Candidate to serve as President of the United States?

Read the entire article here.  About the article and the author:

(Author’s Note:  This article was originally published as “Four Questions” on NoQuarter and TD kindly asked me to update this work with my previous article originally published here, The Trojan Candidate.  I realized that in writing this article that without the tireless work of TD, Judah Benjamin, and others here, none of us would even know about, or be writing about, concerned with, nor litigating on the eligibility issues involved with Obama. In defense of our Constitution, nothing more, nothing less. Thank you, thank you, thank you, true patriots!)

Unanswered Questions

The Census Usurped (cont.): Day 25 – February 13, 2009

February 13, 2009

We reported earlier on the usurpation of the U.S. census whereby the Obama administration proposes to transfer the functions of the Census Bureau from the Commerce Department to the Office of the President. The national census (enumeration), which takes place every 10 years as required by the U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 2), is essential to properly apportion representatives to the Congress. Recently New Hampshire Republican Senator Judd Gregg was nominated to the post of Secretary of Commerce in the Obama Administration. Shortly after accepting the nomination the Obama people, in a naked power play, announced the above cited transfer of census activities. That did not sit well with Senator Gregg and he subsequently bowed out citing “irresolvable conflicts” on the stimulus package and the Census.

Today Project 21, an initiative of The National Center for Public Policy Research, issued the following press release stating the organizations concern about the constitutional crisis inherent in the usurpation of the Bureau of The Censue:

Is a Constitutional Crisis Pending?Politicization of Census Hints Obama Scandal is in the Making

Washington, D.C. – Commerce Secretary-designate Judd Gregg’s abrupt withdrawal implies a constitutional crisis involving the 2010 Census my be pending, says Mychal Massie, chairman of the Project 21 black leadership network.

“One of the principal jobs of the Commerce Secretary is to conduct a census every 10 years that will decide voting districts and in part creates a new political playing field. Senator Gregg seems to have recognized that the White House wants to usurp this power and rightly wanted nothing to do with it,” said Massie. “Senator Gregg’s act should be seen as a wake-up call to America that strong oversight is needed over the census process lest it be abused for partisan gain.”

In a statement announcing his withdrawal from consideration for Commerce Secretary, Senator Gregg said, “I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me.”

Earlier this month, Obama Administration officials said the director of the Census would report directly to the White House, perhaps to presidential chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. Administration officials have since tried to play down the proposed relationship after it caused controversy.

While serving in Congress, Emanuel chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In a 2006 interview on issues regarding the upcoming Census with USA Today, he said “if you think redistricting is always partisan and political, which it is, it’s going to be on steroids this time.” In a commentary published by Politico, Representatives Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Patrick McHenry (R-NC) wrote that this restructuring of authority regarding the Census “is a naked political power grab and transparently partisan” that “undermines a constitutionally-obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy.”

“Personally, I was surprised that Senator Gregg didn’t recognize the initial offer to run the Commerce Department for what it was from the beginning,” added Project 21’s Massie. “I believe it was little more that an attempt by Obama to further weaken his opponents by using the senator both as cover – as he did in Monday’s press conference – and to further consolidate partisan domination of the Senate by his party in having the seat filled with a politically-weak social liberal and a fiscal moderate. I’m glad Senator Gregg took the honorable road and is returning to the Senate. I only hope that his action will bring the insight and scrutiny that is necessary to keep ensure the Census is free of political influence.”

1860 Census Table

1860 Census Table

Obama Not the First Usurper: Day 24 – February 12, 2009

February 12, 2009

The first pretender (usurper) to the U.S. Presidency was the ineligible Chester A. Arthur who occupied the office from September 19, 1881 until March 4, 1885. The history of Arthur’s usurpation is somewhat shrouded in mystery but some very recent research has shed some new light on that usurpation. We republish here “The Liar Who Became President” which originally appeared at Steady Habits December 7, 2008.

The Liar Who Became President…

Once upon a time there was a politically ambitious man who told many lies about himself and his family. We shall call him Mr. X. During one of his early political campaigns a political enemy circulated rumors that Mr. X was born in a foreign country and therefore ineligible for high elective office. Mr. X denied the charge saying his father was a British subject but that he (X) was born here.

Mr. X claimed that his mother had always lived in the U.S. which was untrue as she had lived in another country with her husband and had (a child) there. Mr. X realized early on that he was not a “natural born citizen” because he knew that he was born before his father was naturalized. X told lie upon lie about his father’s age, the year the father came to America, even his own age; and he destroyed most of his papers all in the effort to conceal the fact that he was ineligible for high office. Who is Mr. X?

As strange as this may sound, we are not discussing Barack Obama here. Mr. X is Chester A. Arthur, the 21st President of the United States who succeeded to the Presidency upon the assassination of President James Garfield. Due to the diligent research of Leo C. Donofrio with the assistance of Arthur biographer Greg Dehler we learn that Chester A. Arthur was a usurper, never eligible for POTUS. Talk about an amazing confluence of events: just as we are ready to install the ineligible Barack Obama as POTUS we learn that this has happened before. As Donofrio says in his report on the matter; “… it’s no precedent to follow.”

The political enemy mentioned in the lead paragraph was, in reality, one Arthur P. Hinman (see footnote below)*, who may have been hired by the Democrats to smear Arthur. Interestingly, the charge of ineligibilty for POTUS brought by Hinman against Arthur was true, but for the wrong reason: Chester A. Arthur was a British subject at birth (just as Obama was) but by virtue of his birth prior to his father’s naturalization rather than birth on foreign soil. As in Obama’s case, who acknowledges on his website that he had dual citizenship at birth, we find the evidence in plain sight but too late discern its meaning.

President Chester A. Arthur

President Chester A. Arthur

*More interesting but entirely without foundation was the Hinman myth circulated in 1880 and 1881. This story asserted that Elder Arthur had three sons: William Chester Alan Arthur, born at the home of his mother’s parents in Dunham, Province of Quebec; Chester Abell Arthur, born at Fairfield; and William Arthur, Jr., born at Hinesburgh, Vermont. When William Arthur, Jr., was born, the oldest son dropped the William and retained the names Chester Alan, as he could do because of the death in infancy of his brother, Chester Abell. He later, according to the Hinman story, appropriated the birth record of the second son in order to sustain his American citizenship. No death record existed to prove this substitution because the father had sold the infant’s body to a medical school! On the basis of these allegations, the American public were assured that Arthur was a British subject and in consequence disqualified for the Vice Presidency or Presidency. It was a political maneuver, and, as such, ineffective. (from “Chester A. Arthur-A Quarter-Century of Machine Politics” by George F. Howe)

Obama Not the 1st Usurperd

Congress & SCOTUS Fraud Complicit: Day 23 – February 11, 2009

February 12, 2009

Obama and McCain Both Constitutionally Ineligible. Precedent Set by Allowing Obama Usurpation Will Plague Nation’s Future. The People Must Act to Restore Our Constitution. Obama Must Be Exposed!

Today’s post is a letter from blogger Zapem in response to yesterday’s (Day 22) post

It’s too bad that World Net Daily doesn’t do an article on the actual history of S.R. 511. It shows the people the truth about the unconstitutional agenda at work here.

Attorney Mario Apuzzo makes the argument that the Senate investigated John McCain, but not Barack Obama and asks the question why.

I ask the question why they were allowed to get away with what they did when the bill McCaskill (and co-sponsored by Obama, Clinton, etc.) FIRST sponsored, S. 2678, failed. It failed because NO ONE can legislate a single person’s born status, that’s why it failed. The follow-up done 5 weeks later that they tried to pull, with S.R. 511 was not a law, but the media presented it to the public as if it was a law and that’s corruption, plain and simple. It was a lie and a very BOLD lie at that. We’ve proven that much.

The bottom line is, the Senate, the Congress, and Obama and McCain themselves , all knew early on that neither were eligible to run for POTUS. The entire activity in the Senate proves that there was an attempt to circumvent the constitution. It further proves that if McCain was eligible there would have been no need to try to legislate him into an eligible status. The truth is, there was a reason and that reason was, he wasn’t eligible.

Furthermore, S.R. 511 tries to say that McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. McCain’s long form birth certificate proves he was not. That makes S.R. 511 moot as it contends he was born in one place and his actual certificate says he was born in another. This presents an even further problem for Obama. It shows that what’s on a short-form birth certificate isn’t always what is found in the details that can only be provided on the long-form birth certificate. We see that contradiction with McCain’s birth certificates. What we haven’t seen are Obama’s birth certificates. A certification is not a certificate and it certainly doesn’t contain the details a long-form certificate does as was proven with with John McCain.

Obama claims he’s entitled to hide them. The constitution claims he is not. The U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t know what to do and is passing the buck every chance they get for fear of the scandal it would cause. A scandal, because if you look into the history of what congress was doing to covering this up, how much faith would the country have in their elected leaders? How much faith would the rest of the world have knowing said corruption exists? It’s either true or it isn’t true what they have done.

The biggest cover up lies with the officials in Hawaii. They are the ones perpetuating a lie and they know it. But when the truth comes out, and it will, they will be held responsible as well as the congress.

This is not going to go away, even if the media plays chicken little like the courts have. The people should be outraged. While it may put their favorite sweet-talker in the office today, what are they going to say when the same thing is pulled tomorrow and they don’t like that guy? All of a sudden, they will want to cling to their Constitution, which has now been usurped. Do they even understand what type of precedent has been set? That a mere website called Factcheck can dictate who is eligible to run the entire country? It’s absurd!

I intend on telling them they should have thought about their Constitution when they were happily believing that circumventing it was the way to go because they were partisan blind. Circumventing the Constitution leaves the people with no rights, just as we have seen with these bailouts that are bankrupting the country. They aren’t listening to the people because the people aren’t listening to their Constitution. And that’s the only thing that will save them from a corrupted government that intended to cheat them no matter who they voted for. Both John McCain and Barack Obama engaged in unconstitutional and illegal behavior and they know it. So did the people who perpetuated this lie.

This is not over. Not by a long shot. As much as they’d like to keep sweeping it under the carpet and robbing the people like they are right now. Perhaps the people are blind and stupid to the facts. But when they have no money left at all, then they might see it. They’ve been warned. All they have to do is go back and look at the record because the media isn’t going to do it for them and the courts can’t be bothered.
Link to Zapem blog

Congress-SCOTUS Fraud Complicit