Where Is the MSM On Grand Jury Presentments Handed Down in Washington DC

Economic Stimulus. H.R. 5140, the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, passed 385-35 on January 29, 2008 (Roll Call 25). It would provide about $150 billion in economic stimulus, including $101.1 billion in direct payments of rebate checks (typically $600) to most taxpayers in 2008 and temporary tax breaks for businesses. Creating money out of thin air and then spending the newly created money cannot improve the economy, at least not in the long term. (If it could, why not create even more money for rebates and make every American a millionaire?) The stimulus has no offset and thus increases the federal deficit by the amount of the stimulus because the government must borrow the rebate money. A realistic long-term stimulus can only be achieved by lowering taxes through less government and by reducing regulatory burdens.Marsha Blackburn voted FOR this bill.(Source: The New American – July 21, 2008)

Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
She is no conservative.
See her unconstitutional votes at :
http://bluecollarrepublican.com/blog/?p=614
Mickey

Bobbie…

…you cite a non-expert opinion piece as the sole basis for qualifying your argument. I am not aware of any accredited university or college professor that would accept that as a qualifying source. Further, the non-expert you quote obviously doesn't understand much about the American System of Jurisprudence or American Constitutional law. This "American Grand Jury" is not a lawful grand jury with the power to indite a sitting president. The only way to indite a sitting president is to impeach him or her in Congress and I doubt that is going to happen.

As to the President's Hawaiian birth certificate…it was recently authenticated by an independent, objective organization that specializes in investigating conspiracy theories, FactCheck.org. They went to Hawaii and thoroughly inspected the original birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii. They say it is indeed authentic and their results have been duplicated by at least two other independent investigators as well.

You can read all about it here: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_t...

The fact is that President Obama is our President. He was duly elected and remains quite popular amongst the voters. I think we can reasonably expect that he will be re-elected in 2012. While I may or may not like this President, the fact remains that he won the election. This whole nonsensical story about him not being a natural born American citizen is a story dreamed up by a handful of conservative sore losers who are unhappy that the American People have rejected them and their ideology.

Better luck next time Bobbie!

Jackie…

…conservative opinions about this nonsense abound but that doesn't give an more legal credence to this so-called grand jury than does calling a putting lipstick on a pig and calling it a lady. A pig is a pig and a mob of sore losers who are angry about losing all their political power and the White House are still a mob of sore losers.

Only Congress has the right to indite a sitting President (impeachment)…and that is not too likely to happen any time soon.

U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 4,

"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. "

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut...

U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 2,

The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment. "

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec2

and only the Senate can convict an indited (impeached) sitting President.

U.S Constitution, Article I, Section 3,

"The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, they shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut...

These groups of angry conservatives…angry because the American voters have completely rejected them and their right-wing ideology…are meaningless legally, and while their antics may be amusing to the majority of Americans, you can rest assured that We the People would never allow the right-wing to ignore our Constitution, our laws, our traditions, and remove the President.

news across, If this inspection was done with a legitimate unbiased source, I'm sure none of this would be going on. Sadly, factcheck is not that organization. There are always ways to control the results of anything in Government. No matter what side of the fence is being affected. I personally know many people who are extremely concerned about this issue, but reluctant to say anything publicly because of fear of being ridiculed.

Here's another news source on the presentments http://thearizonasentinel.com/2009/07/02/u-s-gran...

I love that ALIPAC has picked it up how appropriate http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-161768-previous.html

So Bobbi,

It looks like these folks have gone about as far with this as they can. I mean, no one cares what this group thinks and they don't have any legal authority. So what now?

Geez Bobbi and Jacki,

Where is your common sense??? It seems to have gone completely out the door (if you've had any at all to begin with), when Obama walked in. Common Sense tells us if he (Obama) has nothing to hide, why is hiding it. The one and true fact remains, he has NOT provided clear-cut documentation that he is a citizen. Again if he has nothing to hide, why is he hiding it. Your blind devotion and lack of common sense is a pity….really.

Dee it's all good, I know you were on the right page, just named the wrong commenter The more it gets out there with people getting together and seeing the ridiculousness of the missing and true vetting documentation, the more people will rise up to make a change. Since old honest Pelosi signed off only, you know there's every reason to believe we have a problem in the White House. Where oh where has our little main stream media gone, oh where oh where can it be? No guts, all paid off, now getting thrown under the bus since they are no longer useful. Even Gibby couldn't defend himself or the admin against Helen last week…..lol. The O-BUMS-O team need to be thrown out as the usurpers they are.

Note that Royce Lamberth is not the chief magistrate judge. Magistrate judges rank under district judges. Judge Lamberth is the chief U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Columbia; he's more powerful than a magistrate judge. See http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/lamberth-bio.html for his biography.

It's important to get this information into his possession, but I don't think he has any legal power to act on it of his own motion. Don't forget about quo warranto in the D.C. Code. § 16-3501 of the D.C. Code says: "A quo warranto may be issued from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the name of the United States against a person who within the District of Columbia usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises, a franchise conferred by the United States or a public office of the United States, civil or military. The proceedings shall be deemed a civil action."

Judge Lamberth is the chief judge in the very court mentioned by the D.C. Code as the one to preside over the quo warranto. § 16-3502 of the code goes on: "The Attorney General of the United States or the United States attorney may institute a proceeding pursuant to this subchapter on his own motion or on the relation of a third person. The writ may not be issued on the relation of a third person except by leave of the court, to be applied for by the relator, by a petition duly verified setting forth the grounds of the application, or until the relator files a bond with sufficient surety, to be approved by the clerk of the court, in such penalty as the court prescribes, conditioned on the payment by him of all costs incurred in the prosecution of the writ if costs are not recovered from and paid by the defendant."

Of course, the Attorney General and U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C. have failed to bring quo warranto. § 16-3503 of the code says: "If the Attorney General or United States attorney refuses to institute a quo warranto proceeding on the request of a person interested, the interested person may apply to the court by certified petition for leave to have the writ issued. When, in the opinion of the court, the reasons set forth in the petition are sufficient in law, the writ shall be allowed to be issued by any attorney, in the name of the United States, on the relation of the interested person on his compliance with the condition prescribed by section 16-3502 as to security for costs."

So if there is someone out there who requested of either the Attorney General or U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C. that a quo warranto be brought on THEIR (the person's) behalf, and they didn't do so (and of course, we know they didn't), that person can now ask the court (over which Judge Lamberth presides) to institute quo warranto under § 16-3503 of the code. Though it would be wise to have an attorney handle the specifics; I'm thinking Leo Donofrio would be best.

So the question is, is there such a person out there who has documentation to prove that they made such a request to either the Attorney General or U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C.? And if not, perhaps someone should make that request now, and if the two relevant authorities refuse to act then the matter can be moved to a § 16-3503 request as aforementioned.

Both ,the atty general and us atty (remember he reseigned recently) had been sent requests for quo warranto….with all evidence…both have refused so far , and as far as i know from recalling whats been written on this issue….additional steps are being taken to advance through the red tape of obsticles and legal jargon .To me thats where the problem lays is in this over the top technical details…written in a fashion to thwart off any and all who might go against Government control.I dont see why it must be so twisted in legal verbage and terms that it sets up a system meant to fail , for those who cannot read through the loopholes and interpretations. i don't like writings that are left up to "semantics".

Ignoring the Constitution? FIRST POINT: Amendment 5 of the Bill of Rights says: " No person shall be held for a captial, or otherwise 'infamous' crime, unless on a PRESENTMENT or indictment of a Grand Jury………." Presentments are drawn up by Citizen Grand Juries. Citizens can gather together and form a grand jury. They do not need the permission of government agents (DA;s Atty General's, etc.) to do so. They then file their PRESENTMENTS (indictments) with the court and the court, constitutionally must act on them. Just because this process has been IGNORED for the past 60 years or so, doesn't negate the right. The Constitution has not been 'amended' to remove this ability. It exists and is part and parcel of the protection the Founders established to insure government does not operate illegally. (The jury is the final protection for all citizens and the jury is not beholding to any judge or court. The jury to this day has the right and the obligation to judge the facts and the LAWS! http://www.fija.org (Fully Informed Jury Association.))
TWO: the Constitution in Article 2, section 1 paragraph 6 states: "NO PERSON BUT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN , OR A CITIZEN AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS CONSTITUTION SHALL BE ELIGIBLE TO THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT." The definition of natural born is having both parents as citizens! It is not us 'independents' or us 'conservatives' you so casually deride that are ignoring and violating our Constitution. This is a deception by Obama and the Democrat National Committee to deliberately commit treason and insultingly think there would not be enough informed patriots around to notice. Well, you demonstrated how uniformed you are and swallowed Obama's feel-good rhetoric hook line and sinker and you have become co-conspiritors in this tyranny. Benjamin Franklin warned us that it will take a vigilent, well-informed citizenry to preserve this Republic. Being vigilent also means not allowing yourselves to be deceived.

nick,

Obama was born in Hawaii. Hawaii is a State of the United States. There are a mountain of supreme court precidents and Federal laws that have established that any person born in the United States is a natural born American citizen. His original birth certificate was thoroughly examined by FactCheck.org and other independent investigators and all have certified that the birth certificate is real. It was also certified by the State of Hawaii. In addition, the Supreme Court has twice now rejected the outrageous claims of the right wing regarding the President's birth certificate. That so-called Grand Jury is not a real grand jury, was never sworn in by a sitting Federal Judge, and has no authority what so ever. In addition, only the House of Representives can indite (impeach) a sitting president and only the Senate can convict and remove a sitting President.

Those are the facts. You don't have to like them, but they are the facts all the same. At this point all the right-wing is doing by continuing to whine and cry about this crazy nonsense is embarrassing themselves and driving the voters right into the lap of the Democrats.

Bobbi,

I checked you links. The first is to a case that will never be heard by the supreme court…so it means nothing. The second and third are to opinion pieces that have no qualification and are merely empty opinions.

The fact is your claims are meaningless. But hey…its a free country…you can say all the crazy things you want to say, but that won't change a thing. Have fun with it!

lol…..I wouldn't want to be the one to call his grandma a liar…or the Kenyan Parliament. If he had nothing to hide, he sure has spent a whole lotta bucks on "transparency".

In the meantime the perfect storm is brewing so sit back, get some popcorn, and watch.

Visit the American Grand Jury website http://www.americangrandjury.com to learn more about your Constitutional rights and see what some of the members of the Supreme Court had to say about it. Then visit http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com and learn why over 35 states are passing legislation based on the 10th Amendment to protect their state soveriegnty. Lots of state representatives involved in protecting your rights and the rights of your state who actually do know the Constitution. God Bless America!

Hey Shawn,

I've got my popcorn ready, however this thing already fizzled when twice the Supreme Court refused to hear it. Besides…

…only the House of Representatives can indite a sitting president (impeachment), and only the Senate can convict and remove a sitting president.

Let me know when the fireworks start…I have my popcorn ready…but I don't think its every going to happen…not unless you can get the Democrats to impeach…and they won't.

See ya in the funny papers!