Category Archives: United States

United States

Oath Keepers, US Constitution, Orders We Will NOT Obey, Oath to Constitution, not politicians, We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people

From the Oath Keepers site:

“Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey


Recognizing that we each swore an oath to support and d
efend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and affirming that we are guardians of the Republic, of the principles in our Declaration of Independence, and of the rights of our people, we affirm and declare the following:

1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people.

The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.

Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.

In addition, we affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In particular we oppose a renewal of the misnamed “assault-weapons” ban or the enactment of H.R. 45 (which would register and track gun owners like convicted pedophiles).

2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects – such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons.

One of the causes of the American Revolution was the use of “writs of assistance,” which were essentially warrantless searches because there was no requirement of a showing of probable cause to a judge, and the first fiery embers of American resistance were born in opposition to those infamous writs. The Founders considered all warrantless searches to be unreasonable and egregious. It was to prevent a repeat of such violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects that the Fourth Amendment was written.

We expect that sweeping warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, under some pretext, will be the means used to attempt to disarm the people.

3. We will NOT obey any order to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to trial by military tribunal.

One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the laws of war to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people. Thus, the Article III Treason Clause establishes the only constitutional form of trial for an American, not serving in the military, who is accused of making war on his own nation. Such a trial for treason must be before a civilian jury, not a tribunal.

The international laws of war do not trump our Bill of Rights. We reject as illegitimate any such claimed power, as did the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1865). Any attempt to apply the laws of war to American civilians, under any pretext, such as against domestic “militia” groups the government brands “domestic terrorists,” is an act of war and an act of treason.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state, or to enter with force into a state, without the express consent and invitation of that state’s legislature and governor.

One of the causes of the American Revolution was the attempt “to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power” by disbanding the Massachusetts legislature and appointing General Gage as “military governor.” The attempt to disarm the people of Massachusetts during that martial law sparked our Revolution. Accordingly, the power to impose martial law – the absolute rule over the people by a military officer with his will alone being law – is nowhere enumerated in our Constitution.

Further, it is the militia of a state and of the several states that the Constitution contemplates being used in any context, during any emergency within a state, not the standing army.

The imposition of martial law by the national government over a state and its people, treating them as an occupied enemy nation, is an act of war. Such an attempted suspension of the Constitution and Bill of Rights voids the compact with the states and with the people.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union.

In response to the obscene growth of federal power and to the absurdly totalitarian claimed powers of the Executive, upwards of 20 states are considering, have considered, or have passed courageous resolutions affirming states rights and sovereignty.

Those resolutions follow in the honored and revered footsteps of Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and likewise seek to enforce the Constitution by affirming the very same principles of our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights that we Oath Keepers recognize and affirm.

Chief among those principles is that ours is a dual sovereignty system, with the people of each state retaining all powers not granted to the national government they created, and thus the people of each state reserved to themselves the right to judge when the national government they created has voided the compact between the states by asserting powers never granted.

Upon the declaration by a state that such a breach has occurred, we will not obey orders to force that state to submit to the national government.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

One of the causes of the American Revolution was the blockade of Boston, and the occupying of that city by the British military, under martial law. Once hostilities began, the people of Boston were tricked into turning in their arms in exchange for safe passage, but were then forbidden to leave. That confinement of the residents of an entire city was an act of war.

Such tactics were repeated by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turning entire cities into death camps. Any such order to disarm and confine the people of an American city will be an act of war and thus an act of treason.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

Mass, forced internment into concentration camps was a hallmark of every fascist and communist dictatorship in the 20th Century. Such internment was unfortunately even used against American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Whenever a government interns its own people, it treats them like an occupied enemy population. Oppressive governments often use the internment of women and children to break the will of the men fighting for their liberty – as was done to the Boers, to the Jewish resisters in the Warsaw Ghetto, and to the Chechens, for example.

Such a vile order to forcibly intern Americans without charges or trial would be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason, regardless of the pretext used. We will not commit treason, nor will we facilitate or support it.“NOT on Our Watch!”

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control” during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war.

During the American Revolution, the British government enlisted the aid of Hessian mercenaries in an attempt to subjugate the rebellious American people. Throughout history, repressive regimes have enlisted the aid of foreign troops and mercenaries who have no bonds with the people.

Accordingly, as the militia of the several states are the only military force contemplated by the Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, for domestic keeping of the peace, and as the use of even our own standing army for such purposes is without such constitutional support, the use of foreign troops and mercenaries against the people is wildly unconstitutional, egregious, and an act of war.

We will oppose such troops as enemies of the people and we will treat all who request, invite, and aid those foreign troops as the traitors they are.

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies, under any emergency pretext whatsoever.

One of the causes of the American Revolution was the seizure and forfeiture of American ships, goods, and supplies, along with the seizure of American timber for the Royal Navy, all in violation of the people’s natural right to their property and to the fruits of their labor. The final spark of the Revolution was the attempt by the government to seize powder and cannon stores at Concord.

Deprivation of food has long been a weapon of war and oppression, with millions intentionally starved to death by fascist and communist governments in the 20th Century alone.

Accordingly, we will not obey or facilitate orders to confiscate food and other essential supplies from the people, and we will consider all those who issue or carry out such orders to be the enemies of the people.

10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

There would have been no American Revolution without fiery speakers and writers such as James Otis, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Sam Adams “setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”

Patrick Henry: “Give me Liberty, or Give me DEATH!”

Tyrants know that the pen of a man such as Thomas Paine can cause them more damage than entire armies, and thus they always seek to suppress the natural rights of speech, association, and assembly. Without freedom of speech, the people will have no recourse but to arms. Without freedom of speech and conscience, there is no freedom.

Therefore, we will not obey or support any orders to suppress or violate the right of the people to speak, associate, worship, assemble, communicate, or petition government for the redress of grievances.

— And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually affirm our oath and pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. Oath Keeper”

Read more:

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03/oath-keepers-declaration-of-orders-we.html

This atttitude and position will become crucial over the next several months.

LA Times, blog, July 13, 2009, Alan Keyes, et al. v Barack H. Obama, et al, Orly Taitz, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, Opponents of Barack Obama’s presidency claim small court victory

From the LA Times blog, July 13, 2009:

“Opponents of Barack Obama’s presidency claim small court victory”

“Supporters of a case that disputes the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s presidency claimed a small victory today when U.S. District Judge David O. Carter told them to fix their paperwork and that he would listen to “the merits” of their case. But others present for the hearing Monday at the federal courthouse in Santa Ana stressed that the case remains a long way from ever getting a full airing in court and may never get to that point.

The case, Alan Keyes, et al. v Barack H. Obama, et al. was filed on Inauguration Day and is one of a raft of suits alleging Obama is ineligible to be president because he is not a “natural born citizen.” Such claims have fared badly in court to date. In December, for example, the Supreme Court dismissed without comment a case challenging Obama’s right to take the oath of office.

Perhaps because of that history, Orly Taitz, the lawyer who filed the current suit, was greatly cheered by Monday’s hearing. “He’s very determined to hear the case on the merits,” Taitz said, referring to the judge. “He stated, the country needs to know if Mr. Obama is legitimate, if he can legitimately stay in the White House.””

Read more:

 http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/opponents-of-barack-obamas-presidency-claim-small-court-victory.html

The Right Side of Life has a complete update:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6655

Miami Herald, Macon ledger-enquirer, Obama not a natural born citizen, Soldier: Obama not U.S. born, can’t send me to Afghanistan

Believe it or not, this story was run in the Macon Ledger-enquirer and was picked up by the Miami Herald:

“Soldier: Obama not U.S. born, can’t send me to Afghanistan”

“MACON — U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook is seeking a federal court order to stall and eventually prevent an upcoming deployment to Afghanistan.

In the 20-page document — filed July 8 with the United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia — Cook’s California-based attorney, Orly Taitz, asks the court to consider granting his client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that President Barrack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of U.S Armed Forces.”

Read more:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/1139969.html

From the Macon Ledger-enquirer:

“Cook received the orders mobilizing him to active duty on June 9, 2009. According to this document, which accompanies Cook’s July 8 application for a temporary restraining order, he has been ordered to report to MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla. on July 15. From there, the Florida resident will to go to Fort Benning, Ga. before deploying overseas.

A hearing to discuss Cook’s request for an injunction or temporary restraining order will take place in federal court Thursday at 9:30 a.m.”

Read more:

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/story/776335.html

Thanks to Zach of the Zach Jones is Home Blog

Larry Sinclair book, update, July 13, 2009, Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair Cocaine, Sex, Lies & Murder, Citizen Wells copy of book

Early in January of 2008, there were two things that I consistently stated to my friends.

1. I intended to be more involved in this presidential election.

2. I knew little about Barack Obama, a candidate who was increasingly gaining support. 

Shortly after stating this, I ran across a link on the internet to someone who purported to have engaged in sex and drug use with Obama in 1999. The allegation appeared to be nonsense, but I wanted to know more about this mysterious candidate, so I followed up on the story. I listened to Larry Sinclair’s Youtube video and was curious. There was something about Sinclair that appeared sincere. I had to know more.

I next found interviews of Obama by Tim Russert, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times. There was a pattern in all of the interviews. Obama was asked about his records during his tenure in the IL Senate. In all of the interviews Obama gave evasive answers and refused to provide records. Hillary Clinton late in 2007 asked Obama about his senate records. A pattern was emerging.

I then went to the official IL Senate records for November 4-8 and what I saw next caused my jaw to drop. Obama was not present for the opening fall session of the IL Senate on November 4, 1999. I later found out that Obama was present for a speaking engagement on November 8, 1999, the day after Larry Sinclair alleged that they had their last encounter. The IL Senate is located in Springfield, IL, the capital, several hours south of Chicago.

I then knew that something was wrong with Obama and that Larry Sinclair may be telling the truth.

I have looked through the book. As many of you know, I had already read most of the chapters and covered the Larry Sinclair story more than any other source. The book is true to everything that I know and everything that Sinclair has consistently told me. It is extremely important that as many people as possible read the book and tell as many people as possible. Larry Sinclair has fought against insurmountable forces to get this book written and published. The really big part of his story is the great lengths the Obama camp has gone to to silence him. We must not let that happen.

After I had reached the point of no return in spending countless hours to attempt to expose the usurper, Obama, I resolved to do my part to make sure that Sinclair’s story was kept alive. The Obama camp was not only trying to silence Sinclair, but they were attempting to deprive the American public of the truth about Obama, something they had done so well with the MSM.

I will be providing some detailed reviews and corroborating comments over the next several weeks.

Stay tuned.

 

LSbook

 

ObamaBook

Let your favorite book store know that you want them to stock the book.

You can order the book in the interim at:

http://sinclairpublishingllc.com/PLACE-DIRECT-ORDERS.html

Kerchner V Obama, lawsuit, July 13, 2009, Washington Times, Mario Apuzzo, Obama not natural born citizen

** See update from Charles Kerchner below **

Look for this ad in the Washington Times on Monday, July 13, 2009, regarding the Kerchner v Obama lawsuit filed by attorney Mario Apuzzo.

Kerchner090713WashTimes

Here is the text of the ad:

 

Obama is NOT an Article II Natural Born Citizen and therefore is NOT Eligible to be President

 
The President and CINC of the USA Must be a .Natural Born. Citizen . U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
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
Obama’s Father Was
Not a U.S. Citizen, nor
Was He an Immigrant
to the USA, nor Was
He Even a Permanent
Resident of the USA
The Law of
Nations,Vattel, 1758,
Chapter 19, Section 212:
.natural-born citizens, are
those born in the country,
of parents who are citizens.
Article II .Natural Born Citizen. Means Unity of Citizenship At Birth
Article II of our Constitution has a lot
to say about how a would-be President
is born. .Natural born Citizen. status
requires not only birth on U.S. soil but also
birth to parents who are both U.S. citizens
by birth or naturalization. This unity of
jus soli (soil) and jus sanguinis (descent)
in the child at the time of birth assures
that the child is born with sole allegiance
(obligation of delity and obedience to
government in consideration for protection
that government gives (U.S. v. Kuhn, 49
F.Supp.407, 414 (D.C.N.Y)) and loyalty to
the United States and that no other nation
can lay any claim to the child.s (later an
adult) allegiance and loyalty. Indeed,
under such birth circumstances, no other
nation can legally or morally demand
any military or political obligations from
that person. The child, as he/she grows,
will also have a better chance of not
psychologically struggling with conicted
allegiance and loyalty to any other nation.
Unity of citizenship is based on the
teachings of the law of nature (natural law)
and the law of nations, as conrmed by
ancient Greek and Roman law; American,
European, and English constitutions,
common and civil law, and statutes; and
Vattel.s, The Law of Nations, all of which
the Founding Fathers read and understood.
These sources have taught civilizations
from time immemorial that a person
gains allegiance and loyalty and therefore
attachment for a nation from either being
born on the soil of the community dening
that nation or from being born to parents
who were also born on that same soil
or who naturalized as though they were
born on that soil. It is only by combining
at birth in the child both means to inherit
these two sources of citizenship that the
child by nature and therefore also by
law is born with only one allegiance and
loyalty to and consequently attachment
for only the United States.

 
Our Constitution requires unity of U.S.
citizenship from birth only for the Ofce
of President and Commander in Chief of
the Military, given the unique nature of
the position, a position that empowers
one person to decide whether our national
survival requires the destruction of or a
nuclear attack on or some less military
measure against another nation or group.
It is required of the President because such
a status gives the American people the
best Constitutional chance that a wouldbe
President will not have any foreign
inuences which because of conict of
conscience can most certainly taint his/
her critical decisions made when leading
the nation. Hence, the special status is
a Constitutional eligibility requirement
to be President and thereby to be vested
with the sole power to decide the fate
and survival of the American people.
Of course, the status, being a minimum
Constitutional requirement, does not
guarantee that a would-be President will
have love and fealty only for the United
States. Therefore, the nal informed and
intelligent decision on who the President
will be is left to the voters, the Electors,
and Congress at the Joint Session, to
whom hopefully responsible media and
political institutions will have provided
all the necessary vetting information
concerning the candidate.s character and
qualications to be President.
Through historical development, unity of
citizenship and sole allegiance at birth is
not required for U.S. born citizen Senators,
Representatives, and regular citizens under
the 14th Amendment and Congressional
enactments. In contradiction and which
conrms the Founding Fathers. meaning
of what a .natural born Citizen. is,
naturalized citizens, since 1795, before
becoming such must swear an oath that
they renounce all other allegiances to
other nations. During the Washington

 
Administration, the First Congress
passed the Naturalization Act of 1795 in
which it provided that new citizens take
a solemn oath to support the Constitution
and .renounce. all .allegiance. to
their former political regimes. This is
during the time that most of the Framers
were alive and still actively involved in
guiding and forming the new national
government and Constitutional Republic.
Today, we still require that an alien upon
being naturalized must give an oath that
he/she renounces all former allegiances
and that he/she will .support and defend
the Constitution and laws of the United
States of America against all enemies,
foreign and domestic.. Hence, allegiance
is not simply a thing of the past but very
much with us today. It is important to
also understand that naturalization takes
an alien back to the moment of birth and
by law changes that alien.s birth status.
In other words, naturalization, which by
legal denition requires sole allegiance to
the United States, re-creates the individual
as though he were a born Citizen but only
does it by law and not by nature. This
is the reason that the 14th Amendment
considers a naturalized person to be a
.citizen. of the United States and not
a .natural born Citizen. of the United
States. This recreation of birth status
through naturalization which also existed
under English common law also probably
explains why John Jay underlined the
word .born. when he recommended to
General Washington that only a .natural
born Citizen. (as to say born in fact, by
nature, and not by law) be allowed to
be President. Consequently, naturalized
citizens stand on an equal footing with
born Citizens (who are so recognized and
conrmed by the 14th Amendment or by
an Act of Congress and who can be but
not necessarily are also .natural born
Citizens.) except that they cannot be
President or Vice President, for they were

 
born with an allegiance not owing to the
United States and acquire that allegiance
only after birth. Surely, if a naturalized
citizen, even though having sole allegiance
to the United States, is not Constitutionally
eligible to be President, we cannot expect
any less of someone who we are willing
to declare so Constitutionally eligible.
The Founding Fathers emphasized
that, for the sake of the survival of the
Constitutional Republic, the Ofce of
President and Commander in Chief of the
Military be free of foreign inuence and
intrigue. It is the .natural born Citizen.
clause that gives the American people the
best ghting chance to keep it that way for
generations to come. American people do
not have the Constitutional right to have
any certain person be President. But for the
reasons stated above, minimally they do
have a Constitutional right to protect their
liberty by knowing and assuring that their
President is Constitutionally eligible and
qualied to hold the Ofce of President
and Commander in Chief of the Military.

 
. Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
Obama is not Article II Constitutionally
eligible to be President. Q.E.D.
. Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Lead Plaintiff
Commander USNR Retired

 

If you would like to help with
this lawsuit, please contact
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
185 Gatzmer Avenue
Jamesburg NJ 08831
Email: apuzzo@erols.com
TEL: 732-521-1900
FAX: 732-521-3906
BLOG: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Paid for by: Concerned Americans contributing at ProtectOurLiberty.org in support of the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al lawsuit.

 

** Update and clarification from Charles Kerchner 7/13/09 **

“To clarify and help people find the correct newspaper in print, you may wish to change the headline to read, “Washington Times National Weekly edition”, instead of just using the name Washington Times.  Some may think it is in the daily paper which it is not, and buy the wrong paper.  I chose the National Weekly edition since it reaches all the movers and shakers nationwide.  It is sold in major book store news stands.  It also has about 100,000 paid subscribers nationwide who in general are the very political aware people in this country. It is also read by leading conservative writers and spokes people on radio and TV.  I hope it stirs things up in DC.”

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
CDR USNR Retired
Lehigh Valley PA
Lead Plaintiff
Kerchner v Obama & Congress

1984, Movie 1984, Internet videos, Atlas Shrugs, Saturday Night Cinema, Obama camp, Internet scrubbing

From Atlas Shrugs:

“Tonight’s feature is 1984, released in 1984, based upon George Orwell’s novel of the same name, following the life of Winston Smith in Oceania, a country run by a totalitarian government. The film was directed by Michael Radford. Extraordinary performances by John Hurt and Richard Burton (in his last film role).

When someone falls out of Government favor and is ”vaporized,” Winston must go through the newspapers and official records and erase the person’s name, creating an unperson.  

Like scrubbing google of Obama’s birth

The Citizen Wells blog has, for over a year, warned of the similarities between the Obama camp and the totalitarian society described by George Orwell in “1984.” Atlas Shrugs has the movie on their website. View the movie here:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/07/saturday-night-cinema-1984.html

Obama Kenyan, MSNBC verifies, Ghana visit confirms, July 10, 2009, Obama not eligible, Obama not natural born citizen

The whole world knows this.

Anyone with an IQ greater than a squirrel
who cares
has figured it out.

 

Obama’s visit to Ghana reveals his Kenyan birth.

From Modern Ghana News:

“History Beckons – As Prez Obama Arrives Tomorrow
Mr & Mrs Obama US President Barack Obama is expected to announce a major foreign policy for Africa during his historic two-day visit to Ghana, beginning Friday, July 10, 2009.

Although Mr Obama has made foreign policy pronouncements for some parts of the world since assuming office in January, this year, he is yet to make one for Africa, and his visit to the country, which the White House describes as “one of our most trusted partners in sub-Saharan Africa”, is expected to be used as a platform to unveil his foreign policy for Africa.

“It is expected that President Obama will make a major foreign policy statement on Africa”, Ghana’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Alhaji Mohammed Mumuni, told the Daily Graphic.

For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever African-American President on this presidential visit to the continent of his birth.

Read more:

http://www.modernghana.com/news/226379/1/history-beckons-as-prez-obama-arrives-tomorrow.html

 

Now watch this MSNBC video!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619#31856235

If MSNBC removes the video, let me know.

Remember this from 2008?

barackbama08usafrica 

So, when will the idiot, treasonous judges in this country pay attention!!!

 

Thanks to commenters Sandy and Rocknee for the info.

John Harris agrees to testify, Blagojevich trial, Obama ties, Tony Rezko, Emil Jones, Valerie Jarrett

Things are moving real slow in preparation for the Rod Blagojevich trial but yesterday, July 9, 2009, the Chicago Tribune reported that Blagojevich chief of staff, John Harris, has agreed to testify against him. What do the names, Rod Blagojevich, John Harris, Tony Rezko, Emil Jones, and Valerie Jarrett all have in common?

Hmmm……Let’s see…….

Barack Obama

Here are some exerpts from the Chicago tribune areticle:

“A chief of staff to former Gov. Rod Blagojevich became the first insider to formally agree to testify for the government, pleading guilty Wednesday in the sweeping federal corruption case against his ex-boss.

John Harris, who was arrested with the former governor in December, is expected to detail for prosecutors perhaps the most stunning charge in the case: how Blagojevich allegedly used his power to appoint a successor to President Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate to barter to enrich himself.

In exchange for Harris’ testimony, prosecutors agreed to recommend he serve less than 3 years in prison. He pleaded guilty to a single count of wire fraud and is expected to be one of a series of former aides and confidants — fellow chiefs of staff Alonzo “Lon” Monk and John Wyma as well as fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko among them — to testify against Blagojevich.

The plea agreement alleges that the former governor viewed the Senate appointment as a unique opportunity to try to bargain with the new Obama administration, perhaps leading to a Cabinet or ambassador’s post.”

“Among them was the allegation that Blagojevich sent Harris to Springfield to see if one Senate candidate would be willing to exchange all the money in his campaign fund for the seat, a message that Harris says he did not explicitly deliver.

Sources identified that candidate as former state Senate Majority Leader Emil Jones (D-Chicago), who denied such a discussion took place.”

“The plea agreement alleged that Blagojevich discussed an option with an official from the Service Employees International Union — an individual he understood to be an emissary working on behalf of Obama. Blagojevich was hopeful that by naming an individual identified only as “Senate Candidate B” — previously disclosed to be Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett — he could secure an appointment to become secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the agreement said.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-blagojevich-chief-pleajul09,0,6559762.story

Obama Birth, Hawaii, Kapi’olani Letter, Obama birth certificate, Obama camp lies

Obama will not produce a valid birth certificate. Obama is such a pathological liar he cannot keep straight which version of his being born in a Hawaii hospital that he last told. Now there is more controversy associated with Obama’s alleged birth in Hawaii.

“First, it was shown that multiple news and Internet sources produced conflicting claims as to where, exactly, the 44th President was born. Then, some of these same sources began to change the story within 24 hours of WorldNetDaily’s spotlight on the issue. Now, according to WND, the Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu, HI has completely removed a letter allegedly from Mr. Obama from their site altogether after having been displayed for 6 months:”

obamahospitalletter

Read more:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6619

Obama, Grand jury presentment, Update, July 7, 2009, Federal Judge Denies Citizen Grand Jury Presentment Filing

From Phil at the Right Side of Life:

“In a recent article, I reported that a number of concerned citizens had visited the USDC for DC and submitted a citizen grand jury presentment to Chief Justice Royce Lamberth in hopes that he would issue a response to the paperwork. His order was made July 2, 2009 (h/t TheJAGHunter):”

“Quotes relevant to the citizen grand jury movement, going forward, include the following:

…And although presentments are constitutionally permitted, there is no authority under the Rules of Criminal Procedure or in the statutes of the United States for this Court to accept one. …

Furthermore, grand juries are convened by the court for the district in which they sit. … Grand jurors are also to be selected at random from a fair cross section of the district in which they are convened. … The individuals who have made this presentment were not convened by this Court to sit as a grand jury nor have they been selected at random from a fair cross section of this district. Any self-styled indictment or presentment issued by such a group has no force under the Constitution or laws of the United States. …

Further, though the papers presented to the Clerk of Court shall not be filed, they shall be assigned a miscellaneous number along with this Order for the court’s record.”

Read more:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6588