Tag Archives: 2010

Judge Susan Bolton may enjoin Arizona Law in part, SB 1070, Section by section, Citizen Wells open thread, July 24, 2010

Judge Susan Bolton may enjoin Arizona Law in part, SB 1070, Section by section

From The Phoenix New Times July 23, 2010.

“In a day filled with protests, arrests, legal arguments, an appearance by the governor, and at least one certified neo-Nazi, the most significant developments in the SB 1070 saga happened within the Sandra Day O’Connor U.S. Courthouse in Phoenix, not without.

There, Judge Susan R. Bolton oversaw two hearings Thursday where the plaintiffs sought to have her enjoin SB 1070, Arizona’s new “papers, please” legislation. But Bolton, without indicating when she would make a decision, signaled that if she enjoins SB 1070, she will do so in part, perhaps gutting significant portions of the law while leaving the remainder ready to go into effect July 29.

Whatever her decision, legal experts anticipate that her ruling will be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which would likely put the law on hold.

Although lawyers for the ACLU, MALDEF, and finally the U.S. Department of Justice argued in separate hearings that the law must be taken as a whole, Bolton kept directing them to the specifics of certain provisions.

“You’re not asking me to do that?” Bolton asked ACLU attorney Omar Jadwat at one point in the morning hearing on the ACLU/MALDEF suit about his request that she enjoin 1070 in its entirety.

“Shouldn’t we be talking about it section by section?” she continued. “And talk about what you want me to enjoin?”

She cited the severability clause in the statute, which would allow her to partially enjoin, while leaving the rest of the statute in force.

Jadwat contended that the law’s stated intent, to make “attrition through enforcement” the policy of Arizona, indicated that all parts of SB 1070 were meant to work together toward this goal.

However, Bolton declared that, “I cannot enjoin the [law’s] intent.””

“”Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to [illegal immigrants]?” wondered Bolton at one point.”
“Playing devil’s advocate, Bolton observed that not a day goes by without the news reporting on a drop house being busted by authorities. Didn’t Arizona have a legitimate concern with “public safety” and the “dangerous situation” that harboring illegal aliens causes?”

“Bolton does not have to issue a decision on an injunction before July 29, the date 1070 is scheduled to go into effect, but most observers believed she will.

It’s worth remembering that an injunction would not overturn the law, just place all or part of it on hold until the various lawsuits play themselves out. The question remaining seems to be how much of the law Bolton will allow to go into effect come the 29th.”

Read more:

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/bastard/2010/07/sb_1070_field_day_will_judge_s.php

Blagojevich trial, Justice Dept, Obama eligibility, World turned upside down, Citizen Wells open thread, July 23, 2010

Blagojevich trial, Justice Dept, Obama eligibility, World turned upside down

We truly do live in a “World Turned Upside Down.”

The ballad  “The world turned upside down” was first published in 1643.

In 1649 after King Charles the First was beheaded, people declared “the world turned upside down.”

It is believed that the British played this tune when they surrendered at Yorktown.

From American Thinker.

“We truly do live in a world upside-down — whether we see it in the world of science, on the airwaves of Britain, or in the streets of America. An inversion has occurred: Ideology takes precedence over facts and lies trump truth. Even religion has undergone a radical change — and Phillips takes a brief foray into the world of “exotic” religions that seem to be proliferating at a rapid clip. But this points out the fundamental cause, as Ms. Phillips sees it, of why the world flipped around.
Judeo-Christian religions, based on the core values of Judaism, have been downgraded in our lives. The precepts that other generations have lived by have been cast aside, or perhaps cast onto the junk heap. These values are what provided a foundation for the scientific method and of rationality. Now they are disparaged by many (church attendance is almost non-existent in England). When that foundation was removed, what moved into the moral vacuum? Feelings and ideology, with a big slug of irrationality.
Paul Johnson, the English historian, wrote a fine epitaph of the final years of the 20th century that also served as a prophecy for how the 21st century would devolve:
One of the keys to understanding the twentieth century is to identify the beneficiaries of the decline in formal religion. The religious impulse — with all the excesses of zealotry and intolerance it can produce — remains powerful, but expresses itself in secular substitutes.
These are the zealots who control much of our world now and who are driving us down very perilous roads. These are the zealots that Melanie Phillips has done a superb job identifying and battling in her superb new book.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/the_world_turned_upside_down.html

“The world turned upside down” sound and lyrics:

http://www.contemplator.com/england/worldtur.html

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, July 22, 2010, Attorney Mario Apuzzo not liable for costs, US Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, July 22, 2010

Just in from Charles Kerchner, lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama and Congress.

“For Immediate Release – 22 July 2010

Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Legal ‘Response’ to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal Order is Successful.

The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal | by Attorney Mario Apuzzo

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/07/third-circuit-court-of-appeals-finds.html

—————————————————–

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal
On July 2, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision affirming the New Jersey Federal District Court’s dismissal of the Kerchner et al v. Obama/Congress et al case for lack of Article III standing. The Court ordered that I show cause in 14 days why the Court should not find me liable for just damages and costs suffered by the defendants, not in having to defend against the merits of plaintiffs’ underlying claims that Putative President Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen,” that he has yet to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii, that Congress failed to exercise its constitutional duty to properly vet and investigate Obama’s “natural born Citizen” status, and that former Vice President and President of the Senate, Dick Cheney, and current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, were complicit in that Congressional failure, but rather in having to defendant against what the court considers to be a frivolous appeal of the District Court’s dismissal of their claims on the ground of Article III standing. On Monday, July 19, 2010, I filed my response. This afternoon, on July 22, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision on whether it should impose the damages and costs upon me. The Court has decided not to impose any damages and costs upon me and has discharged its order to show cause. This means that the matter of damages and costs is closed. Here is the Court’s decision:

“ORDER (SLOVITER, BARRY and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges) On July 2, 2010, this Court filed an Order to Show Cause directing Appellants’ counsel to show cause in writing why he should not be subject to an Order pursuant to F.R.A.P. 38 for pursuing a frivolous appeal. In response, Mario Apuzzo filed a 95-page statement that contains, inter alia, numerous statements directed to the merits of this Court’s opinion, which the Court finds unpersuasive. His request that the Court reconsider its opinion is denied, as the appropriate procedure for that issue is through a Petition for Rehearing. However, based on Mr. Apuzzo’s explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause, filed. Sloviter, Authoring Judge. (PDB).”

I want to thank everyone who supported and encouraged me in this battle. This includes everyone who expressed their feelings on this matter through blog posts, articles, and comments, and emails.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 22, 2010
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
###
——————————————————

For additional information and/or comment contact Attorney Mario Apuzzo of Jamesburg NJ at:

Blog: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Email:  apuzzo@erols.com
Tel:  732-521-1900
Fax: 732-521-3906″

Blagojevich trial, Judge James Zagel to rule on Thursday on throwing out some charges, Citizen Wells open thread, July 22, 2010

Blagojevich trial, Judge James Zagel to rule on Thursday on throwing out some charges

From the Chicago Tribune July 21, 2010.

“The presiding judge in Rod Blagojevich’s corruption trial is considering whether to throw out some or all of the charges against the former Illinois governor or his co-defendant brother.

Speaking hours after prosecutors and defense attorneys both rested their cases Wednesday, Judge James B. Zagel told attorneys he’d rule on Thursday.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-blagojevichtrial-,0,2339978.story

Nothing would surprise me at this point.

Blagojevich trial, Rod not called to stand yet, Rezko and Levine not called by prosecution, Citizen Wells open thread, July 21, 2010

Blagojevich trial, Rod not called to stand yet, Rezko and Levine not called by prosecution

Rod Blagojevich was not called to the witness stand yesterday. Tony Rezko and Stuart Levine were not called by the prosecution. This still smells badly to me and I believe the fix was in on this trial years ago. Blagojevich attorney comments from yesterday, July 20, 2010.

From the Chicago Tribune.

“But in a stunning twist as his time to take the witness stand came, Blagojevich’s attorneys told U.S. District Judge James Zagel on Tuesday that the ex-governor would not testify and that they were prepared to rest their case without calling a single witness, sources told the Tribune. After conferring that message privately to Zagel and prosecutors in a lengthy sidebar, the defense team was told by the judge to mull the decision overnight.

The decision means Blagojevich won’t be able to play any undercover recordings that he felt backed up his denials of wrongdoing. Last week, the judge took parts of two days to decide what recordings could be played for the jury by the defense, though he blocked many of the ones it sought to air.

A number of sources said several factors went into the sudden reversal of course.

 
Blagojevich’s lawyers believed prosecutors had held back part of their case against the former governor to use against him in what promised to be a bruising cross-examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid Schar, who glared toward the defense table after learning of the decision.

The attorneys also were operating under the belief that if Blagojevich testified, convicted fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who has cooperated with the government, was likely to be called as a powerful rebuttal witness by prosecutors. Sources have said Rezko, who allegedly helped Blagojevich scheme to make money by leveraging the powers of his office, had not been prepared by prosecutors to testify but was on notice that he could very likely be called to the stand on short order.”

“”Listen, they told us they were going to bring on Rezko,” Adam Sr. said of the prosecution. “They told us they were going to bring on (convicted political insider Stuart) Levine. They told us they were going to bring on all these witnesses and they didn’t do it. They did not bring them on.””

Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/blagojevich/ct-met-blagojevich-trial-0721-20100720,0,2861528.story

Why wouldn’t the prosecution bring Rezko, Levine and others to the witness stand. Their names are mentioned constantly in all of the legal documents. More on that soon.

US Justice Department corruption in Blagojevich trial, Real Blagojevich trial news, Citizen Wells open thread, July 20, 2010

US Justice Department corruption in Blagojevich trial, Real Blagojevich trial news

I was rereading a US Justice Department document yesterday, the Press Release dated April 2, 2009, that announced the Superceding Indictment of Blagojevich. I encountered a section that caught my attention as I read it with a new perspective. To me it appears a bit Orwellian, an attempt to rewrite history. I am asking for Zach, legal eagles and other astute observers to read this section and compare it to what was in the Criminal Complaint and what the US Justice Dept. knew much earlier. Give me your take on it.

From the Press release.

“The indictment adds several new allegations to those that were lodged in the criminal complaint filed in December when Blagojevich and Harris were arrested. It includes the previous factual allegations that Blagojevich conspired to sell or trade Illinois’ U.S. Senate seat formerly held by President Obama; threatened to withhold substantial state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members sharply critical of Blagojevich; and schemed to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions – both historically and in a push late last year before a new state ethics law took effect.

Among the new factual allegations are that:

  • beginning in 2002 and continuing after Blagojevich was first elected
    governor, Blagojevich and Monk, along with Kelly and previously convicted
    co-schemer Antoin “Tony” Rezko, agreed that they would use the offices of
    governor and chief of staff for financial gain, which would be divided among
    them with the understanding that the money would be distributed after
    Blagojevich left public office;
  • in 2003, Blagojevich, Monk, Kelly, Rezko and other co-schemers
    implemented this agreement by directing lucrative state business relating to
    the refinancing of billions of dollars in State of Illinois Pension Obligation
    Bonds to a company whose lobbyist agreed to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars to Rezko out of the fee the lobbyist would collect, and Rezko in turn agreed to split the money with Blagojevich, Monk and Kelly;
  • After it became public that Kelly and Rezko were under investigation and ceased playing a significant role in raising campaign funds, Blagojevich personally continued to trade his actions as governor for personal benefits, including, for example, delaying a state grant to a publicly-supported school while trying to leverage a U.S. Congressman, who supported the school, or the Congressman’s brother, to hold a campaign fundraiser for Blagojevich; and
  • in an interview on March 16, 2005, Blagojevich lied to FBI agents when he said that he maintains a separation, or firewall, between politics and state business; and he does not track, or want to know, who contributes to him or how much they are contributing to him.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2009/pr0402_01.pdf

Criminal Complaint.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2008/pr1209_01a.pdf

Obama audacity of corruption, Alexi Giannoulias Chicago fundraiser, August 5, 2010, IL state treasurer, Chicago Tribune endorsed David Hoffman

Obama audacity of corruption, Alexi Giannoulias Chicago fundraiser

Here is another jaw dropping example of Obama audacity and corruption.
According to the Chicago Tribune, Obama will attend a fundraiser for Alexi Giannoulias on August 5, 2010. Before presenting that story, here is a memory refresher on Obama Giannoulias ties.

From Citizen Wells January 30, 2010
“We’ll leave it to voters to decide if linking Giannoulias to Rezko is a “smear job,” but the Daily Herald story does exist, and the Giannoulias camp knows it. Hoffman’s ad got the date wrong. Careless again. But it has allowed Giannoulias to present himself again as the victim.

None of this changes our opinion. As we wrote in our endorsement: Hoffman, the former inspector general for the city of Chicago, “is an incorruptible man who tells truth to power…”

Hoffman is the Democrats’ best choice to bring the highest ethical standards to the U.S. Senate.””

“From the Chicago tribune, June 12, 2007.

“Obama endorses Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer”
“But Obama’s record of local endorsements — one measure of how he has used his nascent political clout — has drawn criticism from those who say it reflects his deference to Chicago’s established political order and runs counter to his public calls for clean government.

In the 2006 Democratic primary, for example, Obama endorsed first-time candidate Alexi Giannoulias for state treasurer despite reports about loans Giannoulias’ family-owned Broadway Bank made to crime figures. Records show Giannoulias and his family had given more than $10,000 to Obama’s campaign, which banked at Broadway.”

“From Source Watch

“Barack Obama and campaign contributor Alexi Giannoulias”
“Alexi Giannoulias—a “man who has long been dogged by charges that the bank his family owns helped finance a Chicago crime figure” and “who became Illinois state treasurer” in 2006 after Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) “vouched for him”—”pledged to raise $100,000 for the senator’s Oval Office bid,” Charles Hurt reported September 5, 2007, in the New York Post.[1]

The September 5, 2007, Chicago fundraiser was omitted from Obama’s public schedule and the event was closed to the press,” Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times reported.[2]

“Before he promised to raise funds for Obama, Giannoulias bankrolled Michael ‘Jaws’ Giorango, a Chicagoan twice convicted of bookmaking and promoting prostitution.”
“Obama and Giannoulias reportedly met on the basketball court “in the late 1990s … at the East Bank Club, a luxurious spot in downtown Chicago,” Jodi Kantor wrote June 1, 2007, in the New York Times.[3] Now, “thanks in part to [Obama’s] backing, [Giannoulias] is now the Illinois state treasurer. Other regular gymmates include the president of the Cook County Board of Commissioners, the director of the Illinois Department of Public Health and several investment bankers who were early and energetic fund-raisers,” Kantor wrote.”
“Obama the king maker”

“”Did U.S. Senator Barack Obama clear the field in the Democratic state treasurer’s race?” lawyer and political analyst Russ Stewart wrote January 4, 2006.”
“But none announced, and all deferred to Alexi Giannoulias, a 29-year-old Chicago investment banker who was an early supporter of Obama in his 2004 Senate race, whose father owns Broadway Bank, and whose family helped bankroll the Obama campaign. Giannoulias has said that he will campaign as a ‘progressive,’ and he has promised to put more than $1 million in family funds into the race,” Stewart wrote.”

“In March 2006, Giannoulias said that “his ‘good friend and mentor, Barack Obama,’ inspired him to run.””

Read more:

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2010/01/30/chicago-tribune-supports-david-hoffman-obama-endorsed-alexi-giannoulias-in-2006-democratic-primary-il-democrat-senate-primary-giannoulias-gave-10000-to-obamas-campaign-obama-giannoulias-progres/

 From the Chicago Tribune July 18, 2010.

“President Barack Obama will headline a Chicago fundraiser on Aug. 5 for Democrat Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias, his campaign announced today.

The fundraiser announcement, which was confirmed by the White House, comes on the heels of the one-term state treasurer announcing that he is trailing Republican opponent Mark Kirk in fundraising by a significant margin.
“The President’s visit will reinforce the importance of the clear choice Illinois voters face” between Giannoulias and Kirk, a veteran North Shore congressman, Giannoulias campaign manager Mike Rendina said in a statement.
Giannoulias and Kirk are vying for the seat Obama held when he was elected president.”

Read more.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2010/07/obama-to-headline-giannoulias-fundraiser.html

Justice Department corruption in Black Panther case, Washington Post, July 18, 2010, Andrew Alexander Post Ombudsman, National Editor Kevin Merida, Wished The Post had written about it sooner

Justice Department corruption in Black Panther case, Washington Post

From The Washington Post July 18, 2010.

“Why the silence from The Post on Black Panther Party story?”

“Thursday’s Post reported about a growing controversy over the Justice Department’s decision to scale down a voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. The story succinctly summarized the issues but left many readers with a question: What took you so long?

For months, readers have contacted the ombudsman wondering why The Post hasn’t been covering the case. The calls increased recently after competitors such as the New York Times and the Associated Press wrote stories. Fox News and right-wing bloggers have been pumping the story. Liberal bloggers have countered, accusing them of trying to manufacture a scandal.

But The Post has been virtually silent.

The story has its origins on Election Day in 2008, when two members of the New Black Panther Party stood in front of a Philadelphia polling place. YouTube video of the men, now viewed nearly 1.5 million times, shows both wearing paramilitary clothing. One carried a nightstick.”

“The controversy was elevated last month when J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department lawyer who had helped develop the case, wrote in the Washington Times that his superiors’ decision to reduce its scope was “motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law.” Some in the department believe “the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation,” he wrote. Adams recently repeated these charges in public testimony before the commission.

The Post didn’t cover it. Indeed, until Thursday’s story, The Post had written no news stories about the controversy this year. In 2009, there were passing references to it in only three stories.”

“National Editor Kevin Merida, who termed the controversy “significant,” said he wished The Post had written about it sooner. The delay was a result of limited staffing and a heavy volume of other news on the Justice Department beat, he said.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/16/AR2010071604081_pf.html

Obama deception illegally removed from YouTube, 1984, Big Brother, Citizen Wells open thread, July 19, 2010

Obama deception illegally removed from YouTube, 1984, Big Brother

“The past, he reflected, had not merely been altered, it had
actually been destroyed. For how could you establish, even
the most obvious fact when there existed no record outside
your own memory?”…George Orwell, “1984″

Obama Deception ILLEGALLY removed from YouTube. Alex Jones reports.

http://www.t-room.us/2010/07/alex-jones-censorship-alert-obama-deception-illegally-removed-from-youtube/

Thanks JJ

US Justice Department corruption, Obama eligibility, Blagojevich trial, Citizen Wells open thread, July 18, 2010

US Justice Department corruption, Obama eligibility, Blagojevich trial

This was sent to me in an email. It ties in to the articles on US Justice Department corruption .

” The mountain of evidence that is emerging that Barack Hussein Obama is not who and what he portrayed himself to be to the American electorate, the deception goes beyond using forged douments and a farbricated past to swindle the American public into believing that he was Constitutionally  eligible as per the United States Constitution. That same evidence is exposing the corruption in the United States Congress and the Judicial Branch and those that were complicit in the crime of treason against the United States Constitution, which they swore to uphold and protect and the citizens of this nation.
After repeated attempts to have their concerns redressed and investigated and properly handled, they have willingly and with malice and forethought forfeited their obligation, no different the the United States government deciding what laws to enforce when it comes to immigration or cases involving voter intimidation.  Willingly neglecting their oath and obligation is mocking civil government, it’s rules and laws, and the United States Constitution. May God have mercy on their souls, as he will be their final judge.”

http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/the-preponderance-of-the-evidence-or-the-seriousness-of-the-charge/