Leo Donofrio “Condemns” GA Common Law Grand Jury
Leo Donofrio, attorney and Plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, posted a rebuke of certain comments made by the Georgia common law grand jury as reported by WorldNetDaily:
Furthermore, there is very disturbing language (thanks to Phil at The Right Side of Life for highlighting this today) used by this citizens grand jury which discusses the taking of property and suggests other violent means by which they intend to enforce their presentments. This language is frightening and totally illegal:
“The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions, and any way else they can until amends shall have been made according to the sole judgment of the grand jury.”
That’s criminal insanity right there. Have people lost their minds?
Let it be known that I condemn any such activity as described above.
You can’t protect the Constitution by destroying it. Just because somebody may have become President who isn’t eligible does not give any citizen the right to take the law into their own hands and to form lynch mobs and confiscate property. There is a Constitutional way to challenge the President, but this citizens grand jury manifesto is not it. …
Since the people who have brought this citizens grand jury have written to me and told me personally that my writing on the power of the citizens as grand jurors was their inspiration, I feel the need to disassociate myself from them and their objectives. [emphases in original]
Instead, Mr. Donofrio makes the point that he was originally discussing the independent power of presentment by people empaneled via a federal grand jury (also as originally posted here)…
The Georgia Citizens Grand Jury Must Be Condemned
I have received letters from the people who ran the citizens grand jury in Georgia, and while I appreciate their frustration in that our Government has failed to protect the Constitution by allowing a President to be sworn in who is not a “natural born citizen”, I do not agree that this citizens grand jury has any legal authority whatsoever to demand the removal of a sitting President or to even force the review of his qualifications.
The separation of powers in the Constitution has delegated that power to Congress who in turn enacted the District of Columbia Code provision for Quo Warranto. Sections 16-3501, 16-3502, and 16-3503are the only Constitutional means available to see the President removed or to even have him face an inquiry as to his eligibility. (See parts 1, 2 and 3 of my legal brief on quo warranto.)
Furthermore, there is very disturbing language (thanks to Phil at The Right Side of Life for highlighting this today) used by this citizens grand jury which discusses the taking of property and suggests other violent means by which they intend to enforce their presentments. This language is frightening and totally illegal:
“The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions, and any way else they can until amends shall have been made according to the sole judgment of the grand jury.”
That’s criminal insanity right there. Have people lost their minds?
Let it be known that I condemn any such activity as described above.
You can’t protect the Constitution by destroying it. Just because somebody may have become President who isn’t eligible does not give any citizen the right to take the law into their own hands and to form lynch mobs and confiscate property. There is a Constitutional way to challenge the President, but this citizens grand jury manifesto is not it.
We the people are getting beat up by criminal political actions which subvert the Constitution. If we are to fight back, we must do so within the boundaries of the Constitution. This is because Constitutional criminals are more than happy to see citizens violating the Constitution. They can enforce your crimes with law enforcement. They can even put you on trial for issuing such language as that cited above.
But you can’t do the same to them.
You will be squashed like a bug. Therefore you need to be smarter and more Constitutionally creative than they are. Find the path within the Document or the USA is no more. A true enemy of the Constitution will claim victory if the only way you can stop their crimes is by doing more damage to the Constitution. Either way, the Constitution is destroyed. Try to see that for God’s sake.
Since the people who have brought this citizens grand jury have written to me and told me personally that my writing on the power of the citizens as grand jurors was their inspiration, I feel the need to disassociate myself from them and their objectives.
When I wrote of the subverted power of the Grand Jury as to bringing “presentments” in my articles;
- The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government
- Scotus on the unique power of grand jurors
…I was not doing so in regard to the POTUS eligibility issue. In fact, the first article above was written by me back in 2005 and published at my previous blog. This article had NOTHING to do with Obama’s eligibility.
We are governed by our Constitution, not common law.
My grand jury 5th amendment “power of presentment” articles were meant to educate people as to their power ONCE SWORN IN AS A FEDERAL GRAND JUROR in a federal court.
The articles weren’t meant to encourage citizens to form their own grand juries and prosecute at will. There is no such guarantee in the Constitution. And I am a true believer in the Constitution. Are you?
The Constitution provides in the 5th Amendment that a grand jury can return a “presentment” without the acquiescence of a Federal Prosecutor. I have encouraged people who are sworn in on Federal Grand Juries to use this power to investigate Government crimes even when the Prosecutor has not led them to such crimes. This is the power I was speaking of, and I first wrote about it in 2005 with regard to Constitutional crimes of the Bush administration.
Imagine 25 grand jurors who really know their power sitting in a DC court room… The Government can’t indict without a grand jury so they must have a grand jury empanelled at all times. If the citizens of this nation understood their true power, then once sworn in as grand jurors they could investigate ANY crime that was undertaken by Government.
THIS IS THE POWER I SPEAK OF.
Learn about it, spread it, use it or lose it. It’s a real power.
This citizens grand jury thing is not real. It’s a dog and pony show and a certain distraction from the true education and true power available which will surely confuse the issue and make it easier for the Government to further subvert the true power we the people hold as grand jurors.
When I first read about the Georgia citizens grand jury I thought, “Well, the relief they seek is not Constitutional and since they read my blog they must know that quo warranto is the only Constitutional way to remove the President…so this will simply be an educational PR stunt to foster discussion of the eligibility issue.”
But I can’t agree with that anymore.
The language they’ve published about taking people’s property and “other” enforcement options is complete and utter criminal bullshit.
Any activity which subverts the Constitution is criminal to me. I don’t care if it’s ineligible Presidential candidates or citizens who are frustrated thereby.
If this citizens grand jury is citing my writing as inspiration, then they’ve clearly misunderstood my writing.
Leo C. Donofrio
April 2, 2009
-Phil
Are the people of the united states so stupid to believe that obamas spends millions of dollars to hide his past,just to spite us? Are we to believe that our government does not want to know the truth about Obama? Is the SCOTUS above the law? I am not stupid, and I know that if a person wants to hide something about his past, that it is not LIES that he or she hides, it is truths that are hidden.Truths that will hurt him or her. Why does america ignor this ? I have become afraid of my country and its government! Democrats call me a BIRTHER. What the hell is going on in this country?The Democrats are willing to investigate the CIA AND BUSH AND CHANEY, and throw joe wilson out of politics,but don`t give a damn about checking out to see if our president is an illegal.How long will it take to start americans to fight back, however we have to? When the courts are prooven crooked and the government has become crooked,do we just eat their sh%%.I for one do not feel safe in America anymore. It has become to corrupt.I worry about my family and their future.I want to leave and go somewhere where we can be protected.
millie123,
Welcome to my blog.
First, please see this post that started the whole citizen/common law/national grand jury concept. This will give you a reasonable overview of what the non-federal grand jury is intended to do.
Secondarily, I think you have been somewhat misinformed with respect to these citizen grand juries. The point is not to be the proverbial “judge, jury and executioner” of anyone (that would most assuredly be a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment!). Instead, these private gatherings of individuals are doing what the press and, really, anyone else with a vested interest in the 2008 presidential campaign should have been doing from the beginning: culling together and aggregating evidence, testimony and what not in order to create a presentment that is then submitted to the authorities for further analysis.
In other words, we now have numerous private gatherings of citizens who are petitioning local and State authorities to further investigate the eligibility of the President, much like any individual citizen would submit paperwork to their local FBI office or US Attorney’s office as a means for official follow-up. Certain individuals have said they’ve already been approached by the Secret Service regarding these matters and have been told they (the individuals) are well within their rights to pursue any lawful means to further the investigations.
-Phil
I am assuming that I am correct that these “common law grand juries” are based on the flawed reasoning laid out at http://www.1215.org? If so, the “rules” these juries are going by are NOT preserving and protecting the Constitution. They are throwing it out in favor of the MAGNA CARTA and insisting that they, and only they, have the right to determine the law, the rules, etc. There seems to be no burden of proof on the accusers at all. Now I’ve read in the past 3 or 4 days some audacious claims of what the law is and is not. I have been cursed out for even pointing out that the “natural born citizen” claim made in some of these LEGALLY filed lawsuits is a gray area in which many jurists and legal scholars have disagreements. All I get in return is that I MUST accept a feudal law, long outdated, as the “common law” and support what I consider kangaroo courts or vigilantes who may be well-meaning but very one-sided. Or I hear some one quote de Vattel, without their acknowledging any other source. Why not take a look at Lynch v. Clarke, 3 N.Y. Leg. Obs. 236, 1 Sand. Ch. 483 (1844). Julia Lynch was born in New York City while her Canadian parents were visiting. The case determined that Julia did NOT lose her American citizenship. The court discusses the use of the term “natural born citizen” as it relates to the “common law.” Here’s a direct quote: “Suppose a person should be elected Present who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor that by the rule of the common law, in force when the constitution was adopted, he is a natural born citizen.” This is just ONE of many cases which mitigates against some of the extra-legal activities going on today.
Orly,
Is there some way to get this to The Right Side of Life web site ? Leo needs to get in the fight or back out!
David
Open Letter to Leo Donofrio
Leo,
I am fully cognizant that we are on the same side and that our goal is the same; uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. In keeping with that please accept my comments in the spirit of brotherhood in which they are intended.
You made the statement, “I say there is no Justice outside of the Constitution and that if you sink to that level of thought the true enemies of the Constitution will have defeated you and it forevermore”. I agree wholeheartedly with the statement regarding relevance of Justice to the Constitution however, I strongly disagree with your reference to the Citizens Grand Jury. You go on to say: “But the people have not even come close to doing everything in their power to see that the Constitution is protected. The Constitutionally proper way to challenge POTUS eligibility is via the DC Code quo warranto statute”.
To this latter statement I reply:
While I appreciate your efforts you miss a MAJOR point. Those individuals such as the US Attorneys, Congressman, Officers of the Court etc. that have not taken timely action to ensure our Constitution is not being abused, ignored or dismantled are under oath to defend it. It is nothing short of a travesty that those with the power to investigate the Constitutional qualifications of Barak Hussein Obama to hold the office of President must be forced or even asked to do what they are required by their oath of office to do. I am sorry Leo, but what you are espousing as a reasonable course of action is by analogy like calling for 1 million letters to be sent to every single American Soldier demanding they uphold their oath of office to defend the Constitution. This is absurd! We do this without asking. Our leadership is under oath just as certainly as I am. Make no mistake, if I fail in my duty or my oath of office which is to the Constitution there are severe consequences that I will suffer.
So it is that I ask you. Should Congress, US Attorneys, Officers of the Court etc be held to a LOWER standard than each and every military member? Should we acquiesce to their dereliction or hold them
accountable? What are the consequences for them should they fail? My own Senator Mark Warner from Virginia has turned a blind eye to this and after 17 years in the service of my country absolutely turned his back on me. Should those like him who send our young troops off to die in defense of the Constitution be given a pass on their allegiance to the Constitution and our Country? Should the American People have to send “a million letters” to get a US Attorney to do what they are sworn to do? If indeed they are derelict in their duty or worse aiding and abetting treason at what point does the POWER vested in them return to the PEOPLE? How do we know when that point has been reached? If we remain uncertain if they are derelict or not because of their failure to investigate the questions surrounding Barak Obama and his refusal to be forthcoming must we remain uncertain forever? Should we have to wait until much damage is done to vote them out ? This again is absurd!! We are not asking them do die for our Country just see that our Constitution is being followed. Why have they not done so already and what does this tell us about their motivations and allegiance?
This discourse is not to say we should discontinue in our efforts to resolve this by every means possible using the methods you suggest to include writing letters in mass and calling them. This is to question by what reason you assert the people have not even come close to doing everything in our power via the Courts, pleading with Congress etc etc? The truth is we should NOT even be burdened by this!! So how is it that you claim we have not done nearly enough through the courts? This is not to say that the ultimate responsibility to uphold the Constitution does not rest with We the People, because it does.
I hope that our leaders wake up and listen! I have already warned them, while it has been my prayer that the defense of the Constitution should not come to the citizenry and the ends of means allocated to them by the Constitution; I see it is already happening. The very fact that we are now seeing the formation of Citizens Grand Juries and TEA parties is saying we are farther along that road than we should ever have to be. Is the leadership really that blind or do they feel so empowered they may ignore their responsibility to the Constitution without consequence? With each tic of the clock the questions mount and beg to be answered but are only greeted with deafening silence or worse scoffing, arrogant public officials. The top on this kettle is going to blow and I would not want to be in the kitchen when it does but no matter, there will be no escape for most of us. Ignore the Constitution and we become a Nation without law. Based on my observations, without a change in course, we are headed for social chaos.
I know in most all things there is ALWAYS a point of no return; a marriage that fails, a war that is lost or a treaty broken. Just as certain there is surely a point of no return where the cost to restore our Country to the vision of our Founding Fathers will be at great human suffering and sacrifice. To think that we should lose her is not something I am ready to accept but I can not deny that possibility.
It is not the Citizens of the Grand Juries who have sank to a lower level of thought but our Government. God help us and God forgive them if THEY HAVE sank to the point where they believe the Constitution is not worthy of defense and in doing so placed us all in peril. I still have hope in my heart that this great land will survive; my question now is at what cost and who among them are willing to be the first, if any, to rise to her defense when it is still not clear that they should profit themselves by it.
Sincerely,
Lt Col David A. Earl-Graef USAFR MC
Just my two cents but personally I salute anyone who has something pertinent to say about this colossal mess that the citizens of these United States have allowed,myself included.Seems to me we the people want the Constitution upheld but have sit idly by ,hoping that others would do something.I support Everyone who trys to correct this mess we are involved in.My only hope is that we do it legally.
Lawyer,
I read the posting and saw nothing about her “webmaster” saying anything negative about her credibility.
-Phil
Donofrio is absolutely correct on all points.
Re: Orly Taitz: read what her own Webmaster has to say about her credibility:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2226843/posts
Hopalong,
First, I would like to agree with your assessment of Mr. Denofrio’s tendency towards “flakiness”. He has changed his tact many times to the the discomfort of many of his readers. The important caveat is that his worldview has altered due to new realities.
The rules changed after the election.
The rules changed after the inauguration.
The constitution is specific as to the mechanisms for correcting the improper election of a SITTING President.
Few, if any, have addressed the LEGAL methods for relieving Mr. Obama of his office. Mr. Denofrio has gone to exraordinary length to explain the rationale for his opinion on the matter.
I challenge you and all active litigators to provide similar constitutional cause for other venues for redress. I believe it will be fruitless and hollow, but by all means try.
The anger and desperation of the relevant parties has made hypocrites of the effort to see justice. I urge folks to step back and examine closely what is at stake. I think many have decided to forgoe the constitution in an effort to save the republic. And how does this differentiate some “patriots” from the marxist-socialist-liberals that treat it likewise? I cannot see the difference either.
Heed my advice and have faith in our constitition and write the AGs…or take some time off from work and go to Washington to make your concerns known personally.
Leo might be nuts but he is most certainly right. Bank on it.
SFC Nosworthy
The language that he complains about is the language contained within the legally cited common law.
Then please cite this common law.
It was not some radical made-up wording that the Georgia Grand Jury developed on their own.
O RLY? It sure looks that way.
While Leo Donofrio may be very bright, he is also very self centered based upon other articles I have read that are attributed to him. He seems to feel that he is the only one with the proper judgment or insight into the birth matter. Those who choose to follow a different path than the one he prescribes is unworthy. He is the guru. I say…Bullshit!
I respect Mr. Donofrio for what he has done but he needs to show some respect to others as well. The language that he complains about is the language contained within the legally cited common law. It was not some radical made-up wording that the Georgia Grand Jury developed on their own. Again, Donofrio is just jealous of the work done by others. He wants to be the “big deal”. If it wasn’t his idea, it wasn’t worth doing. He has trashed Phil Berg and Orly Taitz among others.
I say to Mr. Donofrio, nobody elected you to be the “Leader” of the “birther” movement. There is plenty of room for everyone. In fact, the more, the merrier.
Phil,
My next blog article will discuss the HYPOCRISY of those oath bound citizens (government and military) who have taken the tact of the Citizen Grand Jury and SCOTUS to see justice done without recognizing the simple fact only the CONGRESS can remove a sitting President (i.e. impeachment and QW). I’m nearly convinced folks have lost thier minds in the effort to see justice. Easterling, Graf, et al are doing a great disservice in not heeding the insight of folks like Mr. Denofrio.
Where is the voice of reason? Where are the adults? Who actually cares about the constitutional principles that are purportedly worth dying for?
Many “patriots” are no worse than the liberal socialists that are trampling the documant we so dearly respect.
Sad and becoming more visibly futile to support.
SFC Nosworthy
Well Phil, you certainly are the master of the non sequitur.
——–
(Thanks for enabling the preview button, by the way… it is much appreciated).
Reality Check wrote,
Could be, but serious questions of political attitudes strike me as out of place here. This is not a red-state / blue-state thing. The conservatives mainstream has nothing to do with this, and you can find a fringe conspiracy theory in any color you want.
Your moniker says it all, Reality Check.
“I’m not sure what the point of your observation is, except to spread unwarranted Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt ™ about a CLGJ.”
No, that wasn’t my point.
Sue,
And again, Sue, you have the innate ability to observe the obvious. Of course if someone breaks a law and law enforcement enforces said law, then they have a “very good chance” of going to jail.
I’m not sure what the point of your observation is, except to spread unwarranted Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt ™ about a CLGJ.
-Phil
Phil,
“I haven’t seen anything, to date, that shows that the folks in the CLGJ have been shown to “the crowbar hotel,” as you’ve pejoratively put it. Therefore, it’s not a fact — it’s your opinion.”
Here again, these are your words, not mine. I did not say that the CLGJ has been shown the crowbar hotel. What I said was, based upon my understanding of the law, if they try to enforce the verbage they have in their CGJ, then it is a very good chance, fact that they will get to visit the crowbar hotel.
Sue,
I haven’t seen anything, to date, that shows that the folks in the CLGJ have been shown to “the crowbar hotel,” as you’ve pejoratively put it. Therefore, it’s not a fact — it’s your opinion.
-Phil
Practical Kat,
Then simply wait and see if someone actually does do something against another’s rights and legitimately claim that they manifested such behavior based upon the verbiage of sites like mine. In the meantime, sites like mine will continue discussing such controversial topics at the risk of making someone somewhere out there frustrated, irritated and mad.
Incidentally, if so proven, do we also count those Denial of Service attacks against Mr. Donofrio’s previous blogs according to your theory? Perhaps those should be investigated as well. After all, if your theory is good for those who are sympathetic with questioning this President, then they should be just as good for those who don’t agree with folks like myself.
-Phil
“These are your words — especially on the not-so-veiled threat — not anyone else’s”
Phil,
Yes, those are my words and it is not my threat but rather a fact based upon my understanding of the law. Which includes myself too. If I tried to enforce something that I had no power to enforce, I suspect law enforcement authorities would show me to the crowbar hotel too. I was stating a fact, not a threat. Big difference between the two.
Psuedolegal organizations, such as “common law grand juries,” have been used for decades … by anti-government groups. Here’s some information about in whose footsteps Swensson is following:
The Anti-Government
Movement Guidebook (National Center for State Courts)
Renegade ‘Justice’: Common Law Insurgents Build Bogus Judicial System (Southern Poverty Law Center)
Common Law and Uncommon Courts: An Overview of the Common Law Court Movement (Anti-Defamation League)
Excerpt from Guns & Gavels: Common Law Courts, Militias & White Supremacy (Coalition for Human Dignity)
Vigilante Justice: Common Law Courts (Covert Action Quarterly)
Yes, exactly. However, I think in general the political right somehow has come to intertwine religion and politics in such a way that they feel they have a divine right to rule. That is why Obama’s win is giving them such heartburn. The Birthers are channeling their lack of acceptance of this reality to the phony eligibility question.
If you read many of the comments on Phil’s blog and on even more extreme blogs like the OC a common theme is somehow that the world is going to end as we know it if Obama is not removed from power. It isn’t any wonder that a small group of unintelligent people bought into that rhetoric that Obama is Satan since it is being subtly pushed by more main stream republican outlets like Fox News and Limbaugh and was used in desperation by the McCain – Palin campaign, especially by Palin. The reality is that Obama is probably to the right of center of the positions of the average member of the Democratic party and not that different from moderate Republicans.
I think the concern is that the rhetoric and reporting of the so called “indictment” by a “citizens grand jury” might lead some people to commit or threaten acts of theft or violence under mistaken belief that they have some sort of legal right to do so. That’s why Donofrio has correctly used the word “criminal” to refer to any such contemplated acts.
The statement, “The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions, and any way else they can until amends shall have been made according to the sole judgment of the grand jury.” — is objectively false and could encourage some misguided zealots to break the law.
Even a real grand jury doesn’t have the power to take anyones property — grand jury indictments merely allow formal charges to be leveled against whoever is indicted — guilt or innocence is later determined by a judge or petit jury, after a contested trial and proof beyond a reasonable doubt — and punishment is leveled only by the judge. (You’ll note that when a real grand jury returned an indictment against Blagojevich with 16 new charges, he stayed free in Disneyland — he is still “innocent until proven guilty” pending his trial).
Sue,
These are your words — especially on the not-so-veiled threat — not anyone else’s. Assuming rights aren’t violated, I think it’s true that even you would say that the CLGJ has no actual power, per se, so what are you concerned about?
-Phil
Lt. Col. David A. Earl -Graef,
While you have just made an overall exemplary comment on the current status of things, what you’ve said RE: Dr. Taitz is precisely my position as well. In fact, many commenters have so claimed — claimed — many things about her that certain other commenters have attempted to use such claims as the basis for her lying and what not; there is no evidence in hand that anything she has said, to date, has been a lie, though her sometimes broken English has been used quite morbidly against her.
-Phil
“The language they’ve published about taking people’s property and “other” enforcement options is complete and utter criminal bullshit.”
If this CGJ actually tries to do this, I suspect that “We, the people” will find out quickly they are on the wrong side of the law and have no authority to do this. They might also get to visit the crowbar motel.
speedy,
Could you source this claim, please? My understanding is that the jury was held in a private commercial building.
-Phil
“plus Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan, the North Carolina eligibility challenger whose son was arrested 3/25, upon apparently no evidence, for not answering questions at a police vehicle stop…”
I suggest you get all the facts in this arrest before you come to the above conclusion. This young man’s arrest has absolutely nothing to do with the eligibility issue.
earl,
The problem with your premise is that you’re effectively trying to shut down any sort of conversation on any sort of “controversial” topic. After all, if your theory is true, then we are all taking a chance that someone somewhere is going to become sufficiently angry enough about a given issue that they’re going to go run amok and do something very dangerous.
I think you’ve hit on a cop out.
There’s no point in trying to push such theories on this site, because anyone with half an observational ability will see that you’re simply trying to grasp at reasons for why (1) eligibility about this President shouldn’t be discussed; (2) my site should really either stop talking about this President’s eligibility and/or shut down; and/or (3) those who are sympathetic with questioning this President are less than truthful about their claims of eligibility.
-Phil
[...] Andy Martin and Leo Donofrio. For Donofrio on this, I suggest yesterday’s treatment in The Right Side of Life, Thursday, 4/2. For Andy Martin on this, see his net-radio interview by Mark McGrew, Friday, 3/27. Meanwhile, [...]
Obama is aware he is in question of not being transparent to show he is qualified to be POTUS under the Constitution.
I feel Obama is encouraging people to riot over his not being transparent and hiding all his records.
There is talk of bearing arms now on this sight and others.
Does Obama want people to bear arms to get the answers they deserve?
It seems Obama, being an innocent man, serving as leader of the United States he should openly address the ones he serves with the TRUTH along with documents to prove it.
Would Obama actually go so far as to let blood run on the streets so he can hide his records???
The Constitution should not be taken lightly and blood continues to flow abroad to protect it each and every day.
Why do you think it says enemies foreign and DOMESTIC? We have a great military to fight abroad but who do we have to fight for the Constitution on the Domestic side? We have corrupt courts and so called Lawyers looking for loopholes daily with Non American ways while our soldiers die abroad.
Wake up America…
It is the responsibility of Obama to address the people.
How far will Obama let this go before he addresses it?
This issue isn’t just going to go away like some had hoped it would.
Sue,
I have no direct evidence to my knowledge that such monitoring is, in fact, occuring on “these blogs,” so I really couldn’t say.
-Phil