More on Common Law Grand Juries; Dr. Orly Taitz Update
Sam Sewell, prolific blogger at TheSteadyDrip, posted two articles regarding common law grand juries.
The first article pulls from columnist Mark McGrew who explains the basis for such a grand jury (excerpted here):
The fifth amendment of the US Constitution states: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on the presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury”.
So who or what is a Grand Jury?
Most Americans, including most Judges, most prosecutors and most lawyers think a Grand Jury is a function of the government, at the whim of the government, under the control and direction of the government. However, this is constitutionally false and always has been.
Americans are educated to believe that America has three branches of government: The Judicial, The Legislative and the Executive and that is they who decide our lives. This also is false. There is a Constitutional force which has power, authority and dominance over those three branches.
That is the The Grand Jury of We The People. The Grand Jury was intended to give the people of the United States of America total control over a potentially corrupt government and to enable prosecution of corrupt or criminal government officials, agents and employees, whether they were elected, hired or appointed.
The Constitution of The United States of America was created and designed to give the individual or collective people of America the power to tell the government what to do. The government, including the President of the country has no Rights to make Americans do anything that is not permitted by or is contrary to our Constitution. The US Constitution especially has no provision for an illegal alien to be our President and pass laws that we do not permit or condone.
United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ruled in the case of United States vs. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992):
“Rooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history, Hannah v. Larche, 363 US 420, 490 (1960) with J. Frankfurter concurring in result, the Grand Jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the three branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right.”
To be crystal clear: The Grand Jury is a Constitutional fixture in its own right. …
In a second article, Bob Campbell, Editor for AmericanGrandJury.org, talks about the kinds of evidence the online grand jury is seeking in order to produce a presentment (another excerpt):
…PHYSICAL EVIDENCE: Images, web links, stories, articles, photos, videos — anything and everything that could be construed as physical evidence regarding Barack Obama, Barry Sortero, Barack Hussein Obama as it applies to:
1 ) Birth Certificate fraud, forgery, misrepresentation;
2 ) Selective Service documents fraud, forgery, misrepresentation;
3 ) School records or School loans pertaining to Obama history, fraud, misrepresentation;
4 ) Campaign information pertaining to fraud, illegal contributions, voter fraud, voter registration fraud;
5 ) Democratic National Convention information pertaining to illegal vetting of candidate, misrepresentation, fraud;
6 ) Job history, finances, friends, associations pertaining to background of Barack Obama and questionable actions, fraud or misrepresentation;
7 ) Presidential endorsements, actions, sanctions, executive decisions or acts by Obama that could be construed as anti-American or acting against the best interests or will of the people of the United States;
8 ) Abuse of Executive Power that is directly in violation of the laws of the Constitution of the United States of America;
9 ) Fraud against the people using the Internet and/or news media to usurp power and hide the truth;
10 ) Aiding and abetting known enemies of the United States, violating the Logan Act, acting against the best interests of our foreign allies;
11 ) Violating the rights of the people of the United States by usurping power and authority by restricting freedom of speech, free enterprise, or ownership of property or by agreeing to or pushing for unfair taxation or improper spending of taxpayer dollars or by approving such legislation that would weaken our economy, devalue our currency, restrict our banking or our investments;
12 ) or such other crimes or charges as the people of the United States would wish to uncover or pursue. …EXPERT WITNESSES: If you think you may qualify as an expert witness because of your background, skills, knowledge, sensitive positions, or through chance or opportunity as it relates to any of the evidence stated above we would like to hear from you:
1 ) Example: You worked for the DNC and you overheard information about the illegal vetting of Obama;
2 ) You have knowledge or information about illegal contributions to the Obama Campaign;
3 ) You have knowledge or information about voter fraud, or voter registration fraud;
4 ) You can testify as to the Birth Certificate, Selective Service documents, School records, etc., as to their forgery, fraud or misrepresentation thereof.
5 ) This is just a few examples of what might apply; there can be many more examples of expert witnesses. …
Also, Sam provides the following evidence as to the independence of grand juries:
Because grand juries are generally composed of ordinary citizens with no special training or experience in the law, they usually follow the lead of the prosecutor assigned to them. The classic complaint of defendants’ attorneys is that grand jurors would indict a ham sandwich if the prosecutor asked them to. But they don’t always do as the prosecutor wishes, as Jeannene Pacific, the district attorney in Jones County, Mississippi, discovered. Ms. Pacific became the target of her own grand jury when it sought to investigate over $35,000 paid by the county’s Worthless Check Unit to Pacific and her staff as “salary supplements.” Alarmed, Pacific asked the local court to forbid the grand jury’s actions. Although the local court did so, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled that the grand jury had the power to investigate:
The grand jury must be free to pursue its investigations unhindered by external influence or supervision so long as it does not trench on the legitimate rights of any witness called before it. The court generally cannot limit the grand jury, its legitimate investigation, interfere with its investigatory function, control the nature of its investigation, prohibit consideration of offenses within any particular class of crimes, stay its proceedings, dismiss a matter, or do various other things.
Ms. Pacific and her assistant eventually repaid over $30,000.
Ex Parte Jones County Grand Jury, 705 So. 2d 1308 (Miss. 1997)
Previous postings on the citizen/common law grand jury include the following:
- Jury Update: American Grand Jury to Hear Evidence Soon
- Citizen Grand Jury: AGJ Reports 49 Member Requests, Swennson Found a Sheriff
- Citizen Jury Update: Illinois and Georgia
- GA: First Common Law National Grand Jury Convenes; Indictment Returned; ECR Interview
- WND: Citizens in 20 More States to Form Common Law Grand Juries
- New Site Speaks on Citizen Grand Jury Action in KY, OH, TN and IL; Update: GA Support for Jury, Taitz
- Leo Donofrio “Condemns” GA Common Law Grand Jury
- Concerned Citizens Encouraged to Contact US Attorney Over Eligibility
(It appears that I’m going to have to form a page for all of these links!)
In somewhat related news, blogger Citizen Wells recently spoke with Dr. Taitz regarding her web site situation:
I just got off the phone with Dr. Orly Taitz. We spoke for a while about her website and the recent controversy. Dr. Taitz has a new website for Defend Our Freedoms.
Orly stated that Defend our Freedoms is her foundation and that she has been blocked from accessing her data on the previous website. She is still committed to the cause of exposing the truth about Barack Obama.
We also spoke about the US Supreme Court, Justice Scalia, Chief Justice Roberts and law clerk Danny Bickell. She and I are both concerned that Bickell is still employed at the Supreme Court after all of the shady dealings that she and other attorneys experienced from Danny Bickell.
Dr. Orly Taitz will attend the San Antonio, TX tea party and stated she will be willing to stay an extra day if enough citizens are willing to meet with the local FBI office and initiate a Citizens Grand Jury. She also stated that her expenses are very high. Every time that she travels she spends at least a thousand dollars. She is providing her services pro bono, so it is not asking too much for people to donate to the cause to help with expenses.
Dr. Orly Taitz new site:
God bless Orly Taitz
-Phil
Twitter: twitter.com/trsol
Article 1, Section 8 provides Congress with certain powers. One of those powers is to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
The Constitution was written in the 18th century, and many of the ideas, concepts and phrases are ambiguous by today’s understanding. The establishment of the U.S. Code, and Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure are written to carry out Constitutional provisions for the protected rights of citizens on both sides — the accused and victims.
The “birthers” as they have become called, insist that the 5th Amendment gives them authority to convene as a Grand Jury and indict President Obama on their allegation that he is not a natural born United States citizen. After having all their cases dismissed by decisions of the courts, their most recent common law grand jury escapade is likened to reading two sentences of a medical book and concluding that they have correctly diagnosed a medical condition and how to treat it on behalf of “We the People.” They are extremely mistaken.
By comparison, a person cannot admit himself to the hospital on his diagnosis alone. He must be examined by a physician. The physician may call in other physicians and maybe also have specialists to confirm that the person requires medical care and the treatment. The ordering of tests and procedures to determine illness follow a chain of command or authority.
No one would want just anyone sticking a needle in their arm to take blood. They would want to make sure that the person is a trained employee of the hospital, the purpose for taking blood, and that a doctor has ordered it.
Common folk meeting in someone’s barn or dining room, calling themselves a Grand Jury, and sending their indictment to government officials, is in violation of the Constitution, as they are in violation of clearly established judicial rules and procedures that were written in the keeping of carrying out of the Constitution.
The 5th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution set forth due process. Due process as proposed by the founding fathers has been incorporated into the constitutions of all the states. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.”
The 5th Amendment sets forth in pertinent part:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, ….”
The birthers have stopped at that point, without considering the 5th Amendment as a whole. The 5th Amendment protects people from being held for committing a crime unless they are properly indicted; that they may not be tried twice for the same crime; that they need not be forced to testify against themselves; and that property not be taken without just compensation. It also contains due process guarantees. One of the guarantees most people have heard of is “pleading the fifth.”
Due process applies to all phases of a criminal proceeding, starting with any pre-trial activities such as arrests, interrogations, and searches of property. Officials cannot lawfully create rules as they go along. The rights of individuals must be protected from the very beginning and this required the establishment and passing of rules to keep things consistent. People might be familiar with Miranda rights as an established rule to protect the due process rights of individuals.
After considering the 5th Amendment as a whole, we must also know how the government describes the carrying out of the 5th Amendment in regards to the Grand Jury. In 1976, in a case called United States vs. Mandujano, Justice Potter Stewart said the following in regards to the Grand Jury Clause:
“[The grand jury's] historic office has been to provide a shield against arbitrary or oppressive action, by insuring that serious criminal accusations will be brought only upon the considered judgment of a representative body of citizens acting under oath and under judicial instruction and guidance.”
This is the way in which the Constitution’s Grand Jury Clause has been historically understood – as a body of citizens acting under oath AND under judicial instruction and guidance.
The courts cannot have citizens running renegade, meeting as a Grand Jury to indict a neighbor of stealing a rose bush. Especially considered is if they do so when local law enforcement already determined that the neighbor has a receipt for purchasing the rose bush that the store verified.
Now, I suppose that someone can allege that the receipt is fake and the store owner is in cohorts with the neighbor, but that does not give them constitutional authority to attempt to circumvent the police investigation by establishing their own lynch mob.
The authority to call forth a Grand Jury clearly lies with “the court.” The birthers might argue that the Constitution does not say that only a court can call forth the Grand Jury. Well, by the same token, it doesn’t say that any group of citizens can meet, calling themselves a “Grand Jury” and giving themselves authority to present an indictment. And, this now goes back to and ties in with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution that grants Congress powers to make laws.
Congress passed the Rules Enabling Act and placed it into U.S. law at 28 U.S.C. Sections 2072 and 2074, giving the Supreme Court of the United States statutory authority to make Rules. The Rules coincide with the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gives the federal courts power to establish “all necessary rules for the orderly conducting [of] business.”
It is logical to conclude that the court’s requirements for the Grand Jury fall under “all necessary rules for the orderly conducting of business.”
With the Sumners Courts Act of 1940, Congress granted authority to the Supreme Court to write and establish the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure became effective on March 21, 1946. The Rules were adopted for three main reasons. The first reason for the adoption of the Rules is designed to abolish the technicalities which led to the dismissal of cases or the reversal of convictions for reasons unconnected with the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
The second reason for the promulgation of the Federal Rules is to ensure “fairness in administration.” The final reason given for the adoption of the Rules is to eliminate “unjustifiable expense and delay.”
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6 subsection (a)(1) clearly sets forth:
“When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned. A grand jury must have 16 to 23 members, and the court must order that enough legally qualified persons be summoned to meet this requirement.”
Rule 6, subsection (b)(1) provides that “the government or defendant may challenge the grand jury on the ground that it was not lawfully drawn, summoned, or selected, and may challenge an individual juror on the ground that the juror is not legally qualified.”
The birthers may not realize that their actions can be challenged by U.S. Attorney General Holder. If he does, I would pay to be present.
Now, we come to the point of the 5th Amendment’s “capital” and “infamous” crimes definitions. Almost everyone understands that a “capital crime” is a crime where the punishment is death or life in prison. Could the birthers believe that President Obama has committed any crime deserving of death? Or, is it their contention that President Obama has committed an “infamous” crime?
In United States v. Moreland, 1924, the Supreme Court ruled that an infamous crime is one in which the punishment for the crime could be a prison sentence. This would mean that the birthers are alleging that if President Obama is not a natural born United States citizen, that he is deserving of a prison sentence. I don’t think there are any laws that imprison illegal immigrants – sending them back to their country in which they are a citizen maybe – but not putting them in prison.
Even if the birthers’s allegations are true, (and federal courts have decided they are not), there is no written law coinciding with the 5th Amendment in which relief can be granted to the birthers.
Effectively, our rights as American citizens cannot be protected if Court Rules are violated. The same Rules that protects citizens by requiring that evidence be presented in a certain matter so that charges are not dismissed on technicalities sending the alleged guilty free, also protects the Constitutional due process rights of the accused. We cannot have it one way without the other.
Sources:
http://www.usconstitution.net/constquick.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/Rule6.htm
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6700/is_n3_87/ai_n28695520/
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/203446/Federal-Rules-of-Criminal-Procedure
Sue says:
April 8, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Jacqlyn,
Natural Born Citizen,
I haven’t the slightest idea of what’s going on. I get RSS feeds from about 2 or 3 of “her” sites, so I guess that http://www.orlytaitzesp.com is now her official site.
Incidentally, that is the site I have referenced on my blog roll.
Thanks,
-Phil
I would respectively point out that Dr. Taitz’s appears to deny that repubx.com is her site at all, saying here
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=95&cpage=1#comment-93
——–
dr_taitz@yahoo.com says:
April 23, 2009 at 2:21 am
unfortunately, there is nno current referral on repubx to this site. I don’t know how to get in touch with this gentleman
—————-
that she is not even in communication with the owner of that site. Furthermore that site (repubx.com) is taking donations and has as the header tag: Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, Dr. Orly’s non profit. So what’s up.
Please clear this up for us Orly fans!
See the comment below Dr. Orly’s at the above URL, makes it seem like that Republx is not an Orly site at all, but someone posing as her foundation…
Natural Born Citizen,
While the sidebar is due for an update probably by this weekend, there are a number of sites that are promoting what Dr. Taitz is sharing.
Apparently her “real” website is at http://repubx.com.
-Phil
Uh, seems like your link on the sidebar to Dr. Orly Taitz and this post contradict one another.
Which is her real site?
The one on your side bar claims that the one mentioned in this post is not hers.
Seems like everyone is claiming to be her; which is the true Dr. Taitz site?
Mary Ann wrote,
Impact? Gee Mary Ann, in all your research, what cases did you find in which these “common law grand juries” had the greatest impact?
>>>>HistorianDude says:
April 14, 2009 at 10:13 am
Not all “grand juries” are created equal. Some are Federal, some are State, and some are “common law.”
The grand juries discussed in the 5th Amendment are only of the first type (Federal). The Supreme Court has ruled (Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884)) that it has no other application. Therefore, as interesting as Mark McGrew’s essay is, it is irrelevant to the “citizen’s” grand juries that are currently the obsession of the Birther community.
HistorianDude, you need to check your common law history book again. Just because the common law grand jury is not explained in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure does not mean that the common law grand jury is no longer in existence. That is a lie told to “we the people” by the “anti-birther community.” We’ve long been hoodwinked to believe that it is strictly a function of the judiciary. I for one am glad to have been awakened to this little Constitutional right. You will find this website helpful:
http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/grandjuryrules.htm
>>>>Bob says:
April 14, 2009 at 2:23 am
Mark McGrew who explains the basis for such a grand jury
Oddly, McGrew is curiously silent as to how a group of people that were not impartially selected and never empaneled by a court can constitute an actual grand jury whose presentments and indictments will be recognized as valid.
The grand jury in Ex Parte Jones County Grand Jury was, of course, empaneled by the court. So all this talk about “independence” and “fourth branch of government,” while perhaps interesting, has no bearing on these common law/national/american “grand juries.”
Bob, you also need to do some more research…common law research. I just did a quick Google search and found lots of independent explanations of the term “common law grand jury.” You might be interested to know that many grand jurors are volunteers from the community at large. I know some of the “birthers” call it the 4th branch of government, but I disagree. I think it was intended as a backup for our citizenry to deal with governmental abuse and excess.
To both of you: While I can appreciate your loyalty to your master, your chosen one, I think you are being willfully ignorant of the legality and impact of common law grand juries. But, hey, I’ll support your right to be willfully ignorant if that’s what you really want.
Mary Ann
New hit article at the top of my Stat Counter
My conclusion: Obama will be indicted and charged
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-conclusion-obama-will-be-indicted.html\
Please share! Send link or cut and paste.
From the article,
The thing about the judges is, they’re the judges.
If the Grand Jury is ignored they are impotent except for the court of public opinion and the tactic of another indictment against the “Ignorer” as a co-conspiritor. It is very unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment and all we need is one. However, you are correct to assume that the way we are doing it is without enforcement powers.
Even if these independently convened Grand Juries are the people assembling to redress the grievances that is no small thing.
Hundred of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of which will almost certainly form more conventional grand juries to indict AKA (federal is the least likely to be successful).
The American Grand Jury organization I am affiliated with is using recognized expert witness with a long professional history of forensic testimony. Any prosecutor or judge that ignores such evidence and testimony is risking being seen as a co-conspirator.
However, I am not at all sure that Grand Juries need to be impaneled by a judge.
“ This government is acknowledged by all, to be one of enumerated powers.”
—Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland”
“ We start with first principles. The Constitution creates a Federal Government of enumerated powers.”
—Chief Justice William Rehnquist in United States v. Lopez”
The specific, “enumerated” powers of Congress are spelled out in Article of I Section 8 the Constitution. There are twenty of them.
Because these powers are delegated from the people, they are the only powers Congress has. But our Founding Fathers went further — trying hard to make enumerated powers so obvious that even a politician couldn’t miss the point. They passed the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to shut the door to claims of additional power . . .
Two very important points of the Constitution to take into consideration when determining of impaneling Grand Juries is a power and right of the people, or the people being subject to Court approval.
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
&
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
DC Downsizer Michael Mitchell of Alaska compiled this list of the enumerated powers of the government from Article I of the U.S. Constitution. These are all the powers that the Congress has.
1. Borrow money
2. Regulate commerce among the states
3. Regulate naturalization
4. Regulate bankruptcies
5. Coin money
6. Fix weights and standards
7. Punish counterfeiters
8. Establish post offices
9. Establish post roads
10. Record patents
11. Protect copyrights
12. Create federal courts
13. Punish pirates
14. Declare war
15. Raise an army
16. Provide a navy
17. Call up the militia
18. Organize the militia
19. Makes laws for Washington, DC
20. Make rules for the Army and Navy
And that’s it! Mitchell continues, “According to the 10th Amendment, all else is controlled by the states or the people.
”
I don’t see Grand Jury on that list.
Such a premise will need to be validated by a court decision, no doubt. But the only mention of Grand Jury in the Constitution is “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,” Is the Grand Jury a power and Rioght of the People
My conclusion: It is very unlikely that the American Grand Jury effort will not result in an indictment by a conventionally impaneled Grand Jury. I also think that a SCOTUS decision needs to be made to firmly establish that citizens can impanel Grand Juries without court approval or supervision.
Aristotle the Hun
I can’t think of any charity that would do more for this country.
Defend Our Freedoms isn’t a charitable organization.
Not all “grand juries” are created equal. Some are Federal, some are State, and some are “common law.”
The grand juries discussed in the 5th Amendment are only of the first type (Federal). The Supreme Court has ruled (Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884)) that it has no other application. Therefore, as interesting as Mark McGrew’s essay is, it is irrelevant to the “citizen’s” grand juries that are currently the obsession of the Birther community.
McGrew particularly continues to tap dance around the issue of Constitutional authority in his discussion of grand juries. Scalia’s observation that the Federal Grand Jury “is a constitutional fixture in its own right” hardly establishes it as a “4th Branch of Government” (a phrase that can be found nowhere in Scalia’s Opinion). Scalia’s Opinion goes to great lengths explaining the independence of a Federal Grand Jury once constituted. But he also recognizes that the Constitutional authority for a Federal Grand Jury’s actions is a delegated one, passing specifically through the conduit of one of the Three Branches enumerated in the Constitution.
The functional independence of the Federal Grand Jury once constituted is the subject of this opinion and the clear context of the Scalia reference isolated above by McGrew. But a “grand jury” of any other stripe (“citizen’s,” “people’s,” “National,” call it whatever you want) cannot even be recognized by any law enforcement body unless it has, like a real Federal Grand Jury been delegated constitutional authority by one of the Three Branches. In the case of Federal Grand Juries that requires a constitutive act of being “called together” by a Federal Judge.
In the case of the “common law grand juries” we have been discussing on these pages… no such authorizing activity is taking place. They are, therefore, entirely impotent in terms of generating any enforcement activity for its decisions.
Evidence concerning Barack Hussein Obama is provided in large measure by Obama himself as shown in the following article:
Barack Hussein Obama’s Dislike for the United States of America
By Ron Marlar Mar. 31, 2009
Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” Vanity asks the question, “Is it popular?” But conscience asks the question, “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because one’s conscience tells one that it is right. – Martin Luther King, Jr.
Summary: The author, highly qualified to do so, reviews Obama’s life, actions and plans, and calls for specific action to get Obama to prove he is Constitutionally eligible to run for, serve as POTUS/CINC, the latter in wartime, and that he attained the Office by legal means in campaign fundraising. To show “transparency in government” Obama must prove he is Constitutionally eligible to be POTUS and surrender his campaign finance records for independent audit.
There is no question that Obama is hiding records proving or not his Constitutional eligibility to run for and serve as POTUS/CINC. The only questions are what exactly is Obama hiding and why? McCain’s Constitutional eligibility was determined by the U.S. Congress. Why not Obama’s?
Obama’s campaign finance records are held much in secret. McCain’s are open and available, above board. Why not Obama’s?
Barack Hussein and Michelle Obama do not like the United States of America as it has been and is so far at present. They make their dislike of the U.S. clear in their past and present words and actions. Those that they have associated with as their closest friends and co-workers and those that they have brought into his Administration share their dislike going to hatred of and even to terrorist acts against the U.S.
This is odd because all of them have lived and continue to live lives of privileged elites enjoying the best the U.S. has had and still has to offer.
Obama ran on the campaign mantra “hope for change.” The change was unspecified and remains in some instances unknown or at least not known clearly.
Obama makes some of his hope for change evident in Dreams From My Father, 2004, and The Audacity of Hope, 2006, the latter title taken from a sermon by Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
Before changing its website at tucc.org the church honored W.E.B. DuBois, self-avowed Communist, and Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, headquartered in New York City. Wright preached black separatism and hatred for the U.S., “Goddamn America” his most infamous remark publicized so widely and available at one time on videotape(s) sold by the church.
The church still honors Jeremiah Wright and proclaims itself Africa- and African-centered, teaching Black Liberation theology.
The Obamas are not known to have gone to a Christian church, except for rare ceremonial occasions since moving from Chicago to D.C.
In the books bearing Obama’s name, read by few – less than 1% of the 25 or less percent – legally or illegally-registered by ACORN U.S. voters in the ’08 election who voted for Obama, Obama makes clear his presumed father was Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. His presumed father abandoned Barack, Jr. and his mother to return to Kenya to his other wife and children.
Obama, Sr. was a Muslim, Marxist, political activist in Kenya before his death in a drunken car crash. Obama, Sr. was buried in a Muslim cemetery by Muslim rites – multiple sources.
In The Audacity Obama explains his entire life as “my exotic background,” p. 120. He says further in context I will leave for you to read, “I will stand with the Muslims,” p. 261.
Obama was raised in his “formative years” – his words – ages 6-10 in Indonesia by Indonesian Muslim Lolo Sotero who Obama’s mother married after they were abandoned by Obama, Sr. – multiple sources including Obama’s books.
Indonesia is a large majority Muslim-dominated country with some of the most violent Muslims against Christians and others anywhere in the world today – multiple sources.
In his Indonesia years as an adopted stepson Obama was known as Barry Sotero. He attended school as a Muslim, studied the Qur’an, attended mosque with his father and prayed rote Muslim prayers from the Qur’an – multiple sources including Obama.
At age 10 Obama was sent from Indonesia to Hawaii to be raised by his white grandparents, principally his white, bank executive grandmother. He was sent to an exclusive, private school. As he writes and says he was mentored in Hawaii, heavy into drugs and alcohol as a pre-teen and teenager, by Frank Marshall Davis, black writer, musician and another self-avowed Communist. Obama’s references in his books are vague but become clear in other written and verbal statements of Obama and writers about Obama – multiple sources including Obama.
Some say Davis is Obama’s real father. Obama nor any other living person can be sure who Obama’s father is. Obama’s mother was a promiscuous child, impregnated as an unwed teenage college student by some black man, then an adult woman still interested in Marxist philosophy, men of color and Islam. She died at an early age, confirmed by Obama, it is reported due to sex-related cancer of the uterus – multiple sources including Obama.
From his experiences in Indonesia Obama said, the Muslim call to prayer “is one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset” – multiple sources including Obama.
From Occidental College Obama traveled to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport as an Indonesian citizen at a time when Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship, e.g. U.S. and Indonesian. In Pakistan he stayed at the homes of his closest friends – Muslim men and fellow students at Occidental – multiple sources including Obama.
Obama has made other admissions of his “Muslim faith,” including in a televised interview with George Stephanopoulos, ABC, who graciously tried to correct Obama – video of the interview and multiple sources for both Obama’s admission of his Muslim faith and love of the Muslim call to prayer.
That Obama shares the hatred of Muslims for the U.S. is not arguable since Muslim leaders have called the U.S. “the Great Satan” for years and vowed to destroy us, all Jews, Israel and since the 7th C. to take over the world for Allah, establish a worldwide caliphate with Shar’ia law and to convert, subjugate or murder all unbelievers in Islam. Obama is included in the latter along with his family if he were indeed an unbeliever in Islam.
A principle of Islam is to “seduce (fool, trick) them until strong enough to take them over.” Obama has certainly duped many in the U.S. and the world in pursuit of his aims, his hope for change in and of the U.S. and the world – multiple sources including the Qur’an.
Michelle said, “For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback” – Milwaukee, WI campaign rally on Feb. 18, 2008, YouTube, Feb. 19, 2008 and other public media sources.
She repeated her pride statement in Madison, WI the same day with some variation, “For the first time in my adult lifetime I am proud of my country and not just because Barack has done well but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and not just feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic, common issues, and it’s made me proud” –Madison, WI campaign rally, Feb. 18, 2008, on another YouTube, Feb. 19, 2008 and other public media sources.
Michelle’s statement was repeated in a multitude of media so favorable to the Obamas that Bernard Goldberg wrote a book titled A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (and Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media.
At Princeton University as an undergraduate student Michelle wrote a paper reporting on a study of the feelings of blacks before, while at and after leaving Princeton. Clearly an expression of her racism and ill feelings toward the U.S., the paper was well written technically but devoid of any value other than a catharsis perhaps for her hatred – her paper available online.
All this is odd indeed because not all get to go to Princeton, Occidental, Columbia, Harvard or any other prestigious U.S. or overseas schools. Only the privileged elite and the set asides for racial, ethnic and other preferences get to do so.
Thus the Obamas are privileged elite; mentored, aided, abetted and supported by Black Separatists, Socialists, Communists, Muslims and terrorists at their chosen church – TUCC in Chicago – and at other times and places in their lives.
Obama was mentored at TUCC in Chicago by Wright while working as an ACORN community organizer. The Obama’s were married and their children baptized there. At Occidental, Princeton, Columbia and Harvard, and in their jobs in Chicago the Obamas grew with and profited from their closest friends and co-workers. The latter included Rezko, Ayers, a variety of Muslims and other criminals in prison or pending trial and imprisonment – multiple sources.
With that background, laid out by both Barack and Michelle, Obama as President is leading the U.S. to its knees in bankruptcy, preparing us to welcome “bailout” by those who hold the world’s oil and $$ – we know who they are. Then Obama can surrender us to some form of Islamic dhimmi* under control of Muslims and Communist Chinese, Russians, Cubans, Socialist Venezuelans and others. (*Please Google dhimmi for more information on that travesty in history and presently.)
Obama said the Presidency is an Office for which he is not well suited, and later specifically “well above his pay grade” at the Saddleback Forum, during the campaign. Indeed he is not well suited for the Office by virtue of his lack of qualification by prior education, training, work and life experiences. Furthermore and most importantly is the high probability based on all available evidence that he is not Constitutionally eligible to have run for President let alone serve as POTUS – multiple sources.
Through either ignorance, naiveté, inexperience, lack of qualification in his first real job, or deliberately as the most radical Liberal, strongly influenced at best by Black Separatists, Socialists, Communists, Islam and terrorists he is leading the U.S. to bankruptcy, ready to welcome “bailout” by those who hold the world’s oil and $$, and surrender to some form of Islamic dhimmi under control of Muslims, Communists, Socialists and others – multiple sources.
Both 1) in ignorance, naiveté, inexperience and lack of qualification or 2) deliberately are possibilities, and all by his own admissions in his books – The Audacity of Hope and Dreams From My Father – and in his “campaign rhetoric” – his words again.
All Obama has done before, on and since Jan. 20, 2009 prove what he is doing in carrying out his plan. Either by accidental lack of qualification or by deliberate design the results of Obama are the same – multiple sources including Obama; please see whitehouse.org for the Obama/Biden priorities plan.
He and his Administration show no give, no willingness to deviate from his and its plan. He and his Administration treat the rest of us – we the people – as unfit to judge him and what he is doing to us, the nation and in the world. For the most part he and his ignore us, pressing on with their intents at a rapid, most destructive pace.
Given all that Obama and his Administration leave us no choice.
We can get deal with Obama by legal means maybe before it is too late, if not too late already, by writing, calling, visiting our Representative, Senators, the White House, Attorney General, U.S. Supreme Court, Democrat National Committee, Federal Election Commission, the Electoral College although not currently in session, even and most especially the media.
These are our Constitutional rights to work with the people we have hired and pay to work for us – we the people – not the other way around.
We must demand that they do their jobs, which all have neglected in one way or another, some grossly and willfully.
We must demand they require Obama to show “transparency in government” – prove he is Constitutionally eligible to be POTUS and surrender his campaign finance records for independent audit. His campaign finance records are held much in secret. McCain’s are open and available, above board.
The records of proof of his Constitutional eligibility include his real birth certificate; colleges and universities admission, scholarship, attendance, performance records and significant work done at Occidental, Columbia and Harvard; and any and all of his records from Kenya and Indonesia. The Kenyan Ambassador to the U.S. suggested all this some months ago – multiple sources.
All loyal Americans will do this especially those who voted for him; otherwise their votes are lost. All Obama has done is unlawful, illegal and will be voided leading the U.S. further into anarchy, chaos and third world status to which he thrust the U.S. by running for and serving as President lacking proof of his Constitutional eligibility.
Race riots may result; they have before. They will anyway as Obama disappoints, fails in his promises of hope for change.
Disenchantment with Obama is growing; his approval ratings as POTUS are sinking quickly as is approval of his specific acts, some still secret, unknown outside of Obama and his closest inner circle. A significant and growing number of voters for Obama are expressing voter remorse and have been doing so for some months now – multiple sources, including Rasmussen and other poll takers and reporters.
McCain’s eligibility was determined by the U.S. Congress. Why not Obama’s? – multiple sources.
Liberal Democrat Obamaniacs are sucking us into distractions, majoring in minors, living in the past, and fussing over deck chairs while the ship sinks, along with Obama’s approval ratings. We are letting them do it to us – multiple sources. We must stop it. Stop them. Stop Obama now!
This is not the time to continue engaging in distractions, majoring in minors, living in the past or fussing over deck chairs while the ship sinks.
This is the time to support the President by doing what he has asked all to do – “put aside childish things,” his “campaign rhetoric,” support him in “bipartisan ways, give feedback for transparency in government, hope for change” – multiple sources including primarily Obama.
For those who voted for Obama not do to so shows they do not trust, have faith, belief in Obama. Not to do so shows they are cowards and liars, first to themselves.
We owe it to our brave men and women in uniform to do it. We are in a world war against Islamic jihadists. We have been so since at least the 1970s through seven Presidencies now with varying degrees of success, since the most recent resurgence of Islam in its history. Muslims have made further progress worldwide than ever before, and are on the brink of bringing down the U.S. and other world nations – multiple sources, including again Obama.
Obama is on one hand continuing Bush policies, continuing to put our young men and women into harm’s way overseas. Obama’s policies and actions are jeopardizing them and us on the same battlefronts in Afghanistan and Iraq, elsewhere, and encouraging both old and new enemies of the U.S. to challenge Obama in many ways.
Obama and Biden have said, Obama most recently, we are likely to be hit again on our homeland – the U.S. – multiple sources, including Obama.
If for no other reason please do the right thing, help get Obama to prove his eligibility or not as POTUS and Commander in Chief, giving lawful, legal orders to our fathers, mothers, spouses, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, cousins and close friends who stand between us and more anarchy, chaos and certain destruction.
Our troops from low ranks to an Army Reserve Major General are challenging Obama as POTUS/CINC eligible to issue lawful, legal orders to them putting their lives in jeopardy – multiple sources.
-Ron Marlar is a retired military officer, combat-disabled veteran with 21 years on active duty, 38 years total in uniform. He is also a retired university professor, high school department chair and teacher in adult education programs of subjects including aviation, boating, history, international relations, leadership/management and national defense.
He founded and ran several small businesses in aviation, public relations/communication and SCUBA diving. He has studied Islam for 45 years, including in graduate school and frequent meetings with Muslims in the U.S. and the Middle East, visiting in the Middle East for extended stays eight times now since 2004 alone.
He has supported students pursuing doctorates, masters’ degrees and college entry from secondary schools, and missionaries on overseas missions, some with Muslims. He has made many overseas and U.S. mission trips alone or with only one companion and plans to do more as time, money, health and other commitments permit.
Currently he volunteers with a university in underwater marine archaeology in the Mediterranean Sea and ministers to Jews, Muslims and others in the U.S. and overseas, and to those less fortunate in the U.S.
Mark McGrew who explains the basis for such a grand jury
Oddly, McGrew is curiously silent as to how a group of people that were not impartially selected and never empaneled by a court can constitute an actual grand jury whose presentments and indictments will be recognized as valid.
The grand jury in Ex Parte Jones County Grand Jury/i> was, of course, empaneled by the court. So all this talk about “independence” and “fourth branch of government,” while perhaps interesting, has no bearing on these common law/national/american “grand juries.”
Congratulation Dr Orly Taitz, we still have faith in you and keep going till end. It is not end now but soon will. I am glad to call you our “Greatest Liberty Lady in American History”. We shall get our American Promised Lands Back for our Lord and for our American Citizens !. Thank you Orly, we love you for ever.
Sincerely,
Robert R Sewell Sr age 78
OK everyone – here is our chance to do our part. Dr. Taitz is spending her own money to literally save our country. We all support her in the “comments” section, but that isn’t going to pay the bills. Nobody expects any of us to drain our bank accounts, but if each of us sends her $5 or $10 it would sure go a long ways toward helping pay her expenses. Consider what she is doing for us and what the consequences are if she succeeds or if she fails. Let’s chip in a little – it will be the best money you have ever spent, and I can’t think of any charity that would do more for this country.
Is there an address where we can send cash or a check? Maybe a bank? Or a professional office?
Thanks for this update, Phil. The person who responded to my Email about the site, RGS (aka Jesse Smith), had said the provider had abruptly stopped the hosting services and the transfer to another site was not complete.
“Her original hosting provider abruptly stopped the hosting, though the transfer process was and is not complete. They still have to provide an authorization code before any changes on this end can be made.”
While Dr. Taitz is in San Antonio, she should seek out Glenn Beck. He is there for the Tea Party.
Anyone who thinks Dr. Taitz doesn’t have a leg to stand on, does not have the right to mess with her right of free speech or anyone else’s.
Agree, disagree…if someone is silenced, we all lose.