Tag Archives: Monday

Ron Paul blames America for 9/11, GOP debate, Monday, September 12, 2011, Whose side is Paul on?, Left wing propaganda

Ron Paul blames America for 9/11, GOP debate, Monday, September 12, 2011, Whose side is Paul on?, Left wing propaganda

“With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?”

“You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.
   For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
   But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot;
   An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
   An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy
sees!”…Rudyard Kipling, “Tommy”

“Militant Islam derives from Islam but is a misanthropic, misogynist, triumphalist, millenarian, anti-modern, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, terroristic, jihadistic, and suicidal version of it. Fortunately, it appeals to only about 10 percent to 15 percent of Muslims, meaning that a substantial majority would prefer a more moderate version.”…Daniel Pipes

If you want politically correct, go somewhere else.

The US defeated Nazi Germany and Japan and then helped rebuild the countries.
In 1990 Saudi Arabia asked for US troops to help stop the invasion of Kuwait and ultimately protect the Saudis.
The French, Germans and Russians were in bed with Saddam Hussein. I believe that the US invasion of Iraq could have been avoided if the United Nations had done it’s job.

I could have blasted Ron Paul in late 2008 when he stated that he would be laughed out of Congress if he challenged Obama’s eligibility. I did not let Mr. Constitution have it then. He was behaving like the rest of the sheep.

I agree with Glenn Beck, some of the statements made by Ron Paul make sense. However, Paul crossed over the line when he blamed America for 9/11. It was irresponsible and wrong!

Ron Paul mentioned the Saudis when he spoke of American Military Bases. His speech sounded more like left wing propaganda and employed selective references. Here are some facts regarding the Saudis.

From Daniel Pipes, winter of 2002/2003.

“DanielPipes.org looks at the Middle East, Islam, terrorism, U.S.
foreign policy, and related topics from the perspective of an American
with a Ph.D. in medieval Middle East history who now heads a
current-affairs think tank, the Middle East Forum.”
“The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations”

 
“Consider two symbolic moments in the U.S.-Saudi relationship involving
a visit by one leader to the other’s country. In November 1990,
President George H.W. Bush went to the Persian Gulf region with his
wife and top congressional leaders at Thanksgiving time to visit the
400,000 troops gathered in Saudi Arabia, whom he sent there to protect
that country from an Iraqi invasion. When the Saudi authorities
learned that the President intended to say grace before a festive
Thanksgiving dinner, they remonstrated; Saudi Arabia knows only one
religion, they said, and that is Islam. Bush acceded, and he and his
entourage instead celebrated the holiday on the U.S.S. Durham, an
amphibious cargo ship sitting in international waters.

In April 2002, as Crown Prince Abdallah of Saudi Arabia, the country’s
effective ruler, was about to travel across Texas to visit President
George W. Bush, an advance group talked to the airport manager in Waco
(the airport serving the President’s ranch in Crawford) “and told him
they did not want any females on the ramp and also said there should
not be any females talking to the airplane.”[2] The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) at Waco complied with this request and passed it
to three other FAA stations on the crown prince’s route, which also
complied. Then, when queried about this matter, both the FAA and the
State Department joined the Saudi foreign minister in flat-out denying
that there ever was a Saudi request for male-only controllers.

The import of these incidents is clear enough: Official Americans in
Saudi Arabia bend to Saudi customs, and official Americans in the
United States do so as well. And it’s not just a matter of travel
etiquette; one finds parallel American obsequiousness concerning such
issues as energy, security, religion and personal status. The Saudis
routinely set the terms of this bilateral relationship. For decades,
U.S. government agencies have engaged in a consistent pattern of
deference to Saudi wishes, making so many unwonted and unnecessary
concessions that one gets the impression that a switch has taken
place, with both sides forgetting which of them is the great power and
which the minor one. I shall first document this claim, then offer an
explanation for it, and conclude with a policy recommendation.”

“Starting in 1991, the U.S. military required its female personnel
based in Saudi Arabia to wear black, head-to-foot abayas. (This makes
Saudi Arabia the only country in the world where U.S. military
personnel are expected to wear a religiously-mandated garment.)
Further, the women had to ride in the back seat of vehicles and be
accompanied by a man when off base.”
“The pattern of Saudi fathers abducting children from the United States
to Saudi Arabia, and then keeping them there with the full agreement
of the Saudi authorities, affects at least 92 children of U.S. mothers
and Saudi fathers, perhaps many more. In each of these heartbreaking
cases, the State Department has behaved with weakness bordering on
sycophancy. To be specific, it has accepted the Saudi law that gives
the father near-absolute control over the movement and activities of
his children and wife (or wives). The department has made no real
efforts to signal its displeasure to the Saudi authorities over these
cases, much less made vigorous efforts to free the children held
against their American families’ wishes.”

“In Saudi Arabia, the U.S. government submits to restrictions on
Christian practices that it would find totally unacceptable anywhere
else in the world-starting with the U.S. president’s not celebrating
Thanksgiving in the Kingdom, as mentioned above. The hundreds of
thousands of American troops in Saudi Arabia in December 1990 were not
permitted to hold formal Christmas services at their bases on Saudi
soil; all that was allowed to them were “C-word morale services” held
in places where they would be invisible to the outside world, such as
tents and mess halls. The goal was for no Saudi to be made to suffer
the knowledge that Christians were at prayer.”

“With Jews, the issue is not freedom of religious practice in Saudi
Arabia; it is simply gaining entry to the Kingdom. In several
instances over many years, agencies of the U.S. government have
excluded Jewish Americans from positions in Saudi Arabia. Hunter
explains that a protocol prohibiting Jews being assigned to the
Kingdom was signed by the U.S. Embassy in Jeddah and the Saudi
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as a result of which the State Department
avoids sending Jewish employees to reside in Saudi Arabia.[11] Select
senior diplomats of Jewish origin may briefly visit the country on
official business but “no low or mid-level Jewish-American diplomat
was permitted to be stationed/reside in Kingdom” during Hunter’s
three-year experience.”

“Mail to U.S. military and official government personnel enters the
Kingdom on U.S. military craft, and American officials in Saudi Arabia
follow Saudi wishes by seizing and disposing of Christmas trees and
decorations and other symbols of the holiday. They seize and destroy
Christmas cards sent to (the mostly non-official) Americans who
receive their mail through a Saudi postal box, and even tear from the
envelope U.S. stamps portraying religious scenes.”

Read more:

http://www.danielpipes.org/995/the-scandal-of-us-saudi-relations

Blagojevich trial, Monday, April 12, 2010, Documents unsealed, Judge James Zagel, Chicago Tribune SunTimes request, What has been kept hidden?

Blagojevich trial, Monday, April 12, 2010, Documents unsealed

Today, Monday, April 12, 2010, sealed documents in the Rod Blagojevich trial will be made public except for portions that defense attorneys successfully plea to keep hidden.

From The Chicago SunTimes.

“Blagojevich judge to unseal key document in case”

“U.S. District Judge James Zagel said today he will make public a key document in the Rod Blagojevich case after major news outlets, including the Chicago Sun-Times, objected to its secret filing.
The Santiago Proffer, a prosecution filing that acts as a road map to the government’s strategy in the case, will be publicly available Wednesday, Zagel ruled today.
The Sun-Times, Chicago Tribune and Associated Press stepped in and asked for the document to be made public after the government initially filed it under seal.
But there may be some portions of the filing that will not be made public.
Zagel is giving defense lawyers until Monday to suggest portions they want to keep out of public view for now.
He then said the prosecution had 24 hours to respond.
Defense lawyer Sheldon Sorosky said he didn’t want the government to file a document that quotes what prosecutors consider their “best tapes.” Sorosky said if the document cites portions of the secret FBI recordings, then all the tapes should be released before trial, so the jury pool isn’t tainted.”

Read more:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/blago/2010/04/blagojevich_judge_to_unseal_ke.html
United States District Court
Northern District of Illinois
Judge James B. Zagel

Chambers: (312) 435 – 5713
PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND
DATE OF APPOINTMENT

April 22, 1987
ENTERED ON DUTY
June 17, 1987
 
1979 – 1980 Director, Illinois Department of Revenue
1980 – 1987 Director, Illinois Department of State Police
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS / PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Judicial conference Committee of Codes of Conduct, (renamed “Committee on Financial Disclosure), 1987 -1994
American Bar Association
Chicago Bar Association
EDUCATION
University of Chicago, B.A.; M.A. 1962
Harvard Law School, J/D/, 1963
PERSONAL:
Born:
March 4, 1941
Chicago, IL

MA Senate debate, Monday, January 18, 2010, Scott Brown, Martha Coakley, Joseph L. Kennedy, Youtube video, Final debate, Turnout Critical in Tight Massachusetts Senate Race

****  UPDATES BELOW  ****

This article will be updated during the day today.

The final debate of the MA Senate race will take place tonight, January 18, 2010 .

From Fox News.

“Turnout Critical in Tight Massachusetts Senate Race”

“Both sides say turnout will be key in a race that could decide the fate of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. Obama campaigned Sunday for Democrat Martha Coakley.”

“BOSTON – Democrats and Republicans ramped up election eve get-out-the-vote efforts in their close battle for a Massachusetts Senate seat that could decide the fate of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul and the rest of his agenda at the opening of the 2010 midterm campaign season.

Obama needs newly embattled Martha Coakley to win Tuesday’s special election for the late Edward Kennedy’s Senate seat and deny Republicans the ability to block his initiatives with a 41st filibuster-sustaining GOP vote.

The president campaigned here Sunday with Coakley, who has seen the double-digit lead she had two weeks ago evaporate under a strong challenge by Republican state Sen. Scott Brown.

Voter turnout is normally low in special elections, but even in staunchly Democratic Massachusetts, apprehension about Obama’s health care overhaul is fueling a huge wave of populist support for Brown.

Polls show that independents, who make up 51 percent of the state’s electorate, have responded enthusiastically to Brown. His campaign is targeting them as well Republicans, who are outnumbered by Democrats 3-to-1 in the Bay State.”

Read more:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/18/turnout-key-tight-massachusetts-senate-race/

MA Senate debate, Monday, January 18, 2010, Scott Brown, Martha Coakley, Joseph L. Kennedy

****  Update January 18, 2010,  1:50 PM  ****

From Fox News

“Voter Enthusiasm a Problem for Coakley, Polls Suggest”

“A new poll out of Public Policy Polling on Monday underscored the depth of Coakley’s challenge. 

The poll showed Brown leading 51-46 overall, 64-32 among independents and winning 20 percent of the vote from those who backed Obama in 2008. On the flip side, the survey showed Coakley pulling just 4 percent of the vote from those who backed John McCain, in the 2008 presidential race. 

And the poll reflected the enthusiasm gap from which Coakley suffers. Eighty percent of Brown supporters said they were “very excited” about Tuesday’s election, while only 60 percent of Coakley supporters felt the same way.” 

Read more:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/18/polls-suggest-voter-enthusiasm-problem-coakley/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+foxnews%252Flatest+%2528Text+-+Latest+Headlines%2529

“White House Predicts Martha Coakley Will Lose Tuesday’s Election”

****  Update January 18, 2010,  4:45 PM  ****

****  Update January 18, 2010,  6:20 PM  ****

From CNN Political Ticker

“Poll: Brown makes gains in Mass. Senate Race”

” A new poll released Monday afternoon indicates that Republican Scott Brown has a 7-point edge over Democrat Martha Coakley in Tuesday’s special election in Massachusetts for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat.

According to an American Research Group survey, 52 percent of likely voters back Brown, a state senator, with 45 percent supporting Coakley, the state’s attorney general. Meanwhile, 2 percent back Joseph Kennedy, a third party candidate who is not related to the late senator. The 7-point advantage for Brown is just within the poll’s sampling error.”

Read more:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/01/18/poll-brown-makes-gains-in-mass-senate-race/

****  Update January 18, 2010,  7:25 PM  ****

From Politico

“New poll: Brown up 9″

“A new InsiderAdvantage poll conducted exclusively for POLITICO shows Republican Scott Brown surging to a 9-point advantage over Martha Coakley a day before Massachusetts voters trek to the ballot box to choose a new senator.
According to the survey conducted Sunday evening, Brown leads the Democratic attorney general 52 percent to 43 percent.
“I actually think the bottom is falling out,” said InsiderAdvantage CEO Matt Towery, referring to Coakley’s fall in the polls over the last ten days. “I think that this candidate is in freefall. Clearly this race is imploding for her.””
Read more:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31621.html

Senate and House daily digest, Saturday, December 19, 2009, Sunday, December 20, 2009, Monday, December 21, 2009, Senate 1:00 AM vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Reid

From the The Library of Congress Daily Digest, Saturday, December 19, 2009 and Sunday, December 20, 2009, approx 9:45, ET Sunday.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

 

Daily Digest

 

HIGHLIGHTS

 

    Senate agreed to the motion to concur in the amendment of the House of Representatives to the amendment of the Senate to H.R. 3326, Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

 

 

[Page: D1499]  GPO's PDF

Senate

Chamber Action

Routine Proceedings, pages S13471-13555

Measures Passed:

Continuing Resolution: Senate passed H.J. Res. 64, making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2010, clearing the measure for the President.

Page S13477

Measures Considered:

Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act–Agreement:Senate resumed consideration of H.R. 3590, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, taking action on the following amendments proposed thereto:

Page S13477

Pending:
Reid Amendment No. 2786, in the nature of a substitute.

Page S13477

Reid Amendment No. 3276 (to Amendment No. 2786), of a perfecting nature.

Page S13477

Reid Amendment No. 3277 (to Amendment No. 3276), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3278 (to the language proposed to be stricken by Amendment No. 2786), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3279 (to Amendment No. 3278), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance, with instructions to report back forthwith, with Reid Amendment No. 3280, to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3281 (to the instructions (Amendment No. 3280) of the motion to commit), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3282 (to Amendment No. 3281), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

During consideration of this measure today, Senate took the following action: The motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, and the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, were rendered moot.

Page S 13473

A motion was entered to close further debate on Reid Amendment No. 3276 (to Amendment No. 2786) (listed above), and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A motion was entered to close further debate on Reid Amendment No. 2786 (listed above), and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A motion was entered to close further debate on the bill, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached providing for further consideration of the bill at approximately 1:00 p.m., on Sunday, December 20, 2009, with the time until 1:30 p.m. to be equally divided and controlled between the two Leaders; that beginning at 1:30 p.m., and until 11:30 p.m., there be alternating hour blocks of time, with the Republicans controlling the first hour block; that at 11:30 p.m., Senate then recess until 12:01 a.m., Monday, December 21, 2009; the time until 1:00 a.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two Leaders, or their designees; with the Majority Leader controlling the final 10 minutes prior to 1:00 a.m., and the Republican Leader controlling the 10 minutes immediately prior; that at 1:00 a.m., Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Reid, and other manager’s amendment.

Page S13478D1500

House Messages:

Department of Defense Appropriations Act: By 88 yeas to 10 nays (Vote No. 384), Senate agreed to the motion to concur in the amendment of the House of Representatives to the amendment of the Senate to H.R. 3326, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, after taking action on the following motions and amendments proposed thereto:
Rejected:

[Page: D1500]  GPO's PDF

Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate with Amendment No. 3248 (to the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment), to change the enactment date. (By 63 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 382), Senate tabled the motion.)

Page S13476

During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
Reid Amendment No. 3252 (to Reid amendment No. 3248), to change the enactment date, fell when Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate with Amendment No. 3248 was tabled.

Page S13472

By 63 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 383), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, Senate agreed to the motion to waive section 311(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and all budget resolutions with respect to Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate to the bill. Thus, the point of order raised was rendered moot.

Page S13476

Messages from the House:

Page S13489

Additional Cosponsors:

Page S13490

Amendments Submitted:

Page S13490

Record Votes: Three record votes were taken today. (Total–384)

Page S13476

Adjournment: Senate convened at 6:45 a.m. and adjourned at 5:34 p.m., until 1:00 p.m. on Sunday, December 20, 2009. (For Senate’s program, see the remarks of the Majority Leader in today’s Record on page S13555.)

Committee Meetings

(Committees not listed did not meet)

No committees meetings were filed.

House of Representatives

Chamber Action

Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 1 public bill, H.R. 3845; and 2 resolutions, and 2 H. Res. 923-924 were introduced.

Page H15506

Report Filed: A report was filed on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 as follows: H.R. 3845, to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism and protect civil liberties, with an amendment (H. Rept. 111-382, Pt. 1).

Page H15506

Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein she appointed Representative Edwards (MD) to act as Speaker Pro Tempore for today.

Page H15505

Chaplain: The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Reverend Gene Hemrick, Washington Theological Union, Washington, DC.

Page H15506

Communication from the Sergeant-at-Arms: The House received a communication from Wilson Livingood, Sergeant-at-Arms, wherein he notified the House that the time previously appointed for the next meeting of the House was to be 6 p.m. on Saturday, December 19, 2009. Pursuant to clause 12(c) of rule I, the Sergeant-at-Arms notified the House that an imminent impairment of the place of reconvening at that time is due to the weather.

Page H15505

Senate Message: Message received from the Senate by the Clerk and subsequently presented to the House today appears on page 15506.

Quorum Calls–Votes: There were no Yea and Nay votes, and there were no Recorded votes. There were no quorum calls.

Adjournment: The House met at 12 noon and at 12:03 p.m. stands in recess until approximately 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 23, 2009.

Committee Meetings

No committee meetings were held.

Joint Meetings

No joint committee meetings were held.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR SUNDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2009

(Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)

Senate

[Page: D1501]  GPO's PDF

No meetings/hearings scheduled.

House
No committee meetings are scheduled.

[Page: D1502]  GPO's PDF

Next Meeting of the SENATE
1:00 p.m., Sunday, December 20  
Senate Chamber

Program for Sunday: Senate will continue consideration of the H.R. 3590, Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act, with alternating hour blocks of time for debate until 11:30 p.m. Senate will then recess until 12:01 a.m., Monday, December 21, 2009, and vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Reid, and other manager’s amendment at 1:00 a.m., on Monday, December 21, 2009.

 http://thomas.loc.gov/j110/j110index1.html

We The People Foundation, WeThePeopleFoundation.org, Press conference, Monday, December 8, 2008, National Press Club, Jeff Schreiber report, Robert Schulz, Philip J Berg, Orly Taitz, Reverend Manning, Chicago tribune, Curt Wrotnowski case December 12, 2008

Robert Shulz of the We The People Foundation held a press conference on Monday, December 8, 2008, at the National Press Club to discuss the eligibility issues and concerns surrounding Barack Obama. Jeff Schreiber covered the event and has written an excellent report:

“A stone’s throw away from the White House, more than 50 members of the press and curious onlookers alike crowded the intimate Edward R. Murrow Room at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. this afternoon to hear arguments why Barack Obama is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president of the United States.

The press conference was sponsored by Robert Schulz and his We The People Foundation, both of which just this last week ran an open letter to the former Illinois senator in his hometown Chicago Tribune, appealing to Obama to present for review any and all documentation which will prove his qualification to serve as president pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. Also attending the press conference: Philip Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney who, in August, filed the first lawsuit questioning Obama’s constitutional eligibility; Orly Taitz, a Chechnyan immigrant turned southern California dentist and lawyer who has filed a pair of suits in the Golden State, one of which was on behalf of Ambassador and former GOP presidential candidate Alan Keyes, who ran as the Independent Party’s candidate for president in this past election.; and Rev. James David Manning, chief pastor at the Harlem-based ATLAH World Missionary Church.”

“Schulz deemed the Court’s decision on Donofrio v. Wells “the latest injury,” cited a “conspiracy of silence” with regards to the individual merits of Donofrio’s case and others, and bundled it together with the adverse decision against self-proclaimed “Internet powerhouse” and “legendary muckraker” Andy Martin in Hawaii and the dismissal of Berg’s case at the district court level in Philadelphia. He also lamented a now widely publicized e-mail response on the eligibility-related issue from Florida Sen. Mel Martinez, who responded to such an inquiry by noting that voters are responsible for vetting candidates at the presidential level and more.

“Mr. Martinez is wrong,” Schulz said. “He would have us believe that our form of government is a democracy rather than a constitutional republic. It is not too great a burden to demand that one who seeks the office of the president simply produce documents proving his legal eligibility.”

Schulz stated that “as supreme law of the land, the Constitution is all that stands between freedom and tyranny.” He noted that “the Constitution is not a menu” and that we “do not get to pick and choose” which provisions and guidelines to follow, maintaining that the Natural Born Citizen clause was designed by our founders to “safeguard our nation from outside influence.””

“Philip Berg was next to speak, introduced by Schulz as a “lifelong Democrat” and 20-year member of the NAACP. Upon reaching the podium, Berg wasted no time in getting to the point.

“Barack Obama is really a phony, and this is the largest hoax perpetrated against the United States in 200 years,” Berg said. “Obama places our Constitution in a crisis situation, and will be able to be blackmailed by other world leaders who know he is not qualified.”

Berg then reminded those in attendance that his case is currently active and pending at the U.S. Supreme Court, contrary to what a Chicago Tribune article last week had asserted. He also noted that his case is distinguishable from Leo Donofrio’s, later expanding upon the statement and telling America’s Right that while Donofrio’s case was looking to the Court to define the concept of “natural born,” his case was merely before the court to ascertain standing, though he has filed for an injunction to stay the December 15 Electoral College vote pending disposition on his petition for writ of certiorari.”

““My case in district court was dismissed for one reason – standing,” Berg said. “According to the court, I don’t have standing, Bob doesn’t have standing, no one in this room has standing. We’re asking for one qualification out of three. We know he’s at least 35 years old. We’ll give him the 14 years in the country. We just want to know that he is natural born. It’s not that difficult.””

“Next up was Orly Taitz, the southern California dentist-turned-constitutional law attorney. A woman with a curious, unidentifiable, Arianna Huffington-like accent, Taitz explained that she was indeed Chechnyan-born and that, during this recent election cycle, “the media in the United States of America was worse than the media in communist Russia.””

“Taitz had several strong points and good moments in her lengthy presentation, including when she argued that startlingly little needs to be done to show eligibility for the ballot in her state, citing one such example where she showcased the lackluster approach of California Secretary of State Bowen in vetting and certifying mere electors by showing that one such elector, certified by Bowen, has been dead since 2001. Another good moment came when Taitz once again argued against potential foreign influence with regard to the presidency by reading from a letter written by the first Chief Justice of the United States, John Jay, to George Washington in 1787.

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.””

“Just when it looked as though the room would open up for questions, the Rev. James David Manning asked to say a few words. A very eloquent and decidedly patriotic man, he led with a prayer.

“I pray, Lord, that we can overcome the wickedness which has overtaken our politicians, the media, and even in our court systems at the highest level,” Rev. Manning said, “and that this long-legged mack-daddy will not be allowed to take the oath of office on the 20th of January.””

““We don’t know who this man is,” he said, cautioning his fellow African-Americans not to accept this fruit of a white woman as their redeemer. “He’s no Booker T. Washington, I’ll tell you that. He’s no Martin Luther King. But he does possess the potential to be the most prolific con-man in the history of this country. It is my prayer that January 20th will not happen, that Barack Hussein Obama will not be inaugurated. This man has come from the womb of a white woman.””

Read the rest of this great article here:

http://www.americasright.com/

Jeff Schreiber puts the MSM to shame with his coverage and article on the press conference and the Barack Obama eligibilty issue, the story of the century.

We The People Foundation, WeThePeopleFoundation.org, Press conference, Monday, December 8, 2008, National Press Club, US Supreme Court, Donofrio vs Wells, Obama not eligible, Chicago Tribune, News

Today,  Monday, December 8, 2008, we should know if the US Supreme Court will consider for review the Donofrio versus Wells lawsuit. Also, the We The People Foundation will hold a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington regarding Obama’s eligibility to be president.

Note this from Leo Donofrio:

“ALL REPORTS STATING I WILL BE AT THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB ON MON DECEMBER 8, 2008 ARE FALSE.

I will not be there and am not in any way associated with this event.

Please pass this information out to the blogosphere far and wide.   The event has nothing to do with me.”

Here is the We The People Foundation press conference notice on the National Press Club site followed by the press release:

Event Name: Obama’s Citizenship 
Event Date: Dec. 8, 2008
Event Type: News Conference 
Time: 1:30 PM 
Sponsored by: We the People Foundation 
Event Location: Murrow Room 
Details: Is Obama a Natural Born Citizen? 
Contact/Reservations: Bob Shultz
518-656-3578
bob@givemeliberty.org 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We The People Foundation

For Constitutional Education, Inc.

http://www.WeThePeopleFoundation.org

2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, NY 12804

December 4, 2008 Contact:

 

 

 

Bob Schulz,

518-656-3578

info@GiveMeLiberty.org

Mr. OBAMA’s ELIGIBILITY TO BE AIRED MONDAY

AT THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB

Queensbury, NY

– On Monday, December 8, 2008, at 1:30 pm,

 

– On Monday, December 8, 2008, at 1:30 pm,

 

the We The People

Foundation will conduct a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C.

The licensed attorneys who initiated lawsuits in PA (Philip Berg), NJ (Leo Donofrio) and CA

(Orly Taitz), challenging Mr. Obama’s legal eligibility to hold the Office of President of the United

States, will briefly summarize the facts, legal arguments and status of their cases. They will

answer questions from the press.

Prior to the start of the conference, at 10 am, the Supreme Court of the United States is

expected to announce whether it will consider applications from these attorneys who have

asked the Court to delay the proceedings of the Electoral College pending a determination of

the underlying constitutional question – the meaning of the “natural born citizen” clause of

Article II of the Constitution and its application to Mr. Obama.

Robert Schulz will briefly discuss Mr. Obama’s response to the publication of his Open Letter in

the

 

 

 

Chicago Tribune

on Monday and Wednesday of this week. For the reasons given in the

Open Letter, Schulz asked Mr. Obama to: (1) immediately authorize Hawaiian officials to

provide a team of forensic scientists access to his original (“vault”) birth certificate and (2)

arrange for the delivery of other documents needed to conclusively establish Obama’s

citizenship status. Mr. Schulz will answer questions from the press.

“Under our Constitution, no one is eligible to assume the Office of the President unless he or

she is a ‘natural born citizen,’” said Bob Schulz, Chairman of the Foundation. “To date, Mr.

Obama has refused all requests to release his original birth certificate or other documents that

would definitively establish his citizenship status and thus his constitutional eligibility.”

The Open Letter to Mr. Obama summarizes the evidence against Mr. Obama and the adverse

consequences that would befall the Nation should he assume the Office of the President as a

 

usurper

 

 

 

.

– On Monday, December 8, 2008, at 1:30 pm,

Donofrio vs Wells, US Supreme Court, Natural Born Citizen, Obama not eligible, Father Kenyan,British rule, Supreme Court Justices answer, US Constitution, New Jersey, Connecticut lawsuit, Secretary of State, Oath of office, Marbury Vs Madison, Monday, December 8, 2008

“Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.”

“If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.”

Chief Justice Marshall opinion, Marbury Vs Madison

Donofrio versus Wells is before all nine Justices of the US Supreme Court
and it is expected that they will decide by Monday morning, December 8,
2008 whether or not they will accept the case for a possible opinion or ruling.
The Leo Donofrio case is based on the natural born citizen provision of the
US Constitution and the failure of New Jersey Secretary of State, Nina Wells to ensure
that Barack Obama is qualified under that provision. Having the US Supreme
Court give serious consideration to this case and uphold the US Constitution
is of utmost importance. However, this case demands attention to other
aspects of upholding the Constitution and clarifying duties that may in the
long term have more far reaching consequences. Here are three distinct
aspects of the Donofrio case that must be addressed and clarified by the
US Supreme Court Justices:

  • The Natural Born Citizen provision of the US Constitution as applicable to the 2008 election.
  • The powers given to state officials in the election process and inherent duties to uphold the
    US Constitution and Federal Election Laws.
  • The oath of office taken by federal and state officers, election officials and judges and the
    duty to uphold the US Constitution.

Not addressed specifically in the Donofrio lawsuit and therefore
not before the US Supreme Court, but a matter of much confusion,
is the statutes in some of the states and pledges by some
political parties to dictate how Electoral College Electors must
vote. This violates the letter and spirit of constitutional law
and the intent of the founding fathers to give carefully chosen
Electors the leeway to make wise choices.

Here is the basis in fact of Leo Donofrio’s lawsuit:

“On October 27, 2008, plaintiff-appellant, Leo Donofrio, a retired attorney acting Pro Se, sued Nina Mitchell Wells, Secretary of State of the State of New Jersey, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, demanding the Secretary execute her statutory and Constitutional duties to police the security of ballots in New Jersey from fraudulent candidates ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States due to their not being “natural born citizens” as enumerated in Article 1, Section 2, of the US Constitution.”

“The cause of action first accrued on September 22, 2008, when Secretary Wells certified to county clerks, for ballot preparation, a written “statement”, prepared under her seal of office, that was required by statute to contain names of only those candidates who were “by law entitled” to be listed on ballots in New Jersey.  The statement is demanded by N.J.S.A. 19:13-22.

The law suit raises a novel contention that the statutory code undergoes legal fusion with the Secretary’s oath of office to uphold the US Constitution thereby creating a minimum standard of review based upon the “natural born citizen” requirement of Article 2, Section 1, and that the Supremacy clause of the Constitution would demand those requirements be resolved prior to the election.

The key fact, not challenged below, surrounds two conversations between the plaintiff-appellant and a key Secretary of State Election Division official wherein the official admitted, twice, that the defendant-Secretary just assumed the candidates were eligible taking no further action to actually verify that they were, in fact, eligible to the office of President.  These conversations took place on October 22nd and 23rd.”

“Now, post-election, plaintiff is seeking review by the United States Supreme Court to finally determine the “natural born citizen” issue. Plaintiff alleged the Secretary has a legal duty to make certain the candidates pass the “natural born citizen” test.  The pre-election suit requested that New Jersey ballots be stayed as they were defective requiring replacements to feature only the names of candidates who were truly eligible to the office of President.”

Here are the three distinct aspects of Donofrio’s lawsuit that should be reviewed and clarified
by the US Supreme Court Justices:

The Natural Born Citizen provision of the US Constitution as applicable to the 2008 election.

Leo Donofrio states:

“Don’t be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesia issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama’s ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama’s father was a Citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama’s birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen “at birth”, just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn’t be eligible to be President.”

Read more from Leo Donofrio

The powers given to state officials in the election process and inherent duties to uphold the
US Constitution and Federal Election Laws.

There is much confusion and misunderstanding about the duties and powers of state officers and election
officials involved in presidential elections.

Read more here

The oath of office taken by federal and state officers, election officials and judges and the
duty to uphold the US Constitution.

From the opinion by Chief Justice Marshall on Marbury Vs Madison:


“The oath of office, too, imposed by the legislature, is completely demonstrative of the legislative opinion on the subject. It is in these words, “I do solemnly swear that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich; and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent on me as according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution, and laws of the United States.”

Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him, and cannot be inspected by him?

If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.

Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”

For the Justices of the US Supreme Court to disregard this important
lawsuit by Leo Donofrio, I am certain that all nine Justices would
violate their oath to uphold the US Constitution and duty to review,
consider and clarify the important principles outlined above. We are
accountable not only to uphold  the US Constitution and rule of law
in regard to the 2008 election, but the future integrity of the
Constitution, our system of checks and balances and stability of our
government. I strongly urge the Supreme Court Justices to help keep
our Constitution and government intact.

 
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.”

Chief Justice Marshall opinion, Marbury Vs Madison

We the People Foundation, Chicago Tribune, Monday, December 1, 2008, Letter to Obama, formal Petition for a Redress, original birth certificate, forensic scientists, December 8, 2008, Washington, D.C. press conference

We the People Foundation has published a letter in the Chicago Tribune today, Monday, December 1, 2008
and will publish another on December 8, 2008. Here is an exerpt from the We the People Foundation site:
“Our full-page Open Letter to Mr. Obama will be published in the Chicago Tribune
on both Monday, December 1, 2008 and Wednesday, December 3, 2008. It will appear in the main news section. Click here to view a copy of the final ad.

Chicago is Mr. Obama’s hometown. His transition team is operating out of the Kluczynski Federal Building in downtown Chicago. He is known to be a regular reader of the Tribune, Chicago’s principal newspaper, with a daily circulation of over a half-million readers. 

The Open Letter to Mr. Obama is a formal Petition for a Redress (Remedy) for the alleged violation of the “natural born citizen” clause of the Constitution of the United States of America. Mr. Obama is respectfully requested to direct the Hawaiian officials to provide access to his original birth certificate on December 5-7 by our team of forensic scientists, and to provide additional documentary evidence establishing his citizenship status prior to our Washington, D.C. press conference on December 8.”

Here is the text of the Letter:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“An Open Letter

to Barack Obama:

Are you a Natural Born

Citizen of the U.S.?

Are you legally eligible to

hold the Office of President?

We The People Foundation

For Constitutional Education, Inc.

http://www.WeThePeopleFoundation.org

2458 Ridge Road Queensbury, NY 12804

info@GiveMeLiberty.org

December 1, 2008

Mr. Barack Obama

Barack Obama Transition Office

Kluczynski Federal Building

230 So. Dearborn St.

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Dear Mr. Obama:

Representing thousands of responsible American citizens who have also

taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America,

I am duty bound to call on you to remedy an apparent violation of the

Constitution.

Compelling evidence supports the claim that you are barred from holding

the Office of President by the ?natural born citizen? clause of the U.S.

Constitution. For instance:

 

 

You have posted on the Internet an unsigned, forged and thoroughlydiscredited,

 

 

computer-generated birth form created in 2007, a formthat lacks vital information found on any original, hand signed

Certificate of Live Birth, such as hospital address, signature of

attending physician and age of mother.

 

 

Hawaii Dept of Health will not confirm your assertion that you were bornin Hawaii.

 

 

Legal affidavits state you were born in Kenya.

 

 

Your grandmother is recorded on tape saying she attended your birthin Kenya.

 

 

U.S. Law in effect in 1961 denied U.S. citizenship to any child bornin Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19

years of age.

 

 

In 1965, your mother legally relinquished whatever Kenyan or U.S.citizenship she and you had by marrying an Indonesian and becoming

a naturalized Indonesian citizen.

You have repeatedly refused to provide evidence of your eligibility when

challenged to do so in a number of recent lawsuits. Instead, you have

been successful in having judges declare that they are powerless to order

you to prove your eligibility to assume the Office of President.

Incredibly, the judge in Hawaii actually said it would be an invasion of

your privacy for him to order access to your original birth certificate in

order to prove your eligibility to hold the Office of President.

Before you can legitimately exercise any of the powers of the President

you must meet all the criteria for eligibility established by the Constitution.

You are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence.

Should you assume the office as anyone but a

 

 

bona fide natural borncitizen of the United States who has not relinquished that citizenship, you

would be inviting a national crisis that would undermine the domestic

peace and stability of the Nation. For example:

 

 

You would always be viewed by many Americans as aposeur – a

 

 

usurper .

 

 

As a usurper , you would be unable to take the required ?Oath orAffirmation? on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or

false swearing, for being ineligible you cannot faithfully execute the

Office of the President of the United States.

 

 

You would be entitled to no allegiance, obedience or support fromthe People.

 

 

The Armed Forces would be under no legal obligation to remainobedient to you.

 

 

No civilian in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any ofyour proclamations, Executive Orders or directives, as such orders

would be legally void.

 

 

Your appointments of Judges to the Supreme Court would be void.

 

 

Congress would not be able to pass any needed legislation becauseit would not be able to acquire the signature of a

 

 

bona fide President.

 

 

Congress would be unable to remove you, a usurper , from the Officeof the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos

including a potential for armed conflicts within the General

Government or among the States and the People to effect the

removal of such a

 

 

usurper .In consideration of the escalating constitutional crisis brought on by the

total lack of evidence needed to conclusively establish your eligibility,

I am compelled to serve you with this First Amendment Petition for a

Redress of this violation of the Constitution.

With all due respect, I ask that you immediately direct the appropriate

Hawaiian officials to allow access to the vault copy of your birth

certificate by our forensic scientists on Friday, Saturday and Sunday,

December 5, 6 and 7, 2008.

In addition, I ask that you deliver the following documentary evidence to

the National Press Club in Washington DC by 10 am on December 8, 2008,

marked for my attention:

 

 

A certified copy of your original, signed ?vault? birth certificate.

 

 

Certified copies of your reissued and sealed birth certificates in thenames Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack

Dunham and Barry Dunham.

 

 

A certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship.

 

 

A certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity.

 

 

Certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College,Columbia University and Harvard Law School.

 

 

Certified copies of any legal documents changing your name.Each member of the Electoral College, who is committed to casting a vote

on December 15, 2008, has a constitutional duty to make certain you are

a natural-born citizen. As of today, there is no evidence in the public

record (nor have you provided any) that defeats the claim that you are

barred by law from assuming the Office of President because you fail the

Constitution?s eligibility requirements.

All state Electors are now on Notice that unless you provide documentary

evidence before December 15, that conclusively establishes your eligibility,

they cannot cast a vote for you without committing treason to the Constitution.

?

 

 

In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiledif it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent,

the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people

by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a

lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become

a law unto himself; it invites anarchy

 

 

.? Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this urgent matter.

Sincerely,

Robert L. Schulz

Chairman”

Read the formatted letter here:

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/misc2008/ChicagoTribune-ObamaLtr-Nov-2008.pdf

 

 

 

 

Obama birth certificate, Monday, November 24, 2008, press conference, Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto, Lester, US Constitution, WorldNetDaily, Called on the President-elect to release a birth certificate

The Obama camp continues to thumb their nose at the US Constitution and American people. During a press
conference today, Monday, November 24, 2008, Deputy Press Secretary Tony Fratto was asked about Obama’s birth certificate. As you will see below, the Obama presidency will be no more transparent and honest than the Obama campaign.
“And Lester, and then we’re done.

Q Thank you, Tony. Two questions. There’s been extensive media coverage of where the two Obama daughters will attend school. And my question: The White House believes that they should be able to attend the school their parents select without criticism because it’s private rather than public, don’t you?

MR. FRATTO: I think we support all parents making that decision.

Q Good. The CEO of WorldNetDaily has called on the President-elect to release a birth certificate listing the hospital and names of parents. The White House believes that this would fully satisfy the constitutional requirement, don’t you?

MR. FRATTO: I don’t think I have anything to say on that, Lester, and I think we’re going to end it right there.

Thank you.

END 11:35 A.M. EST”

Read the transcript here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/11/20081124-1.html

Thanks to commenter venice for the heads up.

Jerome Corsi interview, Tonight, Monday, October 13, 2008, MommaE blog radio

From MommaE:

Hi,
 
I just wanted to tell you that Jerome will be on tonight as I confirmed it about an hour ago.  Please post this on every Blog that you can and e-mail it to every one you know!
 
Here is the information for the show!
 
 
Show times areas follows5 PM Pacific
 
6 PM Mountain
 
7 PM Central
 
8 PM Eastern
 
You can just listen to the show by clicking on the Red Listen Live Button on the top left hand side, or you can click on Live Chat and enter MommaE’s Private Chat.  Just enter a Nickname and click on Chat and you can join in or just read what everyone is posting while you listen to the show!
 
Hope to see you all there!!!
 

Evelyn/MommaE