Chief Cold Case Posse Investigator Mike Zullo to Speak at Surprise, AZ Tea Party Meeting 1-15-13

6 Comments

1. [...] Link to obamaballotchallenge.com blog post [...]

   Surprise! Mike Zullo To Give Investigation Update « My Very Own Point of View, 4 months ago Reply
2. 
   George,
   I may be wrong (no surprise there) but I believe that there is either a prohibition or convention that
   ….a sitting president can not be subjected to trial for any offense in a court of law, but this protection does not extend past his tenure.
   The inference is that once removed from office, he is no more privileged than an ordinary citizen, however he happens to go. I do know that the separation of powers feature of the Constitution prevents any one of the three branches of government from taking any adverse action against any other branch…but two branches acting in concert may do so.
   My feeling is that this, at least, one reason for inaction by the courts and/or Congress.
   My opinion is further buttressed by the fact the Constitution enumerates only the qualifications for the office, and absolutely no hints of disqualifying factors, it supposedly being left to a discerning electorate to decide those factors. (little did the Founders anticipate the deteoriating

   Pete Bennett, 4 months ago Reply

   • 
     Another myth, Pete. Tell that to Larry Klayman, who is distinguished as the ONLY one to ever prevail in a suit against a sitting President (Bubba Clinton). That’s one reason why I recruited him.

     So, unless Obama has “changed” the law with one of his infamous executive orders, he’s still vulnerable.

     GeorgeM, 4 months ago Reply

     • 
       You might want to recheck that, because the suit that Larry claims he was successful in, filegate, ended withthis ruling from the judge

       On March 9, 2010, Judge Lamberth dismissed the case.[37] The judge asserted that the plaintiffs, despite years of opportunity, had failed to provide any evidence that the affair was a grand conspiracy rather than a bureaucratic mistake, and said that “this court is left to conclude that with the lawsuit, to quote Gertrude Stein, ‘there’s no there there.’

       See http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/clinton-era-filegate-case-toss.html

       So, Larry lost. Indeed all Larry says in his official biography blurb is that

       “In this regard, I am the only lawyer ever to have a court rule that an American president committed a crime. This ruling was made by Judge Royce C. Lamberth in the famous Filegate case, which I had filed in federal court in Washington, D.C.”

       http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/klayman/120728

       Which seems at odds with the quoted words of the ruling. So, it seems Larry lied to you.

       Suranis, 4 months ago Reply
3. 
   ….effect of 200 years of complacency on them!). I recall no specific remedy being made by any appellants in any suit by Orly Taitz, or others with cases currently or previously pursued in the various courts. It appears such pursuits serve only as an irritant to them. Is it beyond possibility for any litigant to reveal just what is expected from a ‘positive’ ruling from the judicial system?

   Attorney Mario Appuzo has presented an undeniable case of ineligibility and usurpation in his blog. While making no charges of such behavior, such charges are defined in existing US Statutes, defined for specifically removing any such offender, civil or military, within the District of Columbia.

   How long are we to continue barking up the wrong tree?

   Pete Bennett, 4 months ago Reply

   • 
     Whaaa? No remedy? Voeltz, Klayman, Irion, Kreep, yes, even Taitz, might take issue with that.

     GeorgeM, 4 months ago Reply

Post Your Comment