Ocala FL Grand Jury to Convene 10-31 on Obama/Hillary and Other Political Criminals
Posted by By GeorgeM at 29 September, at 02 : 13 AM Print
I had to steel myself and ignore the over-the-top polemics contained in this article to get to the kernel of relevancy to Obama Ballot Challenge- namely:
“On Oct. 31, 2012, I will be in Ocala, Fla., presenting evidence to a citizens grand jury, chosen in the ordinary course without regard to politics and biases, seeking the indictment of the likes of President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others who have betrayed and terrorized the nation and violated the rule of criminal law. With regard to Obama, not only has he defrauded the American people by being elected president despite his not being a natural born citizen, but he also has compromised, in treasonous fashion, our national security. Once indicted, we will then seek to try him for these crimes. If he refuses to appear at trial, which he surely will, the people will try him in abstentia.
In effect, along with a coterie of other patriots, we will make Ocala in 2012 what Philadelphia was to the colonies in 1776. Please join us in the noble cause, as We the People have been abandoned and scorned by our so-called leaders for far too long. See www.citizensgrandjury.com. Now it is our time to risk our fortunes, sacred honor and lives to preserve the nation, using the rights that our Founding Fathers bequeathed to us: the citizens grand jury.”
Read the rest of this Larry Klayman article on WND, if you wish:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/life-after-romney-and-the-republicans/
Seriously? A citizen grand jury with no jurisdiction? There’s a name for what you’re doing….
Walt Gilmore, 7 months ago
THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT READ THE CONSTITUION YOU MAY GET A LITTLE EDUCATION??? WHO KNOWS.
IF BHO WAD BORN IN THE LINCOLN BEDROOM IT WOULD NOT MATTER!! HIS FATHER WAS NOT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. BOTH PARENTS MUST HOLD THAT HONOR FOR ONE TO BE PRESEDENT. WOW WHAT A CONCEPT.
LP, 7 months ago
Agreed… One of my Canadian customers recently became an American citizen. He said the very 1st requirement for citizenship was for him to RENOUNCE ALL ALLIGIENCES to ALL former countries & powers.
Well, hell…if he had to do that NOW, why is it such a strange REQUIREMENT for the Commander-in-Chief to be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, requiring him to have 2 U.S. citizen parents at the time of his birth in America?
Sen. Rubio & Obama are BOTH NOT Natural Born Citizens…for the same reason…BOTH parentS need to be U.S. citizens when their child is born on U.S. soil…(which Obama has yet to prove, BOTH BCert. ARE PROVEN FORGERIES.)
Joe M., 7 months ago
Here are citations from four U.S., recent court decisions that throw water on your silly idea that one needs two citizen parents to be a natural-born citizen of the United States.
1.) Ankeny v. Daniels, Indiana Court of Appeals (2009)
“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
2.) Tisdale v. Obama, Virginia federal court (2012)
“It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens.”
3.) Purpora V. Obama, Superior Court of New Jersey 2012
“No court, federal, state or administrative, has accepted the challengers’ position that Mr. Obama is not a ‘natural born Citizen’ due to the acknowledged fact that his father was born in Kenya and was a British citizen by virtue of the then applicable British Nationality Act. Nor has the fact that Obama had, or may have had, dual citizenship at the time of his birth and thereafter been held to deny him the status of natural born. It is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel here. … The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a ‘natural born Citizen’ regardless of the status of his father.”
4.) Allen v. Obama, Arizona Superior Court (2012)
“Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise.”
Arthur, 7 months ago
LOL, unfortunately they ignore the precedent they should have used and in some cases were themselves used as precedents in jurisdictions where they weren’t precedents. Most cited Ankeny, which itself is a flawed case, which should have been appealed. A case in GA cannot use an Indiana case as a precedent, for example.
GeorgeM, 7 months ago
Arthur, under “Stare Decisis” in federal law is legal principle by which Judges are obliged to respect “PRECEDENTS” established by prior decisions, hence lower courts must HONOR findings of law made by HIGHER COURTS. In legal context it means that courts should generally abide by PRECEDENTS and NOT disturb settled matters. First is the RULE that a decision made by a superior court is “BINDING PRECEDENT”–which an INFERIOR court CAN’T CHANGE. Second is RULE that a court should NOT overturn its own PRECEDENTS unless there is a strong reason to do so. In Federal court systems state courts are not considered inferior to federal courts but constitute a parallel court system. HOWEVER, on questions as to the meaning of Federal Law including the Constitution, statutes, and regulations–U.S. Supreme Court PRECEDENS MUST BE FOLLOWED. Under rule of “Stare Decisis” ONLY A SITTING SUPREME COURT CAN OVERRIDE A SUPREME COURT DECISION. In Minor v Happersett 1875 Voting rights case, Chief Justice of Supreme Court in Majority opinion on a UNANIMOUS DECISION: “At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was NEVER doubted that ALL children born in a country of parents WHO WERE ITS CITIZENS….are native or NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.” Unless and UNTIL a sitting Supreme Court changes that precedent, those cases you mention hold NO authority over a ruling issued by a US Supreme Court.
Shavager, 6 months ago
[...] Ocala FL Grand Jury to Convene 10-31 on Obama/Hillary and Other Political Criminals [...]
Squatters in the White House, 6 months ago