he circus
out in Washington, DC., for the unlawful
swearing in of the impostor president,
Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro
and so forth, is now over. All the
gushing and slobbering over the trashy
looking rag worn by the militant
Michelle Obama, has faded into the
night. I wonder how many of the mindless
mouth pieces giving their commentary
about the "wonderful, smart First Lady,"
know that in 1993, Michelle Obama, was
ordered by the Illinois Supreme Court to
stop practicing law? The faux First Lady
was ordered by the court; it was not her
choice. (Click
here). The records are sealed by the
court so we don't know why, but I am
told by lawyers sending me email, it had
to be something major for such drastic
action.
The A-list stars from
Hollywood were out in full regalia to
celebrate history: the first African
American president. Barack Hussein Obama
aka and so forth, is the first mulatto
to run for president, but he is not the
44th president. He is an usurper who has
committed a horrible fraud on our
nation. Someone or a number of people
knew years ago that his citizenship
would become an issue and began greasing
the skids to pull off this fraud.
In 2004, the impostor
president
unlawfully ran for the U.S. Senate.
Allegedly, with help from ACORN and the
massive vote fraud we see every
election, he won a seat in the U.S.
Senate under
a law that does not exist. That
election was November 2004.
One year later, Sarah
Herlihy, an associate at the Chicago
firm of Kirkland & Ellis gets her paper
published in the Kent University Law
Review on line. Herlihy claims in her
paper that the citizenship requirement
of the U.S. Constitution has been called
"stupid and discriminating." Of course,
she never tells us who makes this claim.
Please note that a partner at the same
law firm was one Bruce I. Ettelson, who
apparently had a working relationship on
finance committees for Obama and
buffoon, Sen. Richard Durbin. Herlihy's
paper, which shows "author approved
editing" as November 23, 2005, is
titled, "Amending the Natural Born
Citizenship Requirement: Globalization
as the Impetus and the Obstacle."
You can read the paper here.
In February 2008,
Democrats (and one Republican)
began pushing legislation on the issue
of citizenship:
"...on February 28,
2008, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
introduced a bill to the Senate for
consideration. That bill was known as S.
2678: Children of Military Families
Natural Born Citizen Act. The bill was
co-sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama
(D-IL), Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY),
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), and Sen.
Thomas Coburn (R-OK).
"Bill S. 2678
attempted to change article II, section
1, clause 5 of the Constitution of the
United States with reference to the
requirements of being a “natural born
citizen” and hence; the entitlement to
run for President of the United States.
This bill met the same fate that similar
attempts to change the Constitution have
in the past. Attempts such as The
Natural Born Citizen Act were known to
have failed and the text scrubbed from
the internet, with only a shadow-cached
copy left, that only the most curious
public can find....
"Within only five
short weeks after Senate Bill 2678 faded
from the floor, we find Sen. Claire
McCaskill back again, making another
attempt with Senate Resolution 511. On
April 10, 2008, she introduced a
secondary proposal in the form of a
non-binding resolution, recognizing John
McCain as a “natural born citizen” in
defiance of the Constitution. Curiously,
it contained the same identical
co-sponsors, Barack Obama and Hillary
Clinton.
"One has to wonder —
what dire urgency could there possibly
have been in persisting with trying to
legislate a candidate into being a
“natural born citizen”? Certainly
providing a birth certificate and
reading the Constitution would be more
than sufficient. Why did these
candidates and their wishful nominees go
to such lengths in the Senate when
obviously, they had more pressing
matters to attend to? And why were there
two Senators co-sponsoring such an
issue, twice, who were in direct
competition with John McCain in the 2008
election?"
Somewhere along the
way, the issue of Obama's father being a
Kenyan national and under British rule
(British Neutrality Act of 1948)
surfaced while the new Messiah was being
groomed to steal the White House. Obama
is a lawyer and has spent a great deal
of time around other high power lawyers.
Someone along the way said, uh, we have
a problem. Beginning not too long after
Obama became a U.S. Senator, the thorny
problem of the U.S. Constitution had to
be dealt with and out comes a paper by
his lawyer friend, Herlihy, which opens
up the discussion. Next comes the smoke
screen legislation which was really to
"qualify" Obama. Of course, it didn't
work, so with the help of the useful
fools in the dominant media and cable
news networks like FOX, CNN and MSNBC,
the issue was covered up and/or
ridiculed as nothing more than sore
losers or conspiracy nuts.
There is a conspiracy
and a cover up here, just as there is
regarding all the documents and records
Obama is hiding from the American
people.
We know that Chief
Justice John Roberts, Jr., met in
private with Obama on January 14, 2009.
A gross conflict of interest since
Roberts is deciding current cases before
the court where Obama is either the
defendant or the target of the
litigation. Roberts' role in the
unlawful swearing in of the impostor
president was a sobering moment. It made
me sick to my soul. The very next day,
January 21, 2009, Phil Berg's second
case which was heard in secrecy by the
almighty Supreme Court last Friday was
denied.
The next case to be
heard in conference (private) is
tomorrow: Lightfoot v Bowen.
Dr. Orly Taitz is counsel on that one.
Orly also filed a new lawsuit on Monday,
January 19, 2009, in response to an
Executive Order issued by George Bush,
on January 16, 2009.
You can read that lawsuit here; it
explains the basis of the lawsuit in
relationship to Bush's EO. Summons were
issued; Federal District Judge David O
Carter was assigned. The Case Number is:
SACV09-00082DOC. Orly beat the clock
with
Obama's Chief of Staff, who has such
a shady background (Madsen is a die hard
progressive Democrat), one wonders how
he could get any security clearance at
all:
"White House Chief of
Staff Rahm Emanuel dispatched a memo
yesterday afternoon to federal agencies
and departments, directing them to stop
pending rules until the new
administration has time to conduct a
"legal and policy review" of each one.
The directive has become a first-day
tradition among presidents, dating to
Ronald Reagan in 1981, helping incoming
administrations put their own
philosophical stamp on the regulatory
work that is a subtle but potent tool of
presidential power. Presidents George W.
Bush and Bill Clinton did the same
thing."
The United States
Justice Foundation has issued a subpoena
duces tecum for Obama's academic and
housing records from Occidental College
for their lawsuit representing Alan
Keyes, et al v Bowen, Obama, Biden, et
al.
You can view the documents here.
Someone asked what will happen if
Occidental comes back and says they have
no records for Barack Hussein Obama?
That immediately raises a red flag and
the good folks at the USJF can file a
new subpoena for Barry Soetoro, or
petition the judge to force this guy in
the White House to disclose his legal
name so these lawful subpoenas can be
served and processed.
There is a new
petition to impeach Obama;
you can view it here. I wouldn't
bother signing it. God bless these folks
for wanting to see justice done, but I
don't believe this petition will have
any impact. First, the incompetent mad
woman running the House of
Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, will
never let such a petition get past her
skirt. And, second, while I am not a
lawyer, the high crimes and misdemeanors
cited, i.e., the fraud committed by
Obama, was perpetrated before he was
unlawfully sworn into office. Dr. Edwin
Vieira explained this
in a column last October: "Seventh,
if Obama does become an usurper
posturing as “the President,” Congress
cannot even impeach him because, not
being the actual President, he cannot be
“removed from Office on Impeachment for,
and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or
other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (see
Article II, Section 4)."
Furthermore, Dr.
Edwin Vieira points out
in a column last December, even
should all these constitutionally based
lawsuits fail with the U.S. Supreme
Court, the lawsuits will continue over
any legislation signed by the usurper
president.
Obama has pulled off
this gigantic hoax. For now. Judging by
my email and many columns posted the
last two days, Americans are
discouraged, outraged and just plain
old-fashioned whizzed off. Many are
saying the Constitution is dead. Edwin
addressed that
in a column, March 14, 2006:
"On the other side,
if "the Constitution is dead", then to
what authority can patriots appeal
against the depredations of malign
public officials and a corrupted
electorate? Without the Constitution,
patriots are mere dreamers or rebels
whom the Establishment can condemn as
crackpots or criminals. In short, if
common Americans concede that "the
Constitution is dead", they will
surrender the high ground, the
initiative, and even their own best
weapon, and put themselves at their
enemies' mercy. Moreover, if "the
Constitution is dead", how and with what
should or could patriots attempt to
replace the present political apparatus
that oppresses them?"
Those who birthed
this republic did not cut and run even
when they were bloodied and crawling on
their hands and knees. We shall do no
less. The pain will be great, but so was
the pain of Nathan Hale when he was hung
at age 21. Last April,
I stood at his home up in Connecticut.
It was very quiet and no one was around.
I stood there thinking about the
patriots of that time. I've been to Bull
Run, Valley Forge, the homes of
Jefferson, Andy Jackson, Madison,
Washington and Gen. Robert E. Lee. Obama
has been made powerful by those working
to destroy this country. As the impostor
president's power has grown, so too has
his arrogance which will be his undoing.
The day of reckoning for Obama the
Impostor President will come.
What about the masses
who responded to the prod and voted for
Obama? It's being reported that nearly
two million people showed up for the
coronation two days ago. It would have
been convenient to have stands along the
way to fit these people for their chains
of bondage. I hope you can take time
over the weekend to read a document I
covered on my radio show as the
coronation parties were in full swing.
What made millions swoon, weep, raise
their hands to the heavens, declare
Obama the next Messiah and go over the
edge for a nobody with a closed past -
besides the color of his skin?
As I told my
listening audience, I am not a
conspiracy freak. Frequently, I get very
angry email from patriots for debunking
some popular theories that don't hold
water. A couple of months ago, I read
this paper and as I read the 67 pages,
it all came together. Untold numbers of
us couldn't figure out this "Obama
phenomenon" and what was causing
it....until I read this explanation
about conversational hypnosis. Not only
did I read it, I spent six hours running
down the foot notes and studying
Erickson's method used and accepted in
the field of psycho-analysis.
Finally, it all made
sense. As a lay person not trained and
with little prior understanding on this
issue, all I could keep wondering is are
these people all mad, desperate or did
they all take the same pill? No, Obama
simply used a technique of hypnosis on
mass crowds and turned them into little
better than melting butter. A master
orator without an original thought in
his head, he used his voice and hands to
mesmerize.
I learned a great
deal from this document. At some point
the stupefaction will wear off and
millions of people, except for too many
black Americans who voted for one half
of Obama's race (most of them forget
Obama's mother was Caucasian), will
begin to wonder why they voted for Obama
as he blunders along and the economy
worsens. Except, of course, those
blinded by skin color. An incredible
statement was made by a low IQ minion of
Obama's which
sends an ugly message:
"...while watching
ABC News coverage of the inauguration
with my wife over lunch, hosts Charles
Gibson and Diane Sawyer were joined by
Donna Brazile, a Democratic
African-American author, educator and
political activist, who gave a humorous
account of her snatching the
complementary fleece blanket she found
abandoned in Barack Obama’s chair after
the swearing-in ceremony. Apparently she
wanted a souvenir of the momentous
occasion and when the opportunity arose,
she took it.
"As they all laughed
about it, Gibson responded playfully to
her candid admission by saying: “We're
going to check with the legal staff and
find out if that's a felony or a
misdemeanor.” Brazile then gave a stern
look into the camera and said: “We have
a black president – it's neither.”
Read this document:
Obama's use of hypnotic technique during
his speeches
You can decide for
yourself. I'm certain those who support
Obama will poo-poo it away. They've got
too much riding on his campaign
promises. These very same people haven't
done a minute of research on Obama's
background, his proven communist ties
and Marxist beliefs. Obama's faithful
will not see or hear his slick lies
because the thought of betrayal is
simply too much to handle. As Judge
Andrew Napolitano so accurately named
his book, A Nation of Sheep, can you
hear the baaa-baaa still echoing from
the Washington Mall?
min
t
,
from pl. of ill
Wes
Penre is a researcher,
journalist, the owner of the
domain