Sunday, 13 September 2015

Signs Of The Times

And still more petitions…

One for ‘The Impeachment And Disqualification of Hillary Clinton’.  (Not a bad idea, actually.)  And here’s one ‘To The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit To STOP Obama’s Unconstitutional Executive Action for Amnesty’ (their emphases).  Listen to this covering letter/updating explanatory note by Curt Levey, Esq., president of the sponsoring Committee For Justice:

“President Obama’s executive actions on illegal immigration were placed on temporary hold by U.S. District Court Judge Andrew S. Hanen on February 16h.

“When the Obama Administration lawyers were specifically asked about the schedule to expand DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and create the program DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans) - the two programs involve [sic] in the executive actions - they gave false testimony.

“The lawyers told Judge Hanen that DACA’s expansion wasn’t scheduled until February 18th - two days after the hearing.

“Judge Hanen issued an immediate injunction, but discovered on March 3rd that DACA’s expansion began on November 20th and 108,000 illegal aliens had already received work permits through the expanded program.

“The Judge issued a scathing rebuke of the Administration on April 7th, stating that the Administration’’s testimony was ‘misleading,’ ‘troublesome,’ and ‘belied the facts.’

“In addition to lying to a federal judge, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) violated the judge’s injunction by issuing 2,000 work permits as part of DACA after the ruling.

“On July 7th, an irate Judge Hansen issued another scathing rebuke, saying that the Administration’s actions were ‘unacceptable,’ ‘unprofessional’ and that he was ‘shocked and surprised at the cavalier attitude the government has taken.’…

Because you see,Your Honor, the Obama administration is simply taking the lead of their leader, and being a law unto themselves.  What is really going on:

(thumbing nose at judge): Naah naah naah.  Can’t catch us.

(non-Obama-appointed federal judge; stunned): What??

(nose thumber): What are you going to do about it, asshole?  

(non-Obama-appointed federal judge; unable to believe his ears; What???

(nose thumber): Don’t you get it yet, asshole?  WE OWN THE HIGH GROUND now.  We can do anything we want.  And there’s not a damn thing that you can do about it.  We’ve got you covered, man.

If it were up to me, I would take these Obama-admin lawyers behind the woodshed and spank their bottoms red.  Except that they would probably thank me for it.

Which brings me to my next point:

the Same-Sex Marriage decision by the Roberts Supreme Court.

Sigh.  Where to begin…

First of all, it is NOT ‘the law of the land’ now.  It doesn’t matter how extensive a shattering of the Constitution that the Obama admin has engaged in, it is still a fact that the judicial branch doesn’t, can’t, make law.  It can only interpret laws against the Constitution.  The legislative branch is the one to make the law.  

Secondly.  The excuses that the SCOTUS majority used to arrive at their decision on the matter before them don’t hold water.  That state laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman are unconstitutional because of both the Due Process clause and the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment?  Nonsense.  You got that, Judges?  Non-Sense.  No sense.  No way.  No how.  Not even close.   

Oh, I grant you, they are ‘close’ to mealy-minded, shyster-lawerlly types, who want the Constitution to be considered to be ‘a living document,’ subject to the ‘interpretive’ whims of the majority of the SCOTUS at any given time.*  But this was such a stretch that it was, simply, laughable.  And as to that stretch:

Thirdly: Two of the majority in that vote should properly have recused themselves from the hearing and vote, because of a patently obvious prior-involvement, conflict of interest, in having previously presided over same-sex marriages.  And at a minimum, the Chief Justice, John Roberts, should have recused them.  That he didn’t, and they didn’t, is repugnant to the law.  The decision needs to be dismissed.

But then, so does the whole federal governing enterprise.  Executive, judicial, legislative.  Out.  For having failed in your duty - your constitutional duty - to operate with your constitutional system of checks and balances, in order, in this case, to rein in a rogue executive branch.

And the adults will take over now.

Now, that the children have had their day in charge.  And have blown it.  So terribly, thatt they are like children playing with matches.

Big matches.

Big, big matches.

And needing, now, 

to meet their match.

* It must be a boring job, to have merely to interpret laws against the Constitution, rather than as you would like them to mean.  Like Humpty Dumpty, for whom words mean what he says they mean.  But, alas - there you go, Judge.   Them’s the rules.  If you want to be creative, try some other line of work.  Like, say, writing fiction???


2) from ‘Army Special Forces Enraged Over Obama Attacks’ - Greg Corombos - September 13

kibitzer3 a few seconds ago (September 13)

"But there are some things that are not going to change. You're not going to roll back some of the social policies that have been implemented under this president." [quoting Retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. William ‘Jerry’ Boykin, past commander of the Green Berets]

Nonsense. Because everything that this 'president' - this Usurper; this Imposter - has put his hand to goes with him. Into the trash bin. Once The People wake up to the fact that he IS a Usurper; for not being constitutionally eligible for the job. For not being a bona fide 'natural born' citizen; which is one born on the soil (jus soli) of (in this case, U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis). That's PLURAL. As in BOTH. The whole POINT of that eligibility requirement, for that particular office - and that particular office ONLY, may it be duly noted, for the hint to the original-intent, and historical, meaning of the term that it is - being so that the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces would have NO DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES. As a naturalized citizen would be subject to. And as a DUAL citizen would MOST CERTAINLY be subject to. Like Obama.

We need to get back to the Constitution - that is, the rule of law - in this country. And damn soon. Before the Usurper causes any more damage than he already has. To the rule of law. And to the nation.


3) from ‘Anti-Gunners Definitely Won’t Like How 1 Pastor Used His Gun’- September 13
(A pastor captured a would-be burglar of his church by having a gun)

kibitzer3 a few seconds ago (September 13)

"Why do you think the media ignores stories like this?"

Because the MSM is owned lock, stock and barrel (pun intended) by the New World Order crowd, who want a post-American Republic world of cheap indentured servants, and the recalcitrants, like us patriots, locked up in their FEMA camps - or worse.


4) from ‘Obama Birth Certificate Examiner: Donald Trumps Office Given Obama Birth Certificate Fraud Evidence’ - Paul Irey - September 12 (via CDR Kirchner (Ret)’s Blog - cfkerchner - September 13) 

kibitzer3 64p · less than 1 minute ago (September 13)

Excellent work, Paul; thanks for all your diligence in this matter. But it is all irrelevant. Obama fell at the first hurdle when he claimed that Barack Obama was his birth father. Case closed right there. Anyone who looks into the matter will discover early and quite clearly that the definition of a 'natural born' citizen that the constitutional Framers were going by when they put it in their contract for that particular office - and that particular office ONLY, which is the tipoff to this whole thing; keep reading - was from E. de Vattel's definitive tome of the day on such matters, 'The Law of Nations Or Principles of Natural Law': a 'natural born' citizen is one born on the soil (jus soli) of (in this case, U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis). That's PLURAL. As in BOTH. The whole POINT [of the Framers putting it in their contract for that particular office] being to make sure that the person who was as well to become the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces had NO DUAL/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES. As a naturalized citizen would be subject to. And as a DUAL citizen would MOST CERTAINLY be subject to. 

We got into this mess because the Republican Party did not do its proper job as the opposition party. Why? It is obvious now: because they wanted their OWN ineligible candidates to be able to be put up for the job - and they had found out how difficult it would be to get a constitutional amendment through on the subject: between 2003 and '08 both major political parties tried a total of 8 times between them to get such an amendment going through Congress - and they failed each time even to get it out of committee, such was the sensitivity around the subject. So what did they do? They met in a smoke-filled back room in D.C. and colluded in a conspiracy to defraud the Constitution and the American people. All of which will come out in a court of law, with both parties up on RICO-statute charges, for being [the] criminal enterprises [that they are]. 

Obama is not the only one who is going to go down for this attempt at overthrowing the rule of law in this country, and at nation-hijacking itself.


Do I ask for too much?

No.  Just the Truth.  That will be sufficient.

No comments: