Friday, 10 March 2017

On The American Spring And Master Strokes

from ‘FEMA Camps Await Many If the Deep State Wins’ - Dave Hodges - March 8/9
(Hodges referred to the morale-boosting move of Pres. FDR in the early days of the war in the Pacific in approving a landing at Guadalcanal, not so much for strategic purposes - there was none there - but to 'rally the troops' to something positive; calling for Trump to make such a move now, not piddle away precious time before he can drain the swamp completely.)

Stan March 10, 2017 at 12:56 am
(Your comment is awaiting moderation.)

I’ve got an even better Guadalcanal, Dave, and one comparable to Gen. MacArthur’s brilliant stroke in Korea by landing all the way up the coast at Inchon, thus forcing the North Koreans and the Red Chinese to draw back, to protect their supply lines. My lightning stroke is for Trump to arrest Obama, on a whole host of charges by now – including the big one, of his not having been eligible for the presidential office in the first place (easily provable, by a legitimate court of law) – and as his term in office is exposed for having been the illegal one that it was, Trump can dump all of the legislation that the Usurper signed into law, and all of the E.O.’s and P.D.’s that he issued, and all of the appointments that he made – including to the SCOTUS, and inferior courts [and including the FISA court] – into the trash bin. And thus there will be no more Obama appointees to the various courts in the land to block Trump’s draining of the swamp – completely. In concert with the cleaning out of the vermin in Congress; particularly as related to PizzaGate, but also for both major political parties having colluded in the sitting of an illegal candidate in the Oval Office for 8 long years. Setting up TPTB’s attempted takeover of the U.S. federal constitutional Republic. Thwarted by such as master strokes like this one.

But it will cause a storm of riots in the nation? Not if it is couched in the correct terms: as setting the nation back to rights, and with the Great Middle of America clearly behind it. And if the Left still wants a fight – with the likes of George Soros’s money being blocked, legally, for promoting mayhem – then so be it. Nobody said that this was going to be a walk in the park. To put this country, and the world, not only back under the rule of law. But to life under Godly principles.

That is to say, more clearly: to bring in a New World Order, alright. Just not the one that the Dark side envisioned for it. But The Real Thing.


This, setting up a changeover of the Western - and, basically, world's - monetary system, away from fiat and interest-bearing money and fractional-reserve banking to currency based on precious metals; calling a Jubilee, with so much of the debt sloshing around having been illegally created; a Revaluation of nation's currencies, towards their real value (and including the fact that there is enough gold existent to make everyone a millionaire, and thus not needing to do anything, but keep God's abundance flowing in our lives); and a 'draining of the swamp' totally.  All, setting up both Disclosure and Contact.  And all of the above, setting up


Out of The Drama.  Into

the Real Thing.

Before an American Spring takes place.  And makes all of this move into The New more difficult, than it needs to be.

But into it, we will go.  For,

it's that time.


And cosmically.


And, as if to emphasize this point on this early March day, before any intended American Spring gets up too much of a head of steam:

from ‘WOW!  BARACK’S BROTHER MALIK OBAMA Just Tweeted Obama’s Birth Certificate…And It’s Not From Hawaii’ - March 9 (posted at — Andrew West - March 9)
(“Obama’s half-brother Malik just tweeted an image that’s allegedly Barack Obama’s birth certificate from a hospital in Mombassa, Kenya. The birth certificate shows he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961…”)
(My comment posted at both sites)


Let's get the facts straight. And the basic fact is that it doesn't matter WHERE he was born, because his father (his purported, legally attested-to father, that is) was not a U.S. citizen. He failed to be eligible right there; no birth location factor necessary. Because the definition of a 'natural born' citizen at the time that it was codified in the Constitution as an eligibility requirement for the office of the presidency, and as easily attested to by the historical record (too long a story to go into its detail here), is a person "born in the country, of parents who are citizens". (It's from the definitive tome of the day on such matters, E. de Vattel's 'The Law of Nations'.) And that eligibility requirement for that particular office STILL STANDS, absent a constitutional amendment to the contrary.

So: When Justice is served, all of the legislation that he signed into law, and all of the E.O.'s and P.D.'s that he issued, and all of the appointments that he made - including to the SCOTUS, and lesser courts - go with him, into the trash bin. It is to be as if he were never there. For, he was never there legally. And we will have learned a painful lesson: Not to trust our erstwhile masters, in a self-governing nation, where The People are the sovereign, but to take responsibility for our own actions. Personally. And nationally.

3 • Reply 

  • You are aabsolutely right. According to our Constitution both parents must have been American citizens at the time of a presidential candidates birth....he should ever have been allowed to even join the race ffor president in 2008! That fact also nullifies Ted Cruz. I even heard republican citizens say that they hope Melania runs for President, so it is not only flaw of the dems....some republicans are more than willing to ignore the Constitution on this matter as a matter of fact everyone of them in the Congress in 2007 proved that they were willing to ignore it by allowing Obama to run and subsequently win and be seated in the Oval Office. 

    • And as such, being that the United States government was never been able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt his status as a natural born citizen, he never should have been allowed to run for POTUS! Such a high office should never be allowed to be obtained without verifiable proof of citizenship!!!


      And to be crystal clear, Dina, we're not just talking about "verifiable proof of citizenship" as regards the office of POTUS. We're talking about proof of being a 'natural born' citizen. Which requires the candidate to have been born "in the country [or its equivalent, like a military station], of parents who are citizens". The whole POINT of that requirement being to make sure that the occupant of that particular office, who would as well, then, become the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces, had NO DUAL OR OTHERWISE CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES OR INFLUENCES. Had SOLE ALLEGIANCE to the U.S.
      That requirement can be changed - but only by a constitutional amendment. As even recognized by both current major political parties, when, between them, between 2003 and '08 alone, they tried a total of 8 times to get just such an amendment going through Congress - i.e., proposals all of which had this particular issue as their common denominator - and they failed each time even to get their proposals out of committee, such was the sensitivity around this particular issue. So: THEY KNEW. And have known. the truth of this matter. And that's why they face jail time, just as the Usurper does. Both of our current major political parties to face RICO-statute charges, of conspiring between them to commit this crime; to be found guilty as charged - in an honest, Common Law court - fined, dissolved as the criminal enterprises that they will have then been proven to be, and their authorities sent to prison.
      Where they can keep both Obama and Hillary company; those miscreants having been proven guilty of the various charges pending against both of those criminals. As this nation is SET TO RIGHTS.

      There is no such definition "codified in the Constitution." That "definition" was cooked up in 2008 by a goofy part-time lawyer, part-time bass player, who decided after birthering didn't pan out for him that he wanted to be a full-time professional poker player. 
      "When Justice is served, all of the legislation that he signed into law, and all of the E.O.'s and P.D.'s that he issued, and all of the appointments that he made - including to the SCOTUS, and lesser courts - go with him, into the trash bin."
      That's just a malignant birther fantasy. Putting aside the fact that longstanding, well-settled law-- the de facto officer doctrine-- protects the public from just that kind of upheaval, why would laws passed by Congress, which usually don't require a president's signature in the first place, go "into the trash bin" because of a defective signature?


      • kibitzer3 Dave B. a few seconds ago 

      • I'm not sure if I should bother responding to your peculiar arguments, because you may just be a troll. But as I have a few moments free from other, more pressing activity, here is a short such response - as well, to fill any 'onlookers' in on some information for their edification regarding this whole matter.

      • E. de Vattel's 'The Law of Nations,' Book One, Ch. XIX, Sect. 212 (look it up, it's right on the Internet, no dusty legal tome in a law library necessary): "The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens..." 1) Evidence that the constitutional Framers were well aware of this definition of the term: Benjamin Franklin, their elder and well-respected mentor, and who just happened to be sitting right there amongst them as a delegate himself to said proceedings, was known to have had 3 copies of the de Vattel tome in his possession (one of which he gave to the Continental Congress, of these men who were researching into the whole matter of creating a new nation), and which an extant letter proves that he prized. If any of the Framers were nor sure of the definition of a 'natural born' citizen, all they would have to have done was ask Franklin. But many of them were learned gentlemen, and the de Vattel tome was taught in the universities of the day; so that would basically have not been necessary. 2) Evidence that it was, and is, not enough simply to have been born a citizen to qualify under this eligibility requirement: Alexander Hamilton, as a delegate to said proceedings, made a proposal that the citizenship aspect of the eligibility requirements for the office of the presidency require the person only to have been "born a Citizen" - and his proposal was SPECIFICALLY TURNED DOWN, in favor of the more stringent category of citizen. It is clear beyond all question: the Framers did not want anybody in that particular position who did not have SOLE ALLEGIANCE to the U.S.

      • As for "laws passed by Congress": They are not laws legally binding as such until they have been signed off on by the executive, i.e., the president, or passed over his veto, as required in the Constitution. You know, that funny old document that is all that stands in the way between a federal constitutional republic and a tyranny? I thought so.

      No comments: