Posted on 03/28/2009 3:43:32 PM PDT by nysuperdoodle
Stockbridge, Georgia- The questions over the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to occupy his current position as President of the United States continue to be raised. After being presented with evidence in the matter, a citizens' grand jury convened by Carl Swensson in Georgia has returned an indictment against Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka Barry Sutoro.
Reportedly the sealed indictment, scheduled to be delivered to prosecutors on Monday, includes counts of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. "It's a done deal, and the people of the State of Georgia demand action on this matter," said Carl Swensson after the grand jury proceedings had finished. "I can't comment on this other than to say that the sealed indictment will be delivered to prosecutors on Monday."
(Excerpt) Read more at evilconservativeonline.com ...
Who knows were this will lead.
No where. They don’t have any standing, whatsoever.
What does standing have to do with a grand jury?
Means that the President can’t be forced to respond to their indictment, nor will any case ever go to court over this.
Time wounds all heels. Barry will get his someday. The truth always wins. Eventually.
no... standing is a legal term that applies to a plaintiff in a civil suit. I think you mean to say that they haven’t the authority to do so... but according to our own supreme court, they do...so i tmay be ignored by prosecutors, but that doesn’t mean that anyone acted outside their authority. On the contrary.. it means that our government is disregarding common law as well as constitutional law
Saul Alinsky would say, “It doesn't matter!”
Even if it goes nowhere, it is one more irritant that puts pressure on Obama. It is one more way to make Obama appear to be an illegitimate usurper of the office of president, (whether or not he is or not). Indirectly it makes his policies appear illegitimate as well.
The conservative strategy should never at any time give Obama any rest in anything!....and this includes his natural born status.
gnip
This is a make-believe grand jury...but,what the heck: run with it !
I have this on background. Obimbo’s teleprompter will be subpoenaed!
I completely agree.
Apparently it is in the 5th Amendment and sometimes referred to as the “4th Branch of the government”.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2217053/posts?page=18#18
Of course we will have those who want to see America destroyed, as well as those who don’t care enough tell us that we should just ‘grab our ankles’.
Nowhere.
He has Executive immunity since the moment he was sworn in as President. It will be like Clinton. He could not be charged because he was the President and all legal actions against him were postponed while he was in office.
“He has Executive immunity since the moment he was sworn in as President.”
If he does not meet the constitutional requirements for office then he is NOT president and has no immunity.
Maybe they will issue THE supeona of the Birth Certificate ?
Would be nice to have some Court somewhere ask to see it..
This sounds a bit like “Sovereign Citizen” at play:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1541805/four_men_associated_with_sovereign.html
Here’s more:
Actually, he is NOT President. Section three of the twentieth amendment plainly states that a "President elect" MUST "qualify" to be President BEFORE being allowed to become President.
"If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
The burden of "qualifying" rest squarely on the President elect or whoever it might be who is seeking the office of President. It does not require some other person to challenge whether or not qualifications exist.
In addition, the matter of "standing" is clearly laid out in the Constitution as well under Article six as pertaining to the oath of office.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Anyone who has taken THIS oath is duty bound to defend and support the Constitution or they are breaking the law. No court can demand that a person break the law by denying them the opportunity to support the law (the Constitution IS the law).
In case you were wondering,March for Your Country.com is long on motivational patriotic material...and a nice clear plea for donations.
Evidently,declining gas prices have limited its “marching orders”.
http://www.marchforyourcountry.com/
OH-oh-oh !!
There’s more !!!
http://www.riseupforamerica.com/
Never mind the Constitution, folks: we use the Magna Carta !!
Oh good, the indictment is “sealed”!
mrmeangenes wrote:
This is a make-believe grand jury...but,what the heck: run with it !
Pretty much sums it up. A "Common Law Grand Jury."
If you want to convene your own Grand Jury, maybe to indict the Pres__ent's Teleprompter as well, just follow the easy steps outlined at http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/grandjuryrules.htm.
This will go nowhere. The prosecutor they take this to will put it in his automated filing system:
It’ll go nowhere even if there is evidence. We can’t have a constitutional disturbance, can we?
Let sleeping dogs lie.
“Let sleeping dogs lie.”
Why? The issue of 0bama’s eligibility is a critical Constitutional issue. It deserves a full and complete hearing and, ultimately, resolution.
The courts have, to date, found reasons to deny suits seeking such hearing and resolution. If this exercise in GA gets more heat under the pretender and the activist judges that have abrogated their responsibilities under the Constitution, then that is a very good thing.
I saw a report, earlier, that this question is now getting some reporting in the EU, particularly in Poland. That is also a very good thing.
It’s time to take back the country.
Just keep applying pressure, you never know when a break will come. Someday we actually might find out who this character is.
Right you are. Every law suit re; bc, every tea party pokes this sob with a stick. Death by a thousand paper cuts..
I’m afraid you’re mistaken. The Constitution sets forth the procedure, and if there are no objections, then Congress’s counting of the electoral votes constitutes certifying his eligibility. That’s the legal truth. Legally, there is apparently nothing that can be done unless he’s impeached.
Quite possibly there will be many things for which he could be impeached soon.
The only thing that could change this would be proof that surfaces and is made public that he committed fraud. The problem the accusers have is that they have no evidence.
Henry County? This should be interesting.
It does? Quote it from the Constitution for us. If you are talking about the electoral vote counting act of 1877, perhaps you can explain to us how it supports the Constitution by NOT requiring that eligibility qualifications be presented by the President elect. An "act" of Congress cannot override a provision in the U.S. Constitution. It takes an "amendment" to do that. If an act does not support the Constitution, it is "unconstitutional". This is why the electoral vote counting procedure which currently requires that someone raise their hand in objection is unconstitutional. This burden of proof is clearly written into section three of the twentieth amendment as that of the person seeking the office of President.
Coming soon to every small town in America.
This case is beginning to grow legs. Goodbye Obama!
I missed this one entirely in MSNBC.
What an education I get when I come to this site.I like to think the same thing about FreeRepublic. (In fact I was thinking of posting a similar thought when I returned to the thread.)
But I could not. When I tried to return, the thread was gone. It had been pulled by the Moderator and the reason given was "Nonsense." While I might agree that the notion that a "runaway" Grand Jury presentment against the President of the United States is not likely to go anywhere, the notion that these quaint institutions established by the Framers, since the great modern thinkers don't like them, are "outmoded" is one of the many things that FreeRepublic ought to be about. Moderators who call such threads, "Nonsense," need remedial training if they are allowed to remain at all.
ML/NJ
Good luck with that. The mods seem to get their direction from JimRob.
Yep. I wonder if the people running with this thought through the implications. If this were permissible, could I get 25 of my friends together and start issuing indictments as I please?
Yeah: just claim authority under the Magna Carta. All the Barons of the Realm are doing that this year.
How many people are FINALLY starting to think, why is all this mess still going on? Why doesn’t he just show his birth certificate already?
And I don’t mean to a website.
Are you aware that even Leo Donofrio condemns this citizens’ grand jury? The articles he wrote about the power of presentment were written in 2005 to encourage citizens to investigate government corruption after they were sworn in as grand jurors under federal authority. Grand Jurors don’t have to stick to the agenda of prosecutors. They can investigate whatever they dang well please, but only after they’re empaneled by federal authority. Donofrio believes this citizens’ grand jury is illegal and dangerous because the wording they used could get them arrested.
With that said, any rights not outlined in the Constitution and not specifically prohibited by it are reserved to the States and then the people. So, if there were an existing legal framework under which this could be established, it could work. But there isn’t, so it doesn’t.
No I am not. Do you have a link you could provide where his thinking about this is provided.
ML/NJ
Absolutely.
ML/NJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.