US District Court in Memphis, Tennesse, Grand Jury Presentments served naming Obama with Treason

American Grand Jury ^ | December 1, 2009

[Man50D]

PRESS RELEASE: December 1, 2009 by American Grand Jury

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Western District of Tennessee, Memphis, TN served by Mac MacDougall

American Grand Jury has incorporated the Fitzpatrick criminal complaint and the Nancy Pelosi criminal conspiracy complaint within its Presentments.

The American Grand Jury Criminal Presentments have now been hand-delivered by Process-Service to the Clerk of the United States District Court, Mr. Thomas M. Gould, Memphis, Tennessee [serve affidavit by Mac MacDougall] .

The “Affidavits of Process-Serve” can be seen here at the American Grand Jury business website

The criminal charges of Eligibility Fraud and Treason (Barack Obama) and Conspiracy of Election Fraud (Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama) are now pending before these and numerous other Courts.

The criminal charges of Eligibility Fraud and Treason (Barack Obama) and Conspiracy of Election Fraud (Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama) are now pending before these and numerous other Courts.

If acted upon, the Grand Jury Presentments would require that both Obama and Pelosi be criminally prosecuted.

American Grand Jury is actively pursuing decisions in a number of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS located in multiple jurisdictions: District for Columbia, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Kansas, New York, Texas, California, Arizona, Connecticut and others.

More serves will be forth coming.

You can help American Grand Jury in our mission of serving and demanding the Judiciary act upon the Criminal Presentments by visiting here:

If acted upon, the Grand Jury Presentments would require that both Obama and Pelosi be criminally prosecuted.

American Grand Jury is actively pursuing decisions in a number of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS located in multiple jurisdictions: District for Columbia, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Kansas, New York, Texas, California, Arizona, Connecticut and others.

More serves will be forth coming.

You can help American Grand Jury in our mission of serving and demanding the Judiciary act upon the Criminal Presentments by visiting here:

http://ProsecuteObama.org

[Non-Sequitur]

The 5th Amendment is a federal law and supersedes any law you are referring to but fail to cite to buttress your otherwise vacuous claim.

Yes, well when it comes to vacuous claims I appear to be talking to the expert.

Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states: "When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned." The courts, not a bunch of lunkheads who may or may not have ever read the Constitution to begin with.

[tired_old_conservative]

I think it's clear that a bunch of people can just get together and call themselves a Grand Jury. They can present to a court if they want (with or without wearing funny hats). What they don't get is that the court is under no legal obligation of any kind to treat them as a real Grand Jury. And no court will.

By the by, I did read the counts in the “presentment.” The second is the best—”You're a criminal because I say so, dang it!” Good demonstration of why courts don't take this type of thing seriously.

Maybe they should try “You're a criminal because I say THE GOD OF ISRAEL says so.”

[Non-Sequitur]

By the by, I did read the counts in the “presentment.” The second is the best—”You're a criminal because I say so, dang it!”

Well, they're a grand jury because they say so, dang it! Why should the indictment be different?

Maybe they should try “You're a criminal because I say THE GOD OF ISRAEL says so.”

Ah the God of Israel. It's amazing the kind of crap He gets blamed for.

[Drew68]

Ohhh come on Obama Bots, give up the fight, the GOD of Israel will make sure the truth comes to gurgle gurgle blather blather...

Umm... OK. I guess? I really have no idea what you're talking about.

[Man50D]

Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states: "When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned." The courts, not a bunch of lunkheads who may or may not have ever read the Constitution to begin with.

The Bill of Rights was enacted in 1791. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure was enacted in 1946. The Bill of Rights was created specifically and only for powers granted to the people. The body of the Constitution lists powers granted to the three branches of government. The grand jury is not mentioned anywhere the body of the Constitution but is cited in the Bill of Rights purposely to grant the power of the grand jury only to the people.

The fact you actually argue a law created 155 years after the Bill Of Rights by a branch of government that has no Constitutional authority to usurp powers vested to the people only shows how little you understand or how much contempt you have for Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

Regardless of that fact you also failed to cite Note 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules:

Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal courts."

Note four does not state Presentments are illegal or unconstitutional, only obsolete. This was not oversight. The writers purposely stated it this way because they knew a judicial rule cannot usurp the Constitution but did not want citizens to be aware they have the Constitutional power to form a grand jury.

Yes, well when it comes to vacuous claims I appear to be talking to the expert

Another statement revealing the depth of your ignorance. I didn't reach any conclusions on the grand jury until I had my father, who has been a lawyer for more than 55 years, thoroughly review all the information at the website. He examined all the information for two hours and concluded it was well reasoned and Constitutional but the I'm sure you feel, given you're vast legal knowledge, the sum of your legal expertise exceeds his.

[Non-Sequitur]

The grand jury is not mentioned anywhere the body of the Constitution but is cited in the Bill of Rights purposely to grant the power of the grand jury only to the people.

Soooo...every Grand Jury convened by a federal court is illegal? Is that what you would have us believe?

The fact you actually argue a law created 155 years after the Bill Of Rights by a branch of government that has no Constitutional authority to usurp powers vested to the people only shows how little you understand or how much contempt you have for Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

Maybe I'm just not blessed with your imaginative, if not bizarre, interpretation of the Constitution.

[American Constitutionalist]

" Ohhh come on Obama Bots, give up the fight, the GOD of Israel will make sure the truth comes to gurgle gurgle blather blather.

" Umm... OK. I guess? I really have no idea what you're talking about. "

Ahhh yes, a atheist I presume ??

Hey at least I can give you credit, at least no one can say you lack a sense of humor no matter how much it's misguided.

[American Constitutionalist]

The God of Israel will not be mocked.

The heathen imagine a vain thing...

[Mr. Lucky]

You apparently stopped reading the 5th Amendment before you got to that part about "...nor shall any person...be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."

Rule 6 of the Federal Riles of Criminal Procedure require that a Grand Jury be called by a United States District Court Judge and provides for dismissal or any charge brought by an improperly called grand jury.

[American Constitutionalist]

Maybe I ask you ? ...

What makes you think that the God of Israel can not do such a thing ? are you saying that the God of Israel is powerless ?

[American Constitutionalist]

Maybe I ask you ? ...

What makes you think that the God of Israel can not do such a thing ? are you saying that the God of Israel is powerless ?
And ? on who's authority do you speak ?
As for the big picture in the scheme of things, guess what ? we win in the end...

[Man50D]

Soooo...every Grand Jury convened by a federal court is illegal? Is that what you would have us believe?

Who granted the judicial branch the power of the grand jury? It certainly wasn't the Constitution! The judicial branch cannot arbitrarily usurp the Constitution by writing its own set of rules. Guess where that leaves the The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure was enacted in 1946?

Or maybe you just refuse to accept the facts laid out before you because the powers to be (in this case the judicial branch) have convinced you the Constitution is irrelevant.

Are you actually claiming a law created 155 years after the Bill Of Rights by a branch of government that has no Constitutional authority to usurp powers vested to the people is valid? It's comforting to know your well reasoned insights are more informed than my father's 55+ years of legal experience.

[tired_old_conservative]

I didn’t mock THE GOD OF ISRAEL; I mocked you. Unless, of course, you consider yourself to know his intentions and ways, or to speak for him. Either would, I believe, constitute hubris, the sin of pride.

One of the seven deadly sins, I believe.

[Man50D]

You apparently stopped reading the 5th Amendment before you got to that part about "...nor shall any person...be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."

You apparently fail to understand the Bill Of Rights are powers vested only to the people and not vested to the three branches of government.

Rule 6 of the Federal Riles of Criminal Procedure require that a Grand Jury be called by a United States District Court Judge and provides for dismissal or any charge brought by an improperly called grand jury.

You obviously didn't read post #25. I suggest you read it.

[STE=Q]

I would have trouble charging Obama with treason.

Treason:

Violation or betrayal of the allegiance that a person owes his sovereign or his country, esp by attempting to overthrow the government; high treason

From the above it’s obvious that in order to commit treason one has to betray one’s country... in this case, the United States of America.

I doubt if America was EVER Obama’s country to betray.

Those that have, with foreknowledge of their crime, abetted Obama’s usurpation are a different story.

May a pox be upon their house!

STE=Q

[tired_old_conservative]

The portion of the 5th amendment you cite exists to protect the citizenry from being bought to trial by the federal government for crimes absent any procedural process that establishes some minimal standard of evidence. It does not exist to let a bunch of yahoos run around indicting each other with ridiculous counts of the type found in this “presentment.” Such an interpretation yields a state of anarchy that would effectively negate the very protection for which the Grand Jury concept is cited.

[Man50D]

The portion of the 5th amendment you cite exists to protect the citizenry from being bought to trial by the federal government for crimes absent any procedural process that establishes some minimal standard of evidence. It does not exist to let a bunch of yahoos run around indicting each other with ridiculous counts of the type found in this “presentment.” Such an interpretation yields a state of anarchy that would effectively negate the very protection for which the Grand Jury concept is cited.

The 5th Amendment is part of the Bill Of Rights. The Bill Of Rights was written specifically for granting certain powers to the people and only the people. The powers for the three branches of government are cited in the body of the Constitution that were enacted two years earlier. The 5th Amendment does not set a minimal standard of evidence. It provides two different methods for the people to bring charges, either by Presentment or indictment, hence the wording "unless on a presentment or indictment". The anarchy would be in allowing any of the three branches of government the power of the grand jury. You obviously have much less faith in your fellow Americans than did our founding fathers.

[deport]

Curious.....

Has any of these presentments been acted upon either by being allowed to move forward in the normal court procedure or outright rejection by the court?

[Man50D]

Has any of these presentments been acted upon either by being allowed to move forward in the normal court procedure or outright rejection by the court?

To my knowledge none have resulted in a court forming an indictment but the idea is to continue serving Presentments nationwide thereby flooding the judicial system, making it increasingly difficult to ignore and increasing the chance at least one will form an indictment.

[tired_old_conservative]

I haven’t taken basic math in a while, but given that these deranged things have 0% chance of ever getting a indictment, let’s assume 1000 are filed.

1000 x 0.0 = ???