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

[American Constitutionalist]

I guess your not aware that the Bible tells us that God reveals the hidden things and bring those things to light ?

[Drew68]

1000 x 0.0 = ???

At least the various courts are earning money from the filing fees.

[American Constitutionalist]

" 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. "

The word of God speaks for it's self and through the study of God's word, yes, we can know some of the ways of God and his will.
The King of Syria was perplexed in how his secret plans to come against Israel was being revealed, until one of his servants told him that it was the prophet Elisha... there are other examples in God's word that the plans of evil men would be exposed..

[tired_old_conservative]

Book of Daniel, oh smug and self satisfied one.

I'm just not arrogant and narrow-minded enough to believe that God's will automatically conforms to my particular political beliefs, desires or derangements. As I recall, the Bible itself cautions against that on numerous occasions. Humility, the progenitor of love, is a fundamental Christian virtue.

[American Constitutionalist]

First place, what I described was in II KINGS chapter 6... and no, I would agree with you, God does not conform to anyone's political belief, how ever, Conservatives basically have some element of values in the Christian faith.
Does not matter what religion of the evil men are, God will reveal hidden things and secrets of God's people enemies to his people..

[tired_old_conservative]

Yes, but who are we to automatically assume the people we simply disagree with are evil?

“Judge not, that ye not be judged.

For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye meet, it shall be measured to you again.

And who beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

Who said that again?

[American Constitutionalist]

" Yes, but who are we to automatically assume the people we simply disagree with are evil? "

Stalin ? Hitler ? David Koresh ? Manson ? you would have us to believe that they were not evil men ? .....

“Judge not, that ye not be judged.
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye meet, it shall be measured to you again.

And who beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considered not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

Jesus was showing them the princible of sowing and reaping, what you sow, you shall reap, if you give, it will be given back to you.
How can we say that Communist who kill Christians are not evil ? how can we say that the Nazis who killed over 6 million Jews were not evil, as you say, judge not, least you shall be judged, so then, we should have never went to Germany and defeated the Nazis.
Are we to say that , that evil never happened ?
What about the man who killed those 4 police officers ? ... are we to say that he was just misunderstood ?

[wintertime]

For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye meet, it shall be measured to you again.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is an admonition to judge FAIRLY and WISELY. Do I want to be judged by others fairly and wisely in a manner that is **truthful**? Yes, of course I do. Therefore, I too must judge fairly, wisely and **truthfully**!

This scripture is not a commandment to be brain dead about evil.

As for the mote and beam in the eye, we must remove our beam so that we can see **clearly** fairly** and truthfully.

[tired_old_conservative]

And I guess this is a good example of where I part ways with the shrill, misshapen thing on the fringes that falsely calls itself conservative.

This started as a discussion about a Grand Jury “presentment” that is ludicrous and laughable to anyone with their brain turned on, let alone people who understand the law. I didn't introduce God into such a silly conversation.

Yet here we are: “Stalin? Hitler? David Koresh? Manson?” That's what I hear from the fringe and not-so-fringe all the time these days. It's sad.

Well, I'm sorry. Obama isn't Hitler or Stalin, he's not leading a Muslim army to invade this country, and he's not shredding the Constituion while maniacally laughing and drinking the blood of cute and fuzzy kittens. That is 100% nut talk. We don't get to actually pretend we're Wolverines fighting the invasion of Idaho, at least on the adult end of the country.

You're making Obama into so much more than he is. He's just some left-wing politician whose policies conservatives should generally oppose, but he is President. He's also beatable if we can stay sane. Stop being a bunch of whiny, bedwetting babies telling ourselves inane fables about an American Grand Jury or Orly Taitz and get over it. Get up off the paranoid whimpering rug and do the real work to win elections. Because, believe it or not, the other side is allowed to win elections. That's sort of the whole premise of free countries.

Real conservatism is about objectively facing reality to the best of our ability, not confusing our own precarious emotional states with external reality. Not embracing delusions just because we're angry or upset. And I'm sorry again, but if the only way you can deal with losing elections is to imagine the other side as absolute evil, then Jesus was talking to you.

He was telling to you get a grip, for your own sake.

[Mr. Lucky]

Claiming to have a dad who was a lawyer for 55 years, but who didn't know that the convening of grand juries was governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, is less than an overwhelming argument.

I hope your dad didn't handle death penalty cases.

[Man50D]

Claiming to have a dad who was a lawyer for 55 years, but who didn't know that the convening of grand juries was governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, is less than an overwhelming argument.

The Grand jury is governed by the 5th Amendment. Are you claiming rules concocted by one branch of government can usurp the Constitution and/or the Bill of Rights?

[Mr. Lucky]

The 5th Amendment also requires that defendants be afforded due process of law.

[Man50D]

The 5th Amendment also requires that defendants be afforded due process of law.

Correct. The 5th Amendment provides due process either by Presentments or indictments of a grand jury. It does not specify of a grand jury convened only by a court.

[Mr. Lucky]

But the term “due process” means that a person may be convicted only by procedure established by law. Federal law provides for grand juries to be convened by order of District Courts and does not provide otherwise.

[Man50D]

But the term “due process” means that a person may be convicted only by procedure established by law.

Correct. That law is the 5th Amendment.

Federal law provides for grand juries to be convened by order of District Courts and does not provide otherwise.

Wrong. What you are referring to is not a Federal law. It is a Federal Rule. Note four of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules admits Presentments are still enforceable. per Rule #4:

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."

Rule four does not claim Presentments are unconstitutional for a reason. The Committee understood they don't have the Constitutional authority to declare Presentments or those who serve them unconstitutional.

The 5th Amendment cannot be arbitrarily usurped by any branch of government. Following your logic or illogic the executive and legislative branches should be able to also arbitrarily write their own set of rules to negate other Amendments in the Bill of Rights thereby wresting all powers from the people.

[Mr. Lucky]

OK, what is the procedure under federal law for convening a grand jury outside of appointment by a District Court judge?

[Man50D]

OK, what is the procedure under federal law for convening a grand jury outside of appointment by a District Court judge?

Anyone can randomly select individuals from their community to form a grand jury. Obviously those individuals must agree to be on a grand jury.

[Non-Sequitur]

How about answering my question? Is it your contention that every grand jury empanelled by the federal or state courts has been unconstitutional? Yes or no?

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.

Hardly. I just refuse to accept your odd-ball interpretation of the Constitution.

[Man50D]

How about answering my question? Is it your contention that every grand jury empanelled by the federal or state courts has been unconstitutional? Yes or no?

Are you serious? That question was already answered in post #32 if you bothered to use a little common sense. I'll rephrase. The Constitution doesn't grant the judicial branch power of the grand jury then what is the only logical answer?

Hardly. I just refuse to accept your odd-ball interpretation of the Constitution.

What part of the Bill Of Rights are powers granted only to the people don't you understand?

[American Constitutionalist]

Well, I'm sorry. Obama isn't Hitler or Stalin, he's not leading a Muslim army to invade this country, and he's not shredding the Constituion while maniacally laughing and drinking the blood of cute and fuzzy kittens. That is 100% nut talk. We don't get to actually pretend we're Wolverines fighting the invasion of Idaho, at least on the adult end of the country.

" You're making Obama into so much more than he is. He's just some left-wing politician whose policies conservatives should generally oppose, but he is President. He's also beatable if we can stay sane. Stop being a bunch of whiny, bedwetting babies telling ourselves inane fables about an American Grand Jury or Orly Taitz and get over it. Get up off the paranoid whimpering rug and do the real work to win elections. Because, believe it or not, the other side is allowed to win elections. That's sort of the whole premise of free countries. "


Why don't you take your naive see no evil logic and tell the victims of 9/11 in New York that.
Plenty of personal attacks from you,, typical of liberals doing that....
Why don't you tell those victims of 9/11 that it's Obama's and Holder's policies that might let those terrorist free since the news today is that one of the terrorist asked the judge to dismiss the case.
So I guess you would call those 9/11 victims " Whiners " and " bed wetters " because they object to Obama's policy of letting those terrorist have their day in court in New York when they are enemy combatants who have NO US CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS...