Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congress: Arrest Mr. Obama
ATLAH Media Network ^ | 07/07/10 | ATLAH Ministries

Posted on 07/07/2010 3:17:29 PM PDT by ATLAHWorldwide

Congress: Arrest Mr. Obama

Dr. James David Manning calls for Congress to arrest Mr. Obama. Recorded on 21 June 2010. http://atlah.org/atlahworldwide/?p=8723


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: atlah; barack; certifigate; congress; humor; naturalborncitizen; obama; unhingedcrank
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last
To: cammie
Just because you believe Manning to be a charlatan does not mean that you’re on Obama’s side...

Check the poster's posting history. Always fighting Obama's battles. Professional troll, in my opinion.

101 posted on 08/08/2010 8:42:20 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

So did St. Paul.


102 posted on 08/08/2010 9:32:27 PM PDT by Soothesayer9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: trumandogz

The muslim should be arrested because he hasn’t proven that he is an American citizen. Laws matter in this country but your pal spits at them EVERY chance he gets. Some leader.


103 posted on 08/08/2010 9:37:56 PM PDT by Son-Joshua (son-joshua)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
That is why the US Supreme Court has rejected all eight Obama eligibility appeals that have reached them.

Really? I must have missed that when did they state that? Please cite your reference to the USSC and their rejection.

104 posted on 08/08/2010 9:40:52 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
Nobody, at the whitehouse or in congress, is following the law. If you follow “the law,” while your enemy obeys no law, you will lose. The only time you can possibly follow “the law,” is if you have enough firepower to enforce “the law.”

Strategically, you're obviously correct.

Tactically, balancing the logical follow-up of your argument with keeping the country intact is problematic.

105 posted on 08/08/2010 10:12:23 PM PDT by Talisker (When you find a turtle on top of a fence post, you can be damn sure it didn't get there on it's own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
If Obama is a CRIMINAL fraud, it is astonishing to me that there has been no attempt made to remove him via the criminal justice system.

Especially brought on by the POWER BROKERS on the Right. [crickets]

"The U.S. tea party movement must separate itself from “cranks and conspiracy nuts,” Republican pundit Karl Rove said in an opinion piece...“This includes 9/11 deniers, ‘birthers’ who insist Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., and militia supporters espousing something vaguely close to armed rebellion.”

Where were these Birthers at the beginning of the presidential campaign-last minute discovery missed by opposed vetters on the Right.

Palin cautiously ( O'Reilly FOX video) calls the Birthers only "an element" of the Tea party movement.(I was impressed in how she dodged that bullet, has learned well on the pitfalls in media interviews A+)

As the pundits sitting close to Glenn Beck have stated. The sitting President does not have to show any more evidence thereof, as the Birthers have been painted "flakes" on the Right as well as a part of the Tea Party movement.

Impeachment in war times? Best to channel efforts elsewhere...if the Republican Party can only grow a spine. The Democratic party will SURELY implode from within. Both parties have now drawn a line in the sand which is not good for tax paying Americans on either side. No need for either side to read any bills before them--feet up on the desk (only taking media spots),already knowing how their vote will be cast.

And that solves what again???

106 posted on 08/08/2010 10:21:55 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
I happen to agree. There is absolutely no reason Mr. Obama should not be tried for treason.

Please let it happen quickly can not stand much more of this. Nov. hopefully will be a good start.

107 posted on 08/08/2010 10:25:58 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone

Really? I must have missed that when did they state that? Please cite your reference to the USSC and their rejection.


Here are the eight Obama eligibility appeals that have been denied at the Supreme Court of the United States:
1) Berg v Obama:
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2009/01/12/berg-v-obama-scotus-denies-writ-of-certiorari-before-judgment/
2) Beverly v FEC:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030110zor.pdf
The Denial notice is on page 4, 09-794
3) Craig v US:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/08-10817.htm
4) Donofrio v Wells: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/12/08/supreme_court_declines_to_hear.html
5) Herbert v Obama:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-6777.htm
6) Lightfoot v Bowen: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2171962/posts
7) Schneller v Cortes:
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2009/06/26/schneller-v-cortes-motion-denied-writ-dismissed-with-opinion/
8) Wrotnowski v Bysiewicz:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/08/breaking-supreme-court-declines-to-hear-obama-birth-certificate-challenge/


108 posted on 08/08/2010 11:02:47 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: fight_truth_decay

If Obama is a CRIMINAL fraud, it is astonishing to me that there has been no attempt made to remove him via the criminal justice system.
Especially brought on by the POWER BROKERS on the Right. [crickets]

“The U.S. tea party movement must separate itself from “cranks and conspiracy nuts,” Republican pundit Karl Rove said in an opinion piece...“This includes 9/11 deniers, ‘birthers’ who insist Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., and militia supporters espousing something vaguely close to armed rebellion.”

Where were these Birthers at the beginning of the presidential campaign-last minute discovery missed by opposed vetters on the Right.

Palin cautiously ( O’Reilly FOX video) calls the Birthers only “an element” of the Tea party movement.(I was impressed in how she dodged that bullet, has learned well on the pitfalls in media interviews A+)

As the pundits sitting close to Glenn Beck have stated. The sitting President does not have to show any more evidence thereof, as the Birthers have been painted “flakes” on the Right as well as a part of the Tea Party movement.

Impeachment in war times? Best to channel efforts elsewhere...if the Republican Party can only grow a spine. The Democratic party will SURELY implode from within. Both parties have now drawn a line in the sand which is not good for tax paying Americans on either side. No need for either side to read any bills before them—feet up on the desk (only taking media spots),already knowing how their vote will be cast.

And that solves what again???


All you need to do is find one gung ho prosecuting attorney left in America. It could be a district attorney, a state Attorney General or a US Attorney who wants to go down in history as the person who brought down Obama. Get that person to convene a Grand Jury investigation and use subpoena power of a grand jury to get documents and compel witness testimony.
It really shouldn’t be that difficult. Watergate had a grand jury and so did Whitewater.


109 posted on 08/08/2010 11:07:29 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: ATLAHWorldwide

I love to hear the Reverend refer to Obama as “The Long Legged Mac Daddy”


110 posted on 08/08/2010 11:10:50 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
you stated;

Since the passage of the 14th Amendment in 1868 there are only two classifications of citizens: Citizens-at-birth and naturalized citizens. Citizens at birth can become president, naturalized citizens cannot. No court decision and no law passed by Congress has ever differentiated between a Citizen-at-birth and a Natural Born Citizen.

That is why the US Supreme Court has rejected all eight Obama eligibility appeals that have reached them.

Where in those cases did they cite your allegation? Nowhere. More deception by you.

111 posted on 08/08/2010 11:32:43 PM PDT by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: jamese777; Red Steel

Hello troll. Your comments have no validity on this forum. They they are boring and replete with nonsense.

Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Soebakah is not a natural born citizen.

Please stop spamming your tripe on this forum.


112 posted on 08/09/2010 12:41:23 AM PDT by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer9

tell me about-my morning coffee always taste better when Pastor Manning makes statements like these


113 posted on 08/09/2010 3:11:50 AM PDT by MissDairyGoodnessVT (Free Nobel Peace Prize with oil change =^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
Will never happen.

Birthers are considered by the majority as not credible even by Rove. Palin distances herself...goes down the list.

"for the good of the country during war times"

Suspicion is different than strong belief it is true.

Thirty-one percent of Republicans had suspicions (19 percent) or solid evidence ( 11 percent) that Obama was not born in the country.

Our own Intelligence services are not even interested. Fun to blog about only.

Even the (justice) law firm that always sues..is quiet.

114 posted on 08/09/2010 4:12:07 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: ATLAHWorldwide

Not gonna happen, but Rev. Manning tells it like it is!


115 posted on 08/09/2010 6:03:02 AM PDT by ScottinVA (The West needs to act NOW to aggressively treat its metastasizing islaminoma!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer9

My prayer is that Obama would be impeached,tried for treason and brought to justice.


116 posted on 08/09/2010 6:16:42 AM PDT by thethirddegree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Since he doesn’t qualify for the office, in the first place,
he can simply be removed.


117 posted on 08/09/2010 7:36:37 AM PDT by upcountryhorseman (An old fashioned conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ATLAHWorldwide
Still the best political video on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU
118 posted on 08/09/2010 8:39:47 AM PDT by publiusF27
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
There is absolutely no reason Mr. Obama should not be tried for treason.

I'm not sure I agree with this assertion. The Constitution defines Treason as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Now, let's exclude the possible/arguable inclusion of non-traditional modes of warfare [which includes economic] from the portion regarding the levying of war. It is obvious that Obama is not waging war on any of the States using conventional-warfare, so that portion fails. However, there is the 'OR in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort" portion that deserves some investigation as applied to Obama and his actions. There are several ways to argue that Obama is giving aid to America's enemies covering multiple actions.

Certainly challenging Arizona's sovereignty by challenging SB 1070 in court is providing aid and comfort to illegal aliens. The question thus becomes "are illegal aliens enemies?" According to Dictionary.com 'Invasion' is defined as follows:

in·va·sion     /ɪnˈveɪʒən/     [in-vey-zhuhn]
–noun
  1. an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, esp. by an army.
  2. the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
  3. entrance as if to take possession or overrun: the annual invasion of the resort by tourists.
  4. infringement by intrusion.
Obviously illegal aliens are infringing [on American soil by intrusion thereupon, so definition 4 fits. The advent of Aztlan , Raza, and MEChA certainly qualifies definition #3 as true. Given that most [48 of 77; ~62%] of people on the FBI's Wanted for Murder are aliens definition #2 fits. Given the statements of La Raza and other Aztlan-movements definition #1 fits. Therefore, 'helping' the illegal aliens by not only refusing to execute existing laws but prohibiting States from executing them is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

There is also the matter of destroying the legal system of the US, violating all contract-law; the government takeover of GM/Chrysler. This is a bit more theoretical a proof, and a bit more difficult to prove (deserving its own long paper) but suffice it to say that by voiding contract-law the Executive (along with a complicit Legislative & Judicial) have dealt a big blow to the integrity/legitimacy of the federal government {the Constitution prohibits the sort of violation of contracts that occurred}.

119 posted on 08/09/2010 10:23:34 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Hello troll. Your comments have no validity on this forum. They they are boring and replete with nonsense.

Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Soebakah is not a natural born citizen.

Please stop spamming your tripe on this forum.


Thanks for sharing your heartfelt and passionate opinion. I have taken it under advisement and decided to continue posting. I urge you to ignore my posts since they obviously upset you.

Since many other posters continue to respond and debate the issues that I raise, I don’t think that your personal opinion can be taken to speak for everyone else.

You take good care now.


120 posted on 08/09/2010 10:28:29 AM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson