The charge of “Treason” filed against President Obama in NC court (file #09R81)

TWN ^ | November 14, 2009 | Staff

[yoe]

Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick III levels charge in an effort to avert what he described as a pending civil war

Nogales, Arizona 11/14/2009 12:51 PM GMT (TransWorldNews)

Strong charges by Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick III, a retired US Naval officer were leveled at Preisident Obama as part of a criminal complaint filed with the Clerk of Court, Catawba County, NC (file #09R81) and a copy of the indictment was sent by Certified Mail to District Attorney James C. Gaither (NC District 25B), for further action according to his Oath of Office.”

Some of the details follow:

Said complaint was formally brought by a Military Officer (retired) of the United States of America. All United States Military Officers are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and such complaint is valid, explicit and proper; when an Officer is aware of such malfeasance of Treason by an offender it is that Officer’s SWORN duty to come forward and present such accusation and complaint;

The Military Officer who filed the complaint is Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, III, retired, United States Navy and a graduate of the United States Naval Academy;

Lt. Commander Fitzpatrick on March 17, 2009 did hereby make such criminal accusation and complaint against Obama and presented said complaint before the U.S Attorney Russell Dedrick, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Schmutzer, Eastern District, Tennessee;

An original photocopy of said complaint was submitted to the Grand Jury as evidence for immediate investigation;

See more details (here)

COUNT TWO:

The charge of “Treason” against Obama is before the people of the United States of America. That such complaint is CRIMINAL, of high crimes, and extremely damaging against the people.

[danamco]

Or more likely he refused to play the PC game the higher brazz must follow to get further up on the latter!!!

[danamco]

I would characterize them as our armchair keyboard “warriors” with a big mouth piece, but without the cajones to stand up against tyranny like the Commander Fitzpatrick. It takes a lot of guts to do that!!!

[danamco]

Have you taken a look at all his Czars and what political leaning they have, Anita Dunn and her attorney husband. What about his stands on Israel/Palestine, Iran, etc.???

[danamco]

Ping

[reed13]

Peace

I interpreted your comment as if he was an incompetent bilger for being unable to reach beyond 0-4, rather than the more likely not willing to compromise his morals and toe the PC line.

Most of the line officers I knew who really knew their mission were passed over more than once for failing to toe the PC line and suck up to the appropriate platitudes. I saw a lot of crap promotions go to the suck ups, one of the main reasons I got out - still sticks in my craw.

[Pilsner]

After this Loony Toons attempt fails, Lt. Cmdr. Fitzpatrick can hire Orly Taitz to haul Obama up before the United Federation of Planets on charges of violating the Prime Directive.

As to why he ended his career as an O-4, the story is at this link:

NAVY OFFICER FIGHTS EXILE FROM SEA REPRIMAND THAT KILLED CAREER WAS VENDETTA, HE SAYS

While the story strongly suggests that his bosses were out to get him -- acquittal on 39 out of 40 charges does not give me confidence in the prosecution team -- it also suggests that the guy was a loose cannon with a predilection for leveling broad charges against his chain of command.

Chicken and the egg. Did he flip out because they Navy Brass tried to court martial him out of the service, or did the Navy Brass try to court martial him out of the service because he had flipped out?

[tired_old_conservative]

And that makes him a Muslim leading an invading Muslim army? Please.

You know, sane, lucid people do disagree on the Israeli/Palestinian issue. That's because it's complicated. And unless I missed it, W didn't invade Iran, either. Obama seems intent on sending more troops to Afghanistan, which is also complicated at this point. Whether you agree with his specific decisions or not, they're within the norms of historical U.S. foreign policy behavior and decision making. They may be mistakes, but presidents get to make those without necessarily being traitors leading an invading army.

And are you saying the “czars” constitute an invading Muslim army? I hope not, because that would be silly.

[tired_old_conservative]

I think my service record, and almost anyone’s this side of a dishonorable discharge, can stand up quite nicely to delusional ravings that the President of the United States is leading an invasion of this country with his Muslim army.

[reasonisfaith]

No, it can’t. Not because it isn’t honorable or praiseworthy, but because your service record has nothing to do with the charge against Obama.

In other words, the only argument that can stand up to charges that Obama is doing something to overthrow our Constitution is an argument that explains how the charge itself is wrong.

[reasonisfaith]

Answer this: what’s keeping him from overthrowing our Constitution? What obstacles are in his way?

[altair]

Answer this: what’s keeping him from overthrowing our Constitution? What obstacles are in his way?

Nothing, really. Public opinion. That's why they chip away at it bit by bit.

[PA-RIVER]

Lets be honest. Bottom line, Obama is taking delight in destroying our country.

Call it Treason, call it whatever you like.

I know what I am seeing. A man who hates America and its constitution.

[PA-RIVER]

Lets be honest. Bottom line, Obama is taking delight in destroying our country.

Call it Treason, call it whatever you like.

I know what I am seeing. A man who hates America and its constitution.

[danamco]

What kind of political leanings have Anita Dunn, Van Jones or the Chief Diversity Director Mark Lloyd and a slew of the other like minded Czars???

[tired_old_conservative]

That evades the point. Anyone with half a brain knows what the political leaning of political appointees in a Democratic administration is going to be. They are going to be distinctly different from what you would see in a Republican administration.

This thread cited a link for more information about its supposed patriotic hero Lt. Commander. I did what the true believers always demand. I followed that link and found lunatic drivel about Obama being a Muslim poised to lead an invading Muslim army into the United States. Anyone who chooses to espouse or associate themselves with something that pitiful and stupid cannot expect to be taken seriously by rational men and women. That is true no matter what Obama’s czars think or do, unless you think they constitute an invading Muslim horde. Do you?

I don't agree with the philosophical disposition of Obama's czars, or his appointees in general. But I'm hard-pressed to believe any sane court would consider for a moment that Obama's appointment of people to mostly pre-existing adminsitrative positions, many of which are confirmed by Congress, is treason. It's called staffing the government, and every administration does it. Just because you or I might not like the people appointed doesn't make it illegal.

[American Constitutionalist]

The reason why Bill Clinton was not removed by Congress was because many politicians were more worried of their political careers than doing what was right.

[American Constitutionalist]

" Tactics like this worked so well in removing Bill Clinton from office! Based on their previous success I’m glad somebody is repeating them. "

That's a bogus argument to confuse the sheeple.

The reason why he was not removed from office was not because of the tactics used, it was more so because many politicians were more worried of their political careers than doing what was right.

[varon]

But this is how we shoot down men of courage in America today. We call them “kooks”.

Point well taken!

[American Constitutionalist]

" Answer this: what’s keeping him from overthrowing our Constitution? What obstacles are in his way? "

For example, making laws that are in direct violation of the US Constitution that the rights of Christians are infringed upon, the new hate crimes laws are a direct violation of the US Constitutional right to the freedom to practice religion.

[Artemis Webb]

"That's a bogus argument to confuse the sheeple."

Yup. That was my whole goal in pointing out historical precedence; "Confusing the sheeple".
Oh no, you're onto me.