And, of course, we can already predict how the Obot sycophants will respond once the Grand Jury idea picks up speed.
Let's see, either the Ham Sandwich comparison: 
Or, the Witch-hunt comparison:
Both are easily predictable and easily defeated...
Posted on 04/01/2009 2:20:46 PM PDT by Red Steel
While many groups have sought by civil actions to force Barack Obama to produce his birth certificate, someone new has emerged onto the scene to use another avenue to force that same production.
Georgia resident Carl Swensson, has used his influence by way of his website RiseUpForAmerica.org to advance a criminal complaint against President Barack Obama. Swensson is using the Magna Carta as his basis for the authority to form this citizens grand jury. The Magna Carta is the bill of rights formed on British Law.
Over the weekend the 25 sworn Jurors took testimony from many sources, and then filed them this morning with the States Attorney’s Office in Northern Georgia. The jurors were picked, sworn in, and informed of all official procedures.
On Swensson’s website the actions have serious consequences, “"If the government does not amend the error within 40 days after being shown the error, then the four members shall refer the matter to the remainder of the grand jury. The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions, and any way else they can until amends shall have been made according to the sole judgment of the grand jury.”
One can only hope that this may be the legal device to force Obama to produce his Birth Certificate and not just a Certificate of Live Birth, to a forensic analysis expert to be checked for validity. All we want is closure on this issue, he is either a naturalized citizen or not, and the actual Birth Certificate is the ONLY proof of that……the proof that Obama will not share with anyone.
All the civil cases that have been denied have been dismissed so far, maybe this is the only avenue left!
Thanks for the links. Very interesting reading.
Awright, now you dunnit. Showin' dem poke sannich gone n' hurt dem Muslim's feelin', Y'know.
Rumor has it he does not want "the Roberts court" to be the ones that blew out the first black President. I guess he doesn't realize that by not hearing the case, "the Roberts court" will be the ones that blew out America in favor of white guilt and political correctness.
I really like the phrase “to reign in a corrupt government.”
Many, if not most, states have the authority for the Grand Jury (if not the "citizen" Grand Jury) explicitly set aside in their state constitution. I understand that California uses Civil Grand Juries A LOT -- as they probably need to given how Judges regularly OVERTURN measures voted for by the electorate. Louisiana may allow for Civil Grand Juries as well, but since their statutes are NOT based upon Common Law, the same argument may not apply with ties to the Magna Carta, per se. I'd have to dig deeper to see if Louisiana has such laws OR if Napoleonic Law has some tie to the Magna Carta (perhaps through centuries of arranged royal marriages between France and England).
However, as Polarik pointed out, we just need ANY Grand Jury indictment -- from ANY state.
Let's say that indictment is based upon a subpoena that successfully "orders" to see a copy of BHO's vault Certificate of Live Birth. That indictment and supporting prima facia can then given to any prosecutor, judge, etc, at the state level (and even beyond) to then go "up the food chain" to the SCOTUS. Really -- the SCOTUS may not be necessary... if it's successfully fought out in the Court of Public Opinion.
So, IMO, you really only need ONE successful Grand Jury to make this happen... The more Grand Juries from different states strengthens and legitimizes the process further, emboldening other states to follow suite, thereby cementing their collective actions and powers.
Thomas Jefferson (among other founding fathers) would tell us today, if they could, how "to reign in a corrupt government." Jefferson clearly understood the awesome power of "jury nullification" and a citizen grand jury, to keep the people in control of government.
Here's some excerpts from an excellent 2004 essay on the subject:
In 1789, Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Thomas Paine:” I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by men, by which the government can be held to the principles of it’s constitution.”Jefferson saw trial by jury as the greatest power the people have, and the only way the people had to personally and directly prevent government employees from flagrantly ignoring constitutional restraints and opressing the people with excessive and ridiculous laws and regulations (like we live under today).
Trial by jury, with it’s inherent right and power of the jurors to “veto” or “nullify” bad laws, is the common man’s “peaceful eraser” of legislated and regulated stupidity, theft and tyranny.
From the beginning of trial by jury, most judges have coveted the jury’s awesome power to veto bad laws. For a time in the 19th century more and more judges succumbed to temptation and usurped the jury’s power by concealment, deception and bluff. A debate on this concealment raged in the judiciary in the mid to late 19th century. Then in a bitter 1894 U.S. Supreme Court split decision, (Sparf and Hansen vs. U.S.), criminal trial judges were given a green light to no longer tell jurors of their inherent power to judge the law itself in any criminal trial. ...
And if Jefferson were here today, would he say that the “only anchor” is any of the myriad modern issues that people argue about today?
If Thomas Jefferson were here today, and saw a nation where people complain, petition and fight (and usually lose) incessant battles with a corrupt and unresponsive government, saw a nation where the government servants have often become our masters; saw a nation where the citizen’s most powerful and easily available tool to control government has been gradually concealed and almost hidden by judges; saw a nation where the people impotently complain and whine about government and feel resentful, frustrated and cynical, while the most powerful and available solution we have lies dormant and almost forgotten, perhaps Thomas Jefferson would raise his voice and shout to all of America:
“THE JURY, STUPID!”
...Jefferson knew that as voters, we are powerless to personally and directly change anything about our government. (He might say: Wake up, Pay Attention – changing politicians does not change the government!) As voters, we can only try to elect good politicians and hope they will have the courage to do the right things.
But as jurors, we can personally, directly and immediately reduce the abuses and the power of government by refusing to enforce unnecessary and abusive laws and regulations. And eventually even the size and the expense of government will be reduced because of Jury Nullifications.
Government wields all usurped power, intimidates and controls people by one and only one means: by enforcing bad laws. ...
And, of course, we can already predict how the Obot sycophants will respond once the Grand Jury idea picks up speed.
Let's see, either the Ham Sandwich comparison:
Or, the Witch-hunt comparison:
Both are easily predictable and easily defeated...
Writing letters, working on campaigns for yet more corrupted officials etc. etc. etc. just isn't going to cut it. I know this first hand having 2 years ago sat in my Senator's office watching his aids handle incoming letters and phone calls. What did they do after politely assuring the e-mailers and phone callers the Senator shares their concerns? Deleted the e-mails, trashed the letters, and then joked with other staffers about the 'looser' on the other end of the phone after hanging up.
These people are so arrogant it didn't even bother them that they had constitutents sitting in their office as they did this -- didn't even bother to hide their dislike of the 'people' they were supposed to be representing! The truth is my Senator received NOTHING -- not one e-mail, not one letter, and not one phone call. In fact it is highly likely that these staffers were just doing what they were told to do. And my Senator is Richard Lugar btw.
All I do know is all your 'WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMEN' BS you see on Free Republic over and over amounts to nothing. It doesn't matter. I've witnessed it firsthand. The only thing that matters to these cretens is $$$$$ and how much is going to fund their next campaign. And even then they'll lie to you in order to get that $$$$ and once elected turn on you. Those are the sad facts people. We are living in a corrupted government and it needs to be changed!
I don't even think tea parties are going to do squat to get their attention, although its a good beginning to start gathering together and begin to organize so I do support them. A revolution isn't going anywhere until we get organized.
Hopefully it (the grand jury) will succeed so we don't end up resorting to the violent 'revolutionary' route but I'm not holding my breath on that one.
Okay off my soapbox now, thanks for listening to all my pentup frustrations.
Bump Dat...
Swensson (I’m sure its him-was announced as the one who was leading this GA action) is going to be on unspun’s
“The Awakening” show
this coming Monday night- 2 hr show begins at 8 est.
You really ought to be catching this show regularly-
he’s had on “A-list” types several weeks in a row now and here he has one again- very timely appearances as these things go.
type “Investigating Obama” in google and the IO blogspot comes up w/ links.
Power to Abolish the Grand Jury
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires that federal charges for capital and infamous crimes be brought by a indictment returned by a grand jury. This means that the federal system cannot abolish grand juries, at least not if it intends to continue to bring criminal charges against serious offenders. In the nineteenth century, the U.S. Supreme Court held that this requirement does not bind the states, which means they can decide whether to use grand juries or abolish them. Perhaps as a result of this holding, grand juries fell into disfavor among the states in the nineteenth century, with some taking steps to abolish the institution.
With regard to their current attitudes toward the grand jury, all of the states except one can be divided into four categories:
(1)
Only 10 states (Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming) have given their legislatures the power to abolish the institution of the grand jury. And only one of the ten--Connecticut--has even partially abrogated the use of the grand jury. Nine of the ten combine this ability to abolish the grand jury with the authority to modify it.(2)
Pennsylvania--has given its county courts the ability to abolish the use of the grand jury to bring criminal charges. All of the county courts have exercised this ability.(3)
Twenty-two states (Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia) deny their courts and legislatures the power to abolish the grand jury; they do this either by explicitly denying them this ability or by requiring that grand juries be used to bring charges for at least some offenses. Since it is a federal enclave, the District of Columbia is bound by the Fifth Amendment, which means it must use the grand jury to charge capital or otherwise infamous crimes.(4)
Seventeen states (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wyoming) fall into this category. They do not explicitly authorize the abolition of the grand jury but they do not require that grand juries be used to return charges. One can argue that by not requiring the use of grand juries, these states implicitly authorize the abolition of that institution.
The one state that does not fall into any of these categories is North Dakota. It requires that grand juries be used to bring charges for felonies, but North Dakota also gives its legislature the ability to abolish the grand jury.
I agree with you completely.
One of the many ways I stay motivated is by knowing that our forefathers in the Revolution faced FAR more treachery than we could even begin to imagine in our comparatively peaceful world. Organizing protests or Grand Juries is easy by comparison.
I recently assigned my 10-year-old daughter some extra "homework", to get her to learn more about the early days of our new Republic. She researched a little-known hero -- Hannah Hunter Hendee. It's a fascinating tale!
Hannah's first hand account of that cold morning of Oct, 16, 1780, when mercenary Mohawk Indians hired by the British to destroy their Vermont town, is vividly harsh. And when the Indians kidnap her first-born 7-year-old son to whisk him to Canada to make a British soldier of him... is enough to send shivers down the spine of anyone who has children to know what Hannah must have felt...
Here's the best account I've seen of how Hannah was able to save her son (and eight other boys who shared the same fate) from certain death.
Click on the link below, and start at page 203, in the "Burning of Royalton" chapter, to get a taste of how tough our forefathers had it:
Let's count our blessings ... we can do what's required NOW to keep the freedom our forefathers earned for us with their blood.
Thanks for that wonderful story BP! I myself am a member of the D.A.R. and a documented lineal descendant of a dozen revolutionary war veterans. At last count anyways. I love these stories. They are our heritage. I think what frustates me the most after destroying our constitution about Obama, is that he isn’t satisfied with just destroying our constitution. He also wants to destroy our heritage. And I’m just not going to let him get away with that. I don’t know, guess ‘revolution’ is in my DNA.
Please read Leo’s latest post and the comments following with Leo’s replies. After reading I do have concerns. Will look forward to your comments on this. Thanks!
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/
U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia
Georgia A.J.
Georgia Asst A. J.
Georgia Senate President
Georgia Speaker of the House
The most notable receipt is the one served on the US Attorney in Atlanta, GA.
Some background on Nahmias (seems like a good, honest, no-nonsense fellow):
David Nahmias (NAH-me-us) grew up in Atlanta, Georgia, where he attended Briarcliff High School and was the state’s STAR student. He attended Duke University, where he graduated second in his class and summa cum laude, and Harvard Law School, where he graduated magna cum laude and was an editor of the Harvard Law Review. He then clerked for Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia and for Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States.
After practicing with the law firm of Hogan & Hartson in Washington, D.C., Dave joined the U.S. Attorney's Office in Atlanta in January 1995. He initially handled a number of armed robbery, firearms, arson, and explosives cases, and worked extensively on the investigation of the Centennial Olympic Park and subsequent bombings that resulted in the indictment of Eric Robert Rudolph (who was arrested in 2003 after five years as an FBI Top Ten fugitive and pleaded guilty and was sentenced in 2005 after Dave returned as the U.S. Attorney). Dave then worked in the Fraud and Public Corruption Section, where he successfully prosecuted a Georgia State Senator on corruption charges and several personal injury lawyers and chiropractors on tax and fraud charges, and served as the co-lead prosecutor on a major investigation of public corruption in the City of Atlanta and Fulton County governments. His work in Atlanta was recognized in 2002 with the Director’s Award for Superior Performance by an Assistant U.S. Attorney.
Beginning in late October 2001, Dave was detailed to the Department of Justice Criminal Division in Washington to serve as Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General. In that capacity, Dave coordinated the investigations and prosecutions of Al Qaeda and other terrorist activity around the United States and in numerous foreign countries, assisted in counterterrorism policy-making, and served as a DOJ liaison to other Federal agencies on terrorism-related issues. On August 1, 2003, Dave was appointed as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division, responsible for supervision of the Counterterrorism Section; the Fraud Section, which handles policy and litigation matters including corporate, securities, and health care fraud cases and the Enron Task Force; the Appellate Section; and the Capital Case Unit.
After being nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, on December 1, 2004, Dave returned home to Atlanta to take office as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia. He serves as the chief federal law enforcement officer in the district and manages an office with approximately 80 lawyers who represent the United States in all criminal and civil litigation in federal court in the district. In January 2005, Dave was appointed to serve on the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee of United State Attorneys (AGAC), which reviews and recommends policies for federal prosecutors nationwide. The Attorney General also appointed Dave as Chairman of two of the AGAC’s most important subcommittees: Terrorism and National Security (September 2005-October 2007) and White Collar Crime (October 2007-present). In October 2008, the Attorney General appointed Dave as the Vice-Chairman of the AGAC.
Dave is married to Catherine M. O'Neil, a partner at King & Spalding LLP in Atlanta who formerly served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Atlanta and as Associate Deputy Attorney General and Director of the Executive Office for the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) in Washington. They have two sons.
PingList.
# 51
# 53
# 55
Thanks for the ping.
We the People must have “standing” somewhere. Maybe this will be the time and place.
However, on the thinker/do-er scale, he's better at the theoretical realm than being a man of action (harsh words, I know). He'd scoff at that notion, having a case at least make it to SCOTUS Conference.
But he gave up too easily, "folding his cards" and dissolving into obscurity when the SCOTUS didn't take up his case. He blamed it on the fringe of our "movement." Yes, the "Birthers" are a motley crew. But if you EARNESTLY believe what you know is true, you don't walk away because you don't approve of some of the people on "your side."
Leo doesn't want to rock the boat, or shake things up. He plays too nice in dealing with people who don't "play by the rules." Statements from the Georgia Grand Jury like: "The grand jury may distrain and oppress the government in every way in their power, namely, by taking the homes, lands, possessions..." is STRONG language. BUT, it gets noticed. It inflames, invokes and motivates people to respond. Perhaps it's accomplished its goal...
However, it seems that most of our trusted officials are not "playing by the rules." One evil does not beget another, but if we cannot get a honest response to the injustices we clearly see, perhaps we need to "push the envelope" to get our officials to respond, exercising every option and freedom we are granted within the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
Furthermore, if our forefathers completely "played by the rules," today we'd all be saying, "God save the Queen." They DARED -- and we enjoy our freedoms because of their risk and sacrifice.
When trying to make change happen, you're going to have to more than just "play nice and smile."
It's like trying to surf, and not get your hair wet. We know that only one person can actually do that:
I have to say that I agree with him; but, should that route fail, we still have a few alteratives.
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.
