"What we are facing is telling a policeman, with a camera rolling as we do so, that his job is to prevent crime and in fact over there in that building we think we just saw a burglar entering the back window of the bank, then he ignores us."
To which you posted
"His job is NOT to prevent crime."
So, lets see now, you are of the opinion that a policeman's job is NOT to prevent crime. That's ridiculous, almost "Obama-like" thinking.
I guess if someone takes out a gun in front of a policeman and starts shooting bystanders, he is supposed to wait till everything is over and the gun is emptied before he attempts to apprehend the shooter. That's what YOU are suggesting.
I am suggesting that such a policeman would be sent to prison, deservedly so. If our representatives refuse to obey their oaths of office as it pertains to the Twentieth amendment, section three of the Constitution, they also should be legally prosecuted. The fifth amendment has NOTHING to do with this.
I sugggest you read the above quote again and realize how utterly ridiculous it is. I would also suggest that guns don't kill people, people do, and if a guy pulls a gun in front of a cop, he deserves to be shot dead on the spot...before he shoots anyone.
So, lets see now, you are of the opinion that a policeman's job is NOT to prevent crime. That's ridiculous, almost "Obama-like" thinking.
Listen. I posted what is LEGAL. You really have no call to insult me like this.
It is NOT a policeman's job to prevent a crime in the thinking stage. THAT is obama-like thinking. Many dead wives or girlfriends could tell you that, if they were able to speak. But they can't so allow me to tell you why they can't.
You must have read or seen at least once in your life, that a woman was murdered by a boyfriend, ex-husband, whatever, AFTER she had obtained a court order, a LEGAL restraining order, because she felt her life in danger. Often there were threats, phone calls, stalking, but no proof and NO ARREST. And if there was an arrest, it was for a misdemeanor and a couple days in jail, then out again. The next thing you know, she's dead. Why???
The attempted bombing in New York this past week. It took them a YEAR from the "thinking stage" to an actual crime being committed before they could make an arrest because you can't arrest someone for SAYING they want to, or will at some point in the future, commit a crime.
In your example,you said you think someone is going to commit a crime, so the cop goes and arrests someone who has done nothing yet. How long do you think that cop would have a job?
All the cop can do is watch and wait...UNTIL a crime happens.
If our representatives refuse to obey their oaths of office as it pertains to the Twentieth amendment, section three of the Constitution, they also should be legally prosecuted. The fifth amendment has NOTHING to do with this.
And who is going to prosecute them and for WHAT? What reason did they have to believe that a crime of this astonishing magnitude could be/would be/was hatched and undertaken in such a breathtaking, ingenious way that to this very moment, there is NO SUBJECTIVE PROOF that it actually happened?
Just for shlitz and giggles, though, there is also a little thing called pattern of practice. These people routinely break their oaths and are never prosecuted for it. They pass bills they never read. They take bribes. They do "favors" for contributors. They drink and drive and get away with murder. They do drugs and say I'm sorry. They seduce interns in the whitehouse and sell the Lincoln Bedroom. They commit fraud and perjure themselves. They routinely leak top secret material even when it puts Americans in harm's way. They commit treason. They make backroom deals that sell out their constituents but "We the People" keep electing them.
So again, I ask you. WHO is going to prosecute them and for what?
For NOT knowing a crime was being committed?
How many people who have EVER run for president were NOT natural born citizens of this country? Were they to act completely differently with this one, a sitting Senator, one of THEM???
The CRIME here is Obama himself knowingly, wilfully, and intentionally running for an office he KNEW he could not qualify for. But PROVE IT!!!
You can "demand" all day and the Fifth does apply because you can NOT force a person to incriminate themselves and the crime was already in motion when he declared his candidacy. He can't even be prosecuted for the fraudulent COLB because he did not forge it, never personally acknowledged it or disavowed it, and he can not be forced to. All he has to do is remain silent and obedient.
I fear this man more than you can imagine, but I fear those who hatched this plot ever so much more because it IS ingenious. It is so TRULY evil that whoever is behind it would no more think twice about you or me or my child, let alone this country, than the man in the moon.
Obama is a one trick pony. He does what he is told. The power behind him is evil personified.
Now,if you think this post is worth nothing more than a backhanded insult, go for it, but maybe someone else might be interested. Thanks ever so much.
Well, the problem is if there's 'a camera rolling' we need to get the film out of the camera so that we can PROVE that the policeman WILLFULLY 'turned his head' -- even though he KNEW a crime was being committed.
The reality is we MUST have hard evidence that transcends our suspicion that the 'cop' is corrupt.
Now add to that that not only is the cop, corrupt, but the whole precinct... maybe all the way to the chief of police!
Now the "cops" in this analogy represent the congress and other leaders that we empower.
Some may be corrupted and some may be incompetent and some may have just assumed -- like most of us did at first -- that Obama was properly vetted.
So we need to show through records, documents, and other evidence, that certain people KNEW that there were serious problems with Obama's documentation and WILLFULLY choose to conceal the information.
We need some investigative reporting from the inside... a "smoking gun," so to speak.
In the meantime we have to do everything we can to keep this issue alive until the public at large begins to ask:
Why won't Obama release his vault birth certificate and other vital recards?
What is he hiding?
At that point others -- such as Rush Limbaugh, for instance -- that are now afraid to broach the subject of Obama's eligibility for fear of being labeled a kook, or of the "fringe," may get the courage to bring the issue to the forefront.
STE=Q