Free Republic

The poor and helpless that they leave behind in Mexico, subject to the jurisdiction of Chaos and Anarchy in the Mexican Government, is completely ignored by the Church. While we strip the able bodied from 3rd world nations by the buckets, we ignore whats left behind, leaving nothing but a bad taste in the mouths of those left behind. We promote corruption that drives away free people when we have no checks to immigration, when we give free food and shelter to the able bodies that illegally enter this nation, and encourage this through ignoring our own laws which demand deportations of all of these illegals.

There are 2 sides to every story, too bad one of them are the truth, and the other a cheap excuse that ignores it.

That’s how he gets away with his bogus LF BC and fraudulent SSN.

He has judges in his pocket.

Face it, if more Americans are willing to fight for the perversion that these mental midgets are pushing, then American will die.

The thing is, unless we are moved enough for our sacred honor to become an issue, then we will not stand a chance. The dignity of the people that founded this nation is insulted by what is going on today. If its not worth fighting for, then what they gave us becomes a worthless exercise in humility. Our founding fathers put their lives on the line, the question is, are we willing to do the same thing to protect what they died for?

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.

18 USC Sec. 2383
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

-HEAD-
Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

-STATUTE-
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

-SOURCE-
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103-322, title XXXIII, Sec. 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Defining Insurrection against the AUTHORITY of the United States is not that hard. Insurrection need not be force. By refusing to enforce the Laws of the United States, the President of the United States, through the use of the power that inherently exists in the Executive Branch of our government, is committing an insurrection against the laws which were established under our constitution and represent the lawful authority of this nation.

Criminal acts that become apparent in any case in any trial coming to the attention of any Judge must be referred for prosecution or the Judge himself is complicit in the crime.

That IS a judges duty.

read what I wrote

then use your head

or are you really that shallow?

No.

The case was initiated prior to inauguration.

Got any more cheese, or is it all mold?

Any judge who is aware of criminal acts should refer them to prosecutors.

Period.

This goes to the point that the Sect of State, and the AG, and every office attending to the case at hand, has a primary duty to insure that any criminal act in this case is prosecuted to the full extent of the law under both State and Federal jurisdiction. They are representatives of the people of the State of California, not the candidates, nor to any political affiliations that are popular at the given time of the event. The State is obligated to the protection of the people who are it's citizens, and those who are employed by the State do not have an option to waver from that duty. The omission to perform that duty, when they have received information that indicates that a crime against the people may have occurred, makes them derelict in their performance of duty. If a political agenda is apparent in their actions, they should be prosecuted right along side with the individuals that they are trying to protect.

The Judge should have an obligation to insure that the people's interests are protected as well. The fullest benefit possible to the plaintiffs in this case should be give above and beyond the positions held by the defendants in this case, and in the event of any possible conflict of interests, either personal or in the professional conduct of these people, the plaintiff should be allowed to proceed.

Nice try, but face it, when these Judges fail to apply the full extent of legal precedent, and refuse to acknowledge evidence that implicate that a criminal act may have occurred, then the whole body of cases you presented, many of which are dependent upon error and omission, are bogus.

When the Judicial Branch fails to recognize its own errors, and builds case after case on un-litigated and unconfirmed assumptions, then its not Justice, but a political hot potato that they keep kicking down the road.

Yet, the fact that, if true, a crime of forgery was committed, obligates the Judge to refer that for criminal prosecution. The failure of the DoJ to clear this up, in the interest of the People of the United States, instead of clumsy cover-ups to hide any potential question of criminal acts, flies in the face of justice. The same thing goes with the SSN, both now and in every previous case that these issues have been raised.

It is, literally, treason. One must consider that any person who allegedly would take action to usurp the office of PoTUS to be an enemy of the USA. That person, and every other person who aids and abets that act, are guilty of Treason.

The May 22, 2012 Hawaii “Verification of Birth”, signed by Hawaii State Registrar Onaka, includes the following statement:

“I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our file”.
(RE:Washington Times)

Matching the original record, and certifying that the document attached was issued by the HI DOH, is two different things. Onaka did not certify that all of the information matched, nor did he certify that the document was the one issued by his office, nor dispute any claims to the contrary which are easily found in the public domain. The omission of the certification that the document, which was a copy of the LF BC posed on the official White House web site, leaves open the legal challenge to forgery and fraud.

The records in Hawaii can be something completely different. The state law bars these people from disclosing any information that Obama himself did not disclose. This is a weasel clause so to speak, so that if/when the facts of this case do get to criminal complaints, the officials at the HI DOH are covered.