By JB Williams ——Bio and Archives--September 9, 2009
Cover Story | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
"The mission of the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee is to enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; and to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice for the people of East Tennessee."Why no action on criminal charges of "treason" then? Why won't Commander Fitzpatrick get his day in court, or a "fair and impartial administration of justice" under Obama's DOJ? Since then, Commander Fitzpatrick has remained engaged in his quest for justice and last week he was finally successful in placing the criminal case against Obama before a Tennessee Grand Jury in Monroe County, but not without incident... Back to this in a moment.
"and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."Document #1 includes this language, but document #2 does not. Both appear identical, with this exception. Both appear to be dated and signed by DNC Chair Nancy Pelosi and DNC Secretary Alice Travis Germond. Both appear to be notarized by the same notary of public on the same date. But which of the TWO documents was delivered as the official nomination document? Or, why TWO different documents? Why was the phrase concerning constitutional provisions deleted from the second version of the document? And what evidence was used to fully vet Barack Hussein Obama for the Office of Commander-in-Chief?
"OBAMA-SOETORO IS MY SWORN ENEMY! - And as there were TRAITORS to Italy in Caesars day, I report to this GRAND JURY with force and authority there are senior military officers no more obedient to the CONSTITUTION than their criminal DICTATOR, OBAMA-SOETORO."I must state that in this era of relative morality, I respect the Commander's ability and willingness to state his charges in such unequivocal terms. There can be no missing the Commander's point here, and his position is based firmly in the oath he has taken along with millions of other soldiers, to protect and defend the US Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I can only pray that ALL American soldiers take that oath as seriously as Commander Fitzpatrick, and I suspect that most do. In his efforts to deliver his briefs to the Tennessee Grand Jury, his search for justice was constantly obstructed by local officers of the court. Commander Fitzpatrick alleges that both District Attorney James H. Stutts and Grand Jury Foreman Gary Pettway stopped just short of physical abuse in their endless efforts to obstruct the Commander's access to the court. In fact, on September 4, 2009, Commander Fitzpatrick filed formal criminal charges of obstruction against Grand Jury Foreman Pettway and District Attorney James H. Stutts for their continuing efforts to obstruct justice in the Monroe County Grand Jury system, stating in his complaint -- "My appearance before the Grand Jury panel yesterday was a puppet show. Criminally assisted by others named below, Mr. Pettway first attempted to block my appearance, and then materially interfered with my verbal testimony and blocked all efforts to enter into the record the physical evidence in my possession yesterday." As of this writing, no case number has been issued by Madisonville Police Department concerning Fitzpatrick's criminal complaint against Stutts or Pettway, and it is unknown what if any action, the Monroe County Grand Jury might take on the matter. Meanwhile, on that same day, Obama's DOJ was busy filing yet another dismissal demand in Santa Ana, CA -- using the same old "technicality" defense to stop Orly Taitz in her current case in an ongoing DOJ effort to keep discovery of Obama's history out of Judge David Carter's court this time. Once again, the DOJ's defense argument is limited to technicalities, not the merits of allegations or the growing mountain of evidence against their client.
No direct denial of any of the claims leveled against their client, but just a continued argument that NO American citizen has "proper standing" to question King Barack Hussein Obama and all of his Czars. It should be obvious to all readers at this point, that our system of justice is being manipulated by Ivy League lawyers to subvert the system and obstruct justice. Every case filed so far has been met with a technical defense asserting a "lack of standing" to bring the charges, no matter who brings the charges, how much evidence they have to support their charges, or in what court they bring those charges....III. ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. This Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction Of This Action . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A. Plaintiffs Lack Standing Herein . . . . . . . . 4 1. No Plaintiff Can Show The Required Concrete, Traceable Injury-in-Fact To Provide Standing Herein . . . . . . . 5 2. Plaintiffs Cannot Satisfy The Redressability Requirement For Standing . . 9 B. This Case Presents Non-Justiciable Political Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 C. This Court Lacks Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over Plaintiffs' Quo Warranto Claims . . . . . 16 D. This Court Does Not Have Subject Matter Jurisdiction Of This Action Under Either 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Or 42 U.S.C. § 1988 . . . . 18
According to Obama's defense team, "This motion (to dismiss) is made on the ground that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants, and on the further ground that, as to certain claims and Defendants, Plaintiffs fail to state claims upon which this Court may grant relief. Further, with respect to any and all claims or causes of action alleged herein under the Freedom of Information Act, this Court should also dismiss said claims pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), on the additional ground that venue does not properly lie as to said claims in this District."
The demand for dismissal was signed by attorneys for Obama, I assume paid for by American taxpayers, since all serve under Obama's Department of Justice as U.S. Attorneys...
GEORGE S. CARDONA
Acting United States Attorney
LEON W. WEIDMAN
Assistant United States Attorney Chief, Civil Division
ROGER E. WEST
Assistant United States Attorney First Assistant Chief, Civil Division
DAVID A. DeJUTE
Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants
Further, the very people we expect to uphold and defend the US Constitution against a "domestic enemy within" are also charged with defending that "domestic enemy within" via the Department of Justice, all at taxpayer expense.
Judge Carter Orders Eligibility Case to Trial
As this column comes back from editing, news arrives that Judge Carter did NOT dismiss the eligibility case before his court today.
From the WND report -- "In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.
In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation can be added to the case to represent plaintiffs Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order. Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, also were restored to the case.
But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery -- that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.
Carter ordered a hearing Oct. 5 on the motion to dismiss and ordered arguments submitted on the issue of discovery. - If the case survives that challenge, a pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 11 and the trial for two weeks later."
If Justice is denied in Santa Ana
The term "Once a Marine, always a Marine" seems to hold true in Santa Ana California today. However, as WND reports, the DOJ request to dismiss will be heard in October. If Carter has the backbone to deny the DOJ their desperate plea to keep all Obama facts secret, then Obama's fraudulent political future could be limited to late January 2010.
However, the DOJ carries GREAT weight and powers of persuasion. They will stop at nothing to stop this case from going forward. Based on the body count of past Obama and Clinton opponents, I'd recommend that Judge Carter hire a crack security staff immediately.
Indictment law under Rules of Criminal Procedure adopted in 1946 (but not passed into law or amending the Constitution) are being used to block access to the courts concerning Obama's eligibility.
If for some reason the people are denied access to the courts once more in Judge Carter's court, I return to the same conclusion I have arrived at on countless occasions over the last few years.
The Last Peaceful Solution
If the entire federal government, including the department assigned the duty of administering equal justice under the Constitution and the law, has been perverted into some insane mechanism by which the system itself is used as a tool to obstruct justice and further subvert our system of self-governance, the options for American citizens are limited at best.
In this event, the American Grand Jury effort is the last remaining peaceful alternative for redress, in which the non-binding rules of criminal procedure are set aside and the US Constitution is enforced via a constitutional grand jury process, which has already returned 16 Grand Jury indictments against Barack Hussein Obama.
This thing will not end until Barack Hussein Obama and all co-conspirators have been brought to justice. The Constitution, freedom and liberty MUST be defended at any cost. But all peaceful means must be exhausted before last resort measures become the only alternative to protect the republic.
If the people are afforded NO access to the courts, to congress, to the press, or any other peaceful means of redress, the people are left to their own devices in defense of the free constitutional republic. The people are on their own at that point and it will be every man for himself, patriots against invaders and usurpers...
Left-wing elitists have already determined that not a single American citizen has the "proper standing" and that NO US court has "proper jurisdiction" to demand a constitutional government. But Americans must resist the urge for violent revolution until all peaceful remedies have been exhausted. At that point and for this reason alone, our Founding fathers wrote the following words...
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Declaration of Independence
View Comments
JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner.