TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: Obama (Barry Soetoro) is the visible head of the largest crime syndicate in history and he and his co-conspirators are presently cementing their coup d’état in place.
These
two are conspiring against you, against your family, against our
Republic, and against our posterity—willfully violating and alienating
the rule of law.
This article reveals that a coup d’état
has in fact taken place in the United States, that Obama is the visible
head of it, that he and his co-conspirators have been willfully
violating and alienating the rule of law,
(i.e., circumventing all of the fundamental principles and highest
security measures of our nation), and that the litmus test as to whether
or not a member of Congress, judge or justice in our courts, or other
public officer is conspiring with Obama, (i.e., disrespects the rule of law), is whether or not he/she has been standing publicly and formally declaring the “objections” to Obama’s ineligibility to assume the Office of President, i.e., the “objections” required by the United States Constitution and 3 U.S.C. § 15, including required “objections” to the refusal to make the “call for objections” required by our Constitution and 3 U.S.C. § 15.
NOTE: The rule of law is what matters:
Without the rule of law We the People are no longer a republic and no
longer “governed by the people for the people.”
All Americans are not deceived, nor are we all timid. Obama knows very well that the rule of law now authorizes any American citizen to remove him from the White House.
What is a coup d’état?
Instigated by a group of
co-conspirators within the existing state establishment to depose the
established government and replace it with a new ruling body. A coup
d’état is considered successful when the usurpers establish their dominance. Wikipedia
The facts are that Obama (Barry Soetoro) —
if placed under the rule of law — is not the President, that he and his
co-conspirators willfully placed him above the rule of law, that they
have been covering up these facts (their crimes) to achieve dominance,
to protect one another, and that the rule of law requires that Obama and
they be arrested. The rule of law also states that when the chain of
command in government refuses to hold themselves accountable that it is
the right and the duty of each American citizen to do so by whatever
means necessary.
Article II, Section 1 clause 5 United States Constitution.
Twentieth Amendment United States Constitution states in part:
“… if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified, and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be elected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have “qualified.”
… “Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any.”
NOTE: The word “shall” in the Twentieth Amendment and in 3 U.S.C. § 15 do not imply that the President of the Senate has discretion to decide to not “call for objections.” (There is no discretionary decision to be made.) Neither do the words “if any” imply that the President of the Senate would know before the count of electoral votes whether or not there were “objections” to be made. Quite the opposite, the words “shall” and “if any” mean that the President of the Senate is required to find out if there are any “objections” by making the “call for objections.” And if words have any meaning at all, “shall” and “if any” clearly mean that it is mandatory that the President of the Senate make the “call for objections” to determine whether Obama is “qualified”.
To begin with, Obama has known all along that he could never legally “qualify”
to assume the status of President, so with a small band of
co-conspirators he concocted a scheme to persuade the members of
Congress, judges and justices in our courts and other public officers to
not only disregard the established and known constitutional eligibility
requirements relative to him, but also all of the electoral and
Congressional processes required by their oaths of office, the Twentieth
Amendment of our Constitution and 3 U.S.C. § 15, processes which
require them to make the “objections” to Obama’s ineligibility and the “call for objections”.
Manipulating women in Congress was an integral part of Obama’s scheme.
NOTE: It is the rule of law that determines whether or not Obama is “qualified” to assume the status of President, not Obama, not the members of Congress and not
the judges and justices in our courts: They are all bound by the rule
of law. The fact is that Obama was never deemed in accordance with the
rule of law to be a “qualified” President elect and is therefore not the President.
After eight attempts in Congress to
change the established and known meaning of “natural born Citizen,”
(i.e., multiple attempts intended to subtly persuade all the members of
Congress that the constitutional eligibility requirements were not
important and only unfair impediments to certain members of Congress),
and after the New York Times challenged John McCain’s eligibility and McCain was alleged in two court cases to be ineligible, Clair McCaskill, an early endorser of Obama, with Obama, Hillary Clinton and other “senators,” realizing
that the actions against McCain also threatened Obama,
opportunistically co-sponsored and introduced Senate Resolution 511 on April 10, 2008
to persuade judges to not only dismiss the cases and motions for
injunctive relief against McCain, but to dismiss all court cases against
persons campaigning for the presidency and November 2008 “election” and thereafter.
NOTE: The New York Times did not discuss
in its article the fact that the other requirement to qualify as a
“natural born Citizen” is that a person must be born to two United
States citizens (plural), even though the New York Times knew that
Obama’s father had never been a United States citizen.
The first two court cases and motions for declaratory and injunctive relief that had been filed on March 6, 2008 and April 3, 2008, were quickly dismissed. A third action and motion for preliminary injunction filed on August 11, 2008 was also dismissed. And then a fourth action and motion for injunctive relief filed on August 21, 2008,
this time alleging Obama to be ineligible, was readily dismissed. None
of these court cases were mentioned by Obama and McCain in their
televised debates and the cases were dismissed prior to the “election”.
NOTE: It was in fact not an “election,”
but is a continuing conspiracy—refusing to inform the voting public and
People of the United States of the truth. I don’t know if Sarah Palin
knew when she joined McCain’s campaign that Obama was ineligible to
assume the Office of President, but she has revealed that McCain’s
campaign went to much effort to stop her from speaking.
Ugly Wolves are those who willfully violate and alienate the rule of law.
Why would judges with the duty to uphold
the rule of law not want to determine whether or not a person
campaigning for public office is ineligible to assume the the Office of
President; especially when the voting public and People of the United
States should be made aware (informed) of a person’s ineligibility as
soon as possible? Is it not the duty of the courts to uphold the rule of
law and prevent unnecessary damage to a well ordered society? As Rick
Hasen has argued in Beyond the Margin of Litigation,
it is much better to uphold the rule of law before an election,
allowing the problems to be avoided rather than asking the courts to
clean up ugly messes afterwards. Also, when a person is deemed to be
ineligible, the party still has time to put up a qualified person as a
candidate. Apparently, Judge William Alsup does not think judicial
review is lawful prior to an election — he wrote in his order to
dismiss as follows:
“Judicial review — if any — should occur only after the electoral and Congressional processes have run their course.”
But the members of Congress entirely disregarded Judge Alsup’s order and the “electoral and Congressional processes”
he cited in his order, i.e., they refused to expose McCain’s
ineligibility while he was campaigning and also knew that Obama’s father
was never an American citizen and that Obama was therefore born a
British subject, but again refused to determine in accordance with the “electoral and Congressional processes”
whether or not Obama was ineligible to assume the Office of President.
In fact, Obama, Clinton, McCain, Pelosi and all the other members of
Congress have been conspiring to entirely disregard the “electoral and Congressional processes” (the rule of law)—refusing to declare the constitutionally required objections to Obama’s ineligibility and the “call for objections” required
in 3 U.S.C § 15 — requirements of law Judge Alsup cited as conditions
for why he wrote his order to dismiss. Judge Alsup in fact instructed
the members of Congress in their responsibilities (duty) to obey the “electoral and Congressional processes”.
NOTE: Although Obama co-sponsored Senate
Resolution 511 and knew he was not “born to American citizens” (plural),
he campaigned: Violated and alienated Article II, Section 1 clause 5 of
the Constitution and his senatorial oath to support and defend the
Constitution. The fact that Obama did not conceal from the members of
Congress and the judges and justices in the courts that his father was
never an American citizen reveals that he knew and was fully assured
that he had many co-conspirators in Congress and the courts who would
not make the required “objections” to his ineligibility, i.e.,
co-conspirators who had already decided to not inform the voting public
and People of the United States of his ineligibility and to violate
their oaths to support and defend the Constitution.
Senate Resolution 511
acknowledges one of the requirements within the meaning of the term
“natural born Citizen”: That the person “be born to American citizens”
(plural), but refutes the second requirement, i.e., that the person be
born in the United States.
American citizens need to know that We
the People today do not have representatives in Congress, nor honorable
judges and justices in the courts, i.e., that We the People are no
longer governed “by the people for the people,” but by traitors who
think they have conquered us.
Article II, Section 1 clause 5 United States Constitution
Obama, Clinton, McCaskill and the other “senators”
who unanimously agreed to Senate Resolution 511 did not only use the
resolution to influence federal judges in 2008 to dismiss actions and
motions for declaratory and injunctive relief, but also to persuade all
the other “members of Congress” and all the “judges” and “justices” in our courts to be silent, i.e., to not make any public (formal) “objections”
during the campaign nor thereafter, i.e., all of them conspiring to not
inform the voting public that Obama is ineligible to assume the Office
of President, and to violate their oaths “to support and defend the
Constitution.”
NOTE: The end result regarding Obama’s obvious ineligibility is that nobody in all of the “three branches of government” who has taken an oath “to support and defend the Constitution” and 3 U.S.C. § 15 has done so. Instead, We the People now have a constitutional crisis caused by numerous so-called “public officers” (traitors) conspiring against the rule of law—willfully violating their oaths.
NOTE: Judge Alsup did not determine whether or not McCain was eligible to assume the Office of President.
The “members of Congress” today refuse to mention the word “usurpation” and numerous “judges and justices”
in our courts have dismissed lawful complaints (actions) which allege
that Obama is not a natural born Citizen and is therefore ineligible to
assume the Office of President. The “members of Congress” and “judges and the justices”
have been conspiring by claiming that Americans do not have standing to
challenge Obama’s ineligibility, not even to protect the United States
Constitution and other constitutional laws (our Republic).
NOTE: It appears that these “judges and justices” in our courts (in our judicial branch) have exactly the same opinion that Judge Alsup does, i.e., that the “electoral and Congressional processes” must
take place before any litigation (judicial review) can be lawfully
afforded. But what is really true is that it all boil down to the fact
that many “judges and justices” have labeled challenges to
ineligible persons in the courts as political maneuvering instead of
upholding the rule of law. Judge Alsup wrote in his order as follows:
“Plaintiff will appear
on the November ballot as an elector pledged to Alan Keyes, a
third-party candidate, and seeks to defeat Senator McCain through
litigation rather than via the democratic process, moving for an order
to remove Senator McCain from the California ballot in November.
NOTE: It appears that Judge Alsup has
entirely neglected his duty to uphold the rule of law by reminding the
members of Congress of their duty.
Obama, the “members of Congress,” “judges and justices” in our courts (also in their secret “courts”) and their co-conspirators in the “executive branch”
are in fact willfully violating and alienating natural rights that are
the highest and foremost security measures of the United States. The
so-called “Patriot Act,” the overt assembling of the so-called “Department of Homeland Security,” including the arming and training of “federal agencies” not previously armed, are in fact the acts of levying war against the United States.
“The electoral and Congressional processes” which Judge Alsup cites in his order are legal requirements of the rule of law, and the fact is that these “processes” are, as Judge Alsup immediately acknowledges in his order to dismiss, directly related to “the meaning” of the term “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 clause 5 of our Constitution, i.e., “processes”
intended by our founding fathers for the members of Congress to
determine legally whether or not a person is “qualified” to campaign and
is a “qualified” President elect. Judge Alsup wrote in his order to
dismiss as follows and specifically quotes Article II, Section 1 clause 5
of our Constitution:
“Senator John McCain, this action alleges, is not a ‘natural-born citizen’ within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution of the United States and is therefore ineligible to assume the Office of President.”
“Article II states
that ‘No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall
be eligible to the Office of President.'”
Obama and his co-conspirators disrespect the rule of law as Nazis did.
Judge Alsup made his (order) decision to dismiss, in part, on his opinion that the “only”
appropriate time and actions to challenge a person who is alleged to be
constitutionally ineligible to assume the Office of President is not to
challenge the person in a court of law prior to an election, but to
object publicly for the benefit of the voting public and People of the
United States while the person is campaigning and
in “objections” registered after the electoral votes are counted as
required in the Twentieth Amendment of our Constitution and 3 U.S.C. § 15.
Judge Alsup was referring to the “objections” to the violation and
alienation of Article II, Section I clause 5 of the United States
Constitution and to the “call for objections” required in 3 U.S.C. § 15 as follows:
3 U.S.C. § 15 states in part as follows:
“; and the votes having been ascertained
and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the
result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate,
who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement
shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected
President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a
list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any.
Judge Alsup wrote as follows when citing 3
U.S.C. §15 and he quoted from the statute and the Twentieth Amendment
of our Constitution:
“The statute provides a mechanism for objections to be registered and resolved.”
“[e]very objection shall be made in
writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument,
the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one
Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be
received. When all objections so made … shall have been received and
read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be
submitted to the Senate for its decision: and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the
House of Representatives for its decision.”
“ibid. The Twentieth Amendment further provides:
“… if the President elect shall have
failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President
until a President shall have qualified, and the Congress may by law
provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice
President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as
President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be elected,
and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice
President shall have qualified.”
Judge Alsup continues in his order to dismiss as follows:
“It is clear that mechanisms exist
under the Twelfth Amendment and 3 U.S.C. 15 for any challenge to any
candidate to be ventilated when electoral votes are counted and that the
Twentieth Amendment provides guidance regarding how to proceed if a
president elect shall have failed to qualify. Issues regarding
qualifications for president are quintessentially suited to the
foregoing process. Arguments concerning qualifications or lack thereof
can be laid before the voting public before the election and, once the
election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are
counted in Congress. The members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives are well qualified to adjudicate any objections to
ballots for allegedly unqualified candidates. Therefore,
this order holds that the challenge presented by plaintiff is committed
under the Constitution to the electors and the legislative branch, at least in the first instance.
Judicial review — if any — should occur only after the electoral and
Congressional processes have run their course. Texas v. United States,
523 U.S. 296, 300–02 (1998).”
But McCain, having most certainly read
Judge Alsup’s order to dismiss, and who knew what Senate Resolution 511
stated, did not expose Obama’s ineligibility to the voting public while
Obama was campaigning, nor did Obama expose McCain. Instead, Obama,
McCain, Clinton, Pelosi, the other members of Congress, and other
co-conspirators, including the mainstream news media, conspired to cover
up their ineligibility during their public campaigns, during the count
of the electoral votes and after the count of the electoral
votes—refusing to inform the voting public and People of the United
States of their conspiracy of utter silence during the campaign and that
Obama was not a “qualified” President elect.
NOTE: The words “shall” and “if any” in 3
U.S.C. § 15 (above) do not imply that the President of the Senate has
any discretion to decide not to make the “call for objections.”
There is no discretionary decision to be made, nor do the words “if
any” imply that the President of the Senate would know in advance of the
count of the electoral votes whether or not there were “objections”.
Quite the opposite, the words “if any” mean that the President of the
Senate is to find out after counting the votes if there are any
“objections” by making the “call for objections.” If words have any meaning at all, the word “shall” means it is mandatory that the President of the Senate “call for objections.”
Judge Alsup has not only made a specific point of stating that the “The
members of the Senate and the House of Representatives are well
qualified to adjudicate any objections to ballots for allegedly
unqualified candidates,” but by quoting from our Constitution and
citing 3 U.S.C. § 15 acknowledges the Supreme Law of the Land, including
the oaths that have been taken by public officers. In other words,
Judge Alsup specifically wrote in his decision that all the members of
the Senate and House of Representatives know the eligibility
requirements of the United States Constitution and their oaths, and are
required by the People of the United States to apply them in the
required “processes”.
The mainstream news media conspires with Obama, John Kerry and their friends.
Obama can never legally assume the status of President of the United States.
The members of Congress, including the
President of the Senate, being aware that Obama’s father was never an
American citizen and, as Judge Alsup stated are “well qualified to adjudicate” are required by their oaths to object to Obama’s ineligibility.
NOTE: Judge Alsup’s carefully outlined
the processes that are required by the rule of law to take place in
determining whether or not a per4son is a “qualified” President elect,
and the fact is that none of the “processes” he cited took place: No
formal “objections” to Obama’s ineligibility were made by any “member” of Congress, (e.g., not by McCain nor by Clinton in public debates), and no “call for objections” against his ineligibility after count the electoral votes.
The facts have been absolutely laid bare,
i.e., the voting public and the People of the United States were not
informed during the campaigns in 2008 and 2012 nor after the count of
electoral votes in 2009 and 2013 by those responsible to do so of the
fact that Obama is not a “qualified” President elect.
Obama also cannot be lawfully impeached,
because our Constitution provides for the impeachment of a president,
not a usurper. Obama only pretends to hold the “Office of President” —
he is a usurper, not President of the United States. The “members of Congress”
know this and that is why they do not proceed with articles of
impeachment for usurpation: To do so would expose the fact that they are
complicit in the usurpation and Obama’s other crimes. There is a reason
why “public officers” who have been willfully violating their
oaths—conspiring with Obama while falsely claiming to represent us and
protecting their interests do not want to arrest Obama for impersonating
a public officer.
This post is in progress. Please check back for additional content.
NOTE: Congress had already willfully violated our Constitution many times, so it was not upsetting to the “members” of Congress to do so again.
There is no primary evidence that Barry’s
mother was married to Obama Sr from Kenya or that he was adopted by
Obama Sr from Kenya. But there is primary evidence that his mother was
married to Lolo Soetoro and enrolled him in school as Barry Soetoro –
Muslims accuse Americans who oppose Islam of being “racists”. This is because of Obama’s “Story of Race, “Inheritance” and support for Islam in his books: Islam is not about “Race”
(Obama is black and white), but about Arab invaders who are
infiltrating, colonizing and claiming that their inheritance is to
dominate the world. Deitrich Bonhoeffer was stripped naked, as Jews
were, and led into the execution yard, where the Nazis hanged him for
speaking, which is exactly what Muslims do.
For “representatives” and “public officers”
to conceal willful violations of the rule of law from the People of the
United States, is to lie, commit acts of fraud against the People, and
obfuscate the law. Obama has been publicly lying since his first book “Dreams from My Father, A Story of Race and Inheritance” was published in 1995: All of his lies aimed at infiltrating public offices and destroying the United States.
By willfully violating and alienating the
rule of law Obama (Barry Soetoro) and his co-conspirators have been
willfully doing the following:
a. Have been removing the protection of the laws, i.e., refusing to enforce the laws — instead supplanting them with ex post facto laws.
b. Have been committing
fraud against the voting public and People of the United States, i.e.,
lying and stealing from We the People.
c. Have been depriving We the People of representation
d. Have been violating the public trust
e. Have been acting in a seditious conspiracy against our Government, i.e., against the Government of the United States
f. Have been aiding and comforting the enemies of the United States
g. Have been supplanting our Authority with their absolute Despotism
h. Have
been overtly assembling an unconstitutional (private) army against the
People of the United States, i.e., levying war against the United States
i. Have been disarming the People of the United States
j. Have been appointing one another to offices of government to secure their lawlessness, i.e., to protect one another
k. Have been acting in a conspiracy of silence
l. Have been refusing to arrest one another
No comments:
Post a Comment