Posts Tagged ‘President Barack Obama’


Grace Wyler
Business Insider
June 20, 2012

President Barack Obama has exerted executive privilege over documents related to the Fast & Furious gunrunning operation, stepping into the stand-off between Attorney General Eric Holder and House Oversight Chair Darrell Issa.

The Oversight Committee is demanding previously undisclosed documents about the DOJ’s response to Fast and Furious, a gunrunning operation in which U.S. agents allowed guns to “walk” across the border and into the hands of Mexico’s drug cartels.

Obama’s move today is surprising —this is the first time that he has invoked executive privilege — and comes on the same day that the Oversight Committee is set to vote on whether to hold Holder in contempt over the Department of Justice’s involvement in the botched operation.

Read full article

Advertisements

Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 5, 2012

“Show me the microfiche”, said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. “Show the microfiche – and it’s all over.”

The Sheriff is referring to the missing microfiche that would clear the President’s name in what has become a national debate surrounding the authenticity of his own birth certificate.

The President is currently dragging behind him a sizeable cache of potentially crippling scandals, of which questionable identity documents are the most significant. Now the Arizona Sheriff’s Office’s initial investigation into this issue has progressed from an inquiry, into a fully-fledged, ongoing law enforcement investigation.

“What we are looking at is two possible forged government documents”, explains Arpaio. ”If it was you or anybody else, everyone would say, ‘How come you’re not arresting this guy and how come you’re not doing anything?’ Just because it’s the President nobody wants to touch it?”

Thus far, neither Republicans nor Democrats have been willing to face this thorny issue, which guarantees that it will continue to fester under the surface right through to November. Arpaio adds here, “What is this? A political year that everybody’s afraid to talk about it… where they don’t want to face this issue? That’s sad”.

Watch our special report here:

Infowars conducted a special video report (above), traveling to Phoenix to conduct a series of exclusive interviews with the Maricopa County Sheriff and his Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo, as well as interviews with WND senior reporter Dr. Jerome Corsi to discover the details of this case. In addition, we talked to Arizona State Rep. Carl Seel, and State Senator Lori Klein about a current bill on the table which would force the President to prove his eligibilty to appear on the state’s ballot.

In addition to Investigator Zullo’s evidence pointing to Obama’s forged birth certificate released by the White House in April 2011, our special report also covers important new information was revealed during the news conference including a request by Sheriff Joe Arpaio to the current head of the Selective Service Board to investigate the criminal forgery committed in the case of Barack Obama’s Selective Service registration, as well as new evidence from Dr. Corsi pointing to missing Obama’s INS immigration records from the month of August 1961, and challenging Obama’s claim to his US natural born citizenship.

 


“No president in modern times has questioned their authority.”

Steve Watson
Infowars.com
April 6, 2012

Constitutional expert Judge Andrew Napolitano says he fears that the president is skirting “dangerously close to totalitarianism” with his recent questioning of the authority of the Supreme Court to conduct a review of ObamaCare.

Appearing on Neil Cavuto’s “Your World” show Wednesday, the Judge warned that Obama was systematically flouting the system of checks and balances established by the founding fathers.

“A few months ago he was saying the Congress doesn’t count. The Congress doesn’t mean anything. I am going to rule by decree and by administrative regulation.” Napolitano said.

“Now he’s basically saying the Supreme Court doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter what they think. They can’t review our legislation. That would leave just him as the only branch of government standing.”

“I think he has some problems with understanding the Constitution or accepting limitations on his power.” the Judge added.

During a speech at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, with Vice President Joe Biden in February, Obama said “Whenever Congress refuses to act, Joe and I, we’re going to act,” adding “In the months to come, wherever we have an opportunity, we’re going to take steps on our own to keep this economy moving.”

Earlier this week Obama appeared to challenge the “unelected” Supreme Court not to take an “extraordinary” and “unprecedented” step of overturning his health reform law.

“Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said.

The president then stated “…for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” he said. “Well, this is a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”

In essence, Obama appears to be making the case that the Constitution is outdated because it allows for “an unelected group of people” to make judicial decisions.

Judge Napolitano points out that this is an extreme view for anyone to take, let alone a president.

“There are equal branches of the government, but with respect to what the law means and what the Constitution means, the court is superior to the president.” Napolitano noted.

“No president in modern times has questioned their authority.”

“This is an extreme view of the Supreme Court and the Constitution, one that has not been articulated since Andrew Jackson.” The Judge urged.

Watch the video below:

 


Patrick Henningsen
Infowars.com
April 6, 2012

PHOENIX – Arizona continues to set the stage as a battleground pitting local and state’s rights against the federal government’s inclination to control how states are allowed to govern their own affairs.

The Department of Justice in Washington has accused Sheriff Joe Arapio’s Office of engaging in what they describe as ‘racial profiling and mistreatment of illegals aliens and hispanics’ and alleged ‘human rights violations’ in its patrols and jails.

The DOJ has refused to present any of its alleged evidence to support their charges, yet, they are still moving forward and are threatening to sue if Arpaio does not comply. Not intimidated by Washington’s threats, Maricopa County’s own Attorney General Bill Mongomery told the DOJ yesterday, “put up or shut up”.

Negoiations between the Sheriff’s Office and the DOJ came to a halt on Tuesday when Arpaio flatly refused to allow a court-appointed embedded DOJ ”monitor” stationed in his office full-time, a move which many critics describe as a federal power-grab, aimed at controlling Arpaio, a duly elected office holder representing 4.5 million residents in the Phoenix area.

Maricopa County is not the only Sheriff’s office under DOJ investigation. Arpaio explains, “They been investigating 20 other departments recently with their civil rrights unit in the Department of Justice.” In an earlier FOX interview last December, Arpaio stated flatly, “I’m not going to back down because of politics, because the President wants to get the hispanic vote.”

“What is this, a poker game? They want to go to court, we’ll be glad to meet them in court”, blasted Arpaio.

The DOJ has already spent millions of dollars to date through their three year investigation into Arpaio’s office, including applying pressure on Arpaio to resign as elected Sheriff.

If a compromise cannot be reached between the two parties, the DOJ contends that it will file a federal lawsuit against Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, a legal battle which is likely to cost millions for both sides, and could drag on for years.

There may be other political reasons to force an Arpaio resignation in 2012, besides what critics claim as currying favor with Arizona’s hispanic voting bloc before the November elections. Not least of all, is because of the Sheriff’s Office’s own Cold Case Posse law enforcement investigation into the validity of President Obama’s birth certificate and Selective Service draft card.

According to his team, early returns for the investigation have turned up conclusive evidence on two counts. “What we are looking at is two possible forged government documents”, explains Arpaio.

On the strength of Arpaio’s investigation into Obama, the Arizona State Legislature went on to draft HB 2480 that would require Barack Obama to prove his eligibility as a US President, and would also determine whether his name would appear on the state ballot come November.

Since the Obama I.D. bill was lodged two weeks ago, it has met with some resistance, being intentionally held-up by certain members of the state senate.

Regardless of the outcome of HB 2480, the Sheriff’s Office says they will remain steadfast in their investigation, and will continue to follow-up on evidence of forgery and fraud in the Obama case.

 


Daily Caller
Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona told The Daily Caller that the Supreme Court would be allowing an “all powerful government” over the people if it upholds the individual mandate in the health care law. Kyl said the court must “draw a line” in terms of whether or not the federal government can force individuals to purchase a good or service.


 

“I don’t think anybody can confidently predict how the court is likely to rule and so comments at this point are a little bit premature I would say,” Sen. Kyl told TheDC on Capitol Hill Monday.

“I think there is a very strong argument for it [the individual mandate] being unconstitutional and I think if the court doesn’t draw that line to say that we’re not sure exactly where the line is but this clearly would be over the line in terms of beyond the necessary and proper role of Congress than I don’t see where they ever would draw a line.”

Full article here

 


Petition2Congress
March 23, 2012

WE the People demand that the House and Senate launch Immediately a FULL scale Investigation into President Obama’s eligibilty to be President of the United States and his eligibility to run for office for a second term. It is time you do your jobs,. We Demand to know “Do you support the Constitution of the United States and the People”. The American people deserve to know the truth, if President Obama is eligible and it is YOUR JOBS TO FIND OUT. House Speaker Boehner we will be waiting to hear from you. Senator Reid we will be waitng to hear from you.

United We Stand Divided We Fall: Dakota
____

An investigative “Cold Case Posse” launched six months ago by “America’s toughest sheriff” – Joe Arpaio of Arizona’s Maricopa County – has concluded there is probable cause that the document released by the White House last year as President Obama’s birth certificate is a computer-generated forgery.

The investigative team has asked Arpaio, who is at a news conference in Phoenix live-streamed by WND TV that began at 3 p.m. Eastern time, to elevate the investigation to a criminal probe that will make available the resources of his Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office.

The posse says it has identified at least one person of interest in the alleged forgery of Obama’s birth certificate.

Arapaio, known for his strict enforcement of immigration laws, commissioned the investigative team after local citizens presented him with a petition expressing concern that Obama might not be eligible for Arizona’s presidential ballot.

The posse, comprised of former law enforcement officers and lawyers with law enforcement experience, has interviewed dozens of witnesses and examined hundreds of documents. It also has taken numerous sworn statements from witnesses around the world.

Mike Zullo, Arpaio’s lead investigator, said his team believes the Hawaii Department of Health has engaged in a systematic effort to hide from public inspection any original 1961 birth records it may have in its possession.

“Officers of the Hawaii Department of Health and various elected Hawaiian public officials may have intentionally obscured 1961 birth records and procedures to avoid having to release to public inspection and to the examination of court-authorized forensic examiners any original Obama 1961 birth records the Hawaii Department of Health may or may not have,” Zullo said.

The investigators say the evidence contained in the computer-generated PDF file released by the White House as well as important deficiencies in the Hawaii process of certifying the long-form birth certificate establish probable cause that a forgery has been committed.

Sign the petition here.

To continue reading click on link

http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/sheriff-joes-posse-probable-cause-obama-certificate-a-fraud/

 


Infowars.com
Monday, March 26, 2012

Alex talks with pastor and author Lindsey Williams about the timeline on the financial crash, what currency is a safe bet, and why Obama may not be re-elected due to his involvement in Keystone Pipeline.

 


Government greases the skids for America’s Greece-style meltdown

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
Monday, March 19, 2012

The Obama administration’s move to update an executive order to allow the government to seize control of virtually every aspect of society in both emergency and non-emergency situations lays the groundwork for the future nationalization of the U.S. economy.


Entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” Obama signed the executive order late Friday afternoon. Such timing is normally a deliberate ploy to prevent a controversial issue from being picked up by the news cycle. Recall that Obama signed the highly contentious National Defense Authorization Act on New Year’s Eve.

Under section 201, the EO allows the federal government to take control of;

Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

Although the executive order is an update to the almost identical EO 12919, which was signed by Bill Clinton in 1994, in Section 201(b) of the new version, the words “under both emergency and non-emergency conditions” have been added.

In other words, the federal government is claiming the power to seize totalitarian control of the whole economy – nationalization über alles.

The administration’s move to allow an executive order designed for a time of national crisis to be applied in non-emergency peace time represents a significant ratcheting up on the richter scale of martial law, a measurement Infowars has been upgrading since the late 1990′s.

Just because Obama’s predecessor’s like Clinton and Bush did not use this executive order doesn’t mean it’s not anathema to the U.S. constitution. Obama may not use it either, but just as the President has promised to not use the ‘kidnapping’ provisions of the NDAA which his administration pushed for, that does nothing to prevent a future administration from indefinitely detaining American citizens under the law.

America is already under a state of martial law, but many have been conditioned to accept it because the degree to which it has been implemented has not yet reached its maximum. You don’t have to witness a Waco siege every day with tanks and the government killing citizens to be under a state of martial law.

– We already have the executive branch claiming the power to have Americans abducted and imprisoned without trial under the NDAA.

– We already have the executive branch claiming the power to assassinate American citizens with no legal process whatsoever.

– We already have checkpoints manned by TSA goons as well as other militarized forces spreading across America.

– We already have the Pentagon claiming it doesn’t have to even recognize Congress to launch wars and that the only superior body it has to answer to is the United Nations.

– We already have the Department of Defense characterizing protest as “low level terrorism” while the federal government is busy labeling banal activities and behavior as indicative of terrorism.

Those five things alone illustrate beyond any conceivable doubt that America is already under a degree of martial law.

Martial law is primarily used as a tool of the elite to rob the people blind. Once the next big crisis hits, the degree to which America is under martial law will increase once again.

The fact that this new executive order greases the skids for the government to nationalize the entire economy, placing the means of production of virtually everything under the control of the state, is yet another sign that the feds are preparing for America’s descent into Greece-style austerity hell.

Just as Greece and many countries in Europe have been overthrown by unelected technocrats who have seized control of their economies, America is being primed for the same final act of complete usurpation.


Worries over a “major catastrophe” hitting the United States also drive firearms purchases

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Gun shops are citing fears over Barack Obama’s re-election to explain surging sales, with one store in Lubbock, Texas reporting “drastic” increases in firearms purchases, as a new National Geographic survey finds a majority of respondents believe America will be hit with a “major catastrophe” at some point.

Video

“Now that it’s election season again, you have people uncertain… You have a customer or two coming in and saying that they’re buying because they’re afraid they won’t be able to get it soon,” said J.D. Clay, salesman at Sharpshooters Inc.

Sharpshooters report a 40 per cent increase in recent sales, a figure that has been matched or surpassed nationwide. Gun store owners in West Texas are reporting 50 per cent hikes in sales. The FBI reports a 23 per cent increase in background checks compared to the year before in the lone star state.

After record one day sales on Black Friday back in December, gun stores are also celebrating all time high sales for the month of February.

Gun manufacturerSmith & Wesson’s shares also shot up 18 per cent last week, their highest level in two years, on the back of reports of a 60 per cent surge in backlog orders.

Interest in gun shows is also rampant, with a record turnout of nearly 4,000 people showing up to an event in Iowa this past weekend. Concealed carry permits in the state have soared by as much as 270 per cent over the last year in some counties.

Gun enthusiasts fear that Obama will use his same duck second term to follow through on a promise he made to gun control advocate Sarah Brady during a White House meeting last year, that his administration was working “under the radar” to sneak attack the second amendment rights of American citizens.

“I’m constantly getting questions from people in the community about this,” firearms expert Alan Korwin told the Houston Chronicle. “We saw a fire sale when he was elected last time. But the speculation is that now … with his need to get re-elected gone, the sky is the limit on attacking the Second Amendment.”

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre has echoed the fears, telling a CPAC crowd last month, “All that first term, lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term.”

More generalized fears over an economic collapse and a breakdown in society are also spurring gun purchases as well as other items in preparation for “doomsday” scenarios.

A recent survey commissioned by National Geographic found that there are around 3 million “preppers” in America who are actively taking steps to protect themselves from the threat of unforeseen chaos. The vast majority of Americans who took part in the poll said they expected a “major catastrophe” to hit the United States at some point, with 51% believing there will be a financial collapse within 25 years and 29% fearing a super virus pandemic.


Impeachment proceedings begin in the House and the Senate over Obama’s brazen use of aggressive military force without congressional authority.

Eric Blair
Infowars.com
March 11, 2012

Since 2005, Veterans for Peace and others have been calling for the impeachment of the sitting president for war crimes. After their demands to lawmakers to uphold the rule of law against Bush were largely ignored, they renewed their effort to impeach Obama once he continued to bomb sovereign nations without congressional approval.  Now, lawmakers seem to have finally decided to take the rule of law and Separation of Powers seriously.


Obama will face impeachment over his failure to seek congressional authorization before launching offensive military action in Libya last year.  Official impeachment proceedings have now been filed in both the House and Senate.

Last week, North Carolina Representative Walter Jones filed an Impeachment Resolution in the House H.CON.RES.107.IH stating “Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”

“Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress’s exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution.”

President Barack Obama becomes only the third sitting president to face impeachment following Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.  Johnson was impeached for illegally dismissing an office holder without the Senate’s approval, and Clinton for perjury and obstruction of justice.  Both were acquitted by the Senate.

Significantly, President Obama faces much more serious charges than his impeached predecessors and it’s still unclear what legal defense he will use to diffuse the charges as the legal basis for his unilateral action has been inconsistent and vague from the beginning of the Libya assault.

Prior to military operations in Libya, the Justice Department advised the Administration on the legality of using unauthorized force in Libya in a 14-page memo titled Authority to Use Military Force in Libya, which states vaguely:

We conclude…that the use of military force in Libya was supported by sufficiently important national interests to fall within the President’s constitutional power.  At the same time, turning to the second element of the analysis, we do not believe that anticipated United States operations in Libya amounted to “war” in the constitutional sense necessitating congressional approval under the Declaration of War clause.

The memo goes on explain why the alleged situation on the ground in Libya was in U.S.’s national interest, cites previous times when the U.S. military was deployed without congressional approval and claims the mission was an international support mission with no deployed ground troops to justify their conclusion.

However, in no way were national interests under an “imminent” threat by hostilities in Libya as required by the War Powers Act, and supporting an international mission is irrelevant to the Act.  Furthermore, Obama has maintained the legal defense that American involvement fell short of full-blown hostilities even after hostilities exceeded the 90-day limit of unauthorized use of force afforded under the War Powers Act.

The New York Times quotes directly from the 38-page report Obama sent to concerned lawmakers after the 90-day deadline “U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve U.S. ground troops.”

Therefore, the Administration claims it wasn’t a real military conflict that Congress should concern itself with.  However, at the same time, the White House acknowledged that the cost to U.S. taxpayers was well over $1 billion for these non-hostile military activities.

Coincidentally, on the same day the impeachment resolution was filed, Obama’s Defense Secretary Leon Panetta acknowledged that the Libya War did indeed constituted military combat, but claimed the legal basis for spending U.S. tax dollars on war rested in “international permission”:

This impeachment comes on the heals of other Administration officials giving equally flimsy legal justifications for assassinating U.S. citizens without due process.  Where, also last week, Attorney General Holder sought to clarify this tyrannical authority in a speech at Northwestern University by claiming “judicial process” was not the same as “due process” under the Constitution.
Yet, the Fifth Amendment clearly states “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury”

And as Wikipedia defines due process:

Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects individual persons from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law.

The Obama Administration has clearly “offended against the rule of law”, and it appears his only defense lies in somehow changing the definition of words.  It’s not a strong legal position to be in and it seems for the first time in history a sitting president may be held accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors.

This article first appeared at Activist Post