Obama Treason Charges Advance In Tennessee Grand Jury

reply to post by argentus


I was with you until you brought up the birther argument. I'm sorry, that discussion was one of the biggest piles of BS I ever read.


a black president finally gets elected and suddenly, he's actually from Africa? right


edit: I did lol at "expertise on winged persons", A+

[edit on 30-11-2009 by piddles]

reply to post by 4nsicphd


Uh, quoting the nuts as proof they aren't nuts?
That's....nuts.

Originally posted by Mak Manto
Old Dagger is right.

A grand jury is not able to indict the President for treason. That power lies only with Congress, who's the supreme authority of the land.

Look, for all of you Obama "he's not a natural-born citizen" people: get over it...

He's our President. I didn't like Bush as President, but I said the same thing about the stupid impeachment movements for him. You don't need to like Obama, but many of you have to stop this nonsense that the man isn't a natural-born citizen.

He was born in Hawaii. Multiple state government, colleges, hospitals, and much more collaborate that he was born in Hawaii. Not one single proven birth certificate has come out yet that shows he was born elsewhere.

That means, any birth certificate that shows he was born in Kenya or Indonesia have been proven to be hoaxes.

He's legally allowed to be the President.

Congress is not the "supreme authority of the land" the people are. It is also not true that Congress is the only governing body that has the authority to bring charges of treason against someone, even if that someone happens to be a sitting President. Article III Section 3 of the Constitution for the United States states:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

Based on that text, what Congress has been given the authority to do is declare the punishment for treason once it has been established that treason has been committed. The issue of the current President being accused of treason because he may not have ever been qualified to run for the office to begin with is a dubious charge since it does not satisfy the definition of treason defined by Constitution. It also requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, and it is unclear if there is any more than one witness in the Tennessee Grand Jury event.

While the charge of treason remains dubious, if the current President is unqualified to serve in that office because he was not born in the U.S. then he is guilty of, at the very least, fraud and should be removed from office. However, the notion that only Congress can bring charges of treason against a person, even the President, is just quite simply, not true.

reply to post by OldDragger

The "question", if you mean Obama's citizenship, has been asked and answered and the Congress ( according to Constitutional proceedure) has declared him the duly and lawfully elected President. If that doesn't satisfy you, really who cares? Do you think the courts exist for everybody in the country to air their gripes and questions?

And yet......... the elusive, simple to produce document that would settle the question remains hidden. Do you ever, EVER ask yourself why? I do. More will. To answer your rhetorical question, apparently several people care, or threads like this would receive no response.

But noooo!
Courts exist to decide matters of law. that's LAW, not some Youtube video.
It's over! Done! Obama IS President and will remain so.

Agree. As I said earlier, it's a done deal. You can thank President Obama for the ongoing national division and continued attempts at having the evidence heard.

It's totally irrelevant what you or the "birthers ' think!

Agree. Also irrelevant what you think, however that's not really in the spirit of discussion is it? If either of us don't want to see it, we have but to not click on the thread.

Every court in the US would be clogged with every petty gripe and "theory' on you name it by the "patriot's' reasoning.

I'm going to have to call you on this. Patriot? That's an invective now? I didn't know.

If this clown in the OP's strory had any real evidence, he could petetion any member of Congress1 simple as that! If you had any real understanding of the courts, the law or The constitution you would know how darn silly this whole thing is!

It's been done numerous times. Congress cares about exactly as much about citizen petitions as you do about my opinion of this issue. They have the power, and none other. They also have the majority and that's the way it will stay. It's a done deal. Please, as a favor to me and others, I respectfully request that you capitalize the Constitution when referring to it.

Thank you for the reply. Always good to measure one's opinions against others when discussing strongly emotive issues. Fortunately for you and I, we have equal "standing" where discussion is concerned.

reply to post by piddles


respect Piddles. It's a simple matter for either of us to afford the other, and I thank you. I wish there were more members that utilized that simple skill.

I'll leave now, as I'm woefully close to friending you.

reply to post by OpTiMuS_PrImE


Never gonna happen my friend!

reply to post by Donkey_Dean


i don't recall ever saying it was going to happen should be interesting to watch though

[edit on 30-11-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


From Wikipedia:
"In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of disloyalty to one's sovereign or nation."

If Obama is not an American by birth, then he has not committed the crime of treason, because the USA is not his sovereign/nation. How many of us have seen him standing with his hands clasped together in front of him when the National Anthem is playing. Isn't he suppose to hold his right hand over his heart? This act alone makes me wonder.

Originally posted by OpTiMuS_PrImE
reply to post by Donkey_Dean

 

i don't recall ever saying it was going to happen

should be interesting to watch though

[edit on 30-11-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]

I agree! I find the whole thing rather fascinating, as people feel so compelled to delve into the roots of this nation and to exercise as many of their rights as they can.

Who knew that such provisions were within the government, made available to the people, without them having felt driven to finding this out?

The whole thing has been really intriguing, to say the least.

And to think, all he has to do is unfold that BC he found in his mothers things and let the press take some photos. Such a simple thing.

I think he is rather enjoying the attention. My mother used to say negative attention is better than no attention.

I am a people watcher, I like to observe how people act and react, and this has been a great ride!

reply to post by someoldguy



But I think the whole argument is that he is making the claim he is a naturally born citizen, but even if he is not, he is a naturalized citizen and therefor your argument is moot.

If he were not a natural born citizen, this would make him a usurper.

Being a naturalized citizen, and usurping the seat of the presidency would make him a usurper committing treasonous acts against this country.

So that is a valid argument.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by Libertygal]

Originally posted by Libertygal

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

Originally posted by Libertygal
americangrandjury.org...


There were several state grand juries that formed and found him guilty. The above website has lots of information.


[edit on 30-11-2009 by Libertygal]

Oh=Oh, somebody missed too many days of civics class. Only a slope-headed slack=jawed mouthbreathing fool believes that grand juries find anyone guilty. They indict. Juries, or maybe lynch mobs led by this poster find people guilty. That basic fact of American law has been stated multiple times in this thread. Repeating the ignorant, foolish and obviously racist lie that Obama has been found guilty by several grand juries must be an intentional lie! I bet Liberty gal lives in or near Selma, AL, Jackson, Miss, or Tuscaloosa, AL and misses the good old days.Why else repeat a groundless lie. You probably are cute. So much more the tragedy.

There has to be a presumption of probable cause, read guilt, to indict.

I just posted the link as information, if you don't like it, too bad.

And screw off with the personal attacks.

So, under the judicial system you want there would be a presumption of probable cause read guilt and not a presumption of innocence How very National Socialist of you.
You posted a link to garbage. Don't get mad if the stink rubs off and someone notices and comments.
I'm not attacking you.I'm trying to attack the mindset and tactic"Here, watch this. I'll promote this racist garbage by repeating this stuff and I don't have to assume any personal responsibility for these lies and misinformation because I'm just mindlessly repeating something I read.

Edit because my typing is as bad as Optimus Prime's punctuation. Optimus, God created periodsfor a purpose. And They're free

[edit on 30-11-2009 by 4nsicphd]

reply to post by someoldguy


yes me too such as in this photo

mindlass.files.wordpress.com...

photos.upi.com...

i know theres a post in the forums about it but oh well some he did and some he didn't

[edit on 30-11-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]

reply to post by 4nsicphd



I only posted the reasoning behind US citizens being allowed to form a grand jusry, when someone stated they were not.

I seriously do not consider US Supreme Court Justice Scalia to being someone spewing garbage.

Nice try though!


Edit to add:

Passing a true bill against someone by it's very definition is admitting there is enough evidence to prooffer guilt. If there was not, then the system would be more broken than it is.

When you begin with a presumption of innocence, and if enough evidence is presented to cause reasonable doubt, you get a true bill.

It is not up to the Grand Jury to determine guilt or innocence past the indictment, but to determine if the evidence is enough to cause to question probable cause.

It is the final jury trial, after finding a prosecutor, that would determine guilt or innocence.



[edit on 30-11-2009 by Libertygal]

reply to post by OpTiMuS_PrImE


What is so humorous here is I remember commenting on the fact that people were not allowed to attend a Bush rally with anti-Bush t-shirts on. You know the red circles with the slash through them over the word Bush?
The couple that wore them were arrested, held for a time and released. It was against the Patriot Act to even disparage the President in public.
Boy times have changed. You should stop drinking the tea.
Barack Obama is a great patriot and the President I voted for. He is doing a great job. If you are a Christian, rest assured - God's will WAS done just like you pray. You are the evil anarchist guilty of treason against our country. You are undermining the President of the United States. Finally we are GREAT AGAIN. Can you please try not to muck it up?

If the GOP is the right choice why are the top 5 recommendations of the Earth Policy Institute (a non partisan think tank devoted to saving the planet and our species) in direct opposition to the Republican Party platform????

1. Control population growth
2. Control climate change
3. Conserve fossil fuel use
4. Conserve resources
5. Eradicate poverty and hunger on the planet.

Because their goal is to destroy the planet - not save it.
WAKE UP!

reply to post by Libertygal


I seriously do not consider US Supreme Court Justice Scalia to being someone spewing garbage.

Really? I consider Scalia as almost anti Constitutional.
And do you hold the other Justices in the same high regard?

reply to post by rusethorcain

You are the evil anarchist guilty of treason against our country. You are undermining the President of the United States. Finally we are GREAT AGAIN. Can you please try not to muck it up

that is a pretty insane comment enough said

Also i guarantee you are a very involved christian i can tell by the way you attacked me

HATER HATE ON!

The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as "the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression".[1][2] Furthermore freedom of speech is recognized in European, inter-American and African regional human rights law.

[edit on 30-11-2009 by OpTiMuS_PrImE]

reply to post by Libertygal


Is he a naturalized citizen? Or is this also assumed?

Originally posted by rusethorcain
reply to post by OpTiMuS_PrImE

 

What is so humorous here is I remember commenting on the fact that people were not allowed to attend a Bush rally with anti-Bush t-shirts on. You know the red circles with the slash through them over the word Bush?
The couple that wore them were arrested, held for a time and released. It was against the Patriot Act to even disparage the President in public.
Boy times have changed. You should stop drinking the tea.
Barack Obama is a great patriot and the President I voted for. He is doing a great job. If you are a Christian, rest assured - God's will WAS done just like you pray. You are the evil anarchist guilty of treason against our country. You are undermining the President of the United States. Finally we are GREAT AGAIN. Can you please try not to muck it up?

If the GOP is the right choice why are the top 5 recommendations of the Earth Policy Institute (a non partisan think tank devoted to saving the planet and our species) in direct opposition to the Republican Party platform????

1. Control population growth
2. Control climate change
3. Conserve fossil fuel use
4. Conserve resources
5. Eradicate poverty and hunger on the planet.

Because their goal is to destroy the planet - not save it.
WAKE UP!

The only problem with your reply is ...

He has the right to his opinion and to speak it, type it or post it, as long as he is not being seditious, and he isn't.

What happened to his rights? Why are you so willing to take away his rights? Where did you begin to think this was okay?

Besides, he has stated, more than once in this thread, he posted it as an interesting observation, not as a voice on his stance of the president.

He is inetersted in watching the events unfold, he even said he voted for Obama, iirc.

But you want to take away his right to free speech?

Just wow.

reply to post by argentus


I welcome it

Originally posted by OldDragger
reply to post by Libertygal

 

I seriously do not consider US Supreme Court Justice Scalia to being someone spewing garbage.

Really? I consider Scalia as almost anti Constitutional.
And do you hold the other Justices in the same high regard?

I certainly do.

But what does that have to do with anything? Lets stick to the subject, okay?

We the people *do* have the right to form a Grand Jury. Someone stated we did not, and I posted an article reasoning as to yes we most certainly do.

That would be the subject.