Obama is a constitutional scholar and I'm the Mayor of Awesomeville

reply to post by crimvelvet


Excellent post.

However, I am truly terrified by Mr Greenberg and associates.

I find it amazing how he/they can be both in the limelight as well as in the shadows and sometimes he/they are able to be in both at the same time.

Warmest Regards,

t

Originally posted by JustinSee
Welp, he is a Chicago politician. I expect nothing from him.

edit on 15-7-2011 by JustinSee because: (no reason given)

their "constitution' is different there.

Chicago is a "City-State" !!

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
If what you are relying upon were actually true in American jurisprudence, it would render the power of judicial review meaningless. Congress could just pass an Amendment "overruling" what was struck down as unconstitutional by the Court.

Of course I’m not suggesting Congress can, per se, overrule a Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution and laws, so their interpretation is final.

When I used the term, and when Justices of the Supreme Court used the term in their opinions, it was in reference to the practical effect that new or revised laws passed by Congress have when they address the results of a Supreme Court decision. Reading the President’s remarks in the State of the Union I think it’s obvious he thinks of it this way as well.

Obama using the State of the Union Address to castigate the SCOTUS for a sound opinion was hardly Presidential

It was not inconsistent with the purpose of the State of the Union of recommending to Congress “measures [the President] shall judge necessary and expedient.” Should he have done it? I don’t think so, and I agree with you there. But in the overall scheme of things, looking at his track record as President, this particular incident is not one that particularly bothers me.

It was not the word "overturn" I took exception to, it was his willful ignorance of the legal reasoning behind Citizens United which relied heavily upon a First Amendment that flat out and expressly forbids Congress from doing what they did with the BPFR Act.

If you read the statement objectively he didn’t say the Court’s reasoning was erroneous, he said the result of their decision “reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests.”

I admit I haven’t read any elaborate statements by Obama on this particular issue, but from his statement in the State of the Union, I didn’t interpret it as him disagreeing with “legal reasoning behind Citizens United,” but with the possible results of the decision.

However, I would also suggest that the surest and best way to "correct the problems" that may have arisen from the Citizens United ruling would be by repealing specific definitions legislated by Congress that define corporations as a "person". I sincerely doubt that this was what Obama was advocating. You tell me, do you think Obama would agree with me here? Do you think Obama was urging Congress to repeal definitions defining corporations as "person"?

I don’t know specifically what Obama was advocating, or what he concretely thinks should be done to address, what he sees as, the potentially nefarious outcome of Citizens United.

Has he elaborated or given more extensive statements about this? I honestly don’t know, so I can’t opine on what sort of legislation or modifications to existing legislation exactly he has in mind, or had when he made the statements.

Originally posted by xuenchen

Originally posted by JustinSee
Welp, he is a Chicago politician. I expect nothing from him.

edit on 15-7-2011 by JustinSee because: (no reason given)

their "constitution' is different there.

Chicago is a "City-State" !

!

When Raum Emanuel is dragged by his scalp into the street and shot, I hope they scalp him and sell it on ebay!

Originally posted by Heyyo_yoyo
When Raum Emanuel is dragged by his scalp into the street and shot, I hope they scalp him and sell it on ebay!

gee wizz !

tell us,

what's NOT to like about Rahm ?

how much would that be worth do you think ?

reply to post by filosophia

They can't go a whole year without raising the debt limit. So this is going to be a one trick pony for a long time to come.

Trick Pony indeed.

More like a frecken' TROJAN HORSE!

Unfortunately the scam is too sophisticated and convoluted for most people to understand. I am still trying to disentangle it myself.

I am going to start with the results because it shows just how bad off we really are.

One of the major principles taught to Quality Engineers is the Pareto Principle - The 80-20 Rule - because it holds true for so many aspects of life. In 1906 an Italian economist, Vilfredo Pareto, discovered that 20% of the Italian population owned 80% of the nation’s wealth. Further studies revealed that The Pareto Principle, as it became known, affects us all in every aspect of life.

Does the Pareto Principle still hold true in the USA???

I normally treat Alex Jones as if he had the plague but this article by "Michael??" that he stole from TheEconomicCollapseBlog.com answers my above question. - (Some one really did their homework.)

Will The Banksters And The Corpocracy Eventually Own It All? 29 Statistics About Extreme Income Inequality In America That Will Blow Your Mind

...Over the past several decades, those with huge amounts of money and power have been busy rigging the game so that the rest of the money and power slowly but surely funnels into their hands.... Today, the big banks, the big corporations and the federal government are all in bed with one another and it is average Americans that always lose out.....

[THIS IS THE SIGNIFICANT STATISTIC: cv]
#1 In the United States today, the richest one percent of all Americans have a greater net worth than the bottom 90 percent combined.....

WHOA, Wait a Second 1% of the population controls over 90% of the wealth ???? What ever happen to the natural distribution of 20% controlling 80% 0f the wealth???

Given that the objective of the scam is to move as much of the wealth of the USA from the people into the hands of the World Power Mongers, it looks like they have done a bang up job of it!

EXPLANATION

The Federal Reserve and Government Accounts (such as Social Security) account for 40.6% of the 14 trillion dollar debt.

Those pretty green slips of paper in your wallet commonly known as U.S. dollars are Federal Reserve Notes. Bank scrip. The Fed can print as much of it as it wants or needs to. With this in mind, consider that fully eighty percent (80%) of U.S. Treasuries (U.S. government debt) sold in 2009 were bought by the Fed because there were no other willing buyers. factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com...

However the Federal Reserve doesn't use real money (wealth) to BUY US debt. They create "money" out of thin air and then tell the tax payer that we OWE them that money they just created plus interest! It is the largest FRAUD/SCAM in the world! SEE: www.bigeye.com...


When the Bernanke doubled the US money supply it was done by banks LENDING the new money into the system. That is how "new money" is created in a fiat money system.

Of course those in the know were not about to get "sheared" along with the sheeple so when Nixon took the USA off the gold standard they made sure their wages kept up with inflation unlike the poor smucks in the factories and offices. In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker.

From the beginning of 1964 ($54 billion) to the end of 2010 the bankers have made $1961.967 billion dollars in fiat currency! That is the amount they increased the money supply

That is a factor of 36! The minimum wage in 1964 was $1.15. Is the minimum wage now $41.78???? Or is it about one tenth of that? ($6.55) To add insult to injury the "progressive tax takes a much larger chunk out of my vastly diminished wage.

According to an article in The New Republic of Dec. 2, 1991, in 1948, a married couple with median income and two children, paid only 2% in state, federal, and Social Security taxes. In 1999, Social Security was 15.3%, plus 2.9% for Medicare, out of the first $62,700 in wages, or $11,411.40, and then perhaps 30% in federal taxes…if you were lucky.... www.gold-eagle.com...

But it doesn't end there. There are the invisible taxes on everything we buy. This is the hidden tax that is so difficult to figure out.

"A third of the cost of a gallon of gas is tax, half the cost of a pack of cigarettes and last I checked (20 years ago), there were 109 different taxes on a loaf of bread before you paid sales tax on the loaf and carried it home.' - JB Williams

"If people need any more concrete explanation of this, start with the staff of life, a loaf of bread. The simplest thing; the poorest man must have it. Well, there are 151 taxes now in the price of a loaf of bread — it accounts for more than half the cost of a loaf of bread. It begins with the first tax, on the farmer that raised the wheat..." - President Ronald Reagan




This evidence from 1939 gives a very concise view of how 1% of the population transferred wealth from the other 99% of the population directly into their pockets. And Bernanke just switched from Alan Greenspan's teaspoon to a fleet of bucket loaders!

Appendix E – Money Is Created by Banks Evidence Given by Graham Towers

Some of the most frank evidence on banking practices was given by Graham F. Towers, Governor of the Central Bank of Canada (from 1934 to 1955), before the Canadian Government's Committee on Banking and Commerce, in 1939. Its proceedings cover 850 pages. (Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence Respecting the Bank of Canada, Ottawa, J.O. Patenaude, I.S.O., Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty, 1939.) Most of the evidence quoted was the result of interrogation by Mr. “Gerry” McGeer, K.C., a former mayor of Vancouver, who clearly understood the essentials of central banking. Here are a few excerpts:

Q. But there is no question about it that banks create the medium of exchange?

Mr. Towers: That is right. That is what they are for... That is the Banking business, just in the same way that a steel plant makes steel. (p. 287)

The manufacturing process consists of making a pen-and-ink or typewriter entry on a card in a book. That is all. (pp. 76 and 238)

Each and every time a bank makes a loan (or purchases securities), new bank credit is created — new deposits — brand new money. (pp. 113 and 238)

Broadly speaking, all new money comes out of a Bank in the form of loans.

As loans are debts, then under the present system all money is debt. (p. 459)

Q. When $1,000,000 worth of bonds is presented (by the government) to the bank, a million dollars of new money or the equivalent is created?

Mr. Towers: Yes.

Q. Is it a fact that a million dollars of new money is created?

Mr. Towers: That is right.

Q. Now, the same thing holds true when the municipality or the province goes to the bank?

Mr. Towers: Or an individual borrower.
www.michaeljournal.org...

This is the nitty gritty of how the transfer is made.

New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money. This was one of Mises's original contributions to monetary theory, one that is ignored by all other schools of economic analysis.... Mises argued that the losses of the late-coming losers are the source of income for the early arrival winners....

...This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises's monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game.... The economic benefits obtained by the early users of new money, even gold, are made at the expense of those who gain access to it after it has altered the array of prices.... www.lewrockwell.com...

As the pro-socialist and millionaire economics textbook author Robert Heilbroner finally admitted in The New Yorker in 1990, "Mises was right."



if you have any doubts at all about the CRIMINAL INTENT of those who conspired on Jekyll Island to bring about the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Here are the words of the organizer:

Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none is so effectual as that which deludes them with paper money. It is the most perfect expedient ever invented for fertilizing the rich man’s fields by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation, these bear lightly on the happiness of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. [inflation cv] Our own history has recorded enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice and intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by Government. ~Nelson W. Aldrich, United States Senator, at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 IV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914)). [He was quoting Andrew Jackson. cv] www.linuxtoday.com...

The Average credit card debt per household is $14,687 this does not include education loans, car loans and house mortgages. 97% of the US money supply is in the form of banks loans.- Interesting that the US dollar has lost 96% of its value since the Federal Reserve Act.

So what do we get in return for our obligation to pay all those loans with money we earn through our labor??? The US banks are now operating on an effective ZERO reserve In other words they loan us NOTHING and the entire US is paying INTEREST on 97% of the US money supply! On june 1st 2011,the money supply was $2647.969 BILLION. The banks are earning interest on $2568.53 billion dollars!

First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969)

Mr. Morgan, the bank's president, took the stand. To everyone's surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money "out of thin air" for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. "It sounds like fraud to me," intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, . . . did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

www.webofdebt.com...

So given we are stuck with a fiat currency and the FED more than doubled the money supply, why hasn't the USA seen hypeinflation??? I finally found a reasonable explanation.

...Given the previous hyperinflation, clearly there was ample reason for currency revulsion. So you can consider this argument a necessary but not sufficient precondition. What makes the universal acceptance stick is that government accepts its own money to expunge liabilities to it. In plain English, fiat money has value because it is the only money you can use to pay taxes. ....The fact that this money is also the medium of exchange only entrenches its use. So the tax liability is a necessary pre-condition for fiat currency to work, something I will return to....

[No wonder Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified was Ratified 2/3/1913, a couple months after the Federal Reserve Act. cv]


Weimar Germany 1919-1923

The key to Weimar's hyperinflation was two-fold.

1. The German government had a large foreign currency debt obligation.
2. The German economy lost huge amounts of productive capacity causing prices to soar as demand outstripped supply....


Zimbabwe

While the facts in Zimbabwe are different, the underlying causes for hyperinflation were the same: foreign currency obligations and a loss of productive capacity.

Zimbabwe had established Independence from Britain in 1980. Yet, by the late 1990s 70% of productive arable land was still held by the small minority 1% of white farmers in the country. After years of talk about redistribution, in 2000, the President Robert Mugabe began to redistribute this land.

The redistribution process was a disaster, .... With agricultural production having plummeted, Zimbabwe was forced to pay to import food in hard currency.

Meanwhile, the government turned to the printing presses to fulfil its domestic obligations. as in Germany, the foreign currency obligations, the loss of productive capacity and the money printing was a toxic brew which ended in hyperinflation.

Hyperinflation in the USA, May 2010

As you can see from the two most severe cases of hyperinflation, the problem in each case was a loss of productive capacity, foreign currency liabilities, and a loss of the ability to tax....

In the German example, the Germans had a huge foreign currency liability that it had to pay, meaning it could not make good on the liability by printing money. It was a currency user as far as these liabilities went. Meanwhile, with productive capacity limited, the government was then unable to ease price pressure through the tax lever. The shortage of goods drove up prices inexorably and the government was forced to turn to the printing press in order to meet its domestic obligations.

In the Zimbabwe example, taxes were again central. Unable to recoup enough tax revenue and with large foreign currency obligations and a loss of productive capacity, the government resorted to printing money in an environment where prices were rising.

So, hyperinflation has very specific preconditions that are not apparent in the U.S..

1. No foreign currency liability: The U.S. dollar is the world's reserve currency so the U.S. can pay for trade goods in U.S. dollars.. The U.S. does not have a peg to gold or some other currency which acts as a de facto foreign currency liability. And the U.S. government has substantially no foreign currency liabilities. All of the debt is issued in domestic currency.

2. Price pressures are still anchored: While commodity prices are rising, they are rising in all currencies, not just in USD. Moreover, their rise will create demand destruction before any hyperinflation could occur. Why? Unemployment is high and capacity utilization is low, meaning there are no inflationary pressures on that front to help push inflation higher before demand destruction sets in.

3. Currency revulsion has not set in: Tax compliance is high in the U.S. We are not talking about Russia, Greece or Argentina where government has had a difficult time in raising tax. Moreover, as the USD is still the world's reserve currency, there has been no freefall sell off of dollars, nor do I anticipate any in the near-to-medium term.

In short, there will be no hyperinflation in the U.S. any time soon.... www.creditwritedowns.com...

The article states tax compliance is high in the U.S. Yet the Grace Commission Report to the President (1984) states"...one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken...." Now we have a 20% unemployment rate and the retiring of the baby boomers as well as a federal debt increase from fiscal 1983 deficit of $195 billion to over $14 TRILLION (Interestingly the report projected $13 trillion by the year 2000)

Second when the price of fuel rises there is a corresponding rise in the price of everything else.

Third the Russians, China and others are calling for a different world reserve currency than the dollar.

Fourth the OPEC oil countries are moving to the Euro instead of the US dollar, that is the real reason for the heating up of the middle east. The Real But Unspoken Reasons For The Iraq War

If the US dollar ever losses reserve currency status all those inflationary birds are going to come home to roost and we are going to be in a world of hurt.

Originally posted by filosophia
www.whitehouse.gov...

Ladies and Gentleman, your globalist president:

we're probably not going to get something done because we've got divided government.

Obama, the constitutional scholar, ought to know that the government was divided ON PURPOSE into 3 branches of power.

do you really think that is what he meant by divided ?

really ?


lol

reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot

However, I am truly terrified by Mr Greenberg and associates.

Yes Greenberg is definitely a man to watch, along with Maurice Strong. Dan Amstutz was another one who has done a lot of damage (He wrote the WTO agreement on Ag that will cause famine). Luckily he is now dead.

Another one who we should watch is Tony Blair, Former UK Prime Minister, Former chair of the Fabian Society and now working for JP Morgen in the Middle East (some say he is bucking for president of the EU).... guess what pops up???

FABIAN SOCIETY PHAMPHLET in EGYPT:
From Dictator to Democracy was seen in Egypt

As journalists have sought to untangle the disparate threads that unite these uprisings, one of the most interesting revelations has been a common reference to a dusty -- but still relevant -- book, "From Dictatorship to Democracy."

Earlier this month, the New York Times proclaimed its author, Gene Sharp, a "shy intellectual" who had created "the playbook for revolution" -- noting that his work was posted on the Muslim Brotherhood website during the Egyptian uprising, and was cited equally among Tunisians, Bosnians and Estonians in their quest for freedom. So far, it has been translated into 41 languages....
www.politicsdaily.com...

and LOOKY who has free e-books including Gene Sharp's "From Dictatorship to Democracy."
Fabian Essays In Socialism

I REALLY REALLY do not want "an intellectual elite and world bankers" having complete control like they are managing to do in the European Union.

Unfortunately they are so close to realizing their goal of a world totalitarian government they have come out of the closet.

Of What Use is Global Governance?
by The Global Journal July 1, 2010
Global Governance #01 Pascal Lamy
Of What Use is Global Governance?
by The Global Journal July 1, 2010

Lamy ponders the Triangle of Coherence

Pascal Lamy

by Pascal Lamy, Director, World Trade Organization (WTO)

I define global governance as the system assisting human society to achieve common objectives in a sustainable (i.e., fair and just:lol

manner.....

...Our challenge today is to establish a system of global governance that provides a better balance between leadership, effectiveness, and legitimacy on the one hand, and coherence on the other, to bring the system of global governance out of its gas state....

Gas is the coexistence of particles devoid of hierarchical differentiation. .... Most international organizations, e.g., the World Trade Organization (WTO), operate in this mode.

An example of the liquid state is the European Union, the very incarnation of an international organization of integration in which Member States have agreed to relinquish sovereignty in order to strengthen the coherence and effectiveness of their actions.

The solid state, finally, can be seen as the nationstate, the holder of “hard power,” able to compel individuals to pay taxes or to respect the speed limit, i.e., real force....

The essence of the E.U. is already at the heart of this first initiative: the creation of an area of joint sovereignty.... if we are to believe Jean Monnet, chief architect of the Action Committee for the United States of Europe, when he wrote, “The sovereign nations of the past are no longer the framework in which today’s problems can be solved. And the community itself is merely a step toward the organizational forms of tomorrow’s world.” From this point of view, how is the European system performing today in terms of leadership, consistency, efficiency, and legitimacy? In terms of internal leadership, European governance is doing well... www.theglobaljournal.net...

Well you get the idea.

For those who think the EU is doing "well" I suggest you read Foot & Mouth Report which shows how devastating a vast bureaucracy is to the real welfare of the people. FEMA and HURRICANE KATRINA is another example.

The only legitimate function of government is to protect the lives, liberty, and property of its citizens. In New Orleans, however, it was clear that the primary job of the military, FEMA, and Homeland Security was, not to protect citizens, but to protect the government and keep it functioning....

It was clear from the start that the goal of FEMA and Homeland Security was, not to rescue people, but to control them. Their directive was to relocate families and businesses, confiscate property, commandeer goods, direct labor and services, and establish martial law. This is what they have been trained to do. The reason they failed to carry out an effective rescue operation is that this was not their primary mission, and the reason they blocked others from doing so is that any operations not controlled by the central authority are contrary to their directives. Their objective was to bring the entire area under the control of the federal government - and this they succeeded in doing very well...

And that in a nutshell is the real problem with centralized government. We see the same thing in the "turf wars" between the FBI and local law enforcement, CIA ...

Awesomeville is a place way deep in your mind and you aren't just mayor, you're Emporer.

reply to post by filosophia


Your thread is awesome. This should be on the front page of every news paper and discussed on every TV channel for hours as Obama is a fraud, not near worthy of a community organizer let alone president of the U.S.

reply to post by filosophia


Presidents are so temporary and this took a long time to get this messed up.
Who will you blame these same problems on in a few years when there's a new man there?
Who are you protecting? The middle class has shrunk every year since the mid 70's so some changes are clearly needed while we are still on the map at all.

He is doing things differently.
Look where same old same old has got us.
If you want a different outcome - you have to do things differently.

Originally posted by Sky watcher
reply to post by filosophia

 

Your thread is awesome. This should be on the front page of every news paper and discussed on every TV channel for hours as Obama is a fraud, not near worthy of a community organizer let alone president of the U.S.

Says you.
This is a carbon copy of about 1000 threads on the same topic.
Lets garner up some plain old hatred based on simple disagreements and demonize the man in a sophomoric fashion with little to no new news.

"And I'm the Mayor of Awesomeville"
Is this supposed to be clever?
It is like a ninth grader wrote it and maybe they did. We're adults, no?
This is getting to be like the Chuck E Cheese of internet forums.

reply to post by newcovenant

Who will you blame these same problems on in a few years when there's a new man there?

The same ones I blame it on NOW.

Traitors in the white house (Democrat AND Republican):
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
SpartanKingLeonidas covers the house of Bush:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If a president really wanted to get the USA out of trouble he would urge Congress to get us out of the blasted "free Trade" agreements like the World Trade Organization and NAFTA!

... A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others....

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.
www.sweetliberty.org...

To save money wouldn't you stop spending money?? I don't know but I was taught that in my first year of school.

Originally posted by aptness
The Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution and laws, so their interpretation is final.

If the Supreme court had final authority, why bother having a congress or executive? SCOTUS make laws through interpretation, they have power of punishment through courts, they are the elite above the "ignorant masses" why not just rename America the United States of the High Priests?

reply to post by filosophia

If the Supreme court had final authority, why bother having a congress or executive? SCOTUS make laws through interpretation, they have power of punishment through courts, they are the elite above the "ignorant masses" why not just rename America the United States of the High Priests?

The courts do have final authority. What the American people have not been told is that it is the JURY not the judge who is SUPPOSED to JUDGE and negate a bad law.

That is why we were given the right to a jury trial in criminal matters or in civil matters over $20.

That is why the rights and duties of juries are no longer taught!

That is what "case law" is all about.

A new law is never considered "solid" until it has been through the courts and a "precedence" (case law) has been set. That is it has been upheld in court.

What lawyers & judges won't tell you about juries

....Informed jury amendments have been filed as an initiative in seven states and legislation has been introduced in the Alaska state legislature....

Today, the constitutions of only two states -- Maryland and Indiana -- clearly declare the nullification right, although two others -- Georgia and Oregon -- refer to it obliquely. The informed jury movement would like all states to require that judges instruct juries on their power to serve, in effect, as the final legislature of the land concerning the law in a particular case....

Those who have endorsed the right of a jury to judge both the law and the facts include Chief Justice John Jay, Samuel Chase, Dean Roscoe Pound, Learned Hand and Oliver Wendell Holmes. According to the Yale Law Journal in 1964, during the first third of the 19th century judges did inform juries of the right, forcing lawyers to argue "the law -- its interpretation and validity -- to the jury." By the latter part of the century, however, judges and state law were increasingly moving against nullification. In 1895 the US Supreme Court upheld the principle but ruled that juries were not to be informed of it by defense attorneys, nor were judges required to tell them about it... prorev.com...

There is lots of info about our rights and duties as jurors at: Fully Informed Jury Association

This is such an important issue that Julian Heicklen, was indicted for jury tampering for distributing pamphlets about the jury's power and responsibility to judge both the law and the fact. ______beforeitsnews/story/429/514/Fully_Informed_Jury_Arrest.html

Mark Schmidter, was arrested for against distributing literature.
Keith McHenry and John Kurtz were sentenced for distributing food and taking pictures of police, respectively. tyrannyfighters.com...


Keeping the sheeple ignorant of their rights is the best way to remove them and that is why TPTB are fighting The Fully Informed Jury Movement. Why else would anyone in the USA be AGAINST teaching people about their Constitutional rights???? Why isn't the information TAUGHT in High School???

Good grief PETA gets to teach the kiddies their parents who hunt are "Murderers" but we don't teach a lesson as important as this??? But then TPTB support PETA not those intent on breaking out of their cage.

...Despite denunciations from psychologists and school officials, PETA continues to target children as young as six years old with violent and graphic propaganda. Sidestepping parents and school authorities, PETA lures young and impressionable children into radical activism with a coordinated effort including the use of graphic comic books, grotesque toys, schoolyard demonstrations, email alerts sent directly to 65,000 children, and even a classroom lecturer with a felony rap sheet.... www.thekennelspotlight.com...

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors: $34,100.00 1997 – 2005
Tides Foundation & Tides Center: $80,047.00 2003 – 2005
activistcash.com...

“Tides” behaves as a money-laundering enterprise, routinely obscuring the sources of its tax-exempt millions, and making it difficult (if not impossible) to discern how the funds are actually being used.