Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’


Senators Mile Lee - Ted Cruz AP Photo

Six U.S. Senators have placed outgoing (i.e. lame duck) – Majority Leader Senator Reid – on noticed that if President Barack Hussein Obama unilaterally forces an illegal alien amnesty edict, that audacious Presidential act will cause a constitutional crisis. It is the belief of the Senators (Original Intent) that immigration law is solely the purview of the Congress.

 

Since I agree with those six Senators, Obama illegal Alien Amnesty should be another nail to the coffin of impeachment. God knows many of those nails have already been hammered but political numbers, political correctness, and a cowardly GOP leadership have FAILED to move the coffin from the House to the Senate.

 

JRH 11/6/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’

 

By Terence P. Jeffrey

November 5, 2014 – 3:43 PM

CNSNews.com

 

Republican Senators Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, and David Vitter of Louisiana sent a letter to lame-duck Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada today saying that if President Obama takes unilateral action to grant amnesty to illegal aliens it “will create a constitutional crisis.”

 

The senators told Reid that they would assist him in enacting a measure to stop Obama from unilaterally granting an amnesty, but that if Reid lets Obama go forward with such an amnesty they “would use all procedural means necessary” to make the Senate focus on the constitutional crisis they say that this “lawless amnesty” would create.

 

On Dec. 11, the continuing resolution now funding the government will expire. Before that date, both Houses of Congress will need to approve a new continuing resolution to fund the government beyond that date.

 

If the CR does not permit the Executive Branch to spend money on some action, the Executive Branch cannot take that action.

 

“We write to express our alarm with President Obama’s announced intention to take unilateral executive action by the end of this year to lawlessly grant amnesty to immigrants who have entered the country illegally,” the senators wrote Reid.

 

“The Supreme Court has recognized that ‘over no conceivable subject is the power of Congress more complete’ than its power over immigration,” the senators said. “Therefore, President Obama will be exercising powers properly belonging to Congress if he makes good his threat.

 

“This will create a constitutional crisis that demands action by Congress to restore the separation of powers,” the senators told Reid.

 

“As majority leader of the Senate, you have the responsibility of not only representing the citizens of your state, but also of protecting the Constitution through vigilant exercise of the checks and balances provided under the Constitution,” wrote Cruz, Lee, Sessions, Roberts, Crapo and Vitter.

 

“Therefore, we write to offer our full assistance in ensuring expeditious Senate debate and passage for a measure that preserves the power of Congress by blocking any action the president may take to violate the Constitution and unilaterally grant amnesty,” the senators said.

 

“[H]owever,” they continued, “should you decline to defend the Senate and the Constitution from executive overreach, the undersigned senators will use all procedural means necessary to return the Senate’s focus during the lame duck session to resolving the constitutional crisis created by President Obama’s lawless amnesty.”

__________________________________

All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2014. Cybercast News Service.

 

About CNSNews.com

 

CNSNews.com was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

 

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes “news.”

 

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded CNSNews.com in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.

 

CNSNews.com endeavors to READ THE REST

 

American Interests First


Illegals- Dems Catch, Release & Vote

If Obama gives amnesty to nearly 30 million illegal aliens and brings in 34 million more, he will have increased the population of the U.S. by 19% overnight. This is infinitely worse than the Schumer-Rubio bill, S744, which doubles legal immigrant numbers to 2 million annually, and it will prove catastrophic during this period when 58 million working age U.S. citizens are without jobs. – Justin O. Smith

 

Justin Smith addresses President Barack Hussein Obama’s and the Dem Party’s agenda to flood the USA with Latino immigrants to transform the electorate into a permanent Democratic Party voting bloc. If you love the America the Founding Fathers initiated, then you have to realize that an Obama-Leftist transformation will end that national experiment began in 1776 and initiated into the rule of law with the U.S. Constitution in 1789.

 

JRH 11/1/14

Please Support NCCR

***********************************

American Interests First

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 10/31/2014 6:38 PM

 

American interests must come first in any discussion on immigration and the illegal alien invasion at the core of the U.S. immigration policies, that are currently threatening U.S. national security, and most recently, our immigration crisis has been exacerbated by President Obama’s failure to recognize his primary duty to protect the safety and economic well-being of all Americans. He ignores seventy percent of Americans, who do not welcome these illegal aliens, and he embraces the illegal aliens’ concerns and views them as future Democratic voters, eligible for free legal aid, housing, education, health care and “amnesty”, thus ensuring the complete fundamental transformation of America; demands from illegal aliens have no place in this discussion, if America is to survive as a nation.

 

On October 25th, Oliver Merino, whose mother faces deportation in North Carolina, held up a sign that read, “Hillary, do you stand with our immigrant families?”

 

Americans are sympathetic to the terrible situations others face worldwide, and we try to help where we can. Americans are even extremely welcoming to legal immigrants. But, if a person is here illegally, no matter if it’s to provide for their children _ good reasons, they are still violating the laws of the United States and deserve no more consideration than a thief.

 

Many Latino leaders have demanded reassurances that Obama will not put off executive action that gives legal status to millions of illegal aliens currently in the U.S.  Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and Representatives Luis V. Gutierrez (D-IL) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) make the case in an October 30th op-ed for Univision that “Congress and the Constitution give presidents broad authority to take executive action on immigration policy” and that the authority has been used by past presidents, however, this Congressionally delegated authority was only intended to supplement existing law; Obama’s “amnesty would be violating existing U.S. statutes and making new law, which is not within the executive’s Constitutional authority.

 

Obama knows that he must wait until after the November 4th elections, before unilaterally granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. This is such an unpopular potential “solution” to a manufactured immigration “crisis” that it would cost the Democrats a heavy political cost, especially in the hotly contested Senate races; however, White House officials have reassured frustrated Latino lawmakers, such as Representative Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), that Obama intends to take executive action before the end of the year. And, despite no official action from Obama, recent covert actions by the Obama administration reveal the proof of an impending Obama amnesty.

 

On October 3, 2014, the original Solicitation [order] #HSSCCG-14-R-00028 left the offices of Citizenship and Immigration Services [USCIS] and went through a Burlington, Vermont contracting office. This document requisitioned “Permanent Resident Cards [PRC] and Employment Authorization Cards … for an estimated 4 million cards annually with the potential to buy 34 million cards total” over the next five years (point of contact _ ronald b. slater@uscis.dhs.gov. / phone: 8028724645).

 

If Obama gives amnesty to nearly 30 million illegal aliens and brings in 34 million more, he will have increased the population of the U.S. by 19% overnight. This is infinitely worse than the Schumer-Rubio bill, S744, which doubles legal immigrant numbers to 2 million annually, and it will prove catastrophic during this period when 58 million working age U.S. citizens are without jobs.

 

A June 2014 article, by Steve Camarota and Karen Zeigler, illustrated that net job gains from 2000 to 2014 have gone to immigrants, legal and illegal, while natural born U.S. citizens accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working age population. And, in conjunction with this, studies like the one conducted by Harvard economist Dr. George Borjas also prove that American workers lose wages from illegal and legal immigration.

 

Along with concerns over jobs for U.S. citizens, Americans are concerned over a dangerous disease problem, as Americans saw hundreds of new cases of Enterovirus D-68 [about virus], heretofore uncommon, arrive with this summer’s 65,000 border crashers, who did not receive any health inspections. They were dispersed across the country, and now American children are being paralyzed by this deadly disease, from Chicago to New Jersey and on to Kansas City, MO and Children’s Mercy Hospital where five children have died.

 

According to Dr. Reichmann of the New Jersey Tuberculosis Clinic, “antibiotic strains of tuberculosis have migrated to the border states of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California. Since the 1990s cases among immigrants, legal and illegal, rose from 30% to 42%, and over the past three years, half of the 16,000 new cases of tuberculosis were found in illegal aliens.

 

Aside from health and economic woes, Americans are also witnessing an increased growth and expansion of third world microcosms in U.S. sovereign territory, due to Progressive multicultural policies and immigrant reluctance to become fluent in the English language. Nearly 62 million U.S. residents speak a foreign language at home, representing 21% of America’s population, with 27 million of this number born in the U.S.

 

Steven Camarota, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies offers this observation: “Allowing in over one million new legal immigrants a year and, to a lesser extent, tolerating illegal immigration has important implications for preserving a common language.” It also has important implications for preserving a nation.

 

Why are you not insisting that the U.S. military be deployed to reinforce an overburdened Border Patrol along the southern border and that the U.S. immigration laws be enforced? How much does it cost all of us when a majority of Americans stay silent?

 

Kenneth Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Service union, recently told the ‘Examiner’, “We are still the rubber-stamp entry into the United States … Whether it’s the failure to uphold the public charge laws, the abuse of our asylum procedures, the admission of Islamist radicals, or visas for health risks, the taxpayers are being fleeced and public safety is being endangered on a daily basis.”

 

Shortly after the revelation of the 34 million PRCs to be handed out by the Obama administration, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Jeff Sessions (R-AL) said, “This revelation provides startling confirmation of the crisis facing our Republic.” Sessions accused Obama of “violation of plain statute”, in a bid to “nullify the immigration laws of the United States and its sovereign people.”

 

Americans must demand that Congress defund any “amnesty” executive order Obama might make, and Americans must call for the repeal of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act that injects over one million legal immigrants into the U.S. annually; demand that all immigration be halted temporarily, and tell Congressmen and Senators that before they worry about less fortunate foreign nationals, they need to consider the cost of their actions on the less fortunate of the United States, whose Constitution they have sworn to uphold.

 

By Justin O. Smith

_________________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Text and/or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Justin O. Smith

IRS has become Political Abusive Attack Dog


BHO Fake Outrage toon

John R. Houk

© October 28, 2014

 

The 16th Amendment legitimizes the existence of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

 

Amendment XVI

 

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

 

Your donation matters.

 

Taxing Power

 

Tax

 

Income Tax

 

Taxable Income (16th Amendment; Legal Information Institute (LII) – Cornell University Law School)

 

HOWEVER, the 16th Amendment does not overrule the Bill of Rights (1st ten Amendments to Constitution) pertaining to the Civil Rights and Liberty guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. And yet the IRS has mysteriously acquired the authority to seize property and bank accounts with the presumption of guilt BEFORE a criminal trial.

 

My son sent me a Daily Caller news story that focuses on small business owner Carole Hinders. Ms. Hinders has made the news ironically largely due to a NY Times articles about her and other small business owners being assaulted by the IRS without actual proof the law is being broken. Between yesterday and today Carole Hinders’ story his hit web in a huge way. The irony is all the sides of the political spectrum are displaying outrage over the abuse of power being exercised by the IRS. Could it be that Leftists and Conservatives can join forces over a constitutional issue affecting American citizens?

 

VIDEO: IRS Seizes Innocent Grandma’s Bank Account

 

Published by InstituteForJustice

Published: Oct 27, 2014

 

Carole Hinders has worked hard at her family-owned restaurant, Mrs. Lady’s Mexican Food, for 38 years. The federal government took her entire bank account using civil forfeiture, even though she did nothing wrong. Now, they are refusing to return her money, so Carole and the Institute for Justice have teamed up to fight back.

http://www.endforfeiture.com

 

Perhaps Congress can wise up and use this unified voter outrage to take some immediate legislative action to curb the power of the IRS. If Congress can enact a statesman form a legislative action pertaining to the IRS, you must realize it would only be a temporary fix. Most prominently these days the IRS is a political tool used by Obama against Conservative opponents, however there are more than one Federal agency that uses a law that has to be unconstitutional. State and Federal law enforcement ALSO utilize the Civil Asset Forfeiture law to seize property and money from American citizens. The thing is the public has looked the other way with government seizures because it is the primary weapon of law enforcement to pin down real criminals especially the kind that has built a criminal empire. Who can be unhappy about taking down criminals, right?

 

The thing is citizens like Carole Hinders or even those that have property that stifles the agenda of local, State or Federal authorities can have their property seized. WITHOUT A TRIAL!

 

As Americans on a grassroots level we have to figure out the legalese that protects law-abiding citizens while at the same go after moneyed criminals that break the law pretending to be law-abiding citizens.

 

The website End Civil Forfeiture explains the history of this practice in the USA and how State and Federal government have exploited this beyond the scope of the U. S. Constitution:

 

Civil forfeiture—where the government can take and sell your property without ever convicting or even charging you with a crime—is one of the greatest threats to property rights in the nation today. Civil forfeiture cases proceed against one’s cash, cars, or home, which means that property owners receive few if any of the protections that criminal defendants enjoy.   To make matters worse, when law-enforcement agencies take and sell your property, they frequently get to keep all the proceeds for their own use. This gives agencies a direct financial incentive to “police for profit” by seizing and forfeiting as much property as possible.

 

 

Although the Founders didn’t believe in this superstition, they used civil forfeiture as a way to enforce the collection of customs duties, which provided 80 to 90 percent of the federal revenue during that time. The government often could not try owners of smuggling ships themselves (often because they were overseas), and so civil forfeiture let officials seize their ships and cargo as a second-best option.

 

With minor exceptions during the Civil War and Prohibition, civil forfeiture remained a legal backwater. But as the War on drugs heated up during the early 1980s, so too did civil forfeiture. A key legal change occurred in 1984 when Congress established the Assets Forfeiture Fund. Previously, all federal civil forfeiture revenues were deposited into the government’s general fund. But after the 1984 amendments, federal agencies could retain and spend forfeiture proceeds—subject only to very loose restrictions—giving them a direct financial stake in generating forfeiture funds.  Similar amendments now allow law enforcement agencies in 42 states to keep and use some or all of the civil forfeiture proceeds they seize.

 

“Policing for Profit” Creates Incentives for Abuse

 

The changes at the federal and state levels led to an explosion of forfeiture activity. Because in most jurisdictions law enforcement can keep some or all of the proceeds from civil forfeiture, they have an incentive to seize and keep as much property as possible. …

 

… Here are four ways that civil forfeiture stacks the deck against property owners:

 

·         Burden of Proof: For the government to keep your property using civil forfeiture, it must prove that the property is connected to criminal activity.  But where criminal forfeiture requires the government to prove guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt,” under civil-forfeiture cases the government can prevail under much less rigorous standards.

 

·         Guilty Until Proven Innocent: Although many jurisdictions provide an “innocent-owner” defense that allows owners to get their property back if they had no idea that it was involved in a crime, most jurisdictions presume, however, that owners are guilty and force them to prove their innocence.

 

·         Legal Representation: Anyone who has watched a crime drama knows that the government must provide criminal defendants with an attorney if they cannot afford one. But civil forfeiture victims must either pay for a lawyer—which in many cases can cost more than the seized property is worth—or go it alone.

 

·         “Equitable” Sharing: Federal law provides a loophole called “equitable sharing” to law enforcement in states with good civil forfeiture laws.  This program allows state law enforcement to turn seized assets over to the federal government, which forfeits the property under federal law.  In turn, the feds give up to 80 percent of the forfeited property back to the state agency for its own use, even if state law would have required those proceeds to go into a general fund.

 

READ ENTIRETY (Civil Forfeiture: A Threat to Private Property and the Impartial Pursuit of Justice; By End Civil Forfeiture)

 

The only way I see to change all the law – civil and criminal – to protect the individual rights of law-abiding citizens is to amend the Constitution. I don’t care how much Leftists and Conservatives can agree on reforming the powers of the IRS, you know one day a President will come along to push the envelope of the Constitution citing case law to warp the legalese to go after political opponents. You do realize it won’t matter if that President is a Democrat or a Republican or the emergence of a Third Party to attain the White House, the legalese will be abused.

 

Unfortunately on a Federal level this nation’s governance is way too polarized to effect a Constitutional Amendment to change the definition and application of Civil Asset Forfeiture laws that protects the Rights and Liberty of law-abiding citizens as opposed to moneyed criminals. The only way to amend the Constitution via by-passing Congress is in the Constitution but in the 225 years our Founding document has been the foundation of America’s rule of law the by-pass Congress method to amend the Constitution has never taken place. Why?

 

The reason is political fear. No one active in government seriously thought of the ‘by-pass Congress’ method of amending the Constitution until the 20th century when political polarization seemed to become a hindrance to good governance. The method of offering an Amendment apart from Congress can be accomplish directly by the several States calling for a Constitution Convention. Neither the President, Congress nor the Judicial Branch can nullify or prevent such a convention from occurring. It would be the call of a majority of States. The fear is that a convention to amend the Constitution would evolve beyond the intentions of the reason the States called for it. The very real fear – both Leftist and Conservative – is a Constitutional Convention could take it upon itself to scrap the entire current Constitution. The fear is the potential for a Leftist vision or a Conservative vision to become the rule of law to the detriment of the losing side of the political spectrum.

 

I personally have wavered back and forth on the pluses and minuses of a Constitutional Convention. BUT NOW with the abuses of the IRS simply becoming way too egregious, something must be done. The best thing would be to scrap the whole current tax system developing a new paradigm whether it is income or National sales tax or a combination of both to be fair to the taxpayers while also still have the ability to go after the moneyed criminals of whatever kind of organized crime network might exist (violent criminals or white collar criminals). And whatever that standard is should be applied equally criminally and civilly according to the Fourth Amendment.

 

Amendment IV

 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (Fourth Amendment; Legal Information Institute (LII) – Cornell University Law School)

 

On a personal level I don’t feel comfortable to suggest a different tax system to shoot for. My primary concern here is the abuse of government power on the Civil Rights and Liberty of American citizens. The very reason and cause of the American Revolutionary War in which the British citizens of America’s Thirteen Colonies felt abused by unjust taxation, improper representation and the abuse of government authority.

 

WHEN, in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s GOD entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the Causes which impel them to the Separation.

 

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their CREATOR, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. READ THE REST (In Congress, July 4, 1776. The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America; by the signing delegates and penned by Thomas Jefferson; Library of Congress)

 

TODAY I feel like the risk is necessary for the USA to have a Constitutional Convention. The Federal government cannot be trusted for a long term reform eliminating the IRS as a political attack dog of whatever political party. Just like the Founding Fathers felt a risk was necessary to throw off the bonds of an abusive government, it has become necessary to throw off the bonds of a politically oriented tax agency as well as other Federal agencies that have gone beyond bounds of the guaranteed Liberty of the Bill of Rights.

 

Citizens concerned for the future of their country, under a federal government that’s increasingly bloated, corrupt, reckless and invasive, have a constitutional option. We can call a Convention of States to return the country to its original vision of a limited federal government that is of, by and for the people. (Convention of States: This One Amendment Could Solve Forty-Five Problems; By Steve Robinson; The Maine Wire; 7/15/14)

 

Article Five of the U.S. Constitution enumerates the two ways to amend the Constitution:

 

Article V

 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. (The Constitution of the United States – Article V; National ArchivesFederal Register)

 

Our current tax system is a progressive income tax:

 

A progressive tax structure is one in which an individual or family’s tax liability as a fraction of income rises with income. If, for example, taxes for a family with an income of $20,000 are 20 percent of income and taxes for a family with an income of $200,000 are 30 percent of income, then the tax structure over that range of incomes is progressive. One tax structure is more progressive than another if its average tax rate rises more rapidly with income. (Progressive Taxes; By Joel B. Slemrod; Library of Economics and Liberty)

 

DEFINITION OF ‘PROGRESSIVE TAX’

 

A tax that takes a larger percentage from the income of high-income earners than it does from low-income individuals. The United States income tax is considered progressive: in 2010, individuals who earned up to $8,375 fell into the 10% tax bracket, while individuals earning $373,650 or more fell into the 35% tax bracket. Basically, taxpayers are broken down into categories based on taxable income; the more one earns, the more taxes they will have to pay once they cross the benchmark cut-off points between the different tax bracket levels.

 

INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS ‘PROGRESSIVE TAX’

 

The U.S. progressive income tax is effectively a means of income redistribution. Individuals who earn more pay higher taxes; those taxes are then used to fund social welfare programs that are used primarily by individuals who earn less. Critics of the progressive tax consider it to be discriminatory and believe that a flat tax system, which imposes the same tax on everyone regardless of income, is a fairer method of taxation. (Progressive Tax; Investopedia)

 

Yup, IRS/Progressive Tax is evil. If small potatoes like me has to hire a tax service to figure out the complications of owing or receiving refund then it is evil. How do we replace the evil IRS? The suggestions I have read are the flat tax, fair tax, National Sales Tax or some kind of combination.

 

According to my search engine perusals it appears the Fair Tax seems to be the current favorite tax to terminate the IRS and end political head hunting. I personally see how the Fair Tax (which is actually a national sales tax) looks good on paper; however if things go south versions of the Fair Tax shows sales tax climbing anywhere from 50% to 70% of purchase or service to keep sufficient revenue flowing. Fair Tax proponents tell you the rate is 23% if everything goes as foreseen with a monthly prebate of cash from the government for families that make less than the poverty line in income. The prebate for a family of four below the poverty line utilizing the 23% sales tax rate would receive a monthly government check of $1,983.33 for an annual total of $23,800. Like I said that sounds favorable to me; however if the revenue collection does not complete the Federal budget, does anyone think the sales tax rate will remain at 23%?

 

The Flat Tax still sounds attractive to me. The first problem of a Flat Tax is an agency still has to be around to administer collection of the tax. My God, that agency CANNOT be the same bureaucracy of the Internal Revenue Service. Its management has become politically corrupt that bad things undoubtedly continue to occur. The management level portions of the current IRS must be jettisoned and a whole new agency created under strict guidelines that insures the enforcement of the Bill of Rights in the new tax agency’s collection methods.

 

However in full disclosure Fair Tax proponents do have problems with the Flat Tax. For one thing the politicians are looking for a Flat Tax rate that actually mind cause discomfort for poor to moderate income families while the more wealthy tax payers will jump for glee. I currently fit into the poor to moderate category that would feel a squeeze from higher taxes. On the other hand I also realize across the board less of a tax strain on higher wage earners to wealthy people will release entrepreneurial development that will result in better jobs, more available spendable money and hence a better economy which will also translate into more tax revenue without putting the bite on all Americans.

 

So here are website article with Flat Tax and Fair Tax plusses and minuses leaning to favoring one or the other (in no particular order):

 

o  Could The Fair Tax Movement Ever Replace The IRS? By Mark P. Cussen; Investopedia; 4/4/14

 

o   Flat Tax vs. Fair Tax; By Admin; Freedom Works; 7/6/11

 

o   FAIR Tax Abolishes IRS – Then What? By Peter J. Reilly; Forbes; 8/6/14 9:30AM

 

o   Summary: H.R.25 — 113th Congress (2013-2014) Introduced in House; (01/03/2013): Fair Tax Act of 2013 – Repeals the income tax, employment tax, and estate and gift tax. Redesignates the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as the Internal Revenue Code of 2013.

 

A Constitutional Convention needs to restore Liberty as well as narrowly define the duty of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches to uphold restored and defined Liberty. Here’s part the Leftists will become apoplectic about: A Constitutional Convention needs to simultaneously protect Religious Freedom and NOT prevent religion from being a moral advocate politically to influence government. At the same time government specifically be defined as not involving or inserting itself on how a religion involves itself in politics UNLESS that religion’s specific purpose is to terminate the Constitution, overthrow the government and end the Liberty of the Bill of Rights. Separation of Church and State is a one-way street and not a two-way street. No government in religion but lots of religion as a moral pulpit to influence the morality of society. The Constitution needs to address the issue of preventing the laws and customs of foreign lands from being used as precedents in any judicial case law. There can be no foreign treaties entered into that contradicts the U.S. Constitution without an Amendment change to correspond to that foreign treaty. And as America has traditionally been the melting pot of many national peoples seeking a new life those people must be amenable to swear to abide and uphold the U.S. Constitution adopting the traditions of America first while honoring their former culture second.

 

Well that is the part of a Constitutional Convention I am certain Leftists will cry a convention run-amok. For our Republic to survive future generations the traditions that have made us a desirable melting pot must be preserved. Losing those traditions to some kind of transforming diverse multicultural Socialist Democracy that descends into cultural chaos polarized racially to the extent political polarization tears the nation apart under political ideology rather than preserve national patriotism. Oh yeah … Let’s really drive the Left looney. We should throw in personhood establishing the rights of an unborn baby rather than perpetuate the myth that an unborn baby is an appendage of a woman’s body.

 

JRH 10/28/14 (Hat Tip: Adam)

Please Support NCCR

 

Nefarious Presidential Actions – Teddy to Harding


T Roosevelt Big Stick Diplomacy toon

  Warren & Florence Harding political toon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John R. Houk

© August 7, 2014

 

 

Here is a quote from a comment exchange on my G+ page pertaining to the SlantRight 2.0 post entitled, “Sarah Palin Doubles Down – Impeach Obama 7-19-14”.

 

Me:

 

Gideon fewer Executive Orders does not translate into less unConstitutional actions. Obama’s EO’s contradict the Constitution’s Separation of Powers instituted by the Founding Fathers.

 

Gideon Money:

 

How so? Be specific and use SCOTUS precedent, not Fox talking points.

 

There many comments from others as well as between myself and Gideon. So I decided to embark on a journey to research the issue. I made the mistake to look at the controversial actions of 20th century Presidents through to Obama. This has turned into a larger project than I anticipated.

 

As you may realize there are thousands of Executive Orders in the time period between Teddy Roosevelt which begin in 1901 through Obama’s present in August 2014. I even suspect before I end my journey BHO will undoubtedly deliver some Executive Orders that will further degrade the Constitution and Congress.

 

Hence I am going to divide the research into parts. As of writing this I have no idea how many parts are to come our way. When I started with this research I decided to eventually stick with controversial Presidential actions and decisions that should have been impeachable BUT political expediency always took a back seat to defending the U.S. Constitution. This will hardly be an exhaustive posting of any President’s actions. I am going to stick to ones that were the most controversial in the Press, against Congress, involving SCOTUS dramatically and violations of American citizen’s Constitutional rights. At this point I am up to President Warren G. Harding who died in Office in 1923.

 

When I get to the last part I will post many of the comments that led up to Gideon’s challenge delivered on August 5, 2014. There is a chance to more comments have already taken place on the G+ post. This would mean a marathon of responses. I ain’t gonna do that.

 

So now I begin with President Theodore Roosevelt.

 

Theodore Roosevelt: 3/14/1901 to 3/4/1909

 

President T. Roosevelt had a number of Constitutional issues. The ones that went to the Supreme Court all decided in his favor.

 

Here are a list of TR actions that bristled his Congress during his terms of Office:

 

Panama Canal

 

Originally started by the French, the Panama Canal was intended to drastically shorten the travel time of ships going between the Pacific and the Atlantic. The French project turned out to be a disaster, and they were eager to hand the project off. So when Theodore Roosevelt offered to buy it, they were more than willing. However, the United States Congress was less eager to spend the money. In order to speed things up, Roosevelt helped organize a revolution that overthrew the government of Panama and replaced it with a nation whose constitution had been written by Americans and whose flag had been designed by the wife of a pro-intervention congressmen. Roosevelt’s actions would remain controversial for the rest of his life. (Top scandals and controversies of each United States president – Theodore Roosevelt; By Freeman Stevenson; Deseret News; 3/20/13 12:51 p.m. MDT)

 

On January 22, 1903, the Roosevelt administration and Colombia signed the Hay-Herrán Treaty, which allowed a canal to be built across Panama. However, Colombia’s legislature refused to ratify the treaty.

 

Later that year, Panama, which was under the control of Colombia, revolted and declared its independence on November 3, 1903. The United States recognized the new government of Panama on November 6, and a week later Panama signed a treaty with the United States providing for the construction and operation of the canal in Panama. The treaty, which granted sovereignty to the United States for a ten-mile-wide strip-the Canal Zone-in which to construct the canal, was approved by the U.S. Senate on February 23, 1904.

 

Roosevelt is alleged to have encouraged the 1903 revolution for independence in Panama. The revolution conveniently began after the U.S. warship Nashville docked in Colón, Panama. (What controversy surrounded Theodore Roosevelt and the Panama Canal? Answers.com)

 

Executive Orders

 

Teddy Roosevelt greatly expanded the use of Executive Order in terms of both quantity and reach. He declared certain lands set aside for military reservations or wildlife refuges. He made dozens of people available for appointment to government offices without regard to whether they met Civil Service requirements. (Above the Law: History and Development of Presidential Executive Orders, Part One; By John A. Sterling; LawAndLiberty.org; last revised – 12/31/01)

 

William Howard Taft: 3/4/1909 to 3/4/1913

 

To solve one impasse during the 1909 tariff debate, Taft proposed income taxes for corporations and business. … Supreme Court, in Flint v. Stone Tracy Company, approved it. …  An income tax on individuals, (unlike the tax on corporations) required a constitutional amendment. One was passed with little controversy in July, 1909, unanimously in the Senate and by a vote of 318 to 14 in the House. It quickly was ratified by the states, and in February, 1913, it became a part of the Constitution as the Sixteenth Amendment, as Taft was leaving office. (William Howard Taft16th Amendment; Conservapedia)

 

Taft was considered a do nothing President that caused a split in the Republican Party. The GOP gained the reputation as a Conservative under his aegis and the Republicans considered “Progressive” left to form the Progressive Party-later Bull Moose Party-later dissolving and joining the Democrats. Regardless of Taft’s do-nothing reputation politically his Administration successfully won a huge amount of anti-trust suits. To the modern Conservative, Taft could easily be vilified as the author of Income Tax with the 16th Amendment (Events leading to passage).

 

Woodrow Wilson: 3/4/1913 to 3/4/1921

 

Woodrow Wilson, who served as President from 1913-1921, was an enthusiastic advocate of such an arrangement, stating:

 

“The President is at liberty, both in law and in conscience, to be as big a man as he can. His capacity will set the limit; and if Congress is overborne by him, it will be no fault of the makers of the Constitution … but only because the President has the nation behind him and Congress has not.”

 

 

… To guide society along this path, said Wilson, society needed a “true leader” who could stir the passions of the masses and use them like “tools.” “Men are as clay in the hand of the consummate leader,” he said.

 

Under President Wilson, progressives perfected the art of government propaganda. Wilson appointed the journalist and former muckraker George Creel to head the Committee on Public Information (CPI), the first modern ministry for propaganda in the Western world. Thus empowered, Creel methodically assembled an army of nearly 100,000 “Four Minute Men,” each trained by the CPI to deliver, at a moment’s notice, four-minute propaganda speeches at town meetings or any other public venues where they might be heard. In 1917–18 alone, these operatives delivered some 7.55 million speeches in 5,200 communities.

 

The Espionage Act of June 1917 and the Sedition Act of May 1918 made it illegal, under penalty of imprisonment, to utter any criticism of the government — even in the privacy of one’s own home. The progressives in the Wilson administration confrontationally questioned the patriotism of anyone whose beliefs did not seem to be “100 percent American” – i.e., anyone who was not passionately and unwaveringly pro-Wilson. …

 

 

Also during the Wilson administration, the Postmaster General was authorized to deny mailing privileges to any publication that did not meet with his approval politically; at least 75 periodicals were banned under this regulation. Journalists who printed anything critical of Wilson’s military policies faced the very serious threat of incarceration, or of having their supply of newsprint terminated by the War Industries Board.

 

Wilson’s Justice Department created – again, with large sums of taxpayer dollars – the American Protective League (APL), whose agents functioned as private investigators on behalf of the federal government. Their task was to monitor the activities of their neighbors, co-workers, and friends; to read their neighbors’ mail and listen in on their phone calls, all with the explicit approval of the government. As of 1918, the APL had branches in some 600 cities and a membership in excess of 250,000. The U.S. Assistant Attorney General boasted that America had never been more effectively policed.

All told, during the Wilson years, some 175,000 Americans were arrested for failing to adequately demonstrate their patriotism. All were punished in some way; many were jailed. (READ ENTIRITY – POLICIES OF PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON; Derived from Paul A. Rahe [Progressive Racism] – 4/11/13 and Jonah Goldberg [Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning] – 1/8/08; DTN)

 

The supporter of Barack Obama and my critic of my posts – Gideon Money, would point out this is a “Right Wing” website hence unreliable. The reality is DTN is a well sourced website that Left Wingers hate because the real truth hurts. I should also note that especially after Wilson finally decided to enter WWI he had wide support of the public. It was only after WWI in 1918 that American Conservatives began to reassert themselves in Congress. David Greenberg writing for Slate and posted 12/27/10, concurs with the abuses exposed here, but he can’t help himself by going of the topic of Wilsonian nefariousness by basically saying but hey – Reagan and Bush II did a similar thing that makes them more heinous than Woodrow Wilson. Tom Head (Left Wing bona fides) writing for About.com also agrees with DTN with more of an emphasis on the 1918 Sedition Act. Head brings up the fact that both Acts were passed overwhelmingly by Congress sponsored by Democrats. He also shows that the Supreme Court upheld the Constitutionality of both Acts in which Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Coined the justifying phrase “Clear and Present Danger.” The Espionage Act and thus the connecting Sedition Act were repealed by Congress in 1920 which enabled many violators convicted to be set free from prison.

 

Warren G. Harding: 3/4/1921 to 8/2/1923

 

Harding was a Republican that had success with a Reaganomics-like program of less taxes-less government and higher revenue via economic growth. Ironically list him as one of the worst Presidents in U.S. history. Largely due to a couple of scandals that are not traced to his person but was responsible via choosing horrible greedy administrators who both ended up in jail.

 

Charles Forbes and Veterans’ Bureau Scandal

 

Colonel Charles R. Forbes, a chance acquaintance of Warren Harding, was appointed to head the recently created Veterans’ Bureau. It was later revealed that Forbes entered into corrupt arrangements with a number of contractors, particularly with those involved in the operation of hospitals, and sold government property at a fraction of its value. Charles F. Cramer, attorney for the bureau, committed suicide, which brought increased attention to the agency. In 1923, Forbes resigned his position and fled to Europe.

 

A Senate investigation in 1924 found that Forbes had looted more than $200 million from the government. He was subsequently indicted for bribery and corruption, and was brought back for trial in 1925. He was convicted, fined $10,000 and sentenced to two years in Leavenworth. (Veterans’ Bureau Scandal; United State History)

 

Teapot Dome Scandal

 

Teapot Dome, in U.S. history, oil reserve scandal that began during the administration of President Harding. In 1921, by executive order of the President, control of naval oil reserves at Teapot Dome, Wyo., and at Elk Hills, Calif., was transferred from the Navy Dept. to the Dept. of the Interior. The oil reserves had been set aside for the navy by President Wilson. In 1922, Albert B. Fall, U.S. Secretary of the Interior, leased, without competitive bidding, the Teapot Dome fields to Harry F. Sinclair, an oil operator, and the field at Elk Hills, Calif., to Edward L. Doheny. These transactions became (1922–23) the subject of a Senate investigation conducted by Sen. Thomas J. Walsh. It was found that in 1921, Doheny had lent Fall $100,000, interest-free, and that upon Fall’s retirement as Secretary of the Interior (Mar., 1923) Sinclair also “loaned” him a large amount of money. The investigation led to criminal prosecutions. Fall was indicted for conspiracy and for accepting bribes. Convicted of the latter charge, he was sentenced to a year in prison and fined $100,000. In another trial for bribery Doheny and Sinclair were acquitted, although Sinclair was subsequently sentenced to prison for contempt of the Senate and for employing detectives to shadow members of the jury in his case. The oil fields were restored to the U.S. government through a Supreme Court decision in 1927. (Teapot Dome; Cited Sources – Teapot Dome (1959) by M.R. Werner & J. Starr AND Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. (© 2012); infoplease.com)

 

 

The oil barons [i.e. Harry Sinclair & Edward Doheny] were happy when Wilson left office and Harding—a Republican—was elected in 1920. Many had donated large amounts of money to Harding’s campaign in hope of overturning the conservationist policies of previous administrations. Sinclair himself donated $1 million to Harding’s campaign and became a good friend of the new president. When Sinclair came to Washington, he joined in the White House poker parties and was often invited to stay over night (sic) as Harding’s guest. Doheny had not made a huge donation to Harding’s campaign (he had contributed $25,000), but after the election, he sent congratulatory letters to the president and offered Harding the use of his 375-foot yacht for a post-election vacation cruise.

 

The oil barons’ wishes came true when Harding announced that he had appointed Albert Fall, a former senator from New Mexico, as secretary of the interior. Fall was a rancher, mine owner, and former prospector.

 

He was an “old pal” of Doheny. Fall had hopes that when he left the Cabinet (he planned to stay for only one year) that Doheny would hire him. Fall knew that Doheny had hired the previous secretary of the interior.

 

Fall was also a good friend of Harding, whom he played poker with two or three times a week. When he served in the Senate, Fall had strongly opposed the conservation policies put in place under Presidents Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson. He believed that the government’s land should be placed in the hands of private interests and exploited as soon as possible.

 

Fall wasted no time in helping the oil barons get leases to public lands. One of the first things he did as secretary of the interior was to persuade Harding to transfer authority over the naval reserves from the secretary of the navy to the Department of the Interior. Two months after being inaugurated, Harding signed an executive order putting the reserves in the hands of Secretary Fall.

 

That same month, Fall went to the Kentucky Derby as Sinclair’s guest. He also wrote a letter to his friend Doheny, stating that he had everything worked out with the Department of the Navy. He assured Doheny that he will “conduct the matter of the naval leases under direction of the President” without having to consult with the navy.

 

Many officers in the Navy opposed Harding’s executive order. One admiral complained that if the reserves were turned over to the Interior Department, “we might as well say good-bye to our oil.”

 

 

The first lease, for the California reserves, was negotiated with Doheny in November 1921. Under the terms of the proposed lease, Doheny’s company, Pan-American Petroleum and Transport Company, was to build storage tanks in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, to store oil for the navy, to put crude oil in the tanks, and to pay royalties on the oil drilled from the reserves at a low price. It was a great deal for Doheny. He estimated it would give him a profit of $1 million. In return, Doheny made a “loan” of $100,000 to Fall. On November 28, 1921, three days after Doheny made his offer, his son, Ned Doheny, carried a black satchel containing the $100,000 in cash to Fall’s hotel apartment and watched him count the money.

 

 

The special prosecutors also filed four criminal cases. One charged Fall and Doheny with conspiracy to defraud the United States. Another similar case was against Sinclair and Fall. A third case charged Fall with bribery. And a fourth case charged Doheny and his son Ned with bribery. These cases, which were tried over a period of six years, were less successful. In the conspiracy cases, defense lawyers managed to convince the juries that Doheny and Sinclair had no intent to defraud the United States. The juries accepted the argument that the leases were made to help the navy prepare for war and to protect the country. They found the defendants not guilty. Doheny and his son were also found not guilty of bribery. Only Fall was convicted, for having accepted a bribe while acting in his official capacity. The prosecutors made a strong argument that the evidence showed “the criminal intent of Fall to make money out of his position of trust and honor,” and the jury agreed. Fall was sentenced to a year in jail and to pay a fine of $100,000. His appeal was denied on June 6, 1931, and he was sent to the New Mexico State Penitentiary.

 

* * * * *

As a result of the diligent investigation of the Senate committee and the persistence of the special prosecutors, the rich oil fields at Teapot Dome and in California were recovered and returned to the U.S. Navy. The government collected millions of dollars from Doheny and Sinclair as well as almost $50 million for the oil drilled in its reserves. The Harding administration has remained a symbol of corruption. The Teapot Dome scandal illustrates the dangers that money and corporate power can pose to democratic government. Even the appearance of corrupt influences can erode people’s faith in democracy. (READ ENTIRETY BRIA 24 4 The Teapot Dome Scandal; CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION: Bill of Rights in Action SPRING 2009 (Volume 24, No. 4))

 

Meanwhile, President Harding took a summer trip west, stopping in Wyoming, enjoying Yellowstone and continuing on to Alaska and, eventually, to San Francisco. While there, the President died suddenly. Some historians believe Harding escaped impeachment for his role in Teapot Dome by having the “good fortune” of dying as the scandal was unfolding. Of course, such a conclusion cannot be proven. (Excerpted from: The Teapot Dome Scandal; By Phil Roberts; WyoHistory.org)

 

See Also: Graft and Oil: How Teapot Dome Became the Greatest Political Scandal of Its Time AND The Strange Presidency of Warren G. Harding

 

The scandals in Warren G. Harding’s life is only rivaled by Slick Willie Clinton.

 

 

… good ole Warren was having an illicit affair with not only a young campaign volunteer but there were other women as well. Two of the women were personal friends of his wife Florence, and the campaign volunteer was a young woman named Nan Britton who developed a big honking crush on the President when he was still a mere congressman and was determined to make him hers.

 

… Harding was an unrestrained womanizer. … his wife Florence, known as the Duchess, was the power behind the throne. Five years older than her husband, Florence married Harding against her wealthy father Amos Kling’s wishes. Her first husband had been the ne’er do well son of a wealthy family. As far as Kling was concerned, Harding was cut from the same cloth. But Florence saw a diamond in the rough and was determined to polish him up. Their marriage was a solid business partnership, not a love match. She brought drive and money to the table, and Warren brought her political opportunity.

 

Harding first cheated on Florence three years into the marriage with Susie Hodder, his wife’s best friend since childhood. Then he began a 15 year affair with another friend of the couple Carrie Fulton Phillips. Carrie was blonde and beautiful with the figure of a Gibson girl, tiny waist and a generous bosom. To make it even more complicated, Harding and Carrie’s husband were good friends. The affair started in 1905, a year after Carrie and her husband James lost their young son. James had a nervous breakdown and spent time at Dr. Kellogg’s sanitarium in Battle Creek. While he was a way, the grieving wife was comforted by Harding. Despite their respective marriages, Harding and Carrie found ample time for their trysts. They would sneak away when the two couples took joint vacations to Europe. Once they even managed to meet up in Montreal for New Year’s Eve.

 

Most historians consider Carrie to be the love of his life. More than 100 intimate letters were discovered in the 1960’s but publication of the letters has been enjoined by a court order until 2014. Historians who have seen them say that they are very touching in some ways and also very erotic. The relationship foundered when Carrie developed a passion for all things German, moving to Berlin in 1911, where she may or may not have become a spy for Germany during World War I. At the very least she was outspokenly pro-German. When Harding supported President Wilson’s aggressive response to the sinking of the Lusitania, Carrie was pissed. She threatened to reveal their affair if he voted for war with Germany, but she didn’t go through with her threat. Harding warned Carrie that if she kept it up she faced arrest. Still Carrie was such critic that the Bureau of Investigation put her under surveillance. The Bureau got wind of Harding’s affair but kept silent.

 

After fifteen years, Carrie was tired of being Harding’s mistress, she wanted to be his wife. … While he had no passion for his wife, he did for politics. Carrie had had enough. During the presidential election of 1920, Carrie blackmailed Harding ending up with lump-sum of $25,000 and $2,000 a month for as long as Harding was in politics. She and her husband were also sent on an all expense (sic) paid trip to the Far East courtesy of the Republican party until the election was over.

 

There were minor flings with Augusta Cole, whom Harding impregnated and then forced to have an abortion; Rosa Hoyle, who gave birth to Harding’s illegitimate son; a distraught New York woman who committed suicide when Harding refused to leave his wife. There is also some evidence that Harding may have been responsible for the accidental death of prostitute at one of the many wild parties he hosted. Apparently Hardings (sic) cronies had a secret bank account to buy the silence of his ex-flames.

 

His third mistress Grace Cross had been one of Harding’s secretaries during his senate years, and received a substantial blackmail payment for the return of incredibly sappy and juvenile love letters Harding wrote her. But it was his fourth mistress who was the most infamous, a beautiful blonde named Nan Britton. Britton was a campaign volunteer began sleeping with Harding when she was 20 and he was 51. While other girls pasted photos of movie stars on their walls, Nan plastered his campaign photos on her bedroom walls. Harding and her father were friends, and he knew of her infatuation but pooh-poohed it at the time, insisting that she would meet someone her own age.

 

Harding helped her get a job in the newspaper business, and they began an affair that would last for six years. Nan allegedly lost her virginity to Harding in an (sic) New York hotel room but not before driving him into a frenzy of desire by coyly refusing to sleep with him.  She followed him to Washington when he became a U.S. Senator, allegedly giving birth to a daughter named Elizabeth Ann in 1919 (concieved (sic) during a tryst in the Senate Office building). When Nan told Harding she was pregnant, he offered to pay for an abortion. Nan refused, moving to Chicago with the baby to live with her sister. She saw him secretly during the Republican convention, apparently he spent more time with Nan then he did attending to the business of the nomination. The affair continued even after Harding was in the White House, aided by two Secret Service Agents James Sloan and Walter Ferguson. According to Nan, Florence almost caught them in mid-tryst in one of the cloakrooms in the Oval Office after being tipped off by another agent.

 

 

Some historians believe that Nan Britton’s story of her affair with Harding was nothing but fiction.  There is no hard evidence one way or the other, no surving (sic) love letters.  Both Harding’s relatives and Elizabeth Ann’s descendents (sic) refuse to take a DNA test to prove conclusively one way or the other that Harding was her father.

 

… (Presidential Scandals: The Affairs of Warren G. Harding; By Elizabeth K Mahon; Scandalous Women blog; 2/18/13)

 

If being a moral reprobate wasn’t being bad enough, even in death the scandal was the gift that kept on giving. Due to the obvious yet mysterious cover-up perpetrated by President Harding’s wife Florence, Harding’s death became wrapped in conspiracy theories as to the nature of his demise. The scintillating and the best short version I could find is at the post entitled, “Warren G. Harding: Heart Attack, Stroke, or Murder?” The best breakdown of the conspiracies, what led to them and the aftermath of the death can be found nine chapter post (which obviously begins with chapter one) entitled, “The Strange Life and Death of President Harding”. The latter title gives a decent outline of the conspiracies surrounding Harding’s death:

 

1. Natural Causes?

 

If ever there was a candidate for a heart attack, it was Warren Harding. He lived the fat-filled, tobacco-infused, and alcohol-drenched life of early 20th Century America with gusto.

 

…  a violator of reasonably healthy behavior. His only exercise consisted of desultory rounds of golf, fairly frequent love trysts, and at least twice-weekly marathon poker games. These card games were drenched in highballs, suffused with cigar smoke, and punctuated with copious expectorations of tobacco juice into strategically placed spittoons. While Harding and his cronies played cards and munched on roast beef sandwiches, the Duchess kept the whiskey flowing. These games often ran past one in the morning.

 

 

Dr. Charles Sawyer — Doc Sawyer, as he was known in the Harding family — was a homeopathic physician who believed in herbal preparations, purgatives, laxatives, and other folk remedies. (Harding’s other doctor, a scientifically trained allopathic physician, was Dr. Joel Boone, who was kept at a distance from his famous patient by the jealous and possessive Sawyer.) In brief, Harding’s worsening coronary disease went untreated. (Chapter 6)

 

2. Negligent Homicide?

 

Still, because of his cheerful vigor, Harding’s death came as a surprise. For all of Dr. Boone’s concern, one is left with the impression (derived from Dr. Boone’s diaries and memoirs) that he felt that Harding could have been saved. Even with that hopeful outlook, Boone and the specialists brought into the picture when the ill Harding arrived in San Francisco thought that Sawyer’s treatment of Harding was, at best, contrary to the best medical practice, and, at worst, bizarre.

 

… Sawyer, continuing to mistake Harding’s angina for indigestion, was convinced that its severity was compounded by ptomaine poisoning from “a mess of King Crabs drenched in butter.” Obviously, reasoned Sawyer, he had to purge Harding of the poisons with powerful purgatives. The fact that Harding became weaker and weaker with this treatment did not alarm Sawyer as it had the other three physicians.

 

The agreed upon “cause of death” was a stroke, although only Sawyer appeared to believe that conclusion. The other three doctors, particularly Boone, believed that Harding died from a heart attack. Most likely, the three allopaths agreed to the diagnosis of a stroke to keep Sawyer’s reputation from being damaged by his inept care of the President of the United States.

 

A reasonable conclusion is that Harding was a victim of negligent homicide. … Sawyer, having given Harding another powerful dose of purgative, propelled the president into cardiac arrest.

 

Even if this scenario cannot be proved, it is clear that Sawyer was guilty of horrendous malpractice, both in diagnosis and treatment. It is reasonable to conclude that Harding, who might have died sooner or later from a heart attack, was a victim of negligent homicide. (Chapter 6)

 

3. Suicide?

 

But could Harding have hastened his own end?

 

“I can deal with my enemies. It’s my goddam friends that have me walking the floor at night!” So Warren Harding supposedly told the famous journalist, William Allen White.

 

 

There were times during the Western trip when Harding was visibly depressed. He seemed particularly shaken after a private interview in St. Louis with Fall’s wife. There was a sword above his head, and Harding knew it. He had made a new will just before leaving Washington, executed by his personal attorney, Harry Daugherty. He sold his belovedMarion Star a few weeks before — for a sum far exceeding its worth. His newspaper was to be his place of retirement, his home to go to after his presidency was over. All in all, he seemed to be getting his house in order, anticipating his death.

 

 

While one of the rumors floating around after Harding’s death was that he committed suicide to avoid impeachment and disgrace, there is little likelihood that he was driven to such an act by ingesting poison. It seems an unlikely method to choose to take one’s life, even if he had been clever enough to select a means that would mimic “natural causes.” Harding might have been corruptible, but he was not so clever and devious. (Chapter 6)

 

4. Murder?

 

The specter of murder pervades the characters of the Harding administration. Some of the suicides, notably Jesse Smith, prompted rumors of murder, since the hapless Smith knew too much about the schemes that might have involved Daugherty, bootleggers, grafters, and Harding himself. It is interesting to note that at least five of the principals in this story died suddenly.

 

 

In his book, Means claims that he was on special assignment to Mrs. Harding, who directed him to obtain evidence of Harding’s affair with Nan Britton. … Means was asked to pilfer letters and mementos from Nan Britton, and to deliver them personally to Mrs. Harding. Means recorded her fury over her husband’s infidelity. To add more spice to his account, Means has other revelations about Jesse Smith, Charlie Forbes, and other characters.

 

According to Means, Mrs. Harding had two motives for murdering her husband. The first, and most important, was to protect his reputation from the looming scandals by killing him when he was at the height of his popularity. She could not allow him to be disgraced. His death, she reasoned, would remove him from the tawdry malefactions of his subordinates.

 

The second motive was revenge, prompted by her jealousy over Nan Britton, who had, she claimed, given birth to Harding’s daughter. The betrayal wounded her so deeply that she could not allow her beloved Warren to live.

 

As Means’ potboiler of a book steams to its conclusion, Mrs. Harding more or less admits that she poisoned her husband, almost as an act of charity.

 

…  Most of these murder plots revolved around some idea that Harding had to be silenced, lest he implicate, punish, or otherwise demolish the careers of the grafters.

 

But this was different. Florence Harding had been dead for some six years at the time of the publication of Means’ book — she had died a little more than a year after her husband — and was, of course, not able to defend herself. As it turned out, there was little need for a defense, since Means, recently released from a federal prison in Atlanta after serving a sentence of two years for graft, was not a very credible witness.

 

…  Means was shown to be a fraud, convicted [Editor: pertaining to another American tragedy viz. the Lindbergh baby kidnapping], and spent the rest of his life in prison, where he died in 1939.

 

… the protection of her husband’s reputation was important to her. Her burning much of her husband’s papers immediately after his death evidences this. … (Chapter 6)

 

All nine chapters are an excellent read on Harding’s mysterious death.

 

JRH 8/7/14

Please Support NCCR

 

Overcome Political Realism with Grassroots Conservatism


Face of Obama - Impeach Him

IMPEACH OBAMA!

 

John R. Houk

© July 22, 2017

 

Brent Smith has written an article that is correctly critical of Speaker John Boehner and the GOP Establishment leadership for brushing off calls for President Barack Hussein Obama’s impeachment.

 

Too many Republicans from both Conservatives and GOP Establishment withstand calls for impeachment out of what I can call political realism. The thinking runs something like this: Even if the House of Representatives currently under a GOP majority serves articles of impeachment with a simple majority, the Constitution states that two-thirds of the members of the Senate are needed to convict and remove from Office. (See Standards for Impeachment) That 2/3 today is sixty Senators. Realists believe even with a majority win in the 2014 election it would be doubtful that there would be 60 Republican Senators. And it is a decent guess that if a miracle occurs and the Senate session beginning after the 2014 reaches at least 60 Senators, that are probably enough RINOs to thwart a conviction of President Barack Hussein Obama.

 

Despite the logical arguments of the political Realists I say PHOOEY!

 

Admittedly I felt Barack Obama had a Socialist Transformative agenda to end the Constitutional America as we know it which includes throwing Biblical Christian values into irrelevance from the beginning of the rise of his popularity in the 2008 election cycle. NONETHELESS, for we Americans that want to see accountability from an elected official rather than see how political realism plays out. Beginning impeachment proceedings NOW we the people will see just who in the House stands for accountability and who stands for political realism. The 2014 election cycle will then give constituents an actual voice about their Representative in the House. If constituents vote for a candidate or incumbent that maintains the political realist status quo, then they deserve the future Left Wing despotism that will gain deeper roots resulting from Obama transformatism (See Time [Leftist Vision], Education Brainwashing, OBAMA FORCED A CHANGE NOT WANTED and The Godless Left And Social Justice).

 

If a majority of the House votes to impeach the President, at this point it would probably be the 2015 Senate installed in January that decides to keep or boot President Barack Hussein Obama out of Office. I am praying if a GOP led Senate fails to remove Obama from Office, then more voters will wake-up to the dysfunction of reality politics by insuring a Conservative GOP election of President and a super majority in both the House and Senate in 2016. Impeachment proceedings will make this the true political reality. In this case there is a difference between verified reality and predictive realism.

 

Ben Smith’s article calling for Obama’s impeachment is a growing Conservative grassroots movement to counter the squeamishness of political realism.

 

JRH 7/22/14 (Hat Tip: MinutemenNews.com)

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

No to Impeachment – Yes to Lawsuit

 

By Ben (Smith) the Common Constitutionalist

July 21, 2014

The Common Constitutionalist

 

Recently, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, little Johnny Boehner, proclaimed that, “Every member of Congress swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. So did Pres. Obama. But too often over the past five years, the president has circumvented the American people and their elected representatives through executive action, changing and creating his own laws, and excusing himself from the forcing statutes he is sworn to uphold – at times even boasting about his willingness to do it, as if daring the American people to stop him.”

 

“That’s why, later this month, we will bring legislation to the House floor that would authorize the House of Representatives to file suit in an effort to compel president Obama to follow his oath of office and faithfully execute the laws of our country.”

 

Boehner’s statement was in direct response to Obama’s “So Sue Me” statement to Congress. In other words, Obama will do whatever he darn well pleases, and if you don’t like it – tough toenails for you.

 

He didn’t, nor does anyone else using that phrase, mean to actually sue him. Maybe he did.

 

Boehner says he’s disappointed in “the president’s flippant dismissal of the Constitution we are both sworn to defend…”

 

He’s disappointed? That’s it? Not outraged at the president who is breaking the law on a regular basis, and consistently acting anti-constitutionally?

 

There is a method of redress you know, Johnny. It’s written right in that Constitution you swore to defend but probably haven’t read. It’s called impeachment and I guarantee if this were Bush thumbing his nose at a Democrat Congress, articles would have been drawn up long ago – and rightly so. I would certainly support it, whoever is in office.

 

No official is above the Constitution. No – not even Ronaldus Magnus (Ronald Reagan).

 

So why file a lawsuit? Why not impeachment? A few reasons, in my opinion.

 

First, little Johnny would feel the need to garner “public support” for impeachment which is not required and wholly unnecessary. But we all know he is too cowardly to actually “do his job” without first getting approval. There was almost no support to impeach Nixon before the process began – neither public nor congressional.

 

Second: assuming Congress has legal “standing” or authority in the eyes of the court to even file a lawsuit – it would drag on potentially for years and accomplish exactly nothing – except for spineless Republicans to claim their at least “trying” to stop this “lawless” president. It’s great cover for the lily livered establishment, and they know it.

 

I haven’t heard this theory, but I’ll just throw it out there. Finally and most importantly is the built-in excuse of no longer having to answer any questions.

 

Let me put it a better way. You know – whenever there is a major court case or major lawsuit being litigated – what do the parties always say when asked about the case? “I’m sorry, I can’t discuss that, I can’t comment on an ongoing case. I’d like to comment – but I can’t.”

 

Wow! What better way for both sides to just give the finger to all of us demanding that something be done about Obama.

 

Reporter: “Mr. Boehner – what are you going to do to stop the president’s open border lawlessness?” Boehner: I’m sorry, but that’s part of an ongoing lawsuit. You know I can’t discuss it. Sure wish I could though.”

 

Voilà! Problem solved for the establishment! No more questions – no more scrutiny!

 

Also, once a lawsuit is filed, Congress can wash its hands of it. Their attorneys, being well paid by us rubes, will handle the heavy lifting, as it were. Spineless congressional leaders get a free pass – they don’t have to do anything or say anything.

 

It’s a win-win!

____________________________

Overcome Political Realism with Grassroots Conservatism

John R. Houk

© July 22, 2017

___________________________

No to Impeachment – Yes to Lawsuit

 

About Page

 

The Common Constitutionalist is unique in that it offers not just conservative commentary and analysis from myself and others, but a blend of politics, history, arts, science and humor. Who ever said conservatives aren’t funny? Yeah, I know…most people. He is a contributing writer for Political Outcast and Godfather Politics.

 

Take a look at some of the more popular political articles such as: Newt is Not a Conservative or Manifesto, Then and Now. Perhaps a history article such as: The Great Depression.

 

Although I’m not a scientist, an artist, nor a photographer, all these topics interest me. Here are a few of the most viewed examples: The Hulk Protein, Rare Photos, Rolling Stones, Don’t Try This at Home

 

© 2014 The Common Constitutionalist

The Imperial President


Obama Jesus Self-Portrait

Mark Alexander points out that even Left Wing Constitutional academics are saying President Barack Hussein Obama has crossed the Constitutional line.

 

JRH 7/18/17

Please Support NCCR

************************************

The Imperial President

The Rule of Outlaws

 

By Mark Alexander

Jul. 16, 2014

The Patriot Post

 

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.” –Declaration of Independence (1776)

 

According to a source within the Secret Service, Barack Obama refers to himself as “The Bear” when diverting from a planned security route for “meet and greet photo ops.” He announces such departures by saying, “The bear is loose!”

 

Now, I’m sure it’s only coincidence that “The Bear” is also the mascot of the former Soviet Union, and now the Russian Federation. While it would be more fitting if Obama referred to himself as “The Red Squirrel,” his wishful “bear” reference certainly reflects the tyrannical “rule of lawlessness” that now defines his presidential modus operandi. Obamas administration is now defined by his litany of lies and legacy of scandals, most notably this incomplete list of ignominy: The failure of his so-called “economic recovery plan, his unparalleled foreign policy malfeasance, his ”Fast and Furious“ gun control play, his long list of ObamaCare lies, his IRS Enemies List, the dramatic resurgence of al-Qa’ida, the Benghazi cover-up to protect his 2012 re-election bid, his hollow ”Red Line“ threat to Syria, the ”Russian Spring“ in Crimea, the Middle East meltdown in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Jordan and Israel, the disintegration of Iraq, and now, of course, the VA death panels cover-up and the immigration crisis on our southern border.

 

He has certainly earned the public opinion title of ”worst president since WWII,“ which has negated the smidgeon of good faith he once held with congressional Republicans, and also most of that extended him by all but the most leftwing congressional Democrats.

 

So what’s Obama to do?

 

Having lost control of the House in 2010 and having failed to recover it in 2012, and the pending threat of losing Democrat control of the Senate, Obama has launched, in earnest, a campaign to completely bypass Congress through executive and regulatory diktat, a bold and lawless endeavor unmatched in its unconstitutional offense, except perhaps by Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s despotic regime.

 

The range of his executive and regulatory edicts has been very broad, from 19 executive orders constricting Second Amendment rights, to regulations supporting his “war on coal” and avoiding the Keystone XL pipeline.

 

But the most notable abuses have included his repeated rewrites of the so-called ”Affordable Care Act,” in order that it not wound the re-election campaigns of his congressional Democrats.

 

Now, Obama is increasingly audacious in the exercise of these unlegislated diktats.

 

In November of last year, he pretended to be constrained by law in acting on immigration reform, saying, “If, in fact, I could solve all these problems without passing this through Congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws. That’s part of our tradition.”

 

But a few months later, Obama proclaimed, “Where Congress isn’t acting, I’ll act on my own.” He complained that “we can’t wait” for Congress, and bragged that he’s “getting things done” by disregarding Rule of Law and the separation of powers set forth in our Constitution.

 

“[W]e are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need,” he brazenly declared. “I’ve got a pen … and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward.”

 

These are the words of a despot, and now define Obama’s standard operating procedure, whether secretly ordering the “Taliban Five” terrorist trade for an Army deserter, or choking the economy with his executive and regulatory orders, ostensibly to halt “global warming.”

 

Comment | Share

 

Though Obama claims to be a “professor of constitutional law,” a genuine constitutional scholar, George Washington University’s Jonathan Turley, a self-acknowledged liberal Obama supporter, has offered severe criticism of Obama’s abuse of executive orders and regulations to bypass Congress.

 

According to Turley, “I think that he has crossed the constitutional line. … When the president went to Congress and said he would go it alone, it obviously raises a concern. There’s no license for going it alone in our system, and what he’s done, is very problematic. He’s told agencies not to enforce some laws [and] has effectively rewritten laws through the active interpretation that I find very problematic.”

 

“What’s emerging,” Turley notes, “is an imperial presidency, an über presidency, as I’ve called it. … Obama has repeatedly violated this [separation of powers] doctrine in the circumvention of Congress in areas ranging from health care to immigration law to environmental law. We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis with sweeping implications for our system of government. … We are now at the constitutional tipping point for our system.”

 

Reread those words for their full effect…

 

In his 1973 volume, “The Imperial Presidency,” noted liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger, a key adviser to John F. Kennedy, outlined the extreme danger to Liberty posed by lawless executive overreach. At that time, his focus was on Richard Nixon, but his warnings, like those of Turley, have far more application to Barack Obama.

 

So, with 30 more months of Obama’s escalating assault on Liberty, what now? Make no mistake – this “lame duck” is anything but.

 

Turley advises, “If balance is to be reestablished, it must begin before [Obama] leaves office, and that will likely require every possible means to reassert legislative authority. No one in our system can ‘go it alone’ – not Congress, not the courts, and not the President.”

 

As the ever-erudite Dr. Charles Krauthammer notes, “[Obama’s] gross executive usurpation disdains the Constitution. It mocks the separation of powers. And most consequentially, it introduces a fatal instability into law itself. If the law is not what is plainly written, but is whatever the president and his agents decide, what’s left of the law? … This president is not only untroubled by what he’s doing, but open and rather proud. As he tells cheering crowds on his never-ending campaign-style tours: ‘I am going to do X – and I’m not going to wait for Congress.’ That’s caudillo talk. That’s banana republic stuff. In this country, the president is required to win the consent of Congress first. At stake is not some constitutional curlicue. At stake is whether the laws are the law. And whether presidents get to write their own.”

 

Of course, I think the good doctor would agree, given his sterling psychiatric credentials, that the rise of Obama’s imperial presidency was entirely predictable, given that he is a textbook case study in Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

 

Speaking in Texas last week, Obama’s egomaniacal arrogance shined through with his lavish first-person references – “I,” “me” and “my” (199 times in all) – when outlining upcoming plans to unilaterally dictate “immigration reform” and additional “economic measures.”

 

This week, he made clear his intent to unilaterally advance his populist “class warfare agenda” to “help working Americans … when Congress won’t act.” In his latest weekly address, Obama insisted, “So far this year, Republicans in Congress have blocked every serious idea to strengthen the middle class.”

 

That lie earned him a stern rebuke from even The Washington Post’s Fact Checker, as did his earlier claim that Republicans “have filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation that would help the middle class,” about which The Post concluded, “On just about every level, this claim is ridiculous.” But for Obama’s sycophantic legions of useful idiots, fiction trumps fact.

 

So what can Republicans do?

 

Plenty, if they are willing to fight fire with fire, and they better start igniting those precedents now. It’s going to take more than a threat of a lawsuit from House Speaker John Boehner.

 

House Republicans can use their control of the budget to defund enactment and enforcement of Obama’s lawless orders and regulations. Indeed, if they fail to do so, then they violate their own oaths “to Support and Defend” our Constitution, and Rule of Law becomes gravely imperiled by rule of men.

 

Comment | Share

 

Of course, if Republicans don’t act, and we continue racing down this imperialist path to tyranny, there are tens of millions of American Patriots who understand our options.

 

Having recently celebrated Independence Day, I invite you to re-read the Declaration of Independence. This remarkable treatise on Liberty as “endowed by our Creator” addressed an imperial executive who willfully violated that endowment “which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitled” all people.

 

Our Founders outlined the “injuries and usurpations” committed by the executive, “all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” They noted, “He has refused his Assent to Laws … He has obstructed the Administration of Justice … He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass (sic) our people, and eat out their substance.”

 

There are undeniable parallels between the imperial powers which gave rise to the American Revolution and the imperial presidency which now threatens the Liberty our Founders, and generations of American Patriots since, have defended with their “lives, fortunes and sacred honor.”

 

Obama now jokes about his lawlessness: “It is lonely, me just doing stuff. … I’m just telling the truth now. I don’t have to run for office again, so I can just let her rip.”

 

In other words, short of rigorous intervention by Congress, this gets much worse before it gets any better.

 

Pro Deo et Constitutione – Libertas aut Mors
Semper Fortis Vigilate Paratus et Fidelis

 

_____________________________

*PUBLIUS*

 

The Patriot Post is protected speech pursuant to the “unalienable rights” of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. Copyright © 2014 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

 

REPRINTING, FORWARDING AND POSTING: Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: “The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/)”

 

Your Patriot Post team of editors and staff depend entirely on the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you. We are not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we do not accept advertising. Thank you for standing with us!

 

Please fill out the form below or click here to donate by mail.

Demand Congress Appoint An Independent Special Counsel To Investigate The IRS!


Lerner Destroys Hard Drive - 5th Amendment toon

Do you think the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Obama Administration is lying about the odd disappearance of Lois Lerner’s emails pertaining to illegal political attacks on Conservatives and various Tea Party organizations? Mat Staver believes so. Rep. Darrell Issa believes so. AND I believe so! IF YOU BELIEVE SO us the link and sign the petition by going to the link below.

 

JRH 6/23/14

Please Support NCCR

******************************

Demand Congress Appoint An Independent Special Counsel To Investigate The IRS!

 

By LC STAFF

June 20, 2014 7:54 pm

Liberty Counsel

 

The Internal Revenue Service’s and the Obama administration’s stalling and obstruction of a congressional investigation have gone on long enough. The IRS’ latest “dog ate my homework” excuse for losing 27 months of ex-official Lois Lerner’s emails is as unacceptable as it is unbelievable. The dates of these “lost” emails correspond exactly with the period when the illegal IRS targeting of conservative groups was at its worst.

 

Make your voice heard by signing the national petition below that calls on Congress to appoint an independent special counsel to fully investigate illegal IRS targeting. Politicizing a federal agency in an attempt to silence opposing voices, especially during a presidential election, is not only unconstitutional — it’s un-American and violates everything our nation stands for! Take action with thousands of other Liberty Counsel Action friends by demand that lawmakers on Capitol Hill get to the bottom of the IRS targeting scandal. Call on Congress to immediately appoint an independent special counsel!

 

The petition states: READ THE REST and COMPLETE THE PETITION

 

__________________________

Derived from Liberty Counsel Action Alert

 

Rep. Issa: “I believe Lois Lerner is hiding something”

 

Sent by Mathew Staver

Sent: June 23, 2014 3:49 PM

Liberty Counsel

 

Email Excerpt:

 

In an interview with FOX News this morning, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) said flatly, “I believe Lois Lerner is hiding something.” He also wondered why, if specific emails were important enough to store on her hard drive, she wouldn’t have back-up copies of her “crashed” files.

 

Rep. Issa even went so far as to suggest that the Justice Department and the White House have an interest in keeping ex-IRS official Lois Lerner’s “lost” emails hidden.

 

At 7:00 p.m. Eastern time, IRS commissioner John Koskinen will face tough questions from Issa and other members of the House Oversight Committee. If tonight’s hearing is anything like Koskinen’s Friday appearance before the House Ways and Means Committee, a national “primetime” audience could be in for some intense political fireworks.

________________________

Donate to Liberty Counsel

 

Palin Paraphrased – Obama is a Tyrant, Impeach Him


60153071

 

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2014

 

I just posted “The House should Investigate and Subpoena Obama Administration to the Hilt”. In that post I go over the plus and minus of impeaching President Barack Hussein Obama. I could have started with any one of the scandals of questionable illegal behavior of Obama’s leadership. Since I received a CCC email showing how the President knew Benghazi was a pre-planned Islamic terrorist attack I began there.

 

Right after I began sifting through my email I came to a TeaParty.org email talking of a Sarah Palin post on her Facebook page on Friday the 13th (I wonder if she realized the irony of the date). TeaParty.org cross posted a Breibart.com and written by Tony Lee.

 

In the Tony Lee report I found the Facebook link to Sarah Palin’s page which she excoriated both Democrats and Republicans for the horrid conditions of the illegal immigrant children warehoused in an Arizona detention facility like sardines.

 

Palin’s excoriation of Democrats and Republicans was really the launching pad for calling on voters to throw out Democrats and Republicans alike who frozen immigration reform and MOST OF ALL President Hussein Obama for ignoring immigration law as it is currently on the books of law. In paraphrasing Palin she calls Congress a load of cowards afraid to confront Obama’s law breaking with impeachment proceedings. The implication being the voters can make a difference in Congress’ backbone to impeach the tyrant Obama for his continued illegal behavior.

 

JRH 6/15/14

Please Support NCCR

************************************

Since it Takes a Village to Stop Amnesty Abuse of Children

 

By Sarah Palin

June 13 at 12:11pm

Sarah Palin Facebook Page

 

Dear Humanitarians, Since it Takes a Village to Stop Amnesty Abuse of Children, Join Me

 

“It’s for the children!”

 

“This is a humanitarian crisis!”

 

Finally, they have won me over. I actually agree with the liberals’ war whoop. I, too, demand that this issue of young illegal aliens flooding across our border into horrendous conditions be taken care of. Now! Uncompassionate people, wake up! Though it’s claimed by Democrats ad nauseam to justify more spending to pile on our $17 trillion debt, and it’s applied to every single “crisis” their policies conjure up, and no matter the cause you’re labeled a racist if you disagree with their policies, well, this time it really IS for the children.

 

I say this as a mother – a bleeding-heart compassionate woman and mother. I say, how dare anyone turn a blind eye and further harden your horrid heart when you see these pictures snuck out of the innocent children’s holding pens – snuck out because our government is censoring images released. It must be my (former) friends in the GOP ordering this censorship because Democrat leadership knows better than to EVER spy on or censor the press; they’d NEVER infringe on the First Amendment. So, for shame, Republicans.

 

These thousands of hungry, innocent children rushing in through Mexico are just the tip of the Sedona Red Rocks (granted, some of these illegals are 18-year-old men whom you wouldn’t want to mess with, but, still, according to Obamacare we now dub young adults “children” until they’re 26, so…). Expect to see hundreds of thousands of another country’s children walk right through our welcoming open border, counting on America’s families to render all aid. We owe it to ourselves to be prepared – so, work even harder, working class, while our President uses his trustworthy discernment to redistribute your paycheck, because it IS for the children, after all. And it takes a village, don’t you know?

 

These victims are brought here (by SOMEONE in authority in their own countries) facing sweltering 110-degree Arizona heat, illness, unsanitary conditions with unbelievable hygiene issues, Texan food the kids don’t like because it’s too foreign to them, and possibly sexual exploitation. By any definition, this is child abuse!

 

We cannot ignore this, and to do so proves you are heartlessly oblivious to the plight of those who, though not willing and able to follow rules or our laws, are expecting a free pass and handout anyway. As a Christian I find it unforgivable to ignore this issue of overrunning border security into these conditions in southern states, and this one issue is just about driving me to renounce my Republican ties because, see, even leaders on the RIGHT side of the aisle haven’t exerted all Constitutional power to stop the madness. A few have tried, but until they’re sent reinforcements, then atrocities like the child abuse and exploitation you’re now getting wind of will only get worse.

 

It’s already hard to recognize our once exceptional nation amidst the neglect of this issue of children used as political pawns. Can you imagine this disregard for child safety happening even a short decade ago? The press would have had none of it, and they’d shine light on what the underlying problem is. They’d report that it’s not the innocent babes’ fault, would attempt to get to the bottom of it, and then finally they’d blame Bush. Today, that approach is ignored. They just blame Bush. There is a loud and aggressive invitation to illegals of all ages and from all countries to “kick off your shoes and come on in!” Now that’s Southern Hospitality! It’s sent by foreign leaders and our own. C’mon, with all the free stuff we can supply everyone, how can anyone turn this down? Government will have to grow enormously to accommodate this influx, and services and care will inevitably have to be rationed, but like we teach our children – we’re all better off being disciplined! And isn’t sharing our resources okay as long as we have trustworthy, compassionate career politicians in charge of the nation’s priorities? Remember, our Republic has been blessed because we committed to nurture a caring, compassionate, pro-child, law abiding citizenry. And because of those mores, it’s unconscionable to take any more of this chaos and crisis. I say, enough is enough. This issue of the children MUST be addressed.

 

So, GOP and Democrats alike, where are you on this humanitarian issue of child abuse?

 

Hang on to your hat, because here’s the issue: Barack Obama has orchestrated this newest “crisis” in order to overload the system with the intention of “fixing” the problems his own policies create – by fiat, and that infamous phone and pen; screw the rule of law. He’s warned you by proudly claiming his executive orders can bypass the peoples’ representatives and obviously ignore the will of the people.

 

This exploitation of foreigners’ children is an inhumane ploy to entice families to break laws by literally shoving kids across one of Obama’s infamous and irrelevant lines, with assurance that parents, aunties, step-uncles and third cousins twice removed will get to cut in line too – that sacred line that previously led law abiding, hardworking immigrants to build this great nation. Barack Obama will keep phoning in and penning the message that he will NOT secure borders, so, hey, extended undocumented relatives, you’re free to join the kids being used and abused to snag that golden ticket. Obama surely knows a nation is not a nation without borders, while we must surely know this is the “fundamental transformation of America” that he promised and some of us warned about.

 

Congress and American voters, how long will you let Team Obama get away with this? The recent avalanche of devastating crises caused by a president believing he is above the law has set the most dangerous precedent a once-free people can imagine. To encourage and reward lawlessness by refusing to enforce the will of the people as proven by laws passed by our political representatives is the signature of a tyrant. In this case, Obama’s refusal to enforce immigration laws and his blatant suggestion that his chosen illegal activity will be rewarded are proof of his tyrannical tactics. The recent numerous manipulated “crises” have the media pinging and ponging trying to keep up with what is the scandal of the day, which one overshadows another, and how will they distract next, and who’s on first?! Purposeful decisions causing these crises are meant to overload the system, justify abuse of executive power to “fix” it all, and ultimately tighten control of the people.

 

So, how much more will you take, Congress and We the People? I sense not enough guts in D.C. to file impeachment charges against Team Obama for their countless documented illegalities, so the way to stop this is at the ballot box. To fundamentally restore America to her destined exceptionalism you must get involved and then get to that box. Use YOUR phone and pen to support conservative candidates who will fight for what is right: Constitutionally protected freedom, respected military, free markets to create jobs, and secured borders to protect jobs! We need your help to do this; it takes more than a village to fortify the homeland. ANYONE associated with support for Obama’s deceptive ploys that would stoop to using and abusing innocent children must be voted out of office. ANYONE who has shined the boot that Obama’s put on the neck of our economy and security must be held accountable by those with the legal power to do so – Congress. And then We the People hold Congress accountable. Do not vote for any politician who has gone wobbly on their commitment to respect the will of the people and to fight to defend our Constitution. This wishy-washy status quo has got to go.

 

It IS for the children.

 

– Sarah Palin

 

P.S. I see that HHS is offering a $350 million grant to provide “family planning services” to the children here illegally. The primary expenditure we need to supply in this humanitarian crisis is jet fuel to fly these children back home to their parents.

 

Photo credit: Brandon Darby of Breitbart Texas. Way to go, Brandon, for bringing this story to the nation’s attention!

Illegal Immigrant children packed like sardines

__________________________

Palin Paraphrased – Obama is a Tyrant, Impeach Him

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2014

________________________

Since it Takes a Village to Stop Amnesty Abuse of Children

 

Blog Editor: Palin is the female version Ronald Reagan. For years Reagan was put down by liberals and Establishment Republicans as too dumb and too hawkish to become President. History points out that President Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents in American history. It is ironic that Sarah Palin is excoriated in similar fashion today as President Reagan was in years’ past.

 

This is me praying that Sarah Palin runs for public office again. There has been a draft Palin for Senate push going on and I would be extremely gratified if she ran for President in 2016.

 

So check out Palin’s efforts at Sarah PAC and perhaps throw some support her way by donating to her Political Action Committee.

Time for consequences


Rd Map To Peace Farce toon

Blog Editor Introduction to Glick’s “Time for consequences”

Blog Editor: John R. Houk

4/28/14

(The intro is in no way associated with the Glick’s original essay.)

 

Hamas and Islamic Jihad (aka Palestine Islamic Jihad or PIJ) are both on the U.S. government terrorist list. Which translate to the fact their leadership then are war criminals. A couple of weeks ago Mahmoud Abbas signed a bunch of international protocols as if the Palestinian Authority (PA) was a sovereign nation. The PA is not a sovereign nation. The PA is an autonomous governing body legitimized by the Oslo Accords which was supposed to build a situation between the Jewish State of Israel and the PA of agreed upon building blocks that would lead to a sovereign Palestinian State. The problem has been Israel has given and given while the PA has refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish State, uses their Media and schools to inculcate Jew-hatred and demands that Jerusalem – Israel’s Capital City – should be split back to pre-1967 when the so-called West Bank was part of sovereign Jordan and that portion of the Jerusalem become a Palestinian State Capital City. Oh yes we can add to the PA demand of flooding descendants of refugees that were told to flee the new Jewish State while about 5 or 6 invading armies made an effort to drive Jews into the sea make the Jewish land all Muslim controlled. Of course all of the PA demands are unworkable for Israel to remain a secure nation. It would set up Israel for a combined Palestinian State invasion undoubted coupled with the military of other Jew-hating nations to again drive Jews into the sea and initiate yet another Holocaust. (By the way starting at sunset on 4/27/14 and lasting through sunset on 4/28/14 is Holocaust Memorial Day – aka Yom HaShoah)

 

Abbas’ signing of those international protocols was yet another breach of the Oslo Accords. Just to place the icing on the duplicitous PA intentions Mahmoud Abbas has signed a unity agreement with both the Islamic terrorist organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Caroline Glick points that Abbas’s unity agreement and the signing of the international accords (like the Geneva Convention) immediately turns the PA and its new partners into war criminals. Do you think Obama will disdain the PA and Abbas in the Quartet-Israel-PA peace negotiations?

 

JRH 4/28/14

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Time for consequences

 

By Caroline Glick

April 25th, 2014

CarolineGlick.com

 

It’s hard not to admire Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s brazenness.

 

Two weeks ago, Abbas signed on to 15 international agreements that among other things require the PA to respect human rights and punish war criminals.

 

And this week, he signed a unity deal with two genocidal terror groups all of whose leaders are war criminals. Every leader of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the two parties that signed the deal with the PLO, are war criminals. Under the Geneva Conventions, which Abbas signed onto just a couple of weeks ago, he is required to put them on trial, for their war crimes.

 

Here it is worth noting that under the Geneva Conventions, every single rocket launch from Gaza into Israeli territory is a separate war crime.

 

Abbas was only able to sign the Geneva Conventions on the one hand, and the unity deal with terrorist war criminals on the other, because he is utterly convinced that neither the US nor the European Union will hold him accountable for his actions. He is completely certain that neither the Americans nor the Europeans are serious about their professed commitments to upholding international law.

 

Abbas is sure that for both the Obama administration and the EU, maintaining support for the PLO far outweighs any concern they have for abiding by the law of nations. He believes this because he has watched them make excuses for the PLO and its leaders for the past two decades.

 

When it comes to the Palestinians, the Western powers are always perfectly willing to throw out their allegiance to law – international law and their domestic statutes – to continue supporting the PLO in the name of a peace process, which by now, everyone understands is entirely fictional.

 

Why do they do this?

 

They do it because the peace process gives them a way to ignore and wish away the pathologies of the Islamic and Arab world.

 

The peace process is predicated on the notion that all those pathologies are Israel’s fault. If Israel would just surrender Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians, then the Arabs writ large, and the Muslim world as a whole will cast aside their support for jihad and terrorism and everything will be fine.

 

 
At least that is how Abbas analyzes the situation.

 

And so far, the US has not disappointed him.

 

The Obama administration’s immediate response to Abbas’s unity with terrorist war criminals deal involved pretending it didn’t understand what had just happened.

 

In a press briefing on Wednesday, shortly after Hamas war criminal Ismail Haniyeh signed the deal with Fatah and Islamic Jihad, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki acknowledged that the deal is bad for the peace process. But she wasn’t willing to reach the inevitable conclusion.

 

Rather, she averred, idiotically, “I think the ball, at this point, is in the Palestinians’ court to answer questions to whether this reconciliation meets the US’s long-standing principles.”

 

Two days before the unity deal, a reporter from Al-Monitor asked Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar if Hamas has given up terrorism.

 

Zahar responded, “Anyone who claims so must be drunk. How has Hamas abandoned the resistance [that is, terrorist] effort? What are the manifestations of it doing so? Where have we prevented the launching of rockets?” No ambiguity whatsoever there.

 

And Abbas just signed a deal Hamas, and with Islamic Jihad, the official representative of the Iranian mullahs in the Palestinian war criminal lineup.

 

No ambiguity there, either.

 

If the US is willfully blind to who the Palestinians are, what they are doing, and what they stand for, the Europeans are so committed to the Palestinians that they invented an imaginary world where international law protects war criminals and castigates their Jewish victims as international outlaws.

 

In the EU’s view, Hamas is an attractive organization.

 

During a meeting with Abbas last October, Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign policy chief, urged Abbas to sign a unity deal with Hamas. A statement from her office read that she views reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas “as an important element for the unity of a future Palestinian state and for reaching a twostate solution.”

 

And while unity between terrorist factions is something that Ashton considers conducive to peace, in her view, Jewish presence in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria is tantamount to a war crime.

 

In a statement released by her office last week, after Baruch Mizrahi was murdered by Palestinian terrorists while driving in his family car, with his wife and young children, to a Passover Seder, Ashton gave no more than a perfunctory condemnation of the war crime.

 

 
Four-fifths of her statement involved condemning Israel for respecting Jewish property rights and the rules of due process and international law in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria.

 

In the EU’s imaginary world, being in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem while Jewish is a war crime. Murdering Jews is merely impolite.

 

The deal signed on Wednesday is the fourth unity deal Fatah has signed with Hamas. After the first one was signed in 2007, the so-called Middle East Quartet, which includes the US, the EU, the UN and Russia, issued three conditions for accepting the unity government: Hamas has to recognize Israel’s right to exist, abjure terrorism and accept the legitimacy of the previous agreements signed by the PLO with Israel.

 

As Zahar and every other Hamas leader has made clear repeatedly, these conditions will never be met.

 

But regardless of how Hamas views them, in and of themselves the Quartet’s conditions are deeply problematic. They themselves constitute a breach of international law.

 

The Quartet’s conditions assert that if Hamas and Islamic Jihad agree to them, they will be accorded the same legitimacy as the PLO. In other words, the Quartet members have committed themselves to granting immunity from prosecution for war crimes to all Palestinian terrorists.

 

Providing such immunity is arguably a breach of international law. And it exposes a profound and irrational dependence on the mythical peace process on the part of Western policy-makers.

 

Reacting to this week’s unity deal, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett said, “The agreement between Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad brings the Middle East to a new diplomatic era. The Palestinian Authority turned into the largest terrorist organization in the world, 20 minutes from Tel Aviv.”

 

And under international law, including the agreements that Abbas acceded to just two weeks ago, Bennett is absolutely right.

 

Apologists for Abbas note that this week’s deal is as unlikely as all its predecessors to be implemented.

 

But even if they are right this doesn’t mean that Abbas’s repeated practice of signing unity deals with war criminals should be cast aside as insignificant.

 

They expose the lie at the heart of the peace process. The time has come to call things by their names.

 

Abbas is a terrorist and the PA is a terrorist organization.

 

In light of this incontrovertible fact, the time has come to treat the PA in accordance with international law.

 

Perhaps shocked by Abbas’s behavior, perhaps overwhelmed by the serial failure of every one of its foreign policies, the administration acknowledged that Israel can’t be expected to negotiate with a government that doesn’t accept its right to exist.

 

Administration officials even said that the US would have to revisit its relationship with the PA in light of the agreement with Hamas.

 

No doubt, the administration is convinced that it can revert to form and ignore reality once again the moment the smoke as cleared. But whatever its intentions, the administration’s acknowledgment of Abbas’s bad faith opens the door to action by both Israel and the US Congress.

 

The Israeli government and the US Congress should take the steps necessary to bring their national policies toward the Palestinians into accordance with the law of nations.

 

On Thursday, the security cabinet rightly decided to end negotiations with the PA. But this cannot be the end of the line. Israel must also stop all financial transfers to the PA.

 

Just as critically, Israel must stop cooperating with PA security forces in Judea and Samaria.

 

It must end its support for US training of those forces and call for the US to end its mission to assist PA security forces.

 

 

Israel must begin arresting and prosecuting Palestinian officials who incite for the murder of Jews, and charge them with solicitation of murder.

 

The government should assist Israeli citizens in submitting war crimes complaints against Palestinian officials and the PA generally at international tribunals for their involvement in war crimes, including their incitement of genocide.

 

As for the US Congress, last week, with the passage into law of Sen. Ted Cruz’s bill banning terrorists from serving as UN ambassadors, the Congress showed that it is capable of acting to force the administration to uphold US anti-terror laws.

 

To this end, in accordance with those laws, Congress must act to immediately end US military support for Palestinian security services.

 

The Office of the US Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian territories that trains Palestinian military forces should be closed straightaway. Its personnel should be redeployed out of the area forthwith.

 

So, too, given that the Palestinian Authority now inarguably meets the US definition of a foreign terrorist organization, the US must end all financial assistance to its operating budget. Also, in accordance with US law, the US banking system must be closed to PA entities. Foreign banks that do business with these entities should be barred from doing business with US banks.

 

Abbas is not interested in peace. The two-state model isn’t about achieving peace. It is about blaming the victim of the absence of peace for the absence of peace.

 

Abbas knows his apologists, both in Israel, and most important in the US and Europe. He knows they will go to any length to defend him.

 

The Israeli Left does so because without the phony peace process, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, the Labor Party and Meretz become political irrelevancies.

 

The administration and the EU defend Abbas and the phony peace process because they don’t want to acknowledge the plain fact that Israel is the only stable ally they have in the Middle East and the stronger Israel is the more protected they are. Doing so contradicts their ideology.

 

So now Abbas is telling them that the deal is good for peace since it brings Hamas-controlled Gaza into the PLO and so reunifies the PA, which has been operating as two separate entities for seven years. And they may go along with it.

 

They’ve been perfectly willing to embrace utter nonsense countless times over the years.

 

Only the Israeli government and Congress can stop them. And they must stop them.

 

These phony peaceniks’ preference for Jew-killers over international law comes with a prohibitive price tag. Jews are murdered, war criminals are embraced, and the rule of law is rent asunder.

 

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 

____________________________

All right reserved, Caroline Glick.

 

About Caroline Glick

There is a Duty to Impeach


Uncle Sam- Impeach Obama

John R. Houk
© February 4, 2014
 
I received a Liberty Counsel Action email pushing a petition that will be delivered to key members of the House of Representatives to proceed with Articles of Impeachment to throw out the worst abuser of the U.S. Constitution in American history.
 
Frankly, another purpose of the email is to promote the sale of a 96 page book “The Duty to Impeach: A Call to Throw Off a Lawless President” put out by the Liberty Counsel. It is a great marketing ploy; nonetheless I do encourage participation in the petition and the book purchase. The book will provide a good understanding for the legal reasons to impeach Obama rather than our Conservative anger that President Barack Hussein Obama has used his Executive Order power to make laws and statutes outside the authority of the Constitution. I have not read the book yet but I intend to so I can fuel for future blog posts or to answer the arguments of Left Wing Moonbats.
 
I am unaware – as I am writing this – to what line of thinking “The Duty to Impeach” will follow. It seems to me there are some laws broken in a nefarious illegal fashion with the scandals that the Mainstream Media (MSM) has actually grudgingly shared with their readers. However, the MSM is failing to report the extent to which the Obama Administration is simultaneously stonewalling Congress while publicly retorting to critics that so-called extensive Committee investigations have taken place without evidence of wrong doing showing up for prosecution.  Hello! Did I mention the word Obama Administration STONEWALLING?
 
I look forward to reading the annotated Liberty Counsel book entitled “The Duty to Impeach” to see the legal avenues to pursue impeachment of President Obama.
 
JRH 2/4/14
 

Please Support NCCR

******************************
It is our duty to impeach a lawless President
 
By Mathew Staver
Sent: Feb 3, 2014 at 5:33 PM
Sent by Liberty Counsel Action
 
America has been forced into a constitutional crisis of historic proportions by President Barack Obama. The President’s abuses have brought us to the point that the People can no longer tolerate his subversion of the Constitution or his willful violations of his Oath of Office.

Liberty Counsel Action is calling for the United States House of Representatives to draft Articles of Impeachment against President Obama. We don’t take this action lightly.

Please read my crucial message below – Mat.

 
John,

In his recent State of the Union Address, Barack Obama declared that 2014 is to be “a year of action” – with or without the consent of Congress. He once again asserted his provocative mantra, “I have a pen and I have a phone.”

His misguided declaration is yet another expression of the usurpation of power by the Executive Branch and an arrogant dismissal of the balance of power as set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Barack Obama has repeatedly abused the limited powers of the Executive Branch and has systematically overstepped his constitutional authority.
 

As a constitutional attorney, I am appalled at President Obama’s contemptible misuse of his office.  Has he forgotten he solemnly swore to UPHOLD the Constitution in two inaugural ceremonies?

++Without the constitutionally defined “Separation of Powers,” we are merely a socialist dictatorship masquerading as a democracy.

In his five years of holding the office of president, Barack Obama has proven to the American people time and again that he will stop at nothing to further his radical agenda.
 

He has actively subverted the Constitution, manipulated the rule of law, intimidated and coerced lawmakers, and employed overt deceit and distortion to sway public opinion.

As I have often observed, this is the most corrupt and divisive presidency in American history. The bottom line is this…
 
The Constitution of the United States has been systematically subverted in order to form a more socialized union under the radical rule of Barrack Obama. There is compelling evidence this pattern of abuse will intensify in the Obama administration’s final three years of rule.
 
++America’s patriots must rise up and throw off our lawless, tyrannical President.

The Declaration of Independence states… “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” (emphasis added)
 

The list of President Obama’s long train of abuses and usurpations are too numerous to name in this brief message.  However, when you join our campaign to press Congress to file Articles of Impeachment, you can receive our new 96-page, thoroughly documented book “The Duty to Impeach” plus a quality vinyl bumper sticker for a gift of $10 or more to support this vital effort.

Liberty Counsel Action is declaring that it is our DUTY to throw off this lawless President.  We are calling on the United States House of Representatives, the People’s house, to draft Articles of Impeachment against President Barrack H. Obama … including his failure to faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States and for acting in willful violation of the Constitution of the United States.

In order to properly motivate our elected representatives to take this action, we must have a groundswell of grassroots Americans who are willing to accept this declaration as a personal call to duty!

Join me and the many thousands of your fellow Americans who are saying, “enough is enough.” Click here to read and add your name to our petition to impeach Barrack Obama, our lawless President:
 
http://www.lcaction.cc/677/petition.asp

++It is the duty of a free people to cast off tyrants.

John, we, the American people, must “call out” President Barack Obama!

We are united in purpose in demanding the restoration of constitutional authority, which includes our DUTY to petition the House of Representatives for Articles of Impeachment against a lawless President.

When you sign our Impeach Barrack Obama petition, we will hand deliver your mandate – along with those of many thousands of your fellow concerned Americans – to key congressional leaders.  We will also publish your views to government bureaucrats, the media, and anywhere else such a declaration is strategically advantageous.

Together, we MUST stop this tyranny before Barack Obama and his radical administration succeed in totally remaking the United States of America into a socialist nation!

Click here to read and sign the Impeach Barrack Obama petition:   
 
http://www.lcaction.cc/677/petition.asp
Thank you for recognizing your duty as an American citizen and acting upon that duty!

Mathew Staver, Chairman
Liberty Counsel Action

P.S. After signing, you’ll be given an opportunity to order our new 96-page, fully annotated book, The Duty to Impeach: A Call to Throw Off a Lawless President. In addition, you can obtain our full size, heavy vinyl bumper sticker boldly proclaiming “Impeach Obama!”

Please, take advantage of this very special offer. We need to distribute many thousands of copies of this important resource to help fuel a groundswell of support for a movement to impeach.

John, it is our duty as a free people to impeach a lawless President. I challenge you today to join us in this call for the House of Representatives to draft Articles of Impeachment against Barack H. Obama. Go here to fulfill your duty:

 http://www.lcaction.cc/677/petition.asp

 
############
[Liberty Counsel Action] + + Comments? Questions?
http://www.lcaction.cc/email.asp?ind=10
_______________________________
There is a Duty to Impeach
John R. Houk
© February 4, 2014
______________________________
It is our duty to impeach a lawless President
 
Liberty Counsel Action is a 501(c)4 organization. Gifts are not tax deductible. For full notice including notices for individual states, go here.
http://www.lcaction.cc/r.asp?U=390832&CID=677&RID=38069263