War Against the American People is Treason

Great article by Chuck Baldwin. Unfortunately, he does not take the next logical step of advocating the Unpresident's impeachment for treason. But, you see the logic, and he will too, eventually.

Obama’s Suit Against Arizona An Act Of War

By Chuck Baldwin

Among the limited duties of the US Government enumerated in the federal Constitution is Article. IV. Section. 4.

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion."

However, for several decades now, the federal government in Washington, D.C., has shown great ambition and propensity to engage in activities to which it was never authorized, and to ignore those responsibilities with which it is specifically charged. The responsibility of the federal government to protect each State against invasion is a classic example of the latter.

Can anyone deny that the states on the US southern border (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas) are being invaded by an ongoing onslaught of illegal aliens (many of whom are violent and dangerous criminals)?

Somewhere between 12 and 30 million illegals now reside in the US. The entire country is feeling the effects of this invasion, but the Border States are literally under siege. And not only does the federal government do nothing to protect the states against this invasion, it actively wars against states such as Arizona when they attempt to protect themselves.

Yes, I am saying it: the Washington, D.C., lawsuit against the State of Arizona’s immigration laws should be regarded as an act of war—against the State of Arizona in particular, and against the states general in principle.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

Treason Stream Media Smears Those Who Dare Speakout

More incredibly biased reporting from the unamerican media to cover for the Unpresident Obama.

Brahm Resnik - Jul. 23, 2010 10:23 AM
12 News

12 News has learned that the day before Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu appeared on a white supremacist radio talk show earlier this month, he was the guest of another extremist (Comment: Who defines what is extremism or white sumpremacist in this world. This news show is diseminating inflamatory and slanderous opinions without naming the supremacist group or giving facts to prove it is supremacist. It also cleverly links Alex Jones with white supemacy, although anyone who actually watches him knows that is not the case. Propaganda masquerading as news.) talk show host, who believes President Obama is committing "high treason" in his handling of illegal immigration.

When host Alex Jones of the "Alex Jones Show" asked Babeu whether he agreed that the president was committing treason, Babeu responded, "It borderlines that. I'm not gonna outright call it that. I'm still an officer in the Army." (Comment: Officers in the army have a clear Constitutional duty to clearly identify, speak and act against all enemies of the Constitution, foreign and domestic. Especially, the President.)

Babeu is a major in the Army National Guard.

When host Alex Jones asked Babeu a second time about the treason charge, Babeu did not dispute it.

"What's so shocking is the president, our own government, stands against us and sides with a foreign leader," he said. (Comment: shocking and treasonous, by Constitutional definition of treason, "giving aid and comfort to the enemy.)

The rest of the article is the usual misleading, liberal gibberish, but you're welcome to read it.

to read entire article

The Gathering Storm

These excerpts below are from a World Net Daily article posted May 21, 2009 by Bob Unruh.

It only contains one glaring error. His mother's citizenship is immaterial. What matters is where he was born. He has to be born in the United States of America or a territory in order to be a "natural born citizen."

Don’t believe me, read this from Wikipedia

1862 opinion of the U.S. Attorney General

In 1862, Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase sent a query to Attorney General Edward Bates asking whether or not "colored men" can be citizens of the United States. Attorney General Bates responded on November 29, 1862, with a 27-page opinion concluding, "I conclude that the free man of color, mentioned in your letter, if born in the United States, is a citizen of the United States, ... .[8][italics in original]" In the course of that opinion, Bates commented at some length on the nature of citizenship, and wrote,

... our constitution, in speaking of natural born citizens, uses no affirmative language to make them such, but only recognizes and reaffirms the universal principle, common to all nations, and as old as political society, that the people born in a country do constitute the nation, and, as individuals, are natural members of the body politic.[9][italics in original]

Also,

Regarding people born at U.S. military bases in foreign countries, current U.S. State Department policy (as codified in the department's Foreign Affairs Manual) reads:

"Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth."[19]

This would explain why they bothered to get the fake certificate of live birth. They knew he was born in Kenya and not a US territory and so to make him seem to be a citizen, they went ahead and got the certificate of live birth, not realizing the scrutiny it would be subject to.

Of course, it goes without saying that all laws with his signature are invalid, and his appointments and executive orders are automatically null and void.

Beneath is an excerpt from this excellent and hopeful article .

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Hundreds of "presentments" – or accusations assembled by citizen grand juries – are scheduled to be given to courts, sheriffs, prosecutors, judges and legislators across the United States by July 4 alleging that Barack Obama is ineligible to be president and his occupancy in the Oval Office constitutes treason.



The accusations are being assembled by the citizen grand juries that have been meeting in recent weeks around the country. One organization, American Grand Jury, now has posted an online procedure that provides a step-by-step instruction manual for those who are concerned about Obama.

American Grand Jury Editor Bob Campbell's site includes information on the history of grand juries, their powers, rules, evidence, forms, etiquette and how to file the resulting claims.

While there are other groups organizing and holding grand jury meetings, Campbell told WND that his is the largest group, having convened five already along with two state grand juries. It plans to sponsor another half dozen in the next 30 days.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 370,000 others and sign up now!

"Sooner or later some court or many courts will formally indict Obama from our presentments or [a] complaint," he said. "Our goal is to convene and conclude 12 to 13 grand juries before July 4 rolls around and to serve our presentments as many as 200 times with courts, sheriffs, prosecutors, judges or legislators across the land.

"The pressure is mounting and someday justice will be served or the country will probably explode from loss of faith in our Constitution," he said.

If those numbers don't produce action, he said, the plans are to double, or triple the numbers, and try again.

One such citizens grand jury met recently in a Chicago suburb, literally in Obama's home territory. There spokesman Richard Keefner told WND, jurors were sworn in, reviewed the evidence and deliberated.

"We all came to a unanimous decision that we felt it should be investigated further and warranted the indictment," he told WND.

The citizens grand jury is just the latest channel through which Americans are raising protests over a president they believe is ineligible to hold that office...

...Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

To continue reading

Tanredo Stands Tall on Impeachment

The great Tom Tancredo is displaying true leadership. He is calling on Congress to begin impeachment of the President for not fulfilling his constitutional duty to defend the United States of America.

World Net Daily reports that "Tancredo wrote in a opinion piece in the Washington Times that, 'Mr. Obama's refusal to live up to his own oath of office – which includes the duty to defend the United States against foreign invasion – requires senators and representatives to live up to their oaths. Members of Congress must defend our nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Today, that means bringing impeachment charges against Mr. Obama.'"

No mention in the article of the treason word which is a serious oversight in my opinion. It always best to name things clearly, and this nation must discuss what constitutes treason. Perhaps, Tancred is sticking to high crimes and misdmeanors because it is easier to prove. At any rate this is great news.

An Opinion Ahead of its Time

Some people figure things out before the rest of us. A remarkably prescient article from 2008. This article was written for Uwire by Rory Walkinshire.

I'll get straight to the point: I'm not voting for Barack Obama. In fact, I think he's a traitor.

We live in an unstable world, where the threat of terrorism is all too real. Increasingly, the kinds of conflicts in which America is engaged are of an unconventional nature, such as guerrilla warfare and terrorism.

To understand this, all you have to do is read recent history. Al-Qaida in Iraq has perpetrated dozens of attacks on Americans, including suicide bombings and beheadings. Similarly, the Al-Aqsa Intifada in Israel has witnessed the rise of some of the most ruthless terrorists in the world.

More conventionally, China is ascending as a major regional superpower and a potential military threat to the United States. China is indeed a rising dragon and, according to a May 2006 article by Agence-France Presse, "the pace and scope of China's modernization of its strategic forces and other surprising military developments could pose a credible long term threat to the United States...new weaponry is enhancing China's ability to project and sustain military power well beyond its shores." read more

You Impeachers Are Far From Alone

You may be feeling like the class clown, the office kook, but it you believe Obama’s a traitor, and should be impeached, you are far from alone. Check out some of the web sites below. They are all over the web and some of them have thousands of signatures. At the top, two of my favorites. Take the time to sign some of the petitions. Some of them you can print out and get a signing campaign going. Be sure to make sure you Congressmen see them and then ask them when, not if, they are going to bring a bill of impeachment against The Great Pretender. Send your favorite links to your friends. The more signatures, the faster we get back to being a Constitutional Republic, and the quicker we put the fear into the hearts of our conniving politicians.

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/06/john-boehner-willing-to-present-obama.html

http://thefalsepresident.com/node/5http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9947

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/3/impeach-obama

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/impeach-barack-obama.html

http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/01/20/change-petition-to-impeach-obama/

http://www.petitiononline.com/impeacho/petition.html

http://www.impeachobama2010.org/

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamaimpeachment/

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/11/impeach-obama

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=petition+to+impeach+obama&aq=f&aqi=g1g-m1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=C04TrgUlDTMiqJoq2iwO9i_zFDQAAAKoEBU_Qrpe7&fp=175c9c44859696fe

Polling Place Treason

Still not sure if he’s a traitor?

So, you and your spouse are going to the polling place to cast your vote, to celebrate democracy and your freedom, when suddenly your way is blocked by two Black Panther thugs armed with clubs.

“You ain’t goin’ nowhere, cracker, honky. We ain’t letting no white devils vote. “

“Why, this is an outrage,” you protest, and you summon the police. Guess what. It won’t do any good.

It is perfectly OK for people of color to threaten and intimidate you if you are white. By the way, don’t think being Black or Hispanic will protect you forever. They’ll get to you and sooner than you think. ”One person said the men called a Republican poll worker a “race traitor” and told him there would be “hell to pay,’” according to an article in World Net Daily.

So, who says it’s O.K. for non-whites to intimidate whites at polling places. Eric Holder’s justice department says so. Non-President Obama says so by his silence. Non-white people will not be prosecuted for threatening or injuring you in the future if you attempt to vote. Shades of Zimbabwe. What’s next? Are Obama’s minions going to confiscate your farm, your business, or even your family?

Don’t think it can happen here? Read this article from World Net Daily. It alleges that the justice department has instructed its attorneys that “the voting section will not bring any other cases against blacks and other minorities.”

Understand, you can be throttled and clubbed when you are trying to vote and that’s just fine with the Department of Justice.

What are you going to do about it? Will you call your Congressman and demand the impeachment of Obama for treason for failing to protect the vote?

Obama, who said he would be everybody’s president, should fire Holder on the spot and make a public apology to the American people, and resume the prosecution. But he won’t.

Conclusion: one more proof of treason.

Tancredo on Impeachment

Posted on July 14, 2010 by impeachthetraitor

Very interesting article from Tom Tancredo on impeachment. Published in World Net Daily on June 26th, 2010.

Comments on the article you are about to read:

Tancredo doesn’t mention treason until the very last paragraph, and as if it is not clear yet that Obama is a traitor. Also, he says an impeachment investigation will not start with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of House. These are grave tactical errors.

Put the heat on now! Attack now! Obama’s treason must be addressed now. We must let everyone in the nation, especially the youth, know what treason is and that it is punished by ruin and disgrace, no matter who you are. The national discussion must begin now, and everyone must know and understand what qualifies as treason, and that it is a heinous crime and is punishable to the full extent of the law.

Calling the President a traitor is not treason. Giving aid and comfort to invading minions of the Mexican President is treason. Destroying the several states of the Gulf coast and destroying the health and livelihoods of their citizens is treason.

Obama is clearly a traitor as a national discussion will quickly reveal. If Pelosi and her fellow Democrats want to be known as the Treason Party, that is their choice. rng

Border Battlelines
Tom Tancredo
WorldNetDaily Exclusive Commentary

Yes, yes, I know. An impeachment investigation will never be started while Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the House. The good news is that this obstacle to impeachment will likely be removed by January.

It goes without saying that the impeachment process should never be a political weapon used to pursue partisan political advantage. But neither should an impeachment investigation be obstructed for political reasons.

Impeachment is a constitutional remedy to be used for serious offenses identified in the Constitution. So, we must ask this question: Has Barack Obama crossed the line that separates political differences from the serious offenses that warrant impeachment?

The Constitution’s provisions for impeachment and removal are not aimed solely at the office of president. Article II, Section 4, stipulates that “the President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Let the world know your solution to unconstitutional tyranny in America with the magnetic bumper sticker: “IMPEACH OBAMA!”

I believe there is a growing body of evidence of impeachable offenses sufficient to warrant a formal impeachment resolution in the House, followed by a trial in the Senate.

It is instructive that the founders listed only two specific crimes justifying impeachment – bribery and treason. The accusations of bribery against this president are now numerous and growing, and by themselves deserve an independent investigation under supervision of a bipartisan committee of the House of Representatives. In Pennsylvania and Colorado, candidates for the U.S. Senate were offered federal appointments in exchange for dropping out of their respective races. On their face, those actions are attempted bribery and warrant a thorough investigation.

There are also presidential actions that may stray into the category of high crimes and misdemeanors. Only this past week we have witnessed a United States senator tell his constituents that the president, in an Oval Office conversation, refused a direct request to enforce the Constitution’s guarantee of federal protection against foreign invasion. Obama wants a legislative “deal” in exchange for acting to secure the southwest border.

Let’s ponder the meaning of that news item and ask if this falls into the category of normal political “horse trading.” The president of the United States, in brazen defiance of his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution, refuses to faithfully execute the laws of the United States unless he gets amnesty legislation to benefit another 15 million to 20 million illegal aliens. The principal beneficiary of that amnesty would be a foreign country, Mexico, not the United States.

Article IV, Section 4, of the Constitution guarantees each state protection against foreign invasion. The governor of Arizona and three other governors have formally requested 6,000 National Guard troops to help protect against the foreign invasion now under way, an invasion supported, encouraged and assisted by the government of Mexico. President Obama says – no, I will not fulfill that constitutional duty unless I get something in return.

Seven United States senators have written President Obama to ask him not to use his executive powers for parole and delayed departure to grant de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. If he does use this power, which was clearly intended by Congress as an administrative remedy to be used in individual cases, he will be violating the spirit of the separation of powers and usurping legislative authority over immigration law.

In foreign affairs, this president has shown a cavalier disregard for the security interests of the United States. In Afghanistan, he has insisted on a fixed timetable for withdrawal of U.S. military forces – against the strenuous objections of his military advisers. He thereby gave the enemy a timetable for their victory and the return of terrorist training bases in that country.

Obama has refused to allow anyone in his government to use the term “radical Islam” to describe the enemy who has declared war on this country. To what purpose? If you cannot identify your enemy, that can only serve to hinder the prosecution of that war and undermine the sovereignty and security of the United States.

But perhaps Obama’s most serious offense against the Constitution’s limitations and obligations is his war against the Constitution itself. He does not adhere to the oath he took to defend the Constitution because he does not respect the Constitution.

It may be that these actions do not yet support or prove a case for impeachment. But considering Obama’s drive for expansion of his executive powers and his disregard for clear constitutional duties, it clearly is time for Congress to open an investigation.

Citizens and patriots who love the Constitution and the liberties it protects have already started their own impeachment files to chronicle Obama’s high crimes and misdemeanors, beginning with the overt crime of bribery. Whether or not the crime of treason will be added to that file remains to be seen. But the question is being asked, and the answer may not be pretty.

It’s time to open impeachment file

Posted: June 26, 2010

1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Tom Tancredo is a former five-term congressman from Colorado and 2008 candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. He currently serves as chairman of the Rocky Mountain Foundation and co-chairman of TeamAmericaPac. Tancredo is the author of “In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment | Edit

Obama Commits Act of High Treason; Sides with Foreign Power Against Arizona

contributed by Lee

Alex Jones & Aaron Dykes
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, July 7, 2010

In his latest You Tube address, Alex Jones examines the factors leading towards the Obama Administration’s pending lawsuit against Arizona’s controversial immigration laws, an act of treason under the 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which bars the suing of states under certain circumstances.

Above all, Alex Jones makes the case that Barack Obama and his cohorts have avoided key duties demanded by the Constitution, including defending the border, while engaging in a multitude of illicit activities specifically barred by the Constitution.

Why President Obama would ignore the popular outcry to control the border and rally against Arizona with allies including Mexican President Felipe Calderon makes little sense until put in context with the fact that he intends to ram through historically unpopular amnesty legislation. Outrageously, Arizona Senator Jon Kyl (R) claims that Obama told him privately that, in essence, an open border was a point of leverage on the amnesty issue:

“If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform,” Sen. Kyl quoted President Obama as stating.

Kyl recounted the story to a room of concerned supporters, further characterizing the President’s position as “holding hostage” the border issue to help push the amnesty package. This despite political uproar in Arizona, increased border violence, increased threats to Sheriffs and other law enforcement in border areas, and the closing of many state parks and other areas on the border considered too dangerous to allow Americans into.

DRUG WAR COMPLICITY

Though the social cost of illegal immigrants is often the focus of unrest over the unsecured Mexican-U.S. border, it is the increasingly violent Mexican drug gangs who pose perhaps the greatest threat. Already, the Mexican government has been displaced by drug cartel control. Headless bodies, kidnapping and murders have now become rampant, not only on the Mexican side of the border, but on the U.S. side as well. This alone is reason to take border security very serious.

Yet President Obama and his ilk refuse to do what is necessary.

More outrageously, a recent Bloomberg report revealed that major U.S. banks have knowingly financed Mexican drug cartels and facilitated money laundering without taking any action to stop it. Putting this together with refusal to protect the border paints a clear picture.

The Legal Case for Impeachment for Treason

Impeach the traitor now!

We all know who we are talking about. You knew that the moment you saw the name of the blog, or first heard of it.

Think about that. You instinctively feel that Mr. Obama is a traitor. But is there a legal case? Can a President ever be a traitor? The Constitution thinks so. The Founding Fathers thought so. Thats why they wrote into and approved, in the Constitution Article1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7 The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.Judgement in Cases of Impreachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.Article 2, Section 4The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.Article 3, Section 1. . . The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour. . .

Notice the wording above--When the President of the United States is tried --I love that. "When the President of the United States is tried." They knew human nature and they knew the President would have to be tried. This means it's OK to talk about it and it is OK to call the President a traitor and demand his impeachment. You can't try him as a criminal or traitor until you've first called him a criminal or traitor.

Traitor? Can a President be a traitor. The Constitution says so. Above, Article 2 Section 4 says, the President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, TREASON, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors..

So, let us commence with the legal case for impeachment (yes, it is a slam dunk, open and shut) with Article Four of the Supreme Law of the Land the United States Constitution, Article IV section 4.

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”

Obama promised to uphold the Constitution. He must protect Arizona and the other states of the union from invasion, and Mexico is invading the United States via illegal immigration with the intent of reclaiming the Southwestern United States (and perhaps more) for Mexico. Obama is obstructing Arizona via lawsuit and by refusing to enforce existing federal laws. This refusal to support Arizona and other border states is treasonous and/or a high because it violates his oath to uphold the Constitution, by protecting the nation against invasion.

By deliberately withholding necessary aid from the state of Louisiana and the other states of the United States that lie on the Gulf of Mexico, Mr. Obama has endangered their Republican form of government. Furthermore, this withholding of aid is obviously for advancing a corrupt political agenda for advancing a legislative agenda, exploiting deliberately contrived energy crisis, possible as a result of bribery, that will ensure windfall profits for friends of the administration. These fraudulent actions, destroying the ecological habitats and environments of these state, and the livelihoods, health and general well-being of the citizens of these states constitute a tyrannical and terorristic act of domestic violence against these states and in magnitude and maliciousness, constitute a high crime and/or an act of treason by giving aid to those other states that seek to drill oil in the Gulf and make America dependent on foreign oil and energy sources, and weakening America financially and physically thereby weakening the security of the American citizens.