Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 7:08 — 6.5MB)
via DownsizeDC
How the New Indefinite Detention Provisions can be used on Americans
Congress just passed, and the President just signed, a bill that gives legal authority to the President to kidnap and perpetually imprison persons, including American citizens, without the benefit of due process.
Members of Congress, in the days leading up to the vote, tried to assure their constituents that they have nothing to fear — that the bill doesn’t apply to Americans.
Some were lying. Most were deceived.
Now, I don’t want to imply that Barack Obama plans to sweep up every one of his critics (or even a select few) because of statements they’ve uttered publicly. That is overstatement. The law doesn’t permit that. But consider the following scenario…
You object to the way the Federal Leviathan State is run. You gather, every other Tuesday, with others who share your values. We’ll call your fictional group the Constitution League (CL).
One night, a new fellow shows up. He’s frustrated and outspoken. He complains that the time for meetings is over. Something must be done — something that will “get their attention.” You’re uncomfortable with his remarks but unsure how to respond.
You hope he never returns, and he doesn’t.
What you don’t know, until months later, is that one of our CL colleagues, the chapter Vice President, followed the vocal man out to the parking lot. The two exchanged email addresses and phone numbers. Then, your local VP reached out to a third man, a member of a CL chapter in the nearest big city. The three met regularly. They plotted and executed their own terrorist plot on a U.S. Government facility.
Now, your group meeting was the place they met. The Vice President used his CL email account. CL is all over the news. CL is now, for all intents and purposes, a terrorist group.
And you? Well, you’ve donated to the terrorist organization. You’ve participated in its meetings. The night this angry man walked in, you didn’t call the authorities.
* Can the President have the military come and arrest you? Yes!
* Can he (or she) send you to a military tribunal for trial or just hold you indefinitely in a military facility, without charges? Yes!
Even the bill co-sponsor, Senator McCain, appears to agree with this assessment. Senator Rand Paul asked John McCain, on the Senate floor, “…under the provisions, would it be possible that an American citizen could be declared an ‘enemy combatant’ and sent to Guantanamo Bay, and detained indefinitely?” McCain responded, “I think that as long as that individual, NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE, if they POSE A THREAT to the security of the United States of America, should not be allowed to continue the threat.” {Emphasis Added}
Wait a minute. Wasn’t there a provision in this bill that exempted Americans?
Despite what your Congressional office may have told you (if you called during the debate over this bill) the answer to that question is an emphatic NO!
The relevant sections of the bill are 1021 and 1022.
* Section 1021 asserts the President’s authority to arrest suspected (not convicted) terrorists and gives him the option to choose whether or not they even get a trial, and if so, what kind of trial.
* Section 1022 requires that a certain class of terrorist get no trial. Instead they must be held in military prisons, for as long as this President, or any future President desires.
SECTION 1021
Section 1021 is very expansive in its reach. It “includ[es] any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”
* Who is “any person?”
* What is a “belligerent act?”
* What is “direct support?”
One could be safe in assuming these words mean whatever a creatively-minded prosecutor, a flexible judge, and an ignorant jury define them to mean — EXCEPT THAT, UNDER THIS ACT, ONE MIGHT NEVER GET AS FAR AS A COURT HEARING.
These terms will be defined by the bureaucrats in power.
They could be used against political opponents.
1021 has NO exceptions. There’s not even a hint of an exception. Remember, that section gave the President the authority to arrest you and a set of options on how you were to be handled. These choices are completely divorced from the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments, as well as the Treason provisions of Article III. The President’s new alternatives are…
1. Detention without trial by the military
2. Trial by a military commission
3. Trial by some other court of the President’s choosing
4. Shipping you off to a foreign jurisdiction (info here)
SECTION 1022
1022 is a REQUIREMENT — a binding mandate upon the President. President Obama threatened to veto the bill, but only because he feared 1022 would restrict his power too much. http://gawker.com/5866210/jon-stewart-bashes-obama-for-backing-indefinite-detention-bill
This section is for your fellow CL members/plotters. Whereas, you got snatched up for “support” or “aid” to the plot, they actually carried out an attack, or as the section itself indicates…
“…participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.”
Section 1022 requires the President to go with option #1 above — the other three options are off the table. In other words, no trial, either in a civilian court or military tribunal.
In the final version of the bill, after a public storm started to erupt, the title of the section was changed to indicate that it only applied to “foreign al-Qaeda terrorists.” However, titles are not normally considered part of the law but merely summary descriptions to the reader of a bill.
But this title is especially IRONIC, because it’s this section that includes the so-called exemption for American citizens. Why would you need to exempt American citizens from a section of law that applies to “foreign al-Qaeda terrorists?”
The answer is because the section applies to any kind of “terrorist,” domestic or foreign, no matter what the title says.
And here’s the so-called exemption, with the key word highlighted…
The REQUIREMENT to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
That means that military custody, without a trial, is mandated by law, but that the President, at his discretion or by written policy, may issue a waiver on the basis that a person is an American citizen.
If this provision was a true safeguard for American citizens, then the line would’ve been written like this…
Military custody of citizens of the United States is still prohibited under this act.
See the difference? It’s a requirement that can be waived at discretion, as opposed to a prohibition.
Become a member and support the TAC!
Now, do you realize Congress has given the Federal State the power to use military detention on its own citizens? And that they’ve made it possible to wage a war on peaceful activists, if they can just incite someone in your group to attempt something violent?
Don’t worry. It’s not like the FBI is busy infiltrating meetings, entrapping some dullard into a plot, equipping and financing his efforts, and then claiming credit for stopping another terrorist attack! Oh wait, that’s happened about 40 times since 9/11.
Thus, to complete our story, the angry man who showed up at the CL meeting might’ve work for the FBI. And he duped two idiots in your group, who put you and your fellow members in legal jeopardy.
This new law is that serious. President Obama has claimed he won’t use this power. All that needs to happen now is a provocative incident. Then, all bets are off. Since these nearly unlimited, un-constitutional powers are now law, this President, or a future one, will be able to kidnap and disappear Americans. It could very easily be open season for the police state.
—–
Jim Babka is the President of Downsize DC Foundation and DownsizeDC.org, Inc.. DownsizeDC.org will soon launch a campaign to repeal these sections from the law.
Copyright © 2012 by Jim Babka. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit to the author, DownsizeDC.org and TenthAmendmentCenter.com is given.
(12) That he assigned funding to the Healthcare Bill (impeachable)
Obamacare-legislative branch duty.
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
(13) That he refused to enforce the US Constitution or existing laws (impeachable)
illegal immigrant, and actually ordered to do the opposite of existing laws.
Did not uphold and enforce US laws as required.
New Hampshire State Representative Harry Accornero has charged Obama with treason for failing to uphold federal immigration law and allowing illegal immigrants to not only remain in the country, but also to obtain work permits via executive fiat. Accornero stated that Obama is “destroying the country.” In a letter submitted to The Laconia Daily Sun today, Accornero said, “Any President or member of congress who allows our borders to be violated by illegals of any country
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Using our military for UN war efforts
Constitution of the United States of America, Article 1, Section 8: it stipulates that Congress duty is to “coin money” as a nation and not the Federal Reserve’s with its interest (fee charged on loans). Obama has not corrected this illegal act, nor has he insisted on a complete audit, nor has he frozen the Federal Reserve assets until we can ascertain if what they have done with OUR money is legal; $16 Trillion given to foreign nations, banks, and foreign based mega corporations with no knowledge of congress or the American people.
Took away states power
Taking care of foreign nations people before and above American citizens when sworn to represent America and American citizens: The Republican in charge of doling out foreign aid wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressing “grave concern” over cash payments to Pakistan and asked they stop. Rep. Kay Granger of Texas, who chairs a subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee responsible for foreign aid, is singling out $190 million in “assistance for flood victims who lost their homes” in Pakistan the day after turning down American citizen assistance to those who lost 1000’s of homes due to fire here in the US.
(10) That he is, and has been; committing “conduct amounting to a gross breach of trust or serious abuse of power” (impeachable)
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
It based its conclusion on a staff report, “Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment,” which the committee had ordered prepared before beginning its investigation. This report traced the history, precedents, and grounds for impeachment. The report concluded: “Not all presidential misconduct is sufficient to constitute grounds for impeachment. . . . Because impeachment of a President is a grave step for the nation, it is predicated only upon conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office”
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Took away States power
Misapplication
Maladministration
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Using our military for UN war efforts
He violated the law and the provisions of the Constitution by seizing control of GM and Chrysler without proper authorization from Congress.
Although his unlawful cronies in Congress granted him the authority after the fact, his action to seize corporations was a violation of the law at the time it was implemented. The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court allowed this atrocity is no matter. Thomas Jefferson said it best when he articulated a key principle of liberty–any government that willfully violates the rule of law and encroaches on the rights of the people ceases to be a legitimate government. This government has violated the provisions of the 5th Amendment regarding due process and fair compensation at the very least.
(11) That he wrote legislation (impeachable)
(Obamacare), which is the duty of the legislative branch not the executive branch within the three branches of our government.
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
(9) That he is denying American citizens and those legally allowed being here their Constitutional Rights (impeachable)
NDAA
TSA at airports (“A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace.” 49 US Code-Section 40103), bus stations, train stations, on our roadways.
Patriot Act
First Amendment
Second Amendment
The Bill of Rights sets limits on the federal government, making clear it has no power to infringe on rights we already naturally possess, or limit traditionally held privileges, such as trial by jury
“The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States, 1866
H.R.1955 and S.1959 included in President Obama’s January 21, 2009 Patriot Acts (plural), that also included extension of President Bush’s Patriot Act (singular)
The Legalization of the monitoring and censorship of all US Communications, “Anyone Returning from the Wars is a potential Homegrown Domestic Terrorist”- Guilty until proven innocent
US NORTHCOM in relation to the US Insurrection Act
Posse Comitatus Act
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Warrantless Searches
Warrantless Tracking of US Citizens
Warrantless spying on all the information that can be gathered in many ways: cell phone, stuff made to spy on us, etc
Maladministration
Misapplication
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Using our military for UN war efforts
Retired USAF Col. Richard Niemela of Reston, Va. has been exposing the federal monster for years. He told AFP: “It’s the surreptitious domination by international globalists insidiously using unauthorized and illegal tactics to render null and void those historic and unique powers of the sheriff.”
i. The US has actually been militarizing much of its (State) police agencies. the US congress passed the PATRIOT Act, a sweeping expansion of domestic and foreign intelligence-gathering capabilities. This legislation gave the government the ability to easily search all forms of communication, eased restrictions on foreign intelligence-gathering at home, gave itself greater power to monitor financial transactions and created entirely new categories of domestic terrorism to which the PATRIOT Act’s expanded powers to police could be applied. It was one of the greatest expansions of government police power in history, an expansion which, after some tweaking, has been mostly validated by the congress and reaffirmed by the courts.
President Bush created the Office of Homeland Security to “develop and coordinate the implementation of a comprehensive national strategy to secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks” a week after PATRIOT Act was passed. Then a year later, the Department of Homeland Security was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002.Today Department of Homeland Security is the third-largest government agency, after the departments of defense and veterans’ affairs. Not including the billions the federal government spent on its own agencies, it has also disbursed many billions more to various state and local police agencies, ostensibly for the purpose of fighting the terrorist threat. DHS created new surveillance opportunities for non-terrorist activity. In one notorious case from 2006, it was revealed that Homeland Security had given the remote Alaskan village of Dillingham (population 2,400) $202,000 to purchase surveillance cameras in order to track alleged terrorist activity. Dillingham was not on any known terrorist’s target list, so the only people the surveillance cameras were watching were the citizens. But surveillance wasn’t the end of it.As reported by Radley Balko in the Huffington Post, a Pentagon program – started in the 1980s – to give military equipment to local police escalated in the 2000s, with even university campus police receiving everything from M-16s to armored personnel carriers. Balko quoted one county sheriff saying that he’d use his new Homeland Security-funded SWAT team “for a lot of other purposes, too … just a multitude of other things”.All over the country, police switched out their traditional uniforms for Battle Dress Uniforms, dubbed by one retired policeman in the Washington Post as “commando-chic” regalia.Former San Jose chief of police Joseph McNamara raised these alarms as early as 2006 in the wake of the Sean Bell shooting in New York. He pointed out that the effects of the drug war and 9/11 had led to “an emphasis on ‘officer safety’ where paramilitary training pervades today’s policing, in contrast to the older culture, which held that cops didn’t shoot until they were about to be shot or stabbed”.In the name of “officer safety”, the Taser became a common tool in everyday policing, deployed with little knowledge of the effects, and a tendency to Taser first and ask questions later. But over the course of the past decade, the body count grew as it became more and more obvious that tasers were sometimes as deadly as the guns they purported to replace.’Pain compliance’ And that’s the most prosaic of the new policing toys that are becoming available. Reporter Ando Arick analysed the new generation of weaponry in an article in Harper’s called “The Soft-Kill Solution – New Frontiers In Pain Compliance”. He recounts a 60 Minutes investigation into a new weapon to be used for what the military said was “crowd control in Iraq”. The United States has never had fully militarized police before, armed with the kind of high-tech surveillance and weaponry that would never be allowed if the National Guard were called up in an emergency. And neither have we ever had such a malleable definition of what constitutes an emergency.
(8) That he denied and took away power from the States (impeachable; anyone injured or killed due to those actions, prosecutable))
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Another aspect of the Constitution’s separation of powers is the principle of federalism. Federalism is a legal and political system where the national or federal government shares power with the state governments while each maintains some degree of sovereignty.
The Constitution helps to delineate the roles of the federal government by spelling out its limited powers, which are outlined in the first three Articles. Section 10 of Article I also places specific, limited restrictions on the states; however, these restrictions actually serve to emphasize the powers reserved exclusively to the federal government (e.g., the power to make treaties with other nations). Article IV delineates a few fundamental requirements incumbent upon state governments, as well as guaranteeing to each state a republican form of government. Other than the limited guidance given to the states, the Constitution does not direct the states on the establishment and functions of state governments. The idea is that there are certain limited activities the federal government is best situated to handle; there are other activities that are best left to the states; and still others best dealt with by counties, cities, families, and individuals. 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
State law enforcement agencies (Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, who has spent the latter half of his life teaching sheriffs that they are the top law enforcement officers in their counties despite continuing federal intervention attempts. Dean Wilson, sheriff of Del Norte County (Sacramento), is a great example of this great awakening. He received the loudest and longest applause for his candor in confessing past faults after apologizing for not understanding the central government assault and land grab being committed against the people and what he should have been doing about it. Only in the past year has he done a turnaround and begun to behave as a county sheriff instead of an extension of federal law enforcement
(6) Lied to the American People and congress
About Afghanistan, war (impeachable and prosecutable – murder for killings)
Senior ranking U.S. military leaders have so distorted the truth when communicating with the U.S. Congress and American people in regards to conditions on the ground in Afghanistan that the truth has become unrecognizable. This deception has damaged America’s credibility among both our allies and enemies, severely limiting our ability to reach a political solution to the war in Afghanistan.” Lt. Colonel Daniel Davis, a 17-year Army veteran recently returned from a second tour in Afghanistan.
Lied to the People about NDAA, Patriot Act, Healthcare Bill aka Obamacare
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
On September 8th, 2011, General William Shelton told lawmakers during a highly classified briefing. The four-star general is in charge of Air Force Space Command. According to the Daily Beast, “Pressed by members, Gen. William Shelton said the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony to make it more favorable to a company tied to a large Democratic donor.”
Using our military for UN war efforts
(7) Failed to provide all necessary documents (impeachable)
To the satisfaction of all, or a majority of the American people that he meets the three requirements to run for, or be the POTUS (He does NOT qualify, under the definition of Natural Born Citizen” provided by SCOTUS opinions, to be eligible to serve as President.
Democratic Nominating Committee (DNC) language does NOT include language stating Obama is Qualified, while the Republican Nominating Committee (RNC) document DOES. This shows a direct difference trying to establish that the DNC MAY possibly have known that Obama was not qualified.
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
[D] Killing by a Non-Felon
[1] The “Agency” Approach – A majority of states that have considered the issue apply the so-called “agency” theory of felony murder, which precludes any killing committed during the commission of the felon by a person other that the defendant or his accomplices from serving as the basis for felony-murder. However, a killing by an accomplice can be imputed to others involved in the commission of the felony so that felony-murder can be charged against the non-killers.
[2] “Proximate Causation” Approach – A minority of courts apply the “proximate causation” theory of felony-murder under which a felon is liable for any death proximately resulting from the felony, whether the killer is a felon or a third party.
[3] “Provocative Act” Doctrine – A felon may be held responsible for the death of another at the hands of a third party, if the basis for the charge is not felony-murder, but instead is founded on what is sometimes termed the “provocative act” doctrine, which is simply a form of reckless homicide, e.g., a felon recklessly provokes a victim to shoot in self-defense, killing an innocent bystander.
§ 24.05 Manslaughter
[A] Forms of Manslaughter – Traditionally, three types of unlawful killings constitute manslaughter:
an intentional killing committed in “sudden heat of passion” as the result of “adequate provocation” (voluntary manslaughter);an unintentional killing resulting from the commission of a lawful act done in an unlawful manner (involuntary manslaughter). This is akin to criminally negligent homicide.an unintentional killing that occurs during the commission or attempted commission of an unlawful act (involuntary manslaughter). This type of manslaughter is sometimes dubbed “unlawful-act manslaughter,” or if the killing occurred during the commission of a non-felony, “misdemeanor-manslaughter.”
(5) Is a domestic enemy of the USA (impeachable and prosecutable)
“Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution. They are also those who support those in action, or by inaction; vote, voice, money, etc who are going against or trying to weaken the US Constitution and the Peoples written guarantee of those Rights.
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Misapplication
Using our military for UN war efforts
The Model Penal Code rejects the degrees-of-murder approach.
[B] Intent to Kill
[1] “Deliberate and Premeditated” – Typically, a murder involving the specific intent to kill is first-degree murder in jurisdictions that grade the offense by degrees if the homicide was also “deliberate” and “premeditated.”
[2] “Wilful, Deliberate, Premeditated” – Nearly all states that grade murder by degrees provide that a “wilful, deliberate, premeditated” killing is murder in the first degree.
[3] “Intent to Inflict Grievous Bodily Injury” – Malice aforethought is implied if a person intends to cause grievous bodily injury to another, but death results. In states that grade murder by degree, this form of malice nearly always constitutes second-degree murder.
[4] Extreme Recklessness (“Depraved Heart” Murder) – Malice aforethought is implied if a person’s conduct manifests an extreme indifference to the value of human life. In states that separate murder into degrees, this type of murder almost always constitutes second-degree murder.
[C] Model Penal Code – A homicide is murder if the defendant intentionally takes a life, or if he acts with extreme recklessness (i.e., depraved heart murder).
§ 24.03 Felony-Murder
[A] Common Law – At common law, a person is guilty of murder if he kills another person during the commission or attempted commission of any felony. Nearly every state retains the felony-murder rule.
[B] Statutory Law – Under most modern murder statutes, a death that results from the commission of an enumerated felony (usually a dangerous felony, such as arson, rape, robbery, or burglary) constitutes first-degree murder for which the maximum penalty is death or life imprisonment. If a death results from the commission of an unspecified felony, it is second-degree murder. The felony-murder rule authorizes strict liability for a death that results from commission of a felony.
[C] Model Penal Code – The Code also provides for felony-murder by setting forth that extreme recklessness (and, thus, murder) is presumed if the homicide occurs while the defendant is engaged in, or is an accomplice in, the commission, attempted commission, or flight from one of the dangerous felonies specified in the statute. [MPC § 210.2(1)(b)]
§ 24.04 Limits on the Felony-Murder Rule
[A] Inherently-Dangerous-Felony Limitation – Many states limit the rule to homicides that occur during the commission of felonies which by their nature are dangerous to human life, e.g., armed robbery.
[B] Independent Felony (or Merger) Limitation – Most states recognize some form of “independent felony” or “collateral felony” limitation. That is, the felony-murder rule only applies if the predicate felony is independent of, or collateral to, the homicide. If the felony is not independent, then the felony merges with the homicide and cannot serve as the basis for a felony-murder conviction. For example, most jurisdictions hold that felonious assault may not serve as the basis for felony-murder.
[C] Res Gestae Requirement – A requirement of the felony-murder rule is that the homicide must occur “within the res gestae [things done to commit] of the felony,” which requires both:
temporal and geographical proximity – There must be a close proximity in terms of time and distance between the felony and the homicide. The res gestae period begins when the defendant has reached the point at which he could be prosecuted for an attempt to commit the felony, and it continues at least until all of the elements of the crime are completed. Most courts provide that the res gestae of a felony continues, even after commission of the crime, until the felon reaches a place of temporary safety A causal relationship between the felony and the homicide.
Using our military for UN war efforts
http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim24.htm
§ 24.01 Definition of Homicide
[A] Common Law and Statutory Homicide – At very early common law, “homicide” was defined as “the killing of a human being by a human being.” This definition included suicide. However, modern law defines “homicide” as “the killing of a human being by another human being.” Suicide, therefore, is no longer a form of homicide in most statutes. Homicide is divided into two crimes – murder and manslaughter.
[1] “Human Being” – The common law and majority approaches define the beginning of life as birth for purposes of interpreting the criminal homicide law. A minority of states now treat a viable – or, at times, even nonviable – fetus as a human being under the homicide statute.
Regarding the end of human life, a majority of states, either by statute or judicial decision, have incorporated “brain death” in their definition of “death.”
[2] “Murder” – The common law definition of “murder” is “the killing of a human being by another human being with malice aforethought.”
[3] “Manslaughter” – Manslaughter is “an unlawful killing of a human being by another human being without malice aforethought.”
[4] “Malice” – As the term has developed, a person kills another acts with the requisite “malice” if he possesses any one of four states of mind:
the intention to kill a human being;the intention to inflict grievous bodily injury on another;an extremely reckless disregard for the value of human life; orthe intention to commit a felony during the commission or attempted commission of which a death results.
[B] Model Penal Code – A person is guilty of criminal homicide under the Model Code if he unjustifiably and inexcusably takes the life of another human being [MPC § 210.0(1)] purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently. [MPC § 210.1(1)] The Code recognizes three forms of criminal homicide: murder, manslaughter, and (unlike the common law) negligent homicide.
§ 24.02 Murder
[A] Degrees of Murder – At common law, there were no degrees of murder, and murder was a capital offense. Reform of the common law has resulted in the division of murder into degrees, with only murder in the first degree being a capital offense.
(1) Committed treason (impeachable and prosecutable)
a. Supplied arms to illegal gunrunners for foreign nation that was later used on American soil to kill US citizens.
Operation Gunrunner, Fast and Furious (Impeachable and prosecutable)
Got the funding for Operation Gunrunner (Fast and Furious) on his second try, rolled into the stimulus package a month later.H.R.1 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Ordered the sale of arms to illegal gunrunners for foreign nation used against and killing US citizens on American soil, also resulted in the death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry using one of the trafficked guns.
ATF leadership appears to have been effectively muzzled while the DOJ sent over false denials and buried its head in the sand,” … “That approach distorted the truth and obstructed our investigation.” … the activities of other agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Administration and the FBI, perhaps even the U.S. Attorneys Office and the Department of Homeland Security.
At an oversight hearing last month, three federal firearms investigators testified that they wanted to “intervene and interdict” the guns at the border, but were repeatedly ordered to step aside and let the traffickers proceed. “Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals this was the plan,” John Dodson, an ATF agent, told the panel. “It was so mandated.” Agent Olindo James Casa said that “on several occasions I personally requested to interdict or seize firearms, but I was always ordered to stand down and not to seize the firearms.”
Project Gun Runner (Fast and Furious) was launched under the orders of President Barack Obama with the knowledge of Attorney General Eric Holder. Deputy Attorney General David Ogden announced the Obama Administration’s new and aggressive ‘comprehensive plan’ on March, 24, 2009. The plan was aimed at disrupting gun trafficking between the United States and Mexico.
An executive official is ultimately responsible for any failures of his subordinates and for their violations of the oath he and they took, which means violations of the Constitution and the rights of persons. It is not necessary to prove that such failures or violations occurred at his instigation or with his knowledge. It’s sufficient to show, on the preponderance of evidence, that the president was aware of misconduct on the part of his subordinates, or should have been, and failed to do all he could to remedy the misconduct, including termination and prosecution of the subordinates and compensation for the victims or their heirs
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office”
Obama and Holder walk guns into Honduras also
Maladministration
Misapplication
(4) Committed Murder under Penal Code
Operation Gunrunner, Fast and Furious (Impeachable and prosecutable)
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Info on #3
Maladministration
Misapplication
The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to Support and Defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge.
o The meanings of the words in the Oath for everyone else: “I”- an individual, person, citizen, one member of the whole, officer; “do” – perform, accomplish, act, carry out, complete, achieve, execute; “solemnly”- somberly, gravely, seriously, earnestly, sincerely, firmly, fervently, with thought and ceremony; “swear (or affirm)” – vow, pledge, promise, guarantee; “that I will” – a positive phrase confirming present and future action, momentum, determination, resolve, responsibility, willpower, and intention; “support” – uphold, bear, carry, sustain, maintain; “and defend” – protect, guard, preserve, secure, shield, look after; “the Constitution of the United States.”
“Bound – Being under legal or moral obligation; To constitute the boundary or limit of; To set a limit to; confine”
o First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.
o The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure. Hence the need for Statue 1 to define the administration of the Oath.
He violated the law and the provisions of the Constitution by seizing control of GM and Chrysler without proper authorization from Congress. Although his unlawful cronies in Congress granted him the authority after the fact, his action to seize corporations was a violation of the law at the time it was implemented. The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court allowed this atrocity is no matter. Thomas Jefferson said it best when he articulated a key principle of liberty–any government that willfully violates the rule of law and encroaches on the rights of the people ceases to be a legitimate government. This government has violated the provisions of the 5th Amendment regarding due process and fair compensation at the very least.
The first law statute of the United States of America, enacted in the first session of the First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.
The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure. Hence the need for Statue 1 to define the administration of the Oath. (Impeachable and prosecutable)
Solemn: “marked by the observance of established form or ceremony”, “legally binding, Common legal phrase indicating that an agreement has been consciously made, and certain actions are now either required or prohibited”, “The other requirement for an agreement or contract to be considered legally binding is consideration – both parties must knowingly understand what they are agreeing to”. (American fully expected a president who followed the US Constitutional definition of how our government operates. Part of his “why he was better candidate” brought up many times while running was that he was a “Constitutional Professor”
“Bound – Being under legal or moral obligation; To constitute the boundary or limit of; To set a limit to; confine”
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
Maladministration
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Using our military for UN war efforts
Constitution of the United States of America, Article 1, Section 8: it stipulates that Congress duty is to “coin money” as a nation and not the Federal Reserve’s with its interest (fee charged on loans). Obama has not corrected this illegal act, nor has he insisted on a complete audit, nor has he frozen the Federal Reserve assets until we can ascertain if what they have done with OUR money is legal; $16 Trillion given to foreign nations, banks, and foreign based mega corporations with no knowledge of congress or the American people (defend our Constitution, country from previous domestic enemies)
Keep states their power
The meanings of the words in the Oath: “I”- an individual, person, citizen, one member of the whole, officer; “do” – perform, accomplish, act, carry out, complete, achieve, execute; “solemnly”- somberly, gravely, seriously, earnestly, sincerely, firmly, fervently, with thought and ceremony; “swear (or affirm)” – vow, pledge, promise, guarantee; “that I will” – a positive phrase confirming present and future action, momentum, determination, resolve, responsibility, willpower, and intention; “preserve” – to keep safe from injury, harm, or destruction; “protect” – to cover or shield from exposure, injury, damage, or destruction, to maintain the status or integrity of especially through financial or legal guarantees, to provide a guard or shield; “and defend” – protect, guard, preserve, secure, shield, look after; “the Constitution of the United States.”
I charge that Barack Obama has not done the duties required of the President of the USA as defined by the US Constitution, actively and knowingly went against the duties of the POTUS; and needs to be impeached. Then he needs to be charged, arrested, and held for prosecution, as he is a flight risk.
The Constitution of the United States specifies that an officer is to be impeached for “high crimes and misdemeanors”; experts agree that impeachment is permitted for noncriminal misconduct (e.g., violation of the Constitution), and can include criminal/civil actions.
It has invited considerable debate, but it is generally read to mean both indictable offenses and other serious noncriminal misconduct. The latter has included corruption, dereliction of constitutional duty, and violation of limitations on the power of an office
Actions he committed against our laws require prosecution.
Few of those who currently serve within the three branches of our federal government have been performing their duties as required by our US Constitution, which they knew before taking those offices and positions defined the way those offices and positions defined the exact way those offices/positions operated.
That Obama:
(1) Actively and knowingly went against the US Constitutional and the citizens of the United States. (impeachable)
Conduct seriously incompatible with either the constitutional form and principles of our government or the proper performance of constitutional duties of the presidential office
NDAA
Patriot Act extensions and additions to
Warrantless Search and Seizures
TSA warrantless searches
Denial of First Amendment Rights
Denial of Second Amendment Rights
Maladministration
Misapplication
Mandate to make us all buy health insurance
Using our military for UN war efforts
(2) Did not keep the oath required of him by the US Constitution. (impeachable)
President Obama had/has taken an oath to uphold all the laws and he had/has violated his duties as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer. (*Clinton Impeachment)
Took the Oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the US Constitution” (prosecutable, as he is a domestic enemy attacking us from the inside.)
Oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”