Spread the love


by Leo Patrick Haffey

General George Washington crossing the Delaware River on Christmas Day, 1776. How much are we willing to sacrifice to regain our lost liberties?

(Apr. 8, 2010) We were blessed from our beginning as a Nation under God. Our Founding Fathers bestowed on We the People the most profound privileges in the history of mankind. In our Declaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers succinctly stated our basic rights: “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

As with all Privileges and Rights, Duty comes. In the 233 years of our existence as a Nation by the people, we have lost sight of our Duty. I am as guilty as anyone of wanting to have the privileges and rights without having to perform the duty, but that changed for all of us on January 20, 2009. On that infamous date, a puppet of the puppet masters, alien to our Constitution, was inaugurated as the 44th “President” of the United States of America.

The Socialists, Communists and others alien to Our Country and Our Cause say that this “change” to our Nation is forever, but is that so? I don’t think so.

To dispel that alien notion of “change,” We the People need look no further than the Preamble of the Constitution of the United States: “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union… do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America.” Thus, “we the people,” individually, are established as one party among many to a contract binding upon the executors of this contract, our Constitution.

Who, then, are the executors of this contract with the people?

An executor of the Constitutional Contract is anyone and everyone who takes an oath to be bound by our Constitution and becomes a party to this agreement.

Foremost among the parties counterbalanced upon this executory contract is the President of the United States, the Chief Executive or Executor of the Constitutional Contract.

When is the President bound to this contract, our Constitution:  immediately, upon the taking of the Oath? In the instant case, Barack Hussein Obama became bound to our Constitutional Contract on January 20, 2009.

As succinctly stated by Chief Justice Marshall in the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison, “If a person’s duty is backed by law and not by political in nature, then he becomes subject of the law and is examinable by the court.”  Thus, Barack Hussein Obama, having bound himself contractually by law to our Constitutional Contract, is subject to the jurisdiction of the law.

Furthermore from Marbury, “Specific duty is assigned by law and individual rights depend upon the performance of that duty, it seems equally clear, that the individual who considers himself injured, has the right to resort to the laws of his country for a remedy. The question whether a right has vested or not, in its nature, judicial and must be tried by the judicial authority.” This means that anyone that can show that they were injured by BO’s actions has a right to sue him for said injury.

Most of the eligibility cases have focused on the “individual injured” theory which is an inherently weak legal argument in terms of present day law and a case involving the President of the United States, particularly in terms of obtaining standing.

Consequently, most of the cases previously filed have been dismissed for lack of standing. Simply stated, the lawyers did not include Plaintiffs who had a present contractual right or detriment recognized by law, or the lawyers did not include Defendants who owed a present duty to the Plaintiffs or had somehow injured the Plaintiffs.

As you might have concluded, a Marbury argument overcomes the standing problem in that all citizens received standing by the contractual commitment that Barrack Hussein Obama made to all of us on January 20, 2009.

When the right case with the right Plaintiffs (with standing) and the right Defendants (with a duty owed to Plaintiffs) is brought in a Court with jurisdiction, then the case will be heard.

In SCOTUS, I daresay there is already a majority theoretically inclined to rule for the proper Plaintiffs. It is, after all, the Constitution which the Supremes are all sworn to uphold. Moreover, the Supreme Court Justices are all “just” citizens of this Great Nation, and it is arguable the BO is not even a citizen and certain that he is not a natural born Citizen.

Now, you might think that this lawyer’s restatement of the words of our Founding Fathers are high-minded, but what can I as a single Citizen do to help take my country back from those who aim to destroy it?

This is What We the People Can Do

As provided by our Founding Fathers in our Bill of Rights, the first ten Amendments to our Constitution, Patriots can form Grand Juries to exercise self-governance and take our country back from those who aim to destroy it.

In the First Amendment, we the People are given the unalienable right “peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

In the Fifth Amendment, we the people are given the right to make a “presentment” of criminal charges against corrupt government officials. Historically, a presentment was used when a prosecutor or district attorney would not seek an indictment against a government official. Thus, you see, our Founding Fathers vested we the people with the power to prosecute corrupt government officials without intervention by judges or government attorneys.

In the Ninth Amendment, it is unequivocally stated that, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

In the Tenth Amendment, it is clearly stated, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution…are reserved…to the people.”

What does that mean in the context of the power of Citizen Grand Jurors?

Simply stated, it means that Citizens can form Grand Juries with or without the consent of any branch of the Judiciary, Federal or State.

Furthermore, it means that any and all Federal or State Rules or Laws of Criminal Procedure are unconstitutional to the extent that they limit the formation of Citizen Grand Juries to prior or post-approval by any Branch of the Judiciary, Federal or State.

It gets better for the Power of the People over Our Judiciary in the Eleventh Amendment, “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State…”

In reading the Eleventh Amendment as it pertains to Citizens’ Grand Juries, one must remember the legal context in which it was written. At the time of the ratification of the Eleventh Amendment, most criminal prosecutions were commenced by Citizens utilizing the services of private Citizen Attorneys.  Our Founding Fathers never intended for us to be subjugated and controlled by district attorneys and judges. Quite the contrary, our Founding Fathers intended for We the People to have control over our Judiciary by action of the Fourth Branch of Government, the Citizens’ Grand Jury.

Seen in its true, original context, the Eleventh Amendment clearly states that Citizens can form Federal or State Grand Juries without interference by the Federal Government. Furthermore, the Citizen Grand Juries can subpoena any and all of Barack Hussein Obama’s personal records held in any State or Federal Government Office or Department and said Office or Department is compelled by the Supreme Law of the Land, Our Constitution, to produce said records for said Grand Juries.

In United States vs. Williams (USSC 1992), Associate Supreme Court Justice Scalia eloquently wrote, “Rooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history…the Grand Jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the three branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right.” In other words, the power of the Grand Jury is assigned to We the People in order that we may obtain a “more perfect Union.”

Remember, Patriots, the case against Barack Hussein Obama will be over in Discovery.  Therefore, let us commence with our discovery of the truth regarding the suspect commonly known to us Citizens as Barack Hussein Obama of unknown Citizenship, Allegiance and Alliances.

For further reference, please see the following:

The Right Side of Life article on the Fourth Branch of Government, the Grand Jury

Article on the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause from Investigating Obama Blog

Steven Winter’s Landmark Essay on Standing

Essays on Chief Justice John Marshall

Alan Stang’s article, “Grand Jury Power, Take it Back”

WorldNetDaily article written by Leo Donofrio, “Why Obama is ineligible — regardless of his birthplace”

American Grand Jury historical essay by Leo Donofrio, “The Federal Grand Jury is the Fourth Branch of Government”

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Leo Patrick Haffey (and others):

    Many of you seem unaware of the “bear in the outhouse” in the form of the very serious and very well-argued – from a legal standpoint – action now in Appeals Court called Kerchner et al v. Obama et al. It is far and away the strongest and most-likely-to-be-heard case of all those “out there”.

    It is presently going to be heard “on merit” with respect to the issues of “standing”, etc. which the DOJ attorneys have been using (incorrectly) to attack the Constitution and unlawfully seek to keep in power a man who has never shown himself to be legally eligible to hold the office he now occupies. Once the technical issues such as standing, political question, justiciability, etc. are cleared up the case should be able to be heard “on merit” with respect to the genuine meat of the case – Obama’s eligibility or lack thereof.

    The Appeals Court has tentatively scheduled the “standing” hearing in late June of this year and oral arguments have been requested (but not yet granted by the Court). This hearing in and of itself will yield a good calibration as to whether the Judicial Branch is also in the tank as are the other two branches. If standing is denied, the case will then proceed to the Supreme Court. For good or for ill, courts do not move rapidly, but the late June will be of great importance.

    A link to Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s website is here (with many excellent essays on the eligibility matter and links to all of the legal actions so far):


    To understand just what is being appealed in the Kerchner et al case it would be helpful to read this legal analysis:

    A Federal Judge takes 4 strikes!!!

    The wonderful Apuzzo Brief is a primer on both Constitutional law, the meaning of it, the Founders’ intent vis-a-vis Article II of the Constitution and a forceful put-down of the lies and misinformation put forth by the Obama Flying Monkeys that infect a number of blogs.

    I’d urge everyone to read the Initial Appeals Brief from Attorney Apuzzo’s website along with the many essays by both Mario Apuzzo AND his Lead Plaintiff, Charles F. Kerchner. While there, it would really help to donate even a small amount to the publicity/education fund presently used only for full-page newspaper ads in the Washington Times National Weekly Edition.

    The Initial Appeals Brief gives a very good overview of the original action AND it puts the lie to the many false arguments by the Obot Flying Monkeys about why BHO is either (their words) eligible to hold the office he now occupies OR that it (their words) doesn’t matter that he is not eligible.

    Your understanding of the relation of the U. S. Constitution to We The People will be forever enlightened.

    1. I have communicated with Mario and am well aware of his civil lawsuit. After writing Briefs and Motions and doing extensive, research on civil suits, I am of the opinion that the only viable option for legally removing BHO in the short term is through the Citizen Grand Jury process.

      I do, however, support all the civil eligibility lawyers in their efforts. Having practised civil litigation for nearly 20 years, I am aware of how painfully slow civil cases proceed. Defendants simply respond faster when they are facing Indictments. Then they want speedy trials or settlements. In civil lawsuits, defense lawyers do everything thing they can to slow the legal process down.

  2. Question for the Grand Jury, any Grand Jury……….

    It is my understanding that the Hawaii Dept of Health rules WOULD allow
    disclosure of info on AKAObama, perhaps NOT a certified BC, but info
    contained therein to ANY legal entity involved in a pending court case.
    Has any convened Grand Jury actually requested info from Hawaii Dept
    of Health concerning birth records on him, other than requesting certified

    If you can get SOME info such as birth place, dates and parentage, then
    I would think you could take THAT to a prosecutor or judge and be granted
    discovery for official document copies.

    1. Good idea but it only works through “official channels”, like a Sheriff or Judge. All of which refuse to get involved in any way shape or form. To much controversy for them and after all, they want to get re-elected???

  3. In reply to Carl Swensson, I remain convinced that the ‘teeth’ that we need to compel action on Grand Jury presentments lies within the framework of Citizen’s Arrest. Citizen’s Arrest can very easily backfire, as I have been so succinctly counseled by John Charlton. So any use of that instrument must be thoroughly researched, planned and executed on a selected target. As for a proper target, it would seem that he or she with the duty to accept and process a Grand Jury presentment and who ignores that duty such as a judge or a district attorney would be a likely target. If issued in a county where the sheriff, such as Sheriff Mack, takes the constitution and his job seriously, and perhaps even coordinated with the sheriff, citizens’ arrests seem most likely to produce the desired result — grand jury presentments given proper consideration and then action through our courts.

    1. I agree michaelsr. That is why we have to start at the County level, legally taking back one County at a time using the Citizens Grand Jury process.

  4. why has the supreme court already declined to hear 7 cases involving elligibility. i bet a lot of people don’t know that, but 7 cases have made their way to the supreme court and every time the court said…..none of our business. fact.

  5. I did the first Grand Jury in March of 09 and helped two other states do the same. AmericanGrandJury.org has done +/- 15 more. Presentments have been delivered from the White House and all of the Congress to US Attorneys, Gov.’s, AJ’, Sheriff’s and Judges all over the country. To date, the only response of note was from DC District Court Judge Royce Lamberth who acknowledged our validity but would not act on it since it was not done in his jurisdiction. One of these, done by AGJ was a national jury pool of over 125 jurists.
    Without teeth we have not accomplished the desired results. If you have another method of making these stick then please share with us your knowledge.

    1. 12 Simple Steps for Patriots to put some “Teeth” in Citizen Grand Jury Indictments and regain control of our Government:

      1) Advertise and Promote the Fact that you are forming a Grand Jury in Blogs, Local Newspapers and Community Organizations.

      2) Form the Grand Jury and select a Foreman.

      3) Select a Private Attorney General to make Presentments to Grand Jury, if local DA refuses to make presentments.

      4) Select a convenient Meeting Place.

      5) Communicate with all Citizens who have criminal information to present.

      6) Schedule presentments by said Citizens.

      7) Subpoena documents from Government Offices and Officials.

      8) Schedule presentment of said Documents to Grand Jury by Grand Jury Attorney General.

      9) Have Grand Jury Attorney General present said Documents to Grand Jury.

      10) After investigation and deliberation is completed, vote and issue a True Bill (Indictment) or No True Bill.

      11 Announce all Indictments to the Press and schedule News Conferences in front of your local Court House.

      12) Serve the Indictment on the Judiciary at Court House News Conferences for the Issuance of Arrest Warrants.


      1. Steps 11 & 12 are so important that they deserve restatement:

        11) Announce all Indictments to the Press and schedule News Conferences in front of your local Court House.

        12) Serve the Indictment on the Judiciary at ***Court House News Conferences*** for the Issuance of Arrest Warrants.

        To put “Teeth” in your Indictments, you must PUBLICIZE, publicize, publicise:

        (verb) (tr): to bring to public notice; advertise

  6. Given this review of what is our duty, let us make haste to the formation and order of Grand Jury while we have some Republic left. Lead us in this process
    all over America. NOW is the appointed time.