Supreme Court: Why are you not traitors to the Constitution?

YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS CRISIS AND CAN BE REMOVED AND TRIED FOR TREASON

Dear Editor:  The following letter was sent to the United States Supreme Court today:

“The republic endures and this is the symbol of its faith.” – Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes
Cornerstone Address, Supreme Court Building

July 14, 2010

The U.S. Supreme Court building is on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. Justices serve as long as they demonstrate "during good Behaviour." Are they doing so right now?

Supreme Court of the United States
US Supreme Court Building
One First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Dear Honorable Chief Justice Roberts:

Perhaps you and the rest of the justices have not noticed, but there is a war going on here.  We the people are having a pretty hard time trying to understand just what it is the Supreme Court is doing these days.  Would you care to fill us in?

Maybe you should consider a press conference where you could not only clarify the matter in which Mr. Obama attempted to discredit the Supreme Court but also maybe even rein in this rogue government.  Speaking for most of the people in the United States, we would sure appreciate a fine demonstration of how the separation of powers protects all of us from an overly abusive regime.  We would welcome such a demonstration at any time you can arrange for it to happen.  Like now.

By the way, Justice Roberts, the complaints we raise are not political in nature.  The usurper who is currently being illegally entertained as our president and his cohorts have conveniently managed to blur the line between politics and subversion so effectively that it appears even members of your illustrious judicial body have also fallen for this ruse.

Based on my daily monitoring of events to insure the safety of the Constitution, I can only imagine you might have noticed that our government has been seized by Communists and other progressives,  the Constitution has been totally ignored, Congress and everyone in the regime are violating their oaths of office, and, from what I can tell, bouncing off the walls with bribes and illegal deals that are being funded by “we” the taxpayers.  It would seem that conflicts of interest abound and are the rule as opposed to the exception.

This rogue “administration” is being run by what I believe is an Islamic fundamentalist…you know, we used to call those guys “terrorists,” that is, until the main terrorist himself, “with the help of his friends,” seized control and dumbed up the terms used to describe our enemies.

He is now acting illegally as the president because the Congress and you have turned your back on the Constitution. Now perhaps you all are too embarrassed to admit the nature of your folly and maybe I am totally off-base  here, but this is how I see the matter.  If I am incorrect in my opinion as expressed, I would greatly appreciate your setting the record straight.

While I wait for your response, let me comment that Americans have always been characterized by our generosity, but, geeze, Justice Roberts, I am sure even the members of the Supreme Court could appreciate the bizarre circumstances of actually having invited a domestic enemy dedicated to destroying our country to assume command of our economy, our resources and the most powerful military in the world.  So am I right about this, or is it my imagination?

OK, so let’s get down to brass tacks!  The information below clarifies the issue about which we as citizens have been agonizing for the last 18 or so months.  This one sentence says it all:

As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

So let’s knock off this foot-dragging to settle this issue of Obama’s eligibility.  The responsibility is yours and yours alone.  All of these divisive “No Standing” roadblocks are instruments of your doing.  As I see it, your deliberate judicial shenanigans serve to delay the resolution of this Constitutional crisis and are aiding and abetting our enemy.  We are losing thousands of productive man-days due to your failure to act.

As the guardian and interpreter of the Constitution, in my view, you have failed your responsibility miserably.  You have permitted this problem to persist in violation of your oath of office.  Justice Roberts, just what part of the following is not clear?

The Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law.

EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW

These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

As I see it, when a person runs for public office, he is no longer a private citizen.  He has an obligation and a compelling duty to provide any reasonable background information. How can you possibly deny the public access to this information without incriminating yourself?

The purpose of the constitutional requirement for eligibility is perfectly clear.  What is not clear is if indeed the founding documents must be applied in whole, how is it possible for any one or any entity to circumvent satisfying the requirements as it may become convenient?  Certainly this practice comes under the purview of the courts and is not negotiable.  So tell me, Justice Roberts, on what basis have you permitted this constitutional violation to occur?

Considering your oath of office, your responsibility is ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice.  Your responsibility does not permit you the luxury to decide to what degree you will comply with this responsibility. As I see it, Justice Roberts, you and the rest of the Supreme Court have failed the American people.

We as a people are respectful of the rule of law and we honor the principles laid out in the Constitution.  As you are well aware, every day we find new abuses aimed at further destruction of the Republic that has been built over the last 200 years.  Many of us resent the treatment we have received and warn of limitations to our patience.  The anger of the people is palpable.  If you do not feel it, you had better work at it harder.

Additionally, recent evidence has emerged and many are led to believe this whole conspiracy has been orchestrated by puppet masters behind the politicians who are so powerful that they can arbitrarily change the course of history based on a handshake.  So tell me, Justice Roberts, is the Supreme Court in a position to go along with this type of an “election deal?” A deal between two potential candidates, neither of whom were and still are not qualified to hold the office of the president?  And even though they still might not be qualified, how is it that one of them was capable of fraudulently distorting the outcome of an election and disenfranchising the citizens of the United States?

The most damming part, Justice Roberts…all of this on your watch!

Maybe a few pages out of the Foreign Affairs Manual  “7 FAM 1131.6-2” might explain things.  Let’s face it:  neither candidate could possibly have qualified, so why the games?  Are all of those engaged in this conspiracy so unpatriotic and lacking in ethics and morality as to permit the wholesale slaughter of the American republic for the sake of a power grab or some individual profiteering?

How could such a devious plan by a group of government/private officials be permitted?  How could it be possible that such a conspiracy of this magnitude be carried out by such a broad group of people and entities and yet be kept secret from the American people?

My point here, Justice Roberts, is that your duty to assume an active role as the guardian of the Constitution is long overdue.  On many occasions you have been invited to participate.  However, at each occurrence, you chose to ignore the opportunity to join.

  • Just when do we the people see the application of the safety net so ingeniously devised by the founding fathers to stop just this type of abusive tyranny?
  • When does the Supreme Court assert its responsibility to nullify this gross and arrogant abuse of executive power?
  • Just when do we see the rule of law enforced and the separation of powers by the three branches invoked?
  • What is the key here, Justice Roberts?  What is the trigger?

    Arnie

    ————————–

    Editor’s Note: The quote at the top of this article from the website of the U.S. Supreme Court was taken from Mr. Charles Evans Hughes, who served as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1930-1941.  In 1916, he ran for president against the incumbent, Woodrow Wilson, but did not meet the Framers’ definition of “natural born Citizen,” according to Democrat attorney and ambassador to Italy under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Breckinridge Long.

    Notarized Treason Complaint against Obama
    List of Treasonous Acts of which Obama is accused
    Page 1 of Treason Complaint addressed to the writer's local FBI office

    Page 2 of Treason Complaint sent to FBI


    33 Responses to "Supreme Court: Why are you not traitors to the Constitution?"

    1. kailuagirl   Tuesday, July 20, 2010 at 7:04 PM

      The sad reality is less than 1000 people have viewed this video. Hearing Justice Thomas laugh and joke about the question of POTUS ELIGIBILITY is disgusting beyond measure.

      The distribution of information to the predominant majority of legal U.S. Citizens is the single greatest problem we face. Until those who are not corrupted can distribute the FACTS & TRUTH, I fear, there is little hope to overcome what amounts to tactical destruction of an operative Constitution.

      ALL in Federal Government, elected or appointed, should be removed and replaced. And the entire Media Monopoly should be dismantled, piece by piece, much like many of the corporate conglomerates have been taken down in the last 40 years.

      But, unfortunately, it seems, the predominate majority of legal U.S. Citizens lack the necessary initiative, desire, courage. Without the masses standing firm and united in opposition to the actions of this Federal Government, and in support of Constitutional governance, beating the organized- corrupted, is ???

    2. Michael Duncan   Friday, July 16, 2010 at 2:35 AM

      All my life I have been taught that we are a nation of laws, not men. However, the Supreme Court is in the hip pocket of those who think $$$ trumps our laws.
      Way to go Arnie. My home is your home. I stand behind you 100%.

    3. J. Landsdowne   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 5:39 PM

      Thank you Arnie Rosner for a well written letter! Hope you hear from Justice Roberts soon and it is what we expect to hear from someone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution and takes it seriously. Of course, I am going to have serious doubts, since he is the one who “swore” Barry in… Good luck and thank you for being a true American Patriot!

    4. Tim   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 3:54 PM

      Indiana’s Scott joins growing list of public figures asking eligibility questions

      Black candidate wonders if Obama ‘entitled’ to office

      http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2010/07/black-candidate-wonders-if-obama.html

    5. Arnie Rosner   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 3:15 PM

      Correction… Obama used our tax dollars to pay his attorneys.

      Slight conflict of interest?

      Arnie

    6. Arnie Rosner   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 3:13 PM

      By all means. Let me encourage everyone to express their concerns. Feel free to use my letter as a model and make changes as you see fit.

      I actually go to the extra trouble to send this via FedEx. That way I get a signature.

      Arnie

    7. Tom the veteran   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM

      “It is most true that this Court will not take jurisdiction if it should not: but it is equally true, that it must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it, if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid; but we cannot avoid them. All we can do is, to exercise our best judgment, and conscientiously to perform our duty. In doing this, on the present occasion, we find this tribunal invested with appellate jurisdiction in all cases arising under the constitution and laws of the United States. We find no exception to this grant, and we cannot insert one.”
      The words of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall when he wrote in Cohens v.Virginia 19 US 264 (1821)

    8. tdr   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 10:36 AM

      Vote for Mario to be invited on the Judge’s show.

      http://freedomwatch.uservoice.com/forums/16626-freedom-watch-guest-suggestions/suggestions/268573-mario-apuzzo-esq-

    9. Grandma   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 10:02 AM

      Is it not true that the law clerks are blocking all correspondence to the justices? It gives the justices the excuse to ignore! Didn’t Orly have that problem?

    10. Chance   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 9:34 AM

      Thank you, Mr. Rosner. Can we all do the same thing. Can we all send complaint letters?

    11. Chance   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 9:18 AM

      Thistle: I am sure she is looking to run again. Many conservative radio hosts agree with this. We must see to it that she NEVER again gets on the ballots. She is as much of a communist as Obama.

    12. Carl Swensson   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 8:29 AM

      Excellent job, Arnie!

      This kind of approach needs to be repeated over and over again until they get the message that we’re “tired as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore”.
      You’ve done a great service to our country and I’m sure that (Ret.) Lt. Cmdr. Walter Fitzpatrick will look at this and smile, knowing full well that you, me and everyone else who filed these complaints will have used up their very last peaceful means of redress. It is a warning to the SC and all others playing games with our Constitution that this cannot and will not stand.

      I’m so very tired of hearing from the “Rules of criminal/civil procedure”, anti-Constituional, lili livered courts and judges that we, Americans, have “No standing!?!?!?

      Please folks, repeat Arnie’ actions now, across the country, and let’s show the PTB who really makes this country great.

    13. Tom the veteran   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 5:42 AM

      The danger is not, that the judges will be too firm in resisting public opinion, and in defence of private rights or public liberties; but, that they will be ready to yield themselves to the passions, and politics, and prejudices of the day.
      Joseph Story

    14. Robert Laity   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 4:15 AM

      Correction of link to Clarence Thomas comment:

    15. Robert Laity   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 4:11 AM

      I have filed treason/fraud and illegal alien complaints against Obama (See Criminal Information No. 10-002-896,City of Tonawanda,NY Police Department and INS Complaint of Robert Laity against Obama.

      Clarence Thomas ADMITTED that SCOTUS is “EVADING” the CertifiGate issue:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmX4Fg3W_vY

      Obama PAID his lawyers to find a wat to “EVADE” Article II:
      http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/6507-4049

    16. Tim   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 3:56 AM

      Voters Are Much More Embarrassed by Political Class Than By Arizona

      http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2010/voters_are_much_more_embarrassed_by_political_class_than_by_arizona

    17. KBB   Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 2:41 AM

      You are so correct, thistle. Hillary Clinton as president would just be Obama-lite. She, like Obama, is a student and devotee of Saul Alinsky. She wrote her college thesis on Alinsky’s rules.
      To head off any efforts that Hillary may be thinking of running, we need to send around that YouTube video of her in the primary debates with Obama, where she brags that she’s a “modern progressive”. Well, we now know damn well what a progressive does to America, and we don’t want no stinkin’ progressives. There’s so much damage done by Obama the progressive that we need a big anti-dote, such as a true conservative, to get this place back on track. Hillary, as you say, will be more of the same.

    18. WM. HENDERSON   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 9:59 PM

      WE ARE WITNESS TO THE MOST CORRUPT GOVERNMENT THIS COUNTRY HAS EVER BEEN FACED WITH….

      EVERY BRANCH HAS PROVEN TO BE CORRUPT…

      THE OCCUPANT OF THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT REFUSES TO PROVE HIS ELIGIBILITY BY SEALING ALL HIS VITAL RECORDS…

      THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH IS WORKING AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE …

      THE JUDICIARY HAS PROVEN TO BE AN OBSTACLE TO THE TRUTH AND REFUSES TO UPHOLD THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND…

      ALL HAVE FAILED TO UPHOLD THEIR OATH TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION…

      I WILL NOT MINCE WORDS HERE… THEY ARE TRAITORS TO THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE…

      THE TIME GROWS NEAR THAT THE PEOPLE MUST REMOVE THIS CANCER IN OUR GOVERNMENT IF WE ARE TO SURVIVE AS A NATION…

      PUSH HAS COME TO SHOVE AND THE MIGHTY GIANT THAT IS WE THE PEOPLE HAS AWAKENED TO THIS CORRUPTION AND TREASON…

      STAND UP…

      GEAR UP…

      STAND READY!!!

    19. Stock   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 8:41 PM

      Just in passing, Ms. Virginia Thomas (justice Thomas’ wife) operates a “Conservative” website “Liberty Central”. I am just curious as to why she has not replied to my requests that she explain how the site purports to support Constitutional adherence but yet she has failed or refused to address the “Obama” eligibility issue. I wonder if anyone else here has contacted that site.

    20. Flaming Fury   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 8:20 PM

      Bravo, Arnie! You wrote very well, very concisely, and courageously. Post again in the unlikely event you actually receive a reply!!

    21. jtx   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 7:52 PM

      You’ve given us another excellent letter, Arnie, and let’s hope that the Supreme Court FINALLY comes to its senses. Please keep us informed as to the treason complaint.

      The Kerchner et al v. Obama et al action will be in front of them during their very next session and THEN we’ll really see if and when the rubber hits the road. The case is exceedingly well-pled as you probably know.

      In case others are not aware of the progress of the case which has now cleared the last pre-SCOTUS roadblock in Federal Appeals Court, here’s some pertinent facts – which should ALL be read:

      Reprinted with permission of The Post & Email, Inc.

      When is the Constitution like a Crocodile??

      Apparently it is when you are a Federal Judge with lifetime (taxpayer paid) tenure on either the District Court of New Jersey or the Third Circuit Court of Appeals level as is clearly demonstrated by case 09-4209 Kerchner et al v. Obama et al. If you remember in the District Court, Judge Simandle took it upon himself at the behest of the DOJ lawyers striving to defend Obama (who was initially sued before he took the Oath of Office and while still a private person) by repeatedly violating his judicial oath (meaning violating the Constitution that he swore to uphold).

      In case you weren’t aware of that debacle, here’s a reminder (which should be read) so that you’ll have the background required to grasp what’s going on.

      Read the rest here

    22. Larry Brian Radka   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 7:46 PM

      You’re absolutely right!

    23. michaelsr   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 6:26 PM

      Bob Campbell, AGJ, said, “There is only one way I can see that can stop this menace — 10 million Americans flood the streets of DC, and not leave until Government meets all our demands. We don’t even need to bear arms for that. And it is perfectly Constitutional. Constitution expressly gives that right to the people.”

      My estimate was 16.5 million here on P&E (5% of the population). Think of it as working just like old oil in the bottom of an engine — sludge. Only this would make our government sluggish. I prefer to call it Gumming-up-the-works. Peacefully, non-violently, & legal.

    24. Benaiah   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 6:14 PM

      Are “We the people” entitled to a hearing “upon the merits” as required by the Due Process Clause when the “office of President” is occupied by a person who is not an Article II natural born citizen and thus not “eligible to the office of President” under Article II, Section I, Clause 5, which states, “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…”, or are “We the people” required – in its opportunity to be heard on the seizure of its property, the “office of the President”, by a usurper – to simply accept that Barack Hussein Obama is an Article II natural born citizen and thus “eligible to the office of President” based solely on the digital image of a purported Certification of Live Birth, which was posted on the internet by the usurper himself?

      Is a savings and loan association taken over by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board – without any notice or hearing and on the basis of an administrative record compiled ex parte by the Board – entitled to a post-deprivation hearing “upon the merits” as provided in 12 U.S.C. § 1464 (d) (6) (A) and as required by the Due Process Clause, or is the association restricted – in its first and only opportunity to be heard on the seizure of its property – to an attempt to prove that the Board action was arbitrary and capricious, based solely on the administrative record selected by the Board itself?

      John 10:1-2, 10
      I tell you the truth, the man [USURPER] who does not enter the sheep pen [OFFICE OF PRESIDENT] by the gate [ARTICLE II, SECTION 1, CLAUSE 5 OF THE CONSTITUTION], but climbs in by some other way [FRAUD], is a thief and a robber. The man who enters by the gate [ARTICLE II NATURAL-BORN CITIZENSHIP – BORN IN THE COUNTRY, OF PARENTS WHO ARE CITIZENS] is the shepherd of his sheep [WE THE PEOPLE]. The thief [USURPER] comes only to steal and kill and destroy [THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, AND WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES]…

      Matthew 7:15
      Watch out for false prophets [USURPERS & THOSE WHO SUPPORT USURPERS]. They come to you in sheep’s clothing [CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS & THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES], but inwardly they are ferocious wolves [WHO COME ONLY TO STEAL AND KILL AND DESTROY AMERICA].

    25. Lisa G in NZ   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 5:00 PM

      This is an excellent letter. I hope the justice will actually read it and understand millions of Americans want answers and WILL.NOT.REST until obtained.

    26. A pen   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 4:31 PM

      It should be noted that the entire purpose of regulating citizenship is an exercise in maintaining both political and cultural supremacy over sovereign land. In the early days of this nation there was a need to populate areas to better hold political control over them. Care was taken to grant citizenship to those who would assimilate. One who assimilates does not change the politics of the state nor does he change the culture of his host. There is also a thing called common sense that tells us to look at a persons actions to derive their intentions. Then there is the Law of Nations which has been totally ignored as a legitimate reference in this citizenship exercise. It is clear that congress was instructed by the constitution to use it where foreign laws were encountered, “Offenses against the Law of Nations”, and immigration violations and citizenship fraud are certainly that. It is clear that congress is in contempt of the constitution. It is clear they have joined with the executive in this contempt. It is also clear the federal courts are also in contempt by joining the other two houses. If the third house is refusing to act when it should as chief justice John Marshal made clear then we as citizens have every right and duty to throw off this government. A previous poster, michaelsr, said it best ” Do not count on there being a pretty ending to this” . History has proven this to be correct and the longer the usurpation stands the uglier it will get when thrown off.

    27. 2discern   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:46 PM

      The emphasis of the letter is paramount to the law breaking atmosphere of this administration and the lack of action by CONgress. Actually, the restraint of Patriots nationwide is waning. Although, Arnie exhibits great self control in the letter, the leaks of Constitutional passion spill from his pen. The many who follow this saga of barry soetero occupying the White House without ANY documented proof of eligibility continue to pursue avenues of peaceful legal means. However, time is running out. The daily damage is being done to our Republic and the America we once knew is fading fast with every new bill passed, every executive order signed. Thankfully, once the usurper and his American-hating wife are exposed as the frauds that they are, all the repeals, reversals, and restoration can take place including the removal of any distinction of being the 44th POTUS. We the People will have a new election for the actual 44th POTUS at that time.

    28. Tim   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:42 PM

      An interesting comment from the Washington Times:

      http://americangrandjury.org/interesting-comment-in-the-washington-times

    29. thistle   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:11 PM

      Harry’s mention of Bill and Hillary Clinton brings up the need to mention that the news has been pumping Hillary up the last few weeks and maybe are trying to get people comfortable with her running again or taking over for Obama IF he is removed. That would be disasterous as both Clintons are of the same stinking cloth that Obama is from. They would just continue on taking America down the same slip-sliding path that the Obama regime has been doing the last 19 months. Memory serves me that there were many suspicious instances during the Clinton’s 8 year reign that some problem people (to the Clintons) ‘went missing’ suddenly. Just like the teflon man, Obama, nothing sticks to the Clintons either. Let’s make sure we don’t trade one socialist/communist/marxist (or whatever name you prefer) rat for another.

      Another great letter, Mr. Rosner.

    30. Patrick Martin   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 2:33 PM

      Thank you for expressing our concerns ever so well, Arnie!

      What I also hope they understand, should they continue to ignore, they are facing an uprising from the people that they won’t be able to accommodate.

      My view is that all of Congress belongs in jail for breaking their oath of office, and we have a usurper who most likely belongs on a slow boat back to Kenya.

    31. michaelsr   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 2:03 PM

      Amen, Mr. Rosner. Very nicely stated !

      P.S.
      Justice Roberts: The American people are calling your bluff. Start corrective action NOW. If you hesitate to take action, We The People will soon be forced to. The American people as a whole are peaceful and non-violent. And while a peaceful resolution by your action according to the rule of law is preferred, you should know that we will not go quietly into the night. If we must go, it will be kicking and fighting the whole way. Do not count on there being a pretty ending to this. Keep one more thing in mind: There are many more patriotic Americans than there are leftist wackos who have perpetrated this crisis.

    32. Harry H   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:15 PM

      Thanks to Arnie for focusing on the fact that presidential eligibility is not just a political matter but a legal question, a question in fact of Constitutional mandate. If the Supreme Court cannot bring itself to address the blatant violation of a Constitutional mandate, we are living under jungle law–might makes right.

      Also, Billary Clinton was the backup plan, and returning the Clintons to the White House would have violated the spirit and, I believe, the letter of the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidential power to two terms. But not a peep of protest was raised against the co-president Clintons’ grasp for continued power.

      Without adherence to the Constitution, there is no constitutional republic, just a power-sharing arrangement among the powerz that be.

    33. Kingskid   Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 1:01 PM

      Great letter, Arnie. We can only hope and pray that the SC takes one of the cases working through the legal system and applies proper jurisprudence to this matter of the worst national security crisis this country has ever faced. If they persist in a “hands-off” approach, how can they not be held liable with the usurper?

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.

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