Spread the love


by Sharon Rondeau

George Mason wanted the people's rights enumerated beyond the U.S. Constitution

(Jan. 13, 2011) — The Bill of Rights, which includes the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, was adopted by the Framers largely due to fear that the new  federal Constitution would allow the central government to step outside of its boundaries and invoke tyranny on the citizenry.  The Bill of Rights originally contained 12 amendments, but the first two were not approved.

The Virginia Declaration of Rights, written by George Mason, served as the basis of that which became the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson.  Mason had decried the fact that the new U.S. Constitution did not contain a list of citizens’ rights to guard against government tyranny, and his work was ultimately incorporated into the Bill of Rights drafted by James Madison.

Section 8 of the Virginia Declaration of Rights states:

That in all capital or criminal prosecutions a man has a right to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, to call for evidence in his favor, and to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of twelve men of his vicinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty; nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; that no man be deprived of his liberty except by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.

On September 25, 1789, Congress approved 12 amendments which enumerated the rights of the people which were not to be infringed, and on December 15, 1791, three-quarters of the state legislatures approved Articles 3-12 as presented.  These became the Bill of Rights containing ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights reads:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

A history of grand juries states that “no recorded debate and no opposition” occurred during the Framers’ discussion of the proposed Bill of Rights.

A summary of the case Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, argued in 1956, states:

The grand jury is an English institution, brought to this country by the early colonists and incorporated in the Constitution by the Founders. There is every reason to believe that our constitutional grand jury was intended to operate substantially like its English progenitor. The basic purpose of the English grand jury was to provide a fair method for instituting criminal proceedings against persons believed to have committed crimes. Grand jurors were selected from the body of the people, and their work was not hampered by rigid procedural or evidential rules. In fact, grand jurors could act on their own knowledge, and were free to make their presentments or indictments on such information as they deemed satisfactory. Despite its broad power to institute criminal proceedings, the grand jury grew in popular favor with the years. It acquired an independence in England free from control by the Crown or judges. Its adoption in our Constitution as the sole method for preferring charges in serious criminal cases shows the high place it held as an instrument of justice. And, in this country, as in England of old, the grand jury has convened as a body of laymen, free from technical rules, acting in secret, pledged to indict no one because of prejudice and to free no one because of special favor.

In United States v. Mandujano, 425 U.S. 564, it is stated:

The grand jury is an integral part of our constitutional heritage which was brought to this country with the common law. The Framers, most of them trained in the English law and traditions, accepted the grand jury as a basic guarantee of individual liberty; notwithstanding periodic criticism, much of which is superficial, overlooking relevant history, the grand jury continues to function as a barrier to reckless or unfounded charges. “Its adoption in our Constitution as the sole method for preferring charges in serious criminal cases shows the high place it held as an instrument of justice.”

Presentments historically arose from a grand jury without interference from any government official.  “It observes and collects evidence of the offense and the government has nothing to do with it. So the grand jury is independent. The court then prepares the indictment based on the presentment.”

In his essay “If It’s Not a Runaway, It’s Not a Real Grand Jury” published in the Creighton Law Review, author Roger Roots states:

In theory, the grand jury is supposed to act as a check on the government — a people’s watchdog against arbitrary and malevolent prosecutions.[3] By and large, however, federal grand juries rarely challenge federal prosecutors.

Today, critics are nearly unanimous in describing the alleged oversight function of modern grand juries as essentially a tragic sham.[4] The Framers of the Bill of Rights would scarcely recognize a grand jury upon seeing the modern version conduct business in a federal courthouse.[5] In modern federal grand jury proceedings, the government attorney is clearly in charge and government agents may outnumber the witnesses by six-to-one.[6]

The 1946 Rules of Criminal Procedure issued by the U.S. Supreme Court with the approval of Congress deemed presentments from grand juries “obsolete,” in regard to which Roots states:

A truly independent grand jury — which pursues a course different from the prosecutor — is today so rare that it is an oddity, and a virtual impossibility at the federal level since Rule 6 was codified in 1946.

Today, indictments are issued by a government prosecutor to a grand jury.  Wikipedia describes a grand jury as:

A grand jury, a type of jury now confined almost exclusively to federal courts and some state jurisdictions in the United States, determines whether there is enough evidence for a criminal trial to go forward. Grand juries carry out this duty by examining evidence presented to them by a prosecutor and issuing indictments, or by investigating alleged crimes and issuing presentments.

How did this change in the function and governance of the grand jury occur in which a judge or district attorney controls it on the local level and a federal prosecutor wields control at the federal level?  Has the government takeover of the Fifth Amendment grand juries resulted in jury-rigging to obtain a specific outcome in certain jurisdictions?

If the government now controls the grand juries and even the trial juries, is there any justice at all remaining in the United States?  Are innocent people sitting in jail for years on end waiting for a new trial?

Is the takeover of the grand juries treason against the state and U.S. Constitutions?

Why did the people allow this to happen?

Even in today’s Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure, the duties of the grand jury are stated as:

(1) inquire into, consider, and act on all criminal cases submitted to it by the district attorney general;

(2) inquire into any report of a criminal offense brought to its attention by a member of the grand jury;

(3) inquire into the condition and management of prisons and other county buildings and institutions within the county;

(4) inquire into the condition of the county treasury;

(5) inquire into the correctness and sufficiency of county officers’ bonds;

(6) inquire into any state or local officers’ abuse of office; and

(7) report the results of its actions to the court.

Is that happening in Tennessee, or is the grand jury a puppet of the local government?

During times of war, normal constitutional principles are suspended for the entire population if necessary to win the conflict.  However, constitutional protections, including trial by jury, are not afforded members of the military even during peacetime. In 1775, the Articles of War were drafted by the Second Continental Congress to apply to the Continental Army under General George Washington.  In 1806, the Articles were revised and remained in effect until 1951, when the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) replaced it.

A 1919 hearing by the Senate Committee on Military Affairs chaired by Sen. George E. Chamberlain began:

Gentlemen of the committee, there were a great many letters that came to me, and I assume came to other members of this committee, complaining about the administration of military justice.  I received a great many letters from parents of young men who had been court-martialed and sent to prison, and from those letters I concluded, as you must have concluded, that there were inequalities in the administration of military justice and much harshness and severity of sentence for the crimes committed, many of which were simple breaches of discipline, such as absence without leave, and so forth.  These letters induced me to mention this subject in a little address I made in the Senate on the 30th of December, and later on to introduce a bill on January 13, 1919, to meet the situation, if possible.  That bill was tentative.  This hearing is on that bill in the hope that it or some other measure that will met the situation may be enacted.

Despite congressional consideration over the years, the constitutional right of trial by jury has never been included in the UCMJ.  According to Time, when Maj. Nidal Hasan faces court-martial for his alleged role in the Ft. Hood murders in November 2009, “The UCMJ’s version of the civilian grand jury takes place early in the 120-day process and is much more open and balanced. In the hearing, the prosecution will lay out its prima facie case before a military judge, and the defense will have an opportunity to put in evidence and cross-examine witnesses. Out of that hearing, specific charges will be issued and recommended to an officer with the rank of general in Hasan’s direct chain of command.”  However, no grand jury will review the evidence before an indictment  is issued, so whether or not there is more “balance” or fairness in the military process remains questionable.

Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states that “NoBill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”  A bill of attainder has been described as “A legislative act pronouncing a person guilty of a crime, usually treason, without trial and subjecting that person to capital punishment and attainder. Such acts are prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.”

At a military court-martial, the panel seated to hear the evidence brought against the defendant consists of military officers called “members,” not a jury of one’s peers, which is a different system than the above constitutional provision.  Therefore, members of the military have never had the benefit of a trial by jury as civilians as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.

The military violated its own rule in the courts-martial of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin last month when it failed to adhere to the provision in Chap. 846, Article 46 of the UCMJ, which states:

The trial counsel, the defense counsel, and the court-martial shall have equal opportunity to obtain witnesses and other evidence in accordance with such regulations as the President may prescribe. Process issued in court- martial cases to compel witnesses to appear and testify and to compel the production of other evidence shall be similar to that which courts of the Unites States having criminal jurisdiction may lawfully issue and shall run to any part of the United States, or the Territories, Commonwealths, and possessions.

Could a federal grand jury investigate that?

According to Leo Donofrio, JD, the power of the grand jury has been subverted by the 1946 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Note 4, which has attempted to render presentments from an independently-convened grand jury “obsolete.”  However, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in 1992 affirmed the original role of the grand juries when he stated:

In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people.

An article by Susan Brenner entitled “The Voice of the Community: (N1) A Case for Grand Jury Independence” states:

Our constitutional framers thought it a sound idea to create structures allowing lay citizens to check government excesses. The jury system, one of the more obvious and enduring of such structures, was included in our governmental framework because of the widespread belief that the community’s voice would ensure a more just judicial system. Requiring community consent before charging a person with a serious crime was considered so important that the grand jury structure was immortalized in the Bill of Rights…

The current status of state grand juries is more complex. Some states have maintained and even increased grand jury independence. Others have devolved into more passive institutions than their federal 68 counterparts. The dominant trend in both systems, however, demonstrates an historical transformation from juries that were once active and aggressive to weak and passive bodies that are utterly dependent upon prosecutors for guidance.

If the government has taken away the grand juries guaranteed to “We the People” by the Fifth Amendment by installing their own puppets, what can be done to reclaim them?

Many citizens’ grand juries convened in 2009 and 2010 and were deemed “constitutional” by Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC.  Hundreds of presentments were served upon public officials across the country. However, not one would consider the evidence presented of criminal activity on the part of Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, Congress, and former Vice President Dick Cheney for having certified the Electoral College votes for Obama without any vetting of his constitutional eligibility to serve as President and Commander-in-Chief.  Further, Lamberth stated that “the Presentments will be dismissed as the petitioners lack standing to enforce the criminal laws of the United States.”

However, historically that was the exact function of the grand jury, according to Roots:

The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past.[25]

If citizens’ grand jury presentments will not be acted upon by those in government positions, what about currently-seated state and federal grand juries?  These bodies could be informed of their true power by “We the People” since “In conducting investigations, a federal grand jury can pretty much do what it wants, other than violating certain testimonial and constitutional privileges. Federal grand jury subpoenas are almost never quashed on grounds that they call for irrelevant information or go beyond the grand jury’s authority.”

Could a grand jury which is already convened be asked to examine evidence of criminality in Monroe County, TN; Washington, DC; Hawaii, or Ft. Meade, MD, since they “meet regularly?”

Another source describes the original function of the grand jury as:

Historically, grand juries have performed two functions. They decided whether someone should be charged–“indicted”–for committing a crime. They also investigated criminal activity and the conduct of public affairs. Before the American Revolution, colonial grand juries essentially ran local government, supervising everything from road-building and bridge maintenance to the operation of local jails. Over the years, they lost much of their public affairs function, as the operation of local government was taken over by administrative agencies, an institution that did not exist in colonial times.

If “We the People” want to rein in our government, what better way than to take back the grand juries from government control?  Does there exist one federal grand jury in the country comprising people who will think and act independently and issue a subpoena for Barack Obama’s vital records or to the Monroe County Clerk’s office?  If there is evidence that a crime might have been committed, why not present it to a sitting federal grand jury?

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. Have you ever asked yourself….Why is it so I am not allowed to know who my president is? Why is that? How can it be that presidents can be elected without any sort of disclosure about their past? How can it be that presidential candidates have developed the audacity and arrogance to solicit votes from American Citizens and yet tell those same Citizens….VOTE for ME BUT DON’T ASK ABOUT MY ORIGINS AND PAST! And the gullible citizens fall for it. What does that say? What does that say about a society of over 300 million people? How is it so that America will elect strangers to live in the People’s White House? What happened to America? WHAT HAPPENED TO AMERICA? What in the hell happened? How is it so that presidential candidates can run for the office of the president with the self personal expectation that that as a candidate, the candidate does not in the most courteous way have reveal to that American Citizens for which he solicits votes the STORY OF HIS LIFE? Who in the hell does this presidential candidate think he is? This is a precedent! This is a precedent that must not ever be forgotten about! It raises many many Constitutional questions that require Constitutional Truth! Who in the hell do these people think they are that they do not have to HONOR OUR CONSTITUTION AND THEY DO NOT HAVE TO HONOR ANYMORE THE AMERICAN TAXPAYING CONSTITUENT?

    1. NUTN2SAY – You just said a “whole lot” of truths, and you are exactly spot-on re everything you said. Not only should we clearly know who we are electing to that office, but we should also know if his/her word is worth anything worthy of a vote. Unfortunately the entire system now stinks, and is fraught with criminals which have taken over, and have introduced theft, lies, deceit of every description, voter fraud, smoke and mirrors, and here we are, with a system that just doesn’t work at all. To solve this dilemma, we must first admit to the world that we recognize the problem, because so-far we are becoming the laughing-stock of the world while we lose everyone’s respect, and or own credibility, AND now – we must stand up like adults and correct this bloody mess.


    Representative wants president’s documents filed, & taxpayers protected from costs of litigation.



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

    This is very interesting. If one Attorney General would join this suit all LEGAL, RIGHTEOUS, LAWFUL HELL would break out.


    Read More: Ineligible President Cited As Legal Reason To Kill Obamacare


  3. Dr. Sam Sewell: “I think CGJ is the quickest, most effective, and most practical way to clean up government corruption. I have yet to see a viable argument against that premise.”

    Justice William O. Douglas: “The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people.”

    Abraham Lincoln: “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”

    Mark Levin: “The possibility of impeachment does not immunize the president from criminal prosecution. He remains, at all times, a citizen of the United States who is answerable to the law.”



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




  4. All U.S. Citizens who are concerned about the ineligibility of Barack Obama to be a “natural-born” U.S. Citizen should NOW focus their efforts on getting Congressman Dan Issa (who is chairman of the House Oversight Committee) to use his SUBPOENA powers to force the Hawaii Dept of Health to send his Committee a certified copy of Obama’s Long Form Birth Certificate. This is step ONE. There is something on that Long Form that Obama does not want anyone to see. What is it?

    Step TWO: We need everyone to start a “FREE LTC LAKIN XX DAYS IN PRISON because Obama refuses to release his Long Form Birth Certificate” banner campaign on every Conservative website.

    Do NOT let a day go by without posting or displaying a “FREE LTC LAKIN XX DAYS IN PRISON” message or banners.

    Thank you.

    1. Brett, the quest to see that “long form birth certificate” is THE red herring. It was sealed by the court when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. That fact should tell you the plan was to claim a fact that could never be proved, who his parents were. His legal parents were and still are Lolo Soetoro and Ann Obama Soetoro as stated on Ann’s divorce document from Lolo granted in 1980. At that time the legal and true name of this man today known as Barack Hussein Obama was and still is Barry Soetoro. All other names are aliases. The act of using an alias to make personal gain is a fraud. That is as far as we need go to remove the cloak over this mans true identity. Once the fraud is charged we may then seek to unseal the true identity to expose the truth that at birth there was no legitimate citizenship conferred to the child born Barack Obama. The law in 1961 clearly prohibited the transfer of US citizenship through Ann and allowed only the citizenship of the foreign father to be transferred. In other words the baby had no US citizenship at birth however he could have acquired it. That acquisition ended upon the legitimate adoption and removal to a foreign nation hostile to the US. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama has never shown any citizenship, never sworn an oath of allegiance and as far as records have been searched, has never been naturalized. Therefore we have a foreign national sitting in the white house acting as president. Do we the people have any reason to allow the courts, the congress or the military to refuse to apply the constitution to this man? The answer is NO. Legally they all commit treason. The remedy we seek is a peaceful resolution however that is denied and is running dangerously close to causing a financial collapse due to the policies legislated since the coup began. At some point the suffering will require a hands on approach rather than a verbal and intentionally dilatory legal one. Jack Maskell be damned.

  5. I said it before. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure rulemakers erred in calling Presentments “obsolete”. We still HAVE the right to convene Citizens Grand Juries. The Fifth amendment has never been repealed. In that amendment it sets forth TWO separate procedures for bringing someone to justice. The Federal Grand Jury,State or Local Grand jury is not the “sole” method. The Fifth Amendment states that:

    “No person shall be held to answer for a…crime unless on a presentment OR indictment of a Grand Jury….”

    Presentments are the end product of a non-judicial citizen’s jury,,which were in common practice before 1946 rule changes to the FRCrimP (Errant rulemakers put a “CrimP” in “We the People’s” style. (pun intended).

    An Indictment is the end product of a Judicially convened Grand Jury which is convened upon “Presentment” by the citizen’s group.

    “We the People” are technically the fourth branch of Government. “We the People” are the supreme authority. The government serves the people and not vice-versa.

    1. In Miranda v. Arizona,SCOTUS ruled that:

      “Where RIGHTS” (The right to convene Citizen “Presentment” hearings) “Secured by
      the Constitution are involved,there can be NO RULEMAKING OR LEGISLATION which would abrogate them”. We still HAVE the power to convene non-judicial citizen groups whose purpose it is to determine if a crime has occurred. Nothing is holding us back but our
      determination to INVOKE and USE that authoritry.

    2. “Rules” as in the “1946 rule” are not law. Law trumps rules. The law in the case of juries is found in the 5th Amendment.
      Everyone raise their hand who will point this out to the judge next time you are on jury duty. Everyone who knows they will be placed in contempt if they do this, keep their hand up!

      1. Cite MIRANDA v. ARIZONA,USSCt. and you’ll be in good shape:

        “Where RIGHTS secured by the Constitution are involved,there can be NO RULEMAKING
        OR LEGISLATION which would abrogate them”

        The right of Citizens to convene non-judicial factfinding juries when they suspect that a crime has been committed is unalienable and incorporated in the Constitution in the Fifth Amendment.

    3. make copies of this, WE THE PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE MORE RALLY”S,Go to your town hall meetings.We need the biggest one in DC at the capitol,where the senators and congressman cant leave.

    1. That is great video if the government refuses to provide a fair grand jury then the citizens need to hold their own juries and take the verdicts to the judges. A good place to start is TN there are plenty of courthouses in the state and we could take the jury verdict to them for enforcement of the law.
      Mrs. Rondeau replies: Grand juries in every county and state should be examining evidence of corruption and presenting their findings to law enforcement. If a prosecutor or sheriff refuses to take action, then they themselves should be investigated for criminal activity.

      1. I went to my local Police in the City of Tonawanda,NY after a US District Cout Judge here in Buffalo,NY (USDC Judge McCarthy) told me to contact Law Enforcement. I filed a “criminal information” in March,2010 with the then City of Tonawanda Chief of Police (Cindy Young)in the City of Tonawanda,NY. The Chief apprised me that they forwarded my Complaint onto the FBI and ICE to follow-up. I know that they did this because two DOJ agents came to my house shortly thereafter and asked me if I wanted “Obama Arrested”,telling me that I am not the only complainant.

        See City of Tonawanda Police Criminal Information/Charge against Barack Obama.et al,
        for Election Fraud,use of Several Social Security numbers and treason. Charge#10-002-896,March,2010.

    2. Are you criticizing Sharon and others for asking questions, pixel?

      Don’t Grand Jurors function by asking questions?

      Have you never witnessed a legitimate Grand Jury or Jury Trial?

      Legitimate Grand Juries and Jury Trials are all about asking questions.

      As they say the only stupid question is the one that is not asked.

      Btw, your YouTube link is not working.

  6. When will we all get it, that their plan is and was all along, to ignore every motion, letter, question, act, rant, and everything in between. Their intent was to never answer to anyone or anything ever, not now, not in 2008, and not ever. They will completely shut down everything, disregard it, at all angles, at every turn, without worry. They will and have succeeded. The mindset was etched long before he ever stepped into the race, their bases were covered, assuring that no one could penetrate their walls. As with every battle, their war was of highest security and their battle plans were well planned. At this point, two years into this, i say they have won this battle, but not the war. O cannot stay in office for ever and neither can his army. There will come a time when the battlefield will change, the guards will rotate, and at this time his shields will be penetrated. Only then will his status, birth place and documents be released. When no one cares anymore what this man is about, what he has to say, where he is, what he is doing, it is then no one will care to unearth the truth about him and no one will give a hoot about what the people think, if civil unrest will happen… Cause, he will be a nobody at that time, a has been.. For now, we are fighting a losing battle, we must wait until the rotate of the guard or we unrest. The choices are few, and no man has the answer. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

  7. Since our representatives refuse to respond to the eligibility of Obama, maybe they are ready to discuss the eligibility of Gov. Jindal.

    FOXS News had a ‘special report’ touting Gov. Jindal as a potential candidate for president. I like Governor Jindal but, at the time of his birth, his parents were not American citizens. They were citizens of India. The Governor is not a “natural born citizen”. Maybe Democrats and Republicans in DC will be more interested in Jindals’ eligibility. Our Constitutional Republic can not continue to ignore our Constitution. This tyranny must stop.

    I like the comments posted earlier by G-Starz . Lets get on websites and post comments about eligibility. Be sure to contact your representatives concerning the eligibility of Gov. Jindal. I am anxious to see what kind of response we get.

    Mrs. Rondeau, I have really enjoyed your investigative reporting this past year.
    You are a loyal American patriot. Thank you.
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: You’re welcome.

    1. Gov. Jindal has been asked several times if he will run and he has said no. He knows he is not eligiblie and I believe he has great integrity and won’t.

  8. Hello Sharon,

    You must go a bit further down the rabbit hole to find out why the grand juries today are not working. They must be De Jure Grand Juries not De Facto. Please go here to find out more: http://www.republicfortheunitedstates.org/ click on the history tab.

    Also, there is a DeJure Grand Jury in Az (to name just one) that is hearing cases and sending in presentments where the outcome is in favor of we the people:
    http://www.republicforarizona.org/updates.html scroll down to 11/18/2010

    I really appreciate all the work you do here at the post&email to expose the fraud and support patriots.

  9. Exactly how do we invigorate the grand juries when all judges, prosecutors, congressional representatives, state representatives, will simply ignore our pleas for it?
    Look at how hard American Grand Jury has worked to get the courts to listen. One federal Judge admitted they have the right but then said not in my courtroom.

  10. “If there is evidence that a crime might have been committed, why not present it to a sitting federal grand jury?”

    Why not, because that would be playing right into BHO’s hand. It has always been BHO’s endgame to steer any criminal cases against him into his Federal Court in DC where Holder can get him acquitted of any crime, including murder, as Holder did for BHO’s Terrorist Pal, the Embassy Bomber.

    Remember the case of DC Mayor Marion Barry who was acquitted in DC Federal Court even after the jury saw videos of him buying and smoking crack cocaine?

    What do you think would happen if cases against BHO were brought in any Federal Court anywhere in the US? Of course, Holder would simply have all the cases removed to his DC Federal Court and get BHO acquitted on all charges.

    Then Double Jeopardy would be applied by Holder to make sure that BHO can never be prosecuted again for any crimes.

    State Courts are where charges must be brought against BHO and his co-conspirators if you ever want to have BHO brought to Justice.

    Of course, you would not want to bring a case in Monroe County, Tennessee, but imagine if criminal cases were brought against BHO and his local co-conspirators in State Courts like that of Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona. It is a good bet that BHO and his local co-conspirators would be convicted there.
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: Then concerned citizens should do what Walter Fitzpatrick did and bring a criminal complaint to their county or state grand jury.

    1. Yes but if the County Grand Jury Foreman will not accept the criminal complaint, then a lawsuit against the Grand Jury Foreman et al should be filed with a motion for a hearing upon Original Jurisdiction directly before SCOTUS.


      “We the People” respectfully request that the Barack Hussein Obama stipulate to the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has original jurisdiction over all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; or, in the alternative, that Barack Hussein Obama show good cause why the Supreme Court of the United States shall not have original jurisdiction.

  11. Great article, Sharon. You’ve done excellent work w/ the Post&Email, and it’s a good place for The People to see what’s happening with the Grand Jury process concerning current issues facing us. Thank you for all that you do.

  12. Only public opinion will bend the judges and the congress to act, but it can and we must make sure it does. Chris Matthews and Abercrombie have given we “birthers’ the cover we need by demanding the records themselves and in so doing have sucked the air out of the argument that this issue is a “right wing conspiracy”.

    I implore each and every one of you to go on the comment sections of news articles that have anything whatsoever to do with Obama and drag the birth certificate/citizenship issue into it, even if only as a separate afterthought. Keep it pithy, and copy and paste the messages over and over. Writing letters to congressmen, et al, is important, but the only way to force anyone to do anything is to absolutely clog the media gears with this issue, and happily and amazingly – we have that power!!! Yahoo is where I post. But MSN, Fox News comments sections (they may censor, i don’t know) and others are all prime game.

    Now. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY… it is easy to assume this is asking for too much, that our numbers will be too small to make a difference. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Please know it. Even only a handful of people, posting and re-posting the same few messages with “birth certificate,…birth certificate” will make every other or third message at least become about Obama’s citizenship issue. I’ve practically run the board for an hour or two on some days ALL BY MYSELF, part-time effort, on yahoo – and the news people and the assistants to congressional reps read these things to keep a pulse on the people!

    We CAN control the message boards and consequently the message itself and we must. So put aside whatever you are doing right now and go to yahoo or MSN, Fox or whatever your favorite News Source happens to be that has a fairly free comment board section and sign up, or sign in, and *** post post post post post **** about Obama’s citizenship issue. With some places like yahoo, you don’t even need to be on-topic. You could write WHERE IS OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE and copy and paste it every minute all day long.

    GRIND THE GEARS TO A STOP. SHUT DOWN ALL OTHER DEBATE. It’s legal,we have the power and we need to start using it. Now is the time. Don’t delay. Act now. Act at this very moment. What could possibly be more important?

    And please try to do it every single day.

    Thanks and God Bless America.

  13. The problem of losing the grand jury will only be fixed by citizens using the second amendment.
    The judges and prosecutors control the judiciary and will not let us have the grand jury back unless we fight!!!!

  14. SUPURB!! Congratulations for this article, it proves the need for the Citizens of America to RE-Claim THEIR SOVEREIGNTY, and to have a VOICE in our Futures!
    It also brings to light the Progressive, Fascist, Communistic ALTERATIONS that our “Constitution” has suffered for the last 100 years, the loss of States Rights that have been USURPED by the U.S. CORP.-(Government)-the ILLEGAL, UN-Signed 14th Amendment and the Grief perpetrated upon our Nation in it’s Unlawful Implementation!
    Thank You!
    May GOD Bless U.S. ALL!

    1. > UN-Signed 14th Amendment

      Could you elaborate on that? This is the first time I’ve read someone claim the 14th is not duly ratified (if that is what you mean).
      Mrs. Rondeau replies: I believe it was the 16th Amendment that was never properly ratified.

      1. The 14th Amendment was Signed by only the Secretary of State, not Jackson, I do not have Dates and Names on hand immediately, but the 14th became to “TOOL of STUPIDITY” for Progressives. I can search again but if you would go to a Website: dirtyunclesam.com, hosted by Bruce Ray Riggs-(he ran for a Florida Office)-you will find REAMS or Research and Videos that are SUBSTANTIATED, NOT Hearsay!
        Larry M. Meyer

      2. I think you will find that the 17th Amendment was also not actually ratified but just declared to be so the same as the 16th. However, regarding the 16th, it does not matter because it did not confer any new powers of taxation to the government in any case and the Supreme Court has so ruled on several occasions until they refused to take any more cases because they consider the matter closed and well settled. The 16th Amendment granted no new powers of taxation that did not already exist prior to the 16th so it is irrelevant whether or not it was ratified because it does nothing.

      3. Though it is true the 16th Amendment did not grant any new powers of taxation, as Jedi Pauly says, no one has stopped the IRS from using it to rob and enslave the American people by burdening them with unconstitutional taxes. In fact, according to what I understand, in Dec. 2006 congress passed the “Tax Relief and Healthcare Act of 2006” (H.R. 6111). On March 15, 2007, the treasury department published notice 2007-30. In it they affirm the government is not obligated to respond to the people’s first amendment petitions for redress, and lists at least 40 specific and legitimate arguments against the taxing power of the IRS that will be deemed frivolous and invoke a $5,000 dollar fine.

  15. I agree. The reinvigorating of the grand jury system is the answer to the travesty being perpetrated by the current judicial system, which, instead of a balance of power, seems to be controlled by the President and his Attorney General. Time to re-balance the scales.

    1. Federal Grand Juries are a very sad joke on us. That is why I convened the GA Common Law Grand Jury in March of 09. After hearing the evidence presented this GJ handed down a Presentment of Fraud and wire Fraud aginst BHO. Two more Common Law GJ’s were convened in Ohio and Illinois before AGJ picked it up and started doing “Citizen Grand Juries” on-line.
      None of the Judges, Sheriffs, State AG’s, U.S. Attorneys or even State Legislators would act on our findings and only one Judge (Chief Justice Royce Lamberth of the D.C. District Court) would give any rulings at all
      Judge Lamberth wrote this to me:
      ..,And although presentments are constitutionally permitted, there is no authority under the Rules of Criminal Procedure or in the statutes of the United States for this Court to accept one.
      I hope to garner a meeting with Gov. Nathan Deal concerning this. When I put out the message that the meeting was requested I will be asking any and all to contact his office in the hope that with many people asking, he will give me that meeting.

      1. None of your Grand Juries were acted upon because none of them were properly done, Carl. You might benefit by reading Dr. Sam Sewell’s excellent How-To article on how to properly form and conduct a Grand Jury.

        Dr. Sam Sewell has an excellent analysis of why your Grand Juries failured here.



      2. It may well be that the people no longer know the proper protocol for convening Citizen Grand Juries, since they were claimed to be obsolete through the corruption of our whole judicial system. The majority of our laws could easily be deemed repugnant to Constitution, and so called ” presidents” judges so often rely on are usually nothing more than long-term violations of our Constitution.

        Anyhow any sort of presentment, whether by a group or an individual is due serious consideration as a possible crime as the evidence dictates.

        The evidence in these presentments are being ignored for only one reason, and it is not for its credibility, or improper procedure.