If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Robert Laity, as posted at Australia News

Why does the mainstream press insist on calling him "President Obama?"

(Mar. 17, 2011) — Obama is a faux “President.”  Only bona-fide Presidents are covered by the provisions of the Impeachment protocol.  I disagree that a “sitting” POTUS must be impeached first.  Some who may appear to be a “sitting President” are NOT (Example:  Chester Arthur).

ONLY  bona fides Presidents can be impeached.

Obama can be immediately arrested and face charges in the USDC District of DC, where the crime of usurpation occurred. There is Prima Facie evidence that Obama has never BEEN POTUS. His father was NOT an American. Obama has British Jus Sanguinis and American Jus Sanguinis. Even if Obama was born in the Lincoln Bedroom (US Jus Soli) Obama I NOT a Natural Born Citizen. A Natural-Born Citizen is “one born in a Country of Citizen ParentS”

Secondly, Obama is a traitor and is precluded from holding “Any office under the US”. It is the powers that be that are misprisioners of Treason and Felony. “We the People” MUST act to correct this untenable situation lest our nation falls.

“`This, even if it means MASS Impeachments of responsible Court and Legislative officials as well.

“The President,Vice President and ALL civil officers of the United States SHALL BE REMOVED from office on Impeachment for, and conviction of Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” Article II, Sec.4 (US Const.)

Obama is, prima facie NOT a “Sitting President.”  I believe that it is “Repugnant to the Constitution” that a “Sitting President” cannot be charged with crimes.

See Marbury v. Madison, USSCt,(1803)

I have filed formal charges against Obama. Many others have done so.  Obama formally STANDS ACCUSED. Indeed, if an imposter “Sitting President” could NOT be charged with a Crime, how would he be brought to the Bar of Justice?  Impeachment is a process that is reserved for bona-fides Civil Officers and one that is controlled by the contemporaneous political milieu. It is such a Milieu that allowed Hitler to gain power in Germany.

Obama collaborators, such as Nancy Pelosi, who misrepresented Obama’s qualifications to BE POTUS are still in the Congress and Senate. There are two ways an Impeachment can go. One is a vote not to Impeach,the other TO Impeach. While a fair and constitutional process when a bona-fides POTUS is being Impeached, it is NOT constitutional when a faux POTUS is allowed to proceed under it’s umbrella. A vote NOT to Impeach would be a serious threat to National Security allowing a felonious fraud to continue to usurp the Presidency unabated.

IF and only IF Obama were undoubtedly the Bona-Fides POTUS should Impeachment be the proper forum to address Obama’s crimes. Insofar as Obama’s very authority to BE President is in grave question,THAT issue MUST be decided BEFORE Impeachment could or should even be considered.

Obama,in light of the prima facie evidence against him can be arrested pursuant to already formally registered Charges against him for election fraud and treason as well as using multiple SSNs, inter alia. He can be arrested by ANY law enforcement officer having Jurisdiction in DC and the USDC for the District of DC has Jurisdiction. Ronald Machen, US Attorney for the USDC District of DC, has known about the Charges against Obama for years now.

Robert C. Laity

Founding President,

Society for the Preservation of Democracy and Human Rights.
Reposted with the permission of Greg Rogers, Chief Executive Officer of Australia News.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published.

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

  1. Barack Obama,Jr.

    Be Ye on Notice. You Stand Accused of Felonious Election Fraud and Treason,Inter Alia,in the Name of the People of the United States of America.

    Robert C. Laity

  2. Judge Lamberth,neither Rules nor Statrute can negate the Fifth Amendment enshrinement of the “Presentment”. The 1946 FRCrP change was patently ILLEGAL.
    See Miranda v. Arizona,SCOTUS:
    “Where RIGHTS secured by the Constitution are involved,…”

    {Such as the Right to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances,”secured” by the First Amendment of the Constitution and Conducting Non-Judicial Citizen Presentment Hearings which is “secured”by the Fifth Amendment}

    “…there can be NO RULEMAKING…”

    [This includes the “RULES” of Federal Criminal Procedure]

    “…OR Legislation which would abrogate them”.

    The “Right” to make “Presentments” CANNOT be infringed nor abrogated absent a properly voted for and ratified Amendment to the Constitution. Such an Amendment to make “obsolete” the “Presentment” has NOT taken place. The Fifth Amendment is still INTACT notwithstanding the appearance,under color of Law,that the “Presentment” is “Obsolete” or otherwise done away with by the FRCrP.

  3. Since Obama does not meet the Article II mandate for eligibility, he is only a president-elect and still subject to disqualification per the 20th Amendment. Robert Laity is right: no impeachment needed.

  4. The District of Columbia “District” Court and not the DofC “Superior” Court, which has jurisdiction over the District of Columbia???

    1. I know that it is confusing.

      United States District Courts are divided into Districts. I live in the U.S. District Court,Western District of NY.for example.

      Usurpation of the Presidency is a federal crime.

      The U.S. District Court in D.C. has Jurisdiction.

      It is called the U.S. District Court,District of DC.

      1. Chief Justice of the D.C. District Court Royce Lamberth was the only one to respond to the AGJ Presentment filed by several others and me on June 30, 2009 (treason charge included). His response dated July 2, 2009 was this…
        “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.”
        We The People, in the eyes of the court, are, since the adoption of the rules of Criminal Procedure in 1946, “ANTIQUATED.”

        1. My point on this is that the Federal Rules of Criminal procedure erroneously ruled out presentments as “Obsolete”. They are NOT “obsolete” as long as the Fifth Amendment exists. THAT amendment constitutionalizes Presentments. “No law,rule or regulation can serve to abrogate a right guaranteed by the US Constitution”-Miranda v Arizona, US Supreme court.

  5. IF, and only IF, there comes forward ANY Enforcement Officer in D.C., or Judiciary, or Military!!?? SCOTUS, in three separate Dockets denies their Oath to the Constitution??
    IF there is NO Constitution, and we are no longer “The Land of Laws”, with NO ONE to Enforce~Then are we: A TOTALITARIAN STATE, a DICTATORSHIP, an OLIGARCHY, a COMMUNIST GULAG, OR???

  6. make copies of this remember a lot of people dont have computers,go to capital on 3-20 2011 12:00-4:00 pm,take important copies and videos to rally.This is for theresa Cao.