Tyranny Watch

As if things weren’t bad enough, a Russian professor is predicting the end of the United States.

ANDREW OSBORN
The Wall Street Journal
December 29, 2008

For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument — that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. — very seriously. Now he’s found an eager audience: Russian state media.

In recent weeks, he’s been interviewed as much as twice a day about his predictions. “It’s a record,” says Prof. Panarin. “But I think the attention is going to grow even stronger.”

Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russia relations.

WATCH FOR YOURSELF:

Very interesting. . . .

Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul: The Wall Street Ponzi Scheme Called Fractional Reserve Banking
Ellen Brown
Web of Debt
December 30, 2008

Cartoon in the New Yorker:
A gun-toting man with large dark glasses, large hat pulled down, stands in front of a bank teller, who is reading a demand note. It says, “Give me all the money in my account.”

Bernie Madoff showed us how it was done: you induce many investors to invest their money, promising steady above-market returns; and you deliver – at least on paper. When your clients check their accounts, they see that their investments have indeed increased by the promised amount. Anyone who opts to pull out of the game is paid promptly and in full. You can afford to pay because most players stay in, and new players are constantly coming in to replace those who drop out. The players who drop out are simply paid with the money coming in from new recruits. The scheme works until the market turns and many players want their money back at once. Then it’s game over: you have to admit that you don’t have the funds, and you are probably looking at jail time.

A Ponzi scheme is a form of pyramid scheme in which earlier investors are paid with the money of later investors rather than from real profits. The perpetuation of the scheme requires an ever-increasing flow of money from investors in order to keep it going. Charles Ponzi was an engaging Boston ex-convict who defrauded investors out of $6 million in the 1920s by promising them a 400 percent return on redeemed postal reply coupons. When he finally could not pay, the scam earned him ten years in jail; and Bernie Madoff is likely to wind up there as well.

Most people are not involved in illegal Ponzi schemes, but we do keep our money in accounts that are tallied on computer screens rather than in stacks of coins or paper bills. How do we know that when we demand our money from our bank or broker that the funds will be there? The fact that banks are subject to “runs” (recall Northern Rock, Indymac and Washington Mutual) suggests that all may not be as it seems on our online screens. Banks themselves are involved in a sort of Ponzi scheme, one that has been perpetuated for hundreds of years. What distinguishes the legal scheme known as “fractional reserve” lending from the illegal schemes of Bernie Madoff and his ilk is that the bankers’ scheme is protected by government charter and backstopped with government funds. At last count, the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury had committed $8.5 trillion to bailing out the banks from their follies. By comparison, M2, the largest measure of the money supply now reported by the Federal Reserve, was just under $8 trillion in December 2008. The sheer size of the bailout efforts indicates that the banking scheme has reached its mathematical limits and needs to be superseded by something more sustainable.

Read Full Article. . . .

I’ve upgraded to WordPress 2.7, and they’ve made it much easier to import posts, comments, and more from other blogs. So I’ve finally imported all the old posts from tyrannywatch.wordpress.com into this blog! So finally there is complete integration. I also learned how easy it is to move Blogger posts and comments over to WordPress, so it may be time to self-host my prayeramedic site! Now on to updating more sites. Enjoy the archives!

This was the cartoon of the day at CARPE DIEM, very funny:

He could have also said, “From the U.S. financial system as it’s been run by the Federal Reserve since 1913,” but that would have been too politically incorrect. . . .

Finally some positive news to report on! Here goes:

Stephen C. Webster
Raw Story
December 16, 2008

A federal appeals court ruling late Monday is the cause célèbre of the American Civil Liberties Union, as another provision of the Bush administration’s Patriot Act falls to the judicial system.

Until the ruling, recipients of so-called “national security letters” were legally forbidden from speaking out. The letters, usually a demand for documents, or a notice that private records had been searched by government authorities, were criticized as a cover-all for FBI abuses.

“The appeals court invalidated parts of the statute that wrongly placed the burden on NSL recipients to initiate judicial review of gag orders, holding that the government has the burden to go to court and justify silencing NSL recipients,” said the ACLU in a release. “The appeals court also invalidated parts of the statute that narrowly limited judicial review of the gag orders – provisions that required the courts to treat the government’s claims about the need for secrecy as conclusive and required the courts to defer entirely to the executive branch.”

Because of the ruling, the government will now be forced to justify individual gag orders before a court, instead of casually wielding the power of a blanket gag as the Bush administration has done since the blindingly fast passage of the Patriot Act in Oct. 2001.

In Sept. 2007, a federal judge ruled unconstitutional provisions within the Patriot Act which allowed the government to obtain search warrants without probable cause.

The ACLU’s complete press release follows.

####

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 15, 2008

NEW YORK – A federal appeals court today upheld, in part, a decision striking down provisions of the Patriot Act that prevent national security letter (NSL) recipients from speaking out about the secret records demands. The decision comes in an American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union lawsuit challenging the FBI’s authority to use NSLs to demand sensitive and private customer records from Internet Service Providers and then forbid them from discussing the requests. Siding with the ACLU, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that the statute’s gag provisions violate the First Amendment.

“We are gratified that the appeals court found that the FBI cannot silence people with complete disregard for the First Amendment simply by saying the words ‘national security,’” said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “This is a major victory for the rule of law. The court recognized the need for judicial oversight of the government’s dangerous gag power and rejected the Bush administration’s position that the courts should just rubber-stamp these gag orders. By upholding the critical check of judicial review, the FBI can no longer use this incredible power to hide abuse of its intrusive Patriot Act surveillance powers and silence critics.”

The appeals court invalidated parts of the statute that wrongly placed the burden on NSL recipients to initiate judicial review of gag orders, holding that the government has the burden to go to court and justify silencing NSL recipients. The appeals court also invalidated parts of the statute that narrowly limited judicial review of the gag orders – provisions that required the courts to treat the government’s claims about the need for secrecy as conclusive and required the courts to defer entirely to the executive branch.

“The appellate panel correctly observed that the imposition of such a conclusive presumption ignored well-settled First Amendment standards and deprived the judiciary of its important function as a protector of fundamental rights,” said Arthur Eisenberg, Legal Director for the New York Civil Liberties Union.

In this regard, the opinion stated: “The fiat of a governmental official, though senior in rank and doubtless honorable in the execution of official duties, cannot displace the judicial obligation to enforce constitutional requirements.”

The court, therefore, also ruled that the government must now justify the gag on the John Doe NSL recipient in the case, a gag that has been in place for more than four years.

The ACLU and New York Civil Liberties Union filed this lawsuit in April 2004 on behalf of an Internet Service Provider (ISP) that received an NSL. Because the FBI imposed a gag order on the ISP, the lawsuit was filed under seal, and even today the ACLU is prohibited from disclosing its client’s identity. The FBI continues to maintain the gag order even though the underlying investigation is more than four years old (and may well have ended), and even though the FBI abandoned its demand for records from the ISP over a year and a half ago.

In September 2004, Judge Victor Marrero of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York struck down the NSL statute, ruling that the FBI could not constitutionally demand sensitive records without judicial review and that permanent gag orders violated the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. The government appealed the ruling, but Congress amended the NSL provision before the court issued a decision.

The ACLU brought a new challenge to the amended provision, and in September 2007, Judge Marrero again found the statute unconstitutional.

Bills aimed at bringing the NSL authority back in line with the Constitution were introduced last year in both the House and Senate after reports had confirmed and detailed the widespread abuse of the authority by federal law enforcement. Since the Patriot Act was passed in 2001, relaxing restrictions on the FBI’s use of the power, the number of NSLs issued has seen an astronomical increase, to nearly 200,000 between 2003 and 2006. A March 2008 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report revealed that, among other abuses, the FBI misused NSLs to sidestep the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). In one instance, the FBI issued NSLs to obtain information after the FISC twice refused its requests on First Amendment grounds. The OIG also found that the FBI continues to impose gag orders on about 97 percent of NSL recipients and that, in some cases, the FBI failed to sufficiently justify why the gag orders were imposed in the first place.

In addition to this case, the ACLU has challenged this Patriot Act statute multiple times. One case was brought on behalf of a group of Connecticut librarians and another case, called Internet Archive v. Mukasey, involved an NSL served on a digital library in California. In the latter case, the FBI withdrew the NSL and the gag as part of the settlement of a legal challenge brought by the ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Attorneys in Doe v. Mukasey are Jameel Jaffer, Goodman and L. Danielle Tully of the ACLU National Security Project and Eisenberg of the NYCLU.

Today’s decision can be found online at: www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/38110lgl20081215.html

More information on Doe v. Mukasey and NSLs is available online at: www.aclu.org/nsl

Barack Obama has attempted to distance himself from the crash and burn that is governor Rod Blagojevich. Obama can run but he can’t hide. Obama and Blagojevich took considerable amounts of money from convicted criminal Antoin “Tony” Rezko and top Obama aide, Michael Strautmanis, worked for Blagojevich.

Rezko not only gave Obama money for his presidential bid and convinced others to ante up, he also advised Obama on the purchase of a new Chicago home.

In the lead-up to the election numerous commentators pointed out Obama’s relationship with the corrupt dirt bag Rezko in addition to his relationship with terrorist William Ayers and Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah “God Damn America” Wright, the preacher Obama said he could not “disown” any more than his “white grandmother.”

Nothing would stick, though, because the corporate media was caught up in the disgusting whirlwind of Obama mania it had created. A few neocon trolls over at Fox News tried ever so lamely to out Obama and his various sordid relationships but it was all for naught. After the election when Obama nominated the same old wizened and tired insiders to run his administration and threw in veteran Iran-Contra criminal Robert Gates for good measure — in effect, the man who cerated al-Qaeda under the reprehensible William Casey — the neocons came around and applauded. It was truly a spectacle to see.

Even so, this Blagojevich business has the ability to tarnish Obama before he enters the White House, so he is desperately attempting to insert distance between himself and the Illinois political mobster and snake oil salesman who attempted to sell Obama’s Senate seat right out from under him.

In regard to Blagojevich conspiring to sell or trade for personal benefit the Senate seat left vacant by Obama, the president select said on December 9: “I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening,” according to the Associated Press.

Either Obama had a big time memory lapse or he is lying through his teeth.

“Now that Barack Obama will be moving to the White House, his seat in the U.S. Senate representing Illinois will have to be filled,” KHQA 7 reported on November 8. “Obama met with Governor Rod Blagojevich earlier this week to discuss it.”

As to be expected, this news report is no longer on the KHQA website, it was memory holed. It was however cached and archived after Yahoo crawled the web, as search engines are inclined to do.

So here we have Obama telling a bold-faced lie about his relationship with the criminal slime bucket Blagojevich, who will likely spend a few months in one of those golf club prisons for his shameless pandering. Not word one about Obama’s lie in the corporate media.

It’s said after Obama selected Clinton and Gates and the CFR and Goldman Sachs gang to run his administration the honeymoon was over, at least for the liberals who believed the mirage right up to the end, never mind the smack-down betrayal on Obama’s promise to end the brutal and illegal occupation of Iraq.

Now Obama is telling more lies and nobody beyond the blogosphere and a small corner of the alternative media has the nerve to call him out on it.

A soon to be president telling such big lies should be newsworthy. It’s not because the narcosis of Obama mania is still thick in the air and besides most people expect presidents to lie and start wars and sell the country down the river. Few cared when Clinton lied about “that woman” (while under oath nonetheless) and less seem to care about Obama’s lie.

Chicago Tribune
Tim Jones

UPDATE: The Supreme Court has turned down an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who says President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was a British subject at birth.

The court did not comment on its order Monday rejecting the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election. Donofrio says that since Obama had dual nationality at birth — his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject — he cannot possibly be a “natural born citizen,” one of the requirements the Constitution lists for eligibility to be president.

Donofrio also contends that two other candidates, Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero, also are not natural-born citizens and thus ineligible to be president.

At least one other appeal over Obama’s citizenship remains at the court. Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pa., argues that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as Obama says and the Hawaii secretary of state has confirmed. Berg says Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy. Federal courts in Pennsylvania have dismissed Berg’s lawsuit.

This is a story that won’t go away.

Five weeks after the State of Hawaii vouched for the authenticity of President-elect Barack Obama’s birth certificate, the controversy over allegations that Obama is not eligible to take office next month has reached the Supreme Court, which is expected to announce Monday whether it will consider the matter.

The fight is unusual because it thrives outside the so-called mainstream media, far beyond the oak-paneled offices of $700-an-hour lawyers and a world away from the 535 individuals whose surnames are preceded by Representative or Senator.

This is a different army at work, in an environment increasingly influenced by the Internet.

“It’s only being mentioned by a relative few, by the real die-hard, anti-Obama crowd,” said Michael Harrison, editor and publisher of Talkers magazine, the trade bible of the talk-radio industry. “On mainstream talk radio, it’s not a big deal right now. I think it’s run its course.”

“But,” Harrison added, “we live in a time that, because of the Internet, all points of view can live forever.”

Just as there is a split on the legitimacy of the legal claims, there is also a split within the media on the merits of the story. Is it the last gasp of opposition from opponents of Obama who have a found community of like-minded believers on the Internet, or is there a legal question to be resolved? The court will answer the latter question this week.

The campaign challenging the legitimacy of Obama’s 1961 birth certificate or the legality of his taking office is chronicled by WorldNetDaily, a popular, politically right-leaning site that was the 26th most-visited news and media Web site during November, according to Hitwise, which monitors Net traffic.

“If this [Obama taking office] happens, the question of eligibility for the highest office in the land will no longer even be a matter for concern,” wrote Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WorldNetDaily.

An Obama spokesman declined to comment for this story.

The lawyers who, in at least six states including New Jersey and Connecticut, have argued Obama is not a natural-born citizen and cannot be president include one who supported Hillary Clinton’s presidential bid, one who has thundered for decades against the legality of the federal government collecting income tax, and one who argues that Sen. John McCain, by virtue of his birth 72 years ago in the Panama Canal Zone, would be banned from moving into the Oval Office, had he won last month’s election.

Leo Donofrio is a New Jersey lawyer who tried to get Obama and McCain stricken from the New Jersey ballot in November. Donofrio’s case was presented Friday to justices of the Supreme Court. Another case challenging Obama’s eligibility, this one from Pennsylvania, has not yet been presented to the full court for its consideration.

“My question is on a pure constitutional ground,” said Donofrio. “[Obama] is a citizen of the United States. I just don’t believe he’s a natural-born citizen.”

This is the thrust of the attack, picked up by people such as Bob Schulz, an upstate New York engineer who bought two full-page ads in the Tribune this month that called Obama “a usurper” who “would be entitled to no allegiance, obedience or support from the People.”

Schulz has challenged the federal government on issues including the Iraq War, the Patriot Act and the income tax. “I have a long history of petitioning the government for redress of grievances for violations of the constitution and the law,” said Schulz, who said he and his wife live on Social Security checks. Schulz said the ads cost “tens of thousands of dollars” and were paid for with more than 500 private donations from individuals who support the effort. He said there were “no financial angels” behind it.

If the Supreme Court decides not to consider the case, Donofrio said there “won’t be any beating on the drums saying there wasn’t any justice.”

But that will not be the end of the matter, Farah vowed.

“It’ll plague Obama throughout his presidency. It’ll be a nagging issue and a sore on his administration, much like Monica Lewinsky was on [President Bill] Clinton,” Farah said. “It’s not going to go away and it will drive a wedge in an already divided public.”

That may underscore a landscape change in the media, where the Internet is playing a bigger role in setting the agenda. In 2004, the so-called swift boat campaign against Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, began on the Internet. In fact, the co-author of “Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry,” Jerome Corsi, also wrote “Obama Nation,” a book critical of Obama, published earlier this year.

Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Duke University, said the Internet’s role in forming public opinion is gaining strength. WorldNetDaily, for instance, has one of the faster-growing audiences on the Internet, up 62 percent in the past year, according to Hitwise.

Nyhan co-wrote a study this year that said journalists’ attempts to correct misinformation is unlikely to sway public perceptions because many people want to believe the misperception.

“People often have a strong bias for believing the evidence they want to believe and disbelieving what they don’t believe,” Nyhan said. “There is less of a sense that we all have a common set of facts we can agree on. There’s a polarization, and we can’t even agree on the basic factual assumptions to have a debate.”

I’ll put this all to rest if he’d simply produce his birth certificate. This is ridiculous.

Thanks to HFFT for this:

READ THE HIGHLY DETAILED REPORT

A notable quote from this report:

There is conclusive and irrefutable evidence that the COLB image created and distributed by Obama’s campaign to the Daily Kos, Annenberg’s Factcheck, and the St. Pete Times, Politifact, is, unquestionably, a false identification document. Furthermore, there is conclusive and irrefutable evidence that the photos taken by Annenberg’s Factcheck, in collusion with the Obama campaign, are themselves, false identification documents, having been made from the same false identification document image, as well as from additional false identification documents created for the same purpose; namely, to proffer these false identification documents as true reproductions of a genuine, Hawaii-issued and certified, “Certification of Live Birth” document, and thereby, intentionally deceive the American public into believing that Barack Hussein Obama is a natural-born citizen of the United States, and thereby, fully qualified to become their President.

I never imagined that my studies would amount to this. I thought, like most Americans, that maybe the information was accurate even though the document image was fake. I thought, like most Americans, that Obama would simply present a copy of his real, original birth certificate, and that would be that. Yet, here we are, more than twenty months after Obama announced his candidacy for the Presidency, and nearly three weeks after the election, and Obama still refuses to show his real birth certificate!

Sadly, mainstream media have totally ignored this inconvenient truth and are not even been willing to even look at this birth certificate issue.

READ THE HIGHLY DETAILED REPORT

This video explains the entire issue very well and shows how the MSNBC article was misleading. Just another piece of this puzzle:

It’s sickening people have to file lawsuits at all. You have to show a birth certificate to get a driver’s license, why not to serve as President (where citizenship is a Constitutional requirement)? Sorry smrstrauss, I know you think the opposition needs to supply evidence of Kenyan birth in order to pursue this — but that is not the issue. The issue is that we should expect our President to at least be transparent enough to show a simple document required for almost anything in this country. It’s not a difficult request, simply produce it! Steve sent this in an email to me, it’s from NewsMax:

Team Obama:”All I can tell you is that it is just pure garbage.”

According to the WorldNetDaily headline above, that was the retort of an Obama campaign spokesperson when asked about complaints requesting that Senator Obama produce a valid Birth Certificate to prove that he is constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States.

Article 2, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States, states, “No person except a natural born citizen of the United States, at the time of adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.”

The Constitution of the United States is NOT “garbage” and furthermore, securing the rights of the people under the Constitution is NOT “garbage”!

The Obama campaign’s response is an elitist, condescending slap in the face to patriotic Americans. No one is above the law and Team Obama cannot make the question of Obama’s eligibility go away by disrespecting the American people - and, by inference, the Constitution of the United States.

That’s why we just filed an action that Senator Obama will not be able to ignore… an action that WILL NOT GO AWAY!

In fact, in my humble opinion… we will ONLY “LOSE” if we do NOT have the resources we need to carry on for as long as it takes, and we will “win” as long as we can carry on this fight (more on that later).

SO PLEASE KEEP READING… I promise that when you’re done, you will agree that we have filed the mother of all actions.

The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help - it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms - that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS - that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

Why The “Berg Case” Is Dead In The Water And Why USJF Will Succeed…

You probably already know that Pennsylvania attorney Philip J. Berg filed a suit in U.S. District Court several months back contending that Senator Obama is not a “natural-born” citizen.

And you probably already know that the court dismissed the suit claiming that Berg, as a private citizen, “lacked standing to bring the case.”

Of course, Berg is not the only one who has filed an action and the “Berg Case” is not the only one in which the courts have relied upon the lack-of-standing technicality.

Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter denied an action saying to the plaintiff Rev. Tom Terry, “I don’t think you have standing to bring this suit.”

Washington State Superior Court Judge John Erlick dismissed yet another suit ruling that even the Secretary of State did not have authority to inquire about Senator Obama’s birth certificate.

Can you believe it? What’s going on? Well, perhaps Berg said it best;

“This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don’t have standing, if you don’t have standing, if your neighbor doesn’t have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be president of the United States - the commander in chief, the most powerful person in the world - then who does?”

Of course, Berg’s statement also illustrates why the “Berg Case” and some of these other actions are doomed to fail and why we believe our action WILL succeed!

Simply stated, the lack-of-standing argument is already out there. Yes, it’s egregious but the all too sad reality is that judges will continue to grab onto it like a life-preserver now that it has been put into play… the die has been cast!

That’s why USJF is taking a different approach. Our petitioners are Dr. Alan Keyes, Dr. Wiley S. Drake, Sr. and Markham Robinson!

We state in the Petition we just filed with the court:

“The parties in this case have standing to bring this litigation, due to the fact that Dr. Keyes and Dr. Drake, Sr., are candidates on the California ballot for President and Vice President of the United States, and Mr. Robinson is an Elector for the Keyes-Drake ticket, and Vice Chairman of America’s Independent Party, of Fenton, Michigan, which nominated Dr. Keyes for President. He is also a Chairman of the American Independent Party (California), which nominated Dr. Keyes and Dr. Drake for President and Vice President, respectively. Based on the foregoing, it is imperative for SOS to be provided proof that Senator Obama is a ‘natural born’ citizen.”

Alan Keyes and Wiley Drake were actually on the ballot in California and Markham Robinson is an Elector for Keyes-Drake. If they don’t have standing, one would be hard-pressed to find ANYONE who has standing and if the court attempts to use the lack-of-standing argument, it’s an implied admission that NO ONE has standing to enforce the Constitution!

The Usurper-in-Chief…

Now… a dose of reality. Frankly, a case of this magnitude could be in the courts for years. There are no quick solutions… BUT THAT’S OKAY.

The key is in the following statement which also appears in the Petition:

“Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void, Petitioners, as well as other Americans, will suffer irreparable harm in that an usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”

Part of that statement bears repeating:

“… none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal.”

In other words, as long as this case is in the courts, a cloud hangs over Senator Obama’s head and for the sake of our Constitution and our Republic, the issue MUST be resolved!

If President Obama issues an Executive Order to rescind the Mexico City Policy and allows the tax dollars of Americans to fund organizations that promote abortions overseas, the door to question the legitimacy of that Executive Order remains open.

If President Obama signs a treaty with an unfriendly power or an agreement with the United Nations, the door to question the legitimacy of that treaty remains open.

If President Obama signs a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens into law, the door to question the legitimacy of that law remains open.

If President Obama appoints new Commissioners to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) who bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine, the door to question those appointments and the legitimacy of the actions taken by his appointees remains open.

That’s not to say that he can’t or won’t be able to fulfill the duties of his office, but until this matter is resolved… until he can validate that he is constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States, the door will always remain open to question and challenge the legitimacy of his actions and the dire consequences of those actions.

In short… as long as we have the resources to fight, we’re ahead of the game!

That’s where you come in.

The United States Justice Foundation (USJF) is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization and has been your conservative voice in the courts since 1979. And since USJF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit, your generous assistance is also TAX DEDUCTIBLE!

You can use this link or the hyperlink below to help - it’s TAX DEDUCTIBLE. Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

The Obama campaign has a crack team of high-priced law firms - that’s not three lawyers but THREE LAW FIRMS - that will use every means that money can buy to fight this action. We’re relying on you and patriotic Americans like you.

https://secure.conservativedonations.com/usjf_house/?a=1926

Please use the hyperlink above to make your best TAX-DEDUCTIBLE effort to be a part of this battle.

I’m Not Living In The Real World…

To be brutally blunt, a case of this magnitude may not be won or lost on the merits.

I’m very proud of USJF’s accomplishments over the past 29 years.

We’ve defended Minuteman Civil Defense Corps members protecting our borders from illegal aliens.

We handled litigation against Hillary Clinton for campaign finance fraud in her 2000 Senate race.

We’ve submitted testimony before the United States Senate on Supreme Court appointees.

But all that won’t really matter. It won’t matter which side has the most skilled attorneys. Talent, competence and experience do not assure victory.

Here’s the bottom line.

Team Obama presently has THREE LAW FIRMS at its disposal - and a seemingly unlimited ability to raise funds from the far-left for more legal help.

This potentially translates to hundreds of attorneys and law clerks who can literally throw paperwork at us until we crack under the sheer pressure and cry uncle.

Team Obama WILL try to wear us down (which by the way is yet another reason why the “Berg Case” and many of the others - as mentioned earlier - are doomed to fail and why we CAN get the job done).

They’ll stall and delay and throw paperwork at us so fast, so furiously and for so long… then they’ll wait for us to break under the strain and give up. Or so they think…

Team Obama doesn’t fear our skill or the merits of our case.

The ONLY THING THEY FEAR IS YOU!

They hope and pray that you will not support our efforts or that you will grow tired of the fight. What they fear most is that you will join us and support our efforts!

They know that if you support us, we’ll have the ability to take on additional clerical and research staff, cover court fees, file briefs and take on outside counsel on an as-needed basis.

That’s why they’re praying you don’t help us… but we’re praying that you do!

USJF wasn’t approached by a group of hot-shot movers and shakers. We took on this burden because like you we love this great country and we REFUSE to stand idly by while the Left disrespects the Constitution, the American people and our electoral process.

USJF is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization. We go where others fear to tread. We’re adept at taking on vastly superior forces. And we’re committed to hitting the trenches on this one and willing to get bloody if we must.

That’s our promise to you.

But, in the end, our commitment and our “pit-bull” determination doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

Winning or losing is NOT in our control… and it’s not in Team Obama’s control… IT’S IN YOUR HANDS!

A lot of folks are very angry over Barack Obama’s refusal to validate his eligibility to be President of the United States.

Is it worth a TAX DEDUCTIBLE effort of $5000 or $2500 or even $100 or $50 or $25 to defend the Constitution, the rights of Patriotic Americans under the Constitution and the integrity of our electoral process?

In His Service,

Gary Kreep, Executive Director
United States Justice Foundation