Overnight I was given a lot of other information that in one way or another deals with this issue. There are questions surrounding just how feasible this indictment is as far as legalities in convicting a sitting President and such. I have not been able to read all of this information, and certainly haven’t had time to give my own perspective. What I have done, is provide all of the links I received at the bottom of this post. I would really appreciate it if some of you who have the time and interest, to PLEASE leave some detailed comments and sources. I am thinking, since my time right now is being taken up on another subject I’m working on, that I may just make a finalized posting of this as a USER created blog post and host it on my site. I do hope the information I’ve listed here is enough to get some of you interested enough to do some further digging. Thanks for all your help.
I would be very interested in seeing Judge Andrew Napolitano’s take on this if anyone can find that!
Sometimes in my blog, I take creative license in the way I form my posts and link and unlink parts within. I will ALWAYS inform you, my loyal readers when I have done so, and ALWAYS provide the link for the original story. I have altered the original article somewhat here and you will find the link at the bottom.
Citizens’ Grand Jury Indicts Obama and BidenOCALA, Fla., Oct. 30, 2012– /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ —
Larry Klayman, founder and chairman of Freedom Watch, today announced that President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden have been criminally indicted for having willfully released classified national security information concerning the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, U.S. and Israeli war plans concerning Iran and their cyber-attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The release of this information, among other harm to U.S. national security, resulted in the killing of members of Seal Team Six by terrorists and the arrest and imprisonment of American covert agents by Pakistan, such as the doctor who aided the CIA with regard to the bin Laden assassination. U.S.-Israeli war plans with Iran have also been compromised.
A true bill of indictment was issued by a Citizens’ Grand Jury in Ocala, Florida, who reviewed evidence and voted unanimously to indict Obama and Biden at 6:02 pm on October 29, 2012.The authority for a Citizens’ Grand Jury
can be found at : www.citizensgrandjury.com.
Mr. Klayman, the Citizens’ Prosecutor, issued the following statement: “The Citizens’ Grand Jury, after having deliberated, yesterday issued a true bill of indictment. It did the work that the government should have done, but does not have the integrity to do; that is hold these public officials accountable under the law. For far too long government prosecutors, who are put in place by politicians, have looked the other way as high public officials like Obama and Biden violate the law to further their political agendas. Now, as a result, the people must therefore exercise the rights given to them by the framers of the Constitution, and themselves take legitimate measures to restore the nation to some semblance of legality. This indictment of Obama and Biden is just the first step in a legal revolution to reclaim the nation from establishment politicians, government officials and judges who have represented only their own political and other interests at the expense of ‘We the People.’ Obama and Biden will now be tried in a court of law and I am confident that they will be convicted of these alleged crimes.”The original Full Story can be read at :
Citizens Grand Jury video evidence
Citizens’ Grand Jury Manual Grand Jury Qualifications and Selection of Grand Jury
A collection of videos from Freedom Watch Inc.
I plan on adding information relating to this as it comes to me, and would be most grateful to readers of my blog for contacting me with any news concerning this matter.
Can It All Be Coincidence?
by Don Fredrick,
As I noted in the introduction to my book, The Obama Timeline, a jury at a murder trial will often find the accumulated circumstantial evidence so overwhelming that a guilty verdict is obvious—even though there may be no witness to the crime. “The jurors in the Scott Peterson trial believed the collection of evidence more than they believed Scott Peterson. Among other things, the jury thought that being arrested with $15,000 in cash, recently-dyed hair, a newly-grown goatee, four cell phones, camping equipment, a map to a new girlfriend’s house, a gun, and his brother’s driver’s license certainly did not paint a picture of a grieving husband who had nothing to do with his pregnant wife’s disappearance and murder.”
In the four years I have been gathering information about—and evidence against—Barack Hussein Obama, I have encountered hundreds of coincidences that strike me as amazing. None of those coincidences, by themselves, may mean much. But taken as a whole it is almost impossible to believe they were all the result of chance.continue reading Full Story at : http://www.themoralliberal.com/2012/10/03/can-it-all-be-coincidence/
Citizen grand jury indicts Obama
Groups in 20 more states reviewing eligibility claims
Published: 03/31/2009 at 8:35 PM by Bob Unruh
In Conservative Circles, Calls for ‘Citizen Grand Juries’ Grow
By Dan Testa, 12-09-09
The idea of changing state law, or the state Constitution, to allow citizens to convene grand juries in their counties appears to be gathering steam in some conservative circles of Western Montana. The concept would allow citizens to summon juries comprised of members of the public to investigate alleged crimes – not just judges, as is the case currently.
With a Bitterroot man crafting language for a proposed ballot initiative and a Hungry Horse man forming a group to work on draft legislation, a measure allowing for citizen grand juries, in one form or another, seems poised for broader consideration in the coming year – by either the public or, possibly, lawmakers.
Continue Reading at : http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/in_conservative_circles_calls_for_citizen_grand_juries_grow/14634
Citizens Grand Jury Validity and Legal Authority
CAN CITIZENS FORM THEIR OWN GRAND JURY AND INDICT POLITICIANS FOR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR
By Jim Frazier
An organization called the “American Grand Jury.org” has convened a Grand Jury and indicted President Obama for the crime of treason. Will their indictment be acknowledged in a U.S. District court of law? Are common citizens able to indict an elected official?
“Yes,” says Hal Von Luebbert,” author of “Citizen Power Now.” “The US government has no power to bring anyone to trial. The government can NOT find any person guilty of anything. Both of those powers belong to The People through use of a jury.”
The U.S. Attorney’s office in Colorado does not agree. “I don’t think any citizen- convened Grand Jury has power to be enforced in a court of law,” said Jeff Dorschnor, spokesperson for the U.S. Attorneys office in Denver.
Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck echoed the same idea. “I’ve never heard of a Grand Jury called by citizens,” he said.
Mike Saccone, the Colorado Department of Law’s spokesperson, said, “There are no provisions for formation of citizen grand juries in Colorado. That is the way the statues stand now.”
Continue Reading at : http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=4498
IF IT’S NOT A RUNAWAY, IT’S NOT A REAL GRAND JURY
by : ROGER ROOTS
The doings of American grand juries are notoriously misunderstood and unknown by most sectors of the public. Generally, the grand jury process escapes obscurity only when indictments are made public and when, for whatever reason, grand jury “leaks” are disclosed in the news media. In theory, the grand jury is supposed to act as a check on the government — a people’s watchdog against arbitrary and malevolent prosecutions. 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. The Framers of the Bill of Rights would scarcely recognize a grand jury upon seeing the modern version conduct business in a federal courthouse. In modern federal grand jury proceedings, the government attorney is clearly in charge and government agents may outnumber the witnesses by six-to-one.
A “runaway” grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s “runaway” grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact “runaways,” according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself.
Before the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure — which made independently-acting grand juries illegal for all practical purposes — grand juries were understood to have broad powers to operate at direct odds with both judges and prosecutors. One recent criminal procedure treatise sums up the inherent inconsistency of the modern grand jury regime:
In theory, the grand jury is a body of independent citizens that can investigate any crime or government misdeed that comes to its attention. In practice, however, the grand jury is dependent upon the prosecutor to bring cases and gather evidence. Except in rare instances of a “runaway” grand jury investigation of issues that a prosecutor does not want investigated, the powers of the grand jury enhance the powers of the prosecutor.
Thus, while the grand jury still exists as an institution — in a sterile, watered-down, and impotent form — its decisions are the mere reflection of the United States Justice Department. In practice, the grand jury’s every move is controlled by the prosecution, whom the grand jury simply does not know it is supposed to be pitted against.
The term “runaway grand jury” did not appear in legal literature until the mid-twentieth century. The reason for this is that the term would have been inapplicable in the context of previous generations: every American grand jury known by the Constitution’s Framers would be considered a runaway grand jury under modern criminal procedure. Constitutional framers knew criminal law to be driven by private prosecution and did not contemplate the omnipresence of government prosecutors. Additionally, early American common law placed far more power and investigative judgment in the hands of grand juries than does the criminal procedure of the twentieth century.
Although in 1946 the drafters of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure looked with horror at the prospect of grand juries that “could act from their own knowledge or observation,” long-standing common law precedent upholds the power of grand juries to act “independently of either the prosecuting attorney or judge.” At common law, a grand jury could freely “investigate merely on [the] suspicion that the law [was] being violated, or even because it want[ed] assurance that it [was] not.” In light of the historic independence of the grand jury, the perfidy of the Federal Rules Advisory Committee in limiting the institution through codification can only be seen as willful subversion of well-settled law. 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.
The loss of the grand jury in its traditional, authentic, or runaway form, leaves the modern federal government with few natural enemies capable of delivering any sort of damaging blows against it. The importance of this loss of a once powerful check on the “runaway” federal government is a focus that has remained largely untouched in the legal literature.
This article examines the historic decrease in the powers of the American grand jury during the twentieth century. It introduces the subject of the grand jury in the context of the constitutional language which invoked it, and then compares the modern application of the institution at the federal level with its common law model. Tracing the historic evolution of the grand jury as an anti-government institution in the English common law until its “capture” by the government in the mid-twentieth century, this article will demonstrate how the role of the grand jury has changed considerably over time. Finally, this article will argue that the modern loss of “runaway” or independent grand juries is unconstitutional and recommend a restoration of the grand jury’s historic powers.
Continue Reading at : http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/runaway.htm
SCOTUS on the unique power of Grand Jurors
A blog by : Natural Born Citizen
My recent post concerning the 5th Amendment right of we the people to use the “presentment” power to investigate criminal activity on our own volition to review Government activity and bring all criminality to justice was very well received. It seems to have woken alot of people up to the possibility of reviving the Constitution. The power of “presentment” is not some fanciful concept but a very real provision stated unequivocally in the 5th Amendment. There’s no legal reason why we can’t use it.
That being said, the question of how we can use it must be tackled. But always keep this in mind when the naysayers start harassing you. 25 people sitting on Grand Juries is the way we do all criminal indictments in the US. If somebody is facing the death penalty or life in prison, they must first be brought before a Grand Jury and if 13 of the 25 agree that the person should stand trial then that’s what happens.
LaRouche: Impeach Obama for Complicity in Murder of U.S. Ambassador Stevens
Sept. 15—Lyndon LaRouche today demanded that Congress remain in session to immediately convene impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives against President Barack Obama for his criminal complicity in the Sept. 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in which Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other U.S. officials were killed.
LaRouche declared this afternoon:
“President Obama was complicit before the fact in the events that lead to the killing of four valuable American diplomats. There is sufficient evidence to warrant immediate impeachment proceedings. U.S. officials were repeatedly warned, in the weeks preceding the 9/11 Benghazi attacks, that there was a breakdown of security in the city. The State Department issued a travel alert to all Americans, urging them to stay out of Libya. All of the evidence was there to impose strict security measures. Yet, nothing was done. That failure is on the President’s plate.”
Continue Reading at : http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2012/3937impeach_obama_complicity.html