Oath Keepers: We Can Legally File Charges Against Obama

Oath Keepers: We Can Legally File Charges Against Obama

www.westernjournalism.com

The Oath Keepers recently held a convention in Las Vegas, NV, open only to police officers and sheriffs in which former sheriff (and current congressional candidate) Richard Mack discussed how the 168 attendees could reacquaint themselves with their oath to the Constitution and their own protection when they carry out their duty. One of those duties include issuing a warrant for the arrest of Barack Hussein Obama.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.impeachobamacampaign.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
WND TV to live-stream Arpaio eligibility report

Putting aside the issue of Obama’s eligibility as a natural born citizen to hold office, there are a significant number of wrong doings he has committed that would allow any peace officer desiring so to issue a warrant for Obama’s arrest. As a recidivist offender of the United States Constitution, a mere twenty-five are listed here.

Topping that list:
1. Convicted felon and Chicago real estate developer Tony Rezko’s purchase of land adjacent to Obama’s house in Hyde Park, IL. In 2006, Rezko sold a 10 foot strip of his property to Obama for $104,500, rendering the remainder of Rezko’s $625,000 investment too small to be developed and, for all intensive purposes, worthless.

2. The provision of the Obama campaign donor lists to ACORN in 2007 and 2008, more complete lists than the ones he provided to the FEC. ACORN used the lists to illegally raise money for Obama’s election from donors who had already maxed out their legally allowable contributions.

3. Widespread voter fraud including voter intimidation, ballot stuffing, falsified documents, and threats of violence against Hillary Clinton supporters committed by the Obama campaign and ACORN during the 2008 Democrat primary election. For more information see my CFP article How Obama Used an Army of Thugs to Steal the 2008 Democratic Party Nomination.

4. Obama’s refusal to release his long form birth certificate which would show conclusively that he is a dual citizen and therefore not constitutionally eligible to serve as President. Obama’s college records, which have also not been released, would also contain information regarding his dual citizenship status.

Video included at link with interview of former Sheriff Mack. I recommend watching that video to get much better clued in as to what's going on with this.

One county sheriff at a time, this nationwide program appears to simply reinforce constitutional values at the key sheriff positions all across the country. But combined with that oath, is to remind them that they DO have the power to file charges against Obama.

The interview points out that sheriffs are not beholden to politicians, although some might question that assertion. But the key question is which one will step up to the plate, and potentially bring some of these charges to bear.

Ballot access challenges have been filed in a lot of states.

Arpaio is about to announce his findings from his eligibility investigation soon:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.westernjournalism.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Or even better idea. Let's sneak a raccoon into the white house and call the popo and tell them he doesn't have an exotic pet license

I honestly think it'd be a cold day in hell for some of these things to stick, even as much as some would want them too.

It would be good if this was brought to public attention though

Thanks for posting this TA...

It's about time I heard the Oath Takers discuss the very thing they understood as thier duty being addressed. Yes, they swore an oath to protect our Constitution, and as such, any intelligent individual can thus see how complicit Obama has become in placing himself at the fore as being an agent of Constitutional demise for America.

Thank you!....

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Will they be arresting Bush and Cheney also?

Originally posted by ILikeStars
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Will they be arresting Bush and Cheney also?

Let's pray that they can... and will!

reply to post by ILikeStars


Lets not forget Kissinger and Bernanke. Although they may have the right. All I can say is them and whose army. It surely won't be ours. They are bought and paid for by the same banking cartel.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Well one thing people have to understand is anything that the Oath keepers are able to do ...(THEY) can do also. Many people are not aware - if Oath Keepers can file charges - they can too - and they should. File charges, and make a citizens arrest whenever you see government going astray of the Constitution.

reply to post by redrose123


lol, this could become a virtual charge fest!

Maybe the sheriffs were the secret weapon all along. We should be kicking ourselves in the butt for not putting more pressure on them.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Sounds like a bunch of disinfo to me. A bunch of classic conspiracy theorist case charges, but missing the most important law that Obama has broken? If they really wanted to file charges against Obama, how about for the big one? Murder of a US Citizen?

Seems like that would be most pressing issue. But yet nobody mentions it?

projectavalon.net...

Originally posted by ILikeStars
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Will they be arresting Bush and Cheney also?

If we go for them, why not the hole of congress with the exception of the very few that actually took their duties seriously (as in to DEFEND the constitution, not use it as toilet paper).

And while we are at it might as well go with all the members that are still alive that have done horrible things and put forth terrible legislation.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


I am not a Oath-Keeper memeber but I do remember and take my oath seriously.

The key line....I will defend my Country against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Didn't like Bush and don't much care for Obama.

But I do respect Bush as he has stayed out of the lime light since leaving office. I wonder if Obama will do the same...doubtful.

Chances are he'll follow in the footsteps of Carter and Clinton.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Hmmm, i'm not exactly sure how a police officer or sheriff can issue a warrant for anyone's arrest. Aren't warrants only issued by judges?

I have a deep seated mistrust of any group of people who feel they need to give themselves a grandiose nickname for supposedly doing their jobs.

As ahead of state their are certain privileges in regards to rule of rule and operation of the state. Where the actual line is drawn is a hazy one and basically comes down to support. If a Sheriff wishes to exercise this right then I suggest starting with past executives over current ones due to the issues involved in operation of power.

reply to post by Montana


Only a Judge can issue a warrant for an arrest, and going by the law and constitution the warrant must be supported by probable cause. Since Obama is President, its Federal so im not sure where local law enforcement thinks they have jurisdiction. An arrest without warrant can occur if the crime is committed in the officers presence, or if PC exists through investigation. Thats why if we make an arrest we are required to submit a PC statement and the PA must review and either act on the PC or release the individual within 24-72 hours depending on state.

Secondly President Obama is protected under the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity, and the states are required to recognize that via the 11th amendment, in addition to Article 3 section 2.

The first and foremost reason the doctrine is present is to prevent partisan / harassing actions. If people are concerned about Obama's citizenship status, take it up with y0ur states election committee. Appearing on a state ballot for public office requires the individual comply with state laws, not federal.

Respectfully, judging by the webpage linked listing the 25 actions, its more apparent than ever why the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity is present.

Im not a fan of Obama and as far as his citizenship issue goes im all for getting to the bottom of that one once and for all just to settle the damn issue. As for everything else listed, its a mixed bag. I would like to see some investigated while other issues need to be dropped (assassination of the cleric) because those charges ignore the law.

People wishing to force public officials to abide by their oath and the Constitution im all for. However whats the point of trying to hold a person accountable when the actions to hold that person accountable ignore / violate the Constitution?

Let them try it. Watch how fast they will be declared domestic terrorists, and immediately black bagged, as Obama gained the ability to do on New Year's Eve.

Obama's indefinite detention powers were specifically intended for people like the Oath Keepers. I'd applaud them trying it; but it won't go anywhere. All it will accomplish is to get them killed. The American public would not come to their aid.

reply to post by petrus4


Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. While the NDAA has that language, its a violation of the Supreme Court rulings going all the way back to Bush, 9/11, FISA / Patriot Act / Military Commission Acts of 2006 / 2008 and 2009.

Its a violation of Posse Commitatus, which contrary to popular belief has never been repealed and is still present and active.

If you want an argument for the other side, the NDAA was not needed since State Guard units are exempt from Posses Commitatus. They answer to the adjutant General (top general for the state armed forces) with their commander in chief being the Governor of the state.

We can look at Congressional history and the laws they passed, where we see that many laws have been invalidated by the Supreme Court.

If anybody wanted to possibly investigate the New Jersey Voting machine company whose owner is powerful enough to keep his name out of the limelight when somebody goes down for winning an election on his fixed machines.....perhaps even see if those same machines may have been going around from place to place as needed.....
I am sure there is more to find out in the intervening years....the shell corps all selling the same machines owned by7 this dude...etc etc....but thats Jersey right?not much gets investigated there....
God how can you guys have any real election on electronic machines whose owners wont even give the goverment the codes...no one can check how they compute the votes....
That lasy candidate in Louisiana just figured it out by accident after the election when she went to the storage place and tried out several machines, all of them, gave her only one vote for every three times her vote button was pressed....bingo!
figure it out.......these machines are phoney from the get go, and too suceptable to tampering.
PAPER BALLOTS CAST AND COUNTED IN FRONT OF WITNESSES!
Or give the elections to the mafia companies that make the machines and operate them.....
good luck with that!
Oh, and all of this is public access info.....
surely LEOs are not stupid.....why no heavy investigations?

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by petrus4

 

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. While the NDAA has that language, its a violation of the Supreme Court rulings going all the way back to Bush, 9/11, FISA / Patriot Act / Military Commission Acts of 2006 / 2008 and 2009.

Its a violation of Posse Commitatus, which contrary to popular belief has never been repealed and is still present and active.

Maybe you should file suit against the government, then. I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate that.

I also might be wrong about the NDAA specifically, but black bagging people (or at least making a serious attempt at it; although in fairness, some GTMO cases in particular have been contested) under some legal excuse has already been done. Given your legal expertise, perhaps you are able to tell me which particular excuse they might favour in this case.

If you want an argument for the other side, the NDAA was not needed since State Guard units are exempt from Posses Commitatus. They answer to the adjutant General (top general for the state armed forces) with their commander in chief being the Governor of the state.

So technically, a phone call could be made to a state Governor, asking for State Guardsmen to be sent to an Oath Keeper's...sorry, domestic terrorist's house?

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Topping that list:
1. Convicted felon and Chicago real estate developer Tony Rezko’s purchase of land adjacent to Obama’s house in Hyde Park, IL. In 2006, Rezko sold a 10 foot strip of his property to Obama for $104,500, rendering the remainder of Rezko’s $625,000 investment too small to be developed and, for all intensive purposes, worthless.

The number one item on the list of reasons to impeach Obama is that he bought a 10-foot strip of land from his neighbor in a mutual agreement and that ruined his neighbor's land "for all intensive purposes"? What were those "intensive purposes"?

What?

And you expect this to be taken seriously? "Oh, impeach Obama! He bought land"!!!

I hear he bought a used car from Meryl Streep and j-walked once, too. IMPEACH!!!

So silly! :shk: