Threshold Constitutional Issues: Article II, Section I

©2009 drkate

This article begins a series of discussions on what I would call ‘threshold constitutional issues’.  If you look at the definitions of the word threshold, I would adopt this one as the meaning of these series of posts:

a level, point, or value above which something is true or will take place and below which it is not or will not

In the spirit in which this blog was created, a threshold issue for our nation is whether our Constitution is being followed.  Through research, writing and dialogue, including Constitutional Radio, we completely understand that the Constitution has not been followed for a long time, and has been quite frankly, always under attack.  But that will not justify abandoning it. In fact, we have a moral obligation and constitutionally-mandated duty to maintain and restore our Constitutional republic.  So here we are.

One of the most significant threshold issues for any nation, and for our nation in particular, is whether the head of state or President is eligible for the office.  As Lame Cherry noted a while ago, those who have held this threshold issue up to the light “held the beach at Normandy without reinforcements”, and now have advanced to the field.

The democrats and Obama would have us all believe–if we look at this issue at all– it is just a piece of paper–the birth certificate–and that the concept of “Natural Born Citizen” just means ‘born in the USA’.  Those patriots that have held the line on this understand exactly the threshold issue that exits:  if our President is ineligible, our country does not exist, and nothing he nor the government does is valid.

Below, cross-posted with permission, is the Birthers viewpoint on the lawsuits regarding the eligibility threshold constitutional question.  By chronicling the evolution of these lawsuits, what emerges is the unified concept of natural born citizenship–born in the USA of two U.S. citizen parents.  It cannot be any other way for the Commander in Chief of the United States of America unless the Constitution is amended.

***********

The Unseen Hand

©Teo the Bear, The Birthers

People are constantly asking for our opinion about which court case against Obama is the best, or who we think is the best lawyer.

We have stayed away from picking sides for a reason. Every lawyer involved has done this country a service. Every plaintiff from the individuals suing their Secretaries of States, to the individuals and members of the military suing Obama, and to those suing both Obama and Congress for the good of our Nation has the absolute right to be called a patriot.

What we have noticed is that each lawsuit has approached the issue differently, in the beginning there was no case law as how to stop a usurper from causing this constitutional train wreck. The attorneys used their best judgment and no one should play armchair quarterback. What we have noticed is that each new lawsuit either added something new or took a previous case and applied the lessons learned. Through a learning experience, each new lawsuit is becoming stronger and stronger. The disappointments that we all shared in not having a court hear any of the lawsuits were not in vain, because we have learned from our collective experiences.

To be respectful to the courts some decisions given by the courts were vague, while others pointed out that while a candidate, Obama was protected under the first amendment to run within the political process, for he was not yet subject to the eligibility requirements of Article II, Section 1. Some decisions before the civilian courts were trumped by the application of military law and policies.  Other decisions have applied the rules of standing of civil proceedings because the cases were presented as civil proceedings.

We cannot judge the legal talents of these fine and brave attorneys who are risking their careers in our common pursuit of demanding that our Constitution be observed. Attorney Berg concentrated on the issue of the native-born, (birth certificate) and dual citizenship issue but he was denied standing because Obama was still in the political process and not yet in the constitutional process. Leo Donofrio asked a simple question, “how could anyone whose birth was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 be a natural born citizen.”  Dr. Taitz picked upon the native-born (birth certificate) issue and she sought out members of our military thinking, ‘surely, they would have standing.’ Charles Kerchner expanded these arguments to Vattel’s meaning of a natural born citizen and seen that Congress acted improperly during the process of counting the votes of the Electoral College when they failed to open the floor for objections as required by law. His lawsuit also points out that Congress held hearings on McCain’s citizenship but not Obama’s prior to the election.

Attorney Apuzzo has accepted Mr. Kerchner’s case. He looked at the term natural born citizen and concluded that a would-be President must have absolute and sole allegiance and loyalty to the United States from the time of his or her birth and that it is only unity of citizenship (the joining of jus soli, or citizenship from the soil, and jus sanguinis, citizenship descended from both parents) that can provide this type of allegiance and loyalty. Attorney Apuzzo also approached the standing issue differently than other attorneys have by arguing that Obama’s and Congress’s actions have caused his clients a loss of liberty and denial of equal protection which gives them standing.

As you can see this is not only a learning experience, but also a refinement of the proper argument the court must answer. The argument has grown from place of birth, to dual citizenship, to the citizenship of the parents at the time of birth and is now defined for the courts to hear and  focus all these arguments upon the concept of sole allegiance to the nation by birth and whom the founding fathers thought would exemplify this concept of total loyalty at the moment of their natural birth. The issue of standing has also matured from one citizen asking the courts to stop another citizen from exercising their first amendment rights, to one that now exposes constitutional grounds for standing.

We are trying to decide if a President can owe to foreign sovereigns their loyalties that aught to belong solely to the United States of America at birth or because of dual citizenships. We are also trying to see if Congress is complicit in this deception. All of this plays important factor in structuring the right argument.

The question of standing is very important, we as Americans believe that we as sovereigns of the government have standing. Our Constitution is what created the republican form federal government that we have today. Our proof is in the Constitution, as it clearly starts out with,

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

There can be nothing more clear and compelling for standing on all constitutional issues as that. It is We the People, who have not simply a legal standing, but a natural standing in matters of constitutional importance. For one moment read those words that start our Constitution again. These words have one meaning and one meaning only, We the people are sovereign and our government is answerable to us.

I think about how the arguments to eligibility that Birthers from all over, have been forming over the past year, and how it changed and moved away from the popular, but incorrect ideas of citizenship and became anchored to the intent of the Founding Fathers, and I think there is a purpose to all this. Our founding fathers wrote a few simple words, that perhaps explains everything about why we have not gotten standing yet. We find these words of explanation at the end of the Declaration of Independence. Sometimes simple words explain the unexplainable, words such as “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” can take the question of standing out of legal hands and seem to place it into unseen hands.

The Supreme Court is going to agree to hear only one case, perhaps two if they are close together and can rule on both in the same session. They know that these issues may cut across a wide section of society and that the Nation cannot go back and forth in uncertainty. They will decide if Barack Hussein Obama, II is President until 2013 on the merits of the case presented to them and not make it into a Ping-Pong match. Imagine that this case only took the position that place of birth was important. The birth certificate becomes not only the primary document, but in essence the only document, and if the lower courts took judicial notice of the Hawaiian COLB  through the good faith and credit clause the time going through the appeals process to the Supreme Court could devastate the country leaving a usurper in the Oval Office. What would the appeal process be? Of course it would change from correcting an incorrect definition of a natural born citizen for Article II, Section 1 to that of the changing an incorrect application of the good faith and credit clause. Even take dual citizenship, if presented in an improper argument the court could narrowly rule that unless it was a condition of Birth, it does not affect the status of a natural born citizen. Again the appeals processes is not going to be on the correct definition of a natural born citizen but rather on a previous Supreme Court ruling on allowing dual citizenship for “citizens” in the most generic sense of the word.

I believe it is for an unseen reason that standing has not yet been granted, that it is the unseen hand of Divine Providence protecting this Nation from our own sense of urgency and quietly strengthening one individual on whose shoulders rests the hopes of everyone who believes in a Constitutional republic and not the rule of the unbridled passions of body politic that is too often called democracy.

Perhaps this same unseen hand stopped the earlier lawsuits so the people could run with their passions, as the cry for “change” at any price made many to forget that this Nation is strong and our constitutional protections firm only when we govern ourselves with moral guidance. Did this unseen hand feed us the sweetness of our own egocentric desires, did this unseen hand pour a measure of the intoxicating wine of irresponsibility to the people as they ignored the foundations of our republic, and did this unseen hand do these things because we have forgotten our heritage and our place that Nature’s God put us in to guard against the events of the world that threaten the innocent?  Did Nature’s God withdraw the hand of Divine Providence in the foreknowledge that it would come back to protect the Nation at its darkest hour, after the sweetness of desire turned bitter in our stomachs and the intoxication of irresponsibility shows that we have tossed off our clothes of morality only to see ourselves naked?  If this is the answer then we with the hands that can be seen should show them joined in prayer to Nature’s God upon whose will Divine Providence is ordained.

My personal hope is that standing will not be given to anyone in the active military for this reason. If they present their case and loose, with todays political climate bordering more like 1929 than 2009 I fear that the military would undergo a purge if the member of the active military was given standing and fell. A purge of those who are truly loyal to the Constitution United States and those people we cannot afford to loose. If we loose them, they will be replaced by those whose allegiance will be to the base and corrupt powers that have long sought to enslave free people. For all our failures as a society in allowing two parties to dominate government, they are the citizens’ last hope of keeping a constitutional republic from turning to a people’s democratic republic without the bloodshed of a civil war. There is no doubt that they are brave men and women, and we do not want those brave souls obeying unlawful orders, and most of all we want them to remember their oath to the Constitution. They know what an unlawful order is. When ordered to turn their weapons on citizens who are only exercising both their God given and constitutionally guaranteed rights, or being ordered to surrender to foreign forces, we have little doubt that they will draw the line in the sand and hold fast to their oath. We will need them more then than now if this current government keeps usurping the power we the people gave them and one day decided to turn the military against us. We need them to fight if this appeasing administration decides that only their human sacrifice will appease our enemies. For this reason, I believe the guiding and unseen hand of that Divine Providence that our Founding Fathers called on so many years ago has not given standing to the actions to date. Perhaps it is we who forgot the need for Divine Providence, and I pray that the Divine Providence that was evoked on that fourth day of July did not forget us.

We cannot forget those patriots who pursue other avenues to protect our Constitution. Those that support the ninth and tenth amendments protecting the rights and powers reserved to the people and states, or those that hold fast to the second amendment as our final insurance against tyranny. Those grandmas and grandpas, the stay at home moms, and the common men and women who give up their day to join their fellow Americans in protests at town hall meetings and Tea Parties across the nation exercising their first amendment rights. All of these are patriots made in the same mould as those who on the morning of April 19th 1775 assembled on Lexington Green and faced the mightiest army in the world at that time. All patriots all endowed by their Creator with an unalienable desire to breath the free air of liberty.

Which is the best lawsuit, who is the best lawyer? Who knows! We are not in Rio de Janeiro where we choose lawyers to cheer for as the citizens there choose soccer teams to support. There politics are discussed freely and without fear, but heaven forbid you say you are for Vasco de Gama while the person you are talking to is for the Flamingos. Do we elevate the lawyers opposing Obama’s usurpation of the Presidency to mere a spectator sport? We find ourselves embroiled in the defense of these legal personalities while we ignore the clear and present danger posed by, as John Jay warned, a “Foreigner” in the Oval Office. To say “I’m for Berg” or “I am for Orly,” or any other lawyer, is to destroy our unity in the common defense of our Constitution. We are not for Berg, Donofrio, Taitz or Apuzzo. we are for the Constitution of the United States, and the attorney whose argument and eloquence before the court ends this national nightmare of uncertainty.  We are for those attorneys’ whose commitment to the laws and the rule of law that allows us to remove a usurper from the office of Commander in Chief and can restore confidence to the Nation that is loosing more than confidence, it is loosing hope.

Who ever gets standing what we must do is bow our heads in silent prayer for it is this person that the Divine Providence of Nature’s God has uncovered and, that the argument they present to the courts comes from the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Let us take comfort that in the unseen assurance that the same Divine Providence that protected our nation throughout the Revolutionary War still waits to protect us if we have the faith to call upon the name of Nature’s God.

Please join us at 2:01 PM Eastern time on Wednesday August 19, 2009 for one moment of silence as we bow our heads across the nation from the eastern most shores of Maine, to the western most island in the Aleutian Islands of Alaska to Nature’s God as we again ask for the protection of Divine Providence.

August 19th is an important date in American history it is the day we fought the final battle of the Revolutionary War, the Battle of Blue Licks, and it is the day that the grande dame of our Navy, the USS Constitution (how much more fitting can that be for those of us that swore allegiance to her namesake) scored our first victory of the second war of independence, the War of 1812, against the British ship the HMS Guerriere and earned her immortal nickname “old ironsides” as the British cannon balls bounced off her hull.   The dark side of this day occurred 75 years ago in Germany when the position of the Führer was created by the simple majority of a democratic vote.

At the appointed hour on the August 19, 2009 let us take courage from the deeds of our history and resolve never to allow the dark passions of a desperate world to stain our national soul by believing that any one man or group of men are above the Constitution that empowers them. Let us move forward in our sworn duty, “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” to guard our Constitution and our Republic from all enemies both foreign and domestic.

46 Responses to “Threshold Constitutional Issues: Article II, Section I”


  1. 1 drkate August 16, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    Thank you, Teo for this perspective from the Birthers. I think you are right to describe this as an evolution of the concept as manifested in the steady stream of lawsuits that are still coming.

    And your faith still in the Supreme Court, that it will take one case, is truly significant and a beacon for so many of us that have lost that faith. Yet its true: what would have happened if the cases had stopped earlier?

    Thank you.

    • 2 Tèo Bear `,:-) August 17, 2009 at 7:29 am

      Thank you DrKate for such kind words.

      I do beleive that SOTUS will eventually hear “a” case, while I beleive in the unseen hand, I also look at as a rationalist. Here is my rational reasoning for this thought.

      The Birther movement is not going to go away between now and 2012 unless Obama’s minions declare martial law and hunt us down to extinction. The Birthers are becoming more and more determined to have this question raised to a national debate. If this constitutional train wreck is not cleared off the tracks, there will be other trains barreling into it at high speed. Presidential appointments, foreign treaties, nationalizing the economy and ungodly deficit spending are just a few.

      The judiciary should take notice of all of us and our determination. Someone will eventually reach that standing threshold, even if it is a straw candidate in the 2012 Democratic Primary whose sole purpose is to re-ignight the question in the courts, this time as a candidate questioning another candidates qualifications. Believe me, one judge in one state will hear this case at that time.

      If the question is resolved now it would only be one year of usurpation that needs to be corrected when the government has only spent a fraction of the stimulus money, made so very few appointments and has no treaties. If not four years will need to be undone.

      The wiser minds of the Supreme Court know this, they know that right now only Obama and Congress will incur the peoples righteous wrath. If they allow this to go on, then they themselves risk making not only themselves but the very law they uphold complicit in an act of Treason against the country.

      Congress thinks this will go away if they ignore it long enough, they are by nature creatures of public opinion they serve at the pleasure of public opinion, their vision is in the realm of the immediate placating public opinion, they see not backwards in history for guidance or look forwards for outcome. Congress takes comfort in that the MSM is like themselves only concerned about todays news, never asking the questions like didn’t this happen before or looking forward to how one sound bite can shape lives not yet matured.

      SCOTUS on the other-hand is not concerned with the passions of the public, their vision is both backwards in forming a foundation and forwards in how that decision will shape the lives of Americans.

      So the realist in me thinks that SCOTUS has been waiting for the right argument that is based in neither the political or conspiratorial, but is based solely in the constitutional.

      With that said, the unseen hand often moves people along the right path as often as it prevents them from moving down the wrong path.

      • 3 drkate August 17, 2009 at 11:19 am

        Teo, thank you for these thoughts. In my best moments I am thinking that the Supremes will take the ‘right’ case…and your history above shows the difficulties with all the cases that were filed before Obama was bound to the constitution. He was exercising his first amendment rights running for office knowing he couldn’t serve because of his disability.

        But they bet the barn that we would not be paying attention, and the media complied.

        Now they really are in a world of hurt because the issue will not go away. I thank you for your painstaking, thorough work shining through among all the riff raff.

  2. 5 Ga.Peach August 16, 2009 at 10:16 pm

    This is such a wonderful read. It is sad, but true that many do not feel the need for God in their lives. It is by thoughts such as this you have provided for us, drkate, that many will be reminded of that necessary foundation to bring us back to Grace.

    Bless you. You are truly one of those special people that God chose to bring the country and His children back to where we were so long ago. I can’t thank you enough for all you have done for me.

    FYI: I am watching C-Span2 now. Brian Jennings is speaking on the the threat to silence talk radio. Watch if you can.

    • 6 drkate August 16, 2009 at 11:13 pm

      Hi GA Peach! Thank you for visiting here.

      I thought this was a very interesting perspective, honest, evolutionary, and never discounting that unseen hand which has guided this country since the beginning.

  3. 7 thedametruth August 16, 2009 at 10:24 pm

    Many thanks to you Kate, and to Teo & Lame Cherry for continuing to explore these constitutional crises with the dignity, thoughtfulness and integrity they demand. It is only through the efforts of all that we can hope to restore our Republic and the Constitution that has guided it for so many years.

  4. 9 Lame Cherry August 16, 2009 at 11:21 pm

    My compliments drkate on the depth of your thought provoking post. It reminded me though in utilizing threshold in the deeper sense of covenant or marriage contract.
    The threshold is the basic last venue of threshing or removing the grain from the stalk to obtain the fruit and the yeast covering the fruit to transform it into life when taken (the female form)..
    The hold is the masculine as he carries the female form in her life giving force, by force into his inner darkness where there is either the light of her to make it a home or that light is extinguished and it becomes a chamber of horrors.

    What the point is in this threshold, it is the American virginal daughter of God has by hook and crook, been wed to Barack Obama, because that is what the Constitution is, a covenant of law, which can not be broken. Mr. Obama has in turn plundered the dowery of his wife of the majority, sold her as a prostitute to the world body and chained her to Chicom slavery.

    There is nothing God ordained in this marriage contract. It is why I often site the charms in Mr. Obama’s pocket in being consumptive forces and requiring spiritual payment from the demonic side. It reminds one of Terri Schiavo in being a once vibrant America and in her end euthanized and these same Obama voters telling the world how “beautiful” she looked.
    Mr. Obama is now progressing that role in his Obamacare to euthanize his American national wife.

    If Mr. Obama was interested in the reality of tending this American wife he would be securing her finances, creating jobs, making her people more liberated and free. None of that is the case, and I would submit that the Obama supporters who have been most vehement in attacking birthers, are in the role of the “beaten wife syndrome”. It will make no difference the rapine, assaults, humiliation or degradation they endure. They will still defend Mr. Obama, because he validates their need in he has removed from them their selves and without him, they trigger fear in this maniacal reaction they have in protecting all he is when he is assaulting them.
    I once knew an old Sheriff who hated domestic calls, as every time he was called, the wife would turn on the Sheriff and attack him as the beast of the husband stood there with swolled knuckles from punching his wife.

    In this the birthers are the Sheriff, the Obama supporters the syndrome wife, and people like Ann Coulter and Geraldo Rivera are the neighbors who heard it all, but keep saying, “I didn’t see a thing as we have to keep that couple in the house to pay our wages and to pay taxes so the price of our house doesn’t fall”.

    Welcome to the blogger realm drkate and long may your words be the whispering wind of Truth reminding the neighbors peaking from behind the curtains that an American Lady is being ravaged by a person who can’t even prove he has a marriage contract.

    God bless

    • 10 drkate August 16, 2009 at 11:41 pm

      Lame Cherry,

      thank you so much for visiting and commenting here, and for the words/thoughts of support.

      I have, as you know, been researching and researching on those technical aspects of the constitution…scientist type with the details and all that. Yet, I am continually reminded of the hidden hand, and the larger view as you so gracefully discuss in so many of your postings. And amazed at the connections.

      You speak of a ‘covenant’, an arrangement forced upon an American bride and bearick obama….and from there proceed to describe her destruction and slavery. And I see the same things….in a different way…spurred by Mario Apuzzo (see blogroll) to think of the constitution as a ‘contract’, with Obama willfully breaking that contract every single day. And in legal terms, he is now bound to the constitution; in the terms you speak of, it seems there is nothing more blasphemous than breaking the convenant to ruin….

      Looking forward to more discussions, and blessings your way always. Thank you for your contributions to all!

    • 11 drkate August 17, 2009 at 1:37 pm

      Thank you for this quite profound discussion. This is a must read!

      http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2009/08/barack-obama-wife-beater.html

    • 12 thedametruth August 17, 2009 at 9:15 pm

      Lamecherry, as always, your keen mind and endless insight provide us with some of the most thought provoking information in cyberspace. Like Drkate, I am a student of both the constitutional issues intrinsic in our current constitutional crisis and things spiritual, which come from a force greater than the sum of our parts, which provides a fascinating overlay to it all. I look forward to your posts and have been moved to comment from time to time–all positive–on your work. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, both here and on your site.

  5. 13 tired&true August 17, 2009 at 3:08 am

    I think this is a must read especially for the high school student. Like the bible, the constitution is another document that keeps you thinking long after you thought you understood its meaning.

    The constitution is alive like never before since it’s writing. As someone said to me today, this all had to happen, it was time. When looking back in history you can see now how people followed the most destructive of leaders. We are seeing this now on our soil and it all seems surreal. We now understand why the founding fathers worded the constitution as it is and where the inspiration was taken and for what reasons. There is nothing outdated or stale in its meaning or intent but there is required the questioning mind and the ability to reason to uphold it. Now we can see through the fog with enlightened vision and the old tactics will no longer work.

    The level of expertise and insight by you and other blog sites such as paralegalnm and Lame Cherry equal any constitutional law course. Thank you for the time and effort you all have devoted to this topic. The fabric of deception is being pulled from many sides and eventually the tear will appear.

    • 14 drkate August 17, 2009 at 10:33 pm

      You know, I think that is what we are doing here, creating a record of constitutional inquiry, action, thought, that many would benefit from. A “handbook” if you will.

      I wondered whether I should open this blog to people under 18…

      • 15 Miri August 19, 2009 at 10:43 am

        And notice how clear, simple, and understandable the Constitution is. It’s not 1000+ pages of incomprehensible drivel.

        • 16 drkate August 19, 2009 at 11:43 am

          Hi Miri, so glad to see you here.

          I agree…the simplicity of the constitution-4,400 words (not pages) with the most eloquent words and concepts in history.

          • 17 Miri August 19, 2009 at 10:31 pm

            Thanks, drkate. I’ll toggle between your most excellent blog and Red Pill’s “cafe”. I didn’t know you planned to have open threads, so I’ve been over there, where we have a tag team of moderators. Seems to be working out pretty well. I’ll try to stay on topic here, so that you’re not stuck with too much work moderating my bloviating. 🙂

  6. 18 SteveinVA August 17, 2009 at 7:49 am

    Well done DrKate. I agree when you read the words “We the people” everthing starts to fall into place and we must continue to hold on to those words as the saving force in this sad affair. Please continue with this fine blog.

    • 19 drkate August 17, 2009 at 10:34 pm

      Thanks for coming by Steve…and for the support for this new blog. I will do my best to keep readers interested and dialoguing…

  7. 20 Rosemary Woodhouse August 17, 2009 at 10:07 am

    As referenced by Lame Cherry (love your blog, btw), Ann Coulter is the biggest surprise. Apparently, she doesn’t read her message boards because prior to the selection, there were multiple threads, pages long, with regard to the question of eligibility vis-a-vis the b.c. and the other germaine documents. I believe that we need to focus on the “other documents” (school records, etc.)for surely the truth is under seal in these records.

    • 21 drkate August 17, 2009 at 10:35 pm

      Agreed. Interesting that it seems like it is self motivation again that keeps these people behind the lines until they are absolutely sure this is the way to go!

  8. 22 Kathy August 17, 2009 at 11:48 am

    The only way any of this will be made right is through God’s Grace.

    All of us do what we can in our own way, some of us like you Dr.Kate, Lame Cherry and others do it with your writing, helping put into words what we need to know in order to fight.

    Most of us can only educate ourselves and spread what we know to others, but this is God’s plan to have his children participate in the process and to always seek his guidance and rely on his will to be done.

    Once we get back to really believing that God wants to make this right but he wants us to show him that we are deserving of his Grace and redemption.

    Thank you Dr Kate and may God bless you and keep you in your efforts to educate us with the truth.

    • 23 drkate August 17, 2009 at 10:37 pm

      It no longer feels random, it is a divine plan and yes, we in fact help create it for ourselves…perhaps to do that very thing–return to the Creator. Re-member as they say, become part of the community

  9. 24 d2i August 18, 2009 at 10:15 am

    Dr. Kate – thank you for sharing Teo’s post. Her insight and gentle reminder of God’s hand is soothing to this battered soul. Patience is something that I believe is only acquired after many years of being a student to life’s lessons. I can remember in my youth how I wanted things to happen now, and for the life of me couldn’t understand why they didn’t. After years of suffering my own self-inflicted consequences due entirely to my own impatience, did I finally learn the golden rule.

    As others have shared, I too believe the day of reckoning will come and that SCOTUS will accept the “right” case from the “right” person. God’s hand is most certainly guiding us and we must be certain to listen.

    As queer as this may sound, I am beginning to believe it will be an entirely different violation of the Constitution that will eventually expose both 0 and the DNC apparatus for the fraud they knowingly wreaked on “We the People”.

    As someone stated up thread, 0 was exercising his Constitutional rights, as an American citizen, under the 10th Amendment to run for POTUS. 0 personally crossed the Constitutional line when Chief Justice Roberts had him raise his hand, swear on the bible, that he was eligible to serve and would uphold the US Constitution. Since that very moment, We the People have been engaged in a Constitutional crisis.

    However, something happened before that day which should have sent chills throughout the DNC apparatus, but didn’t for some unknown reason. That is what blogger jbjd has been writing about. Many of you will recall the DNC convention and the manner in which the state pledge counts were halted around noon. This act in and of itself should have raised a major uproar at the convention but it didn’t. I can only assume that Hillary’s delegates resigned themselves to believing their vote didn’t matter and that 0’s nomination was a foregone conclusion. This is exactly what team 0 wanted. They wore down Hillary’s pledged delegates and then built the mirage that he had clenched the necessary number of delegates to win. To this day, I do not believe he did. Therefore, they didn’t raise a fuss. However, what many of these delegates were unaware of is what jbjd was articulating then and continues to write about, that is, there are 10 states whose Constitution requires delegates to vote for their candidate no matter what on the first ballot. If they did not cast their vote for their original candidate, they would be breaking the law.

    You’ll also recall that both candidates were about even in pledged delegates, that is until the DNC RBC stepped in and stole delegates from Michigan – four in all. If my understanding is correct, then it was these four delegates that would have given him the win. However, you’ll recall that many Hillary delegates were pressured to switch to 0, including delegates in binding states prior to the convention. Therefore, many of these Hillary delegates in binding states publicly announced their switch to 0 which, if they exercised their will and cast their first vote for 0, they broke the law, many of them knowingly.

    Incrementalism is the first lesson you learn when lobbying on policy. You nibble away until the foundation of the policy has been so compromised that big change eventually occurs. I believe the same rule needs to be applied to 0 and the DNC. We need to nibble – and the place to start is Hillary’s delegates who dwell in binding states who cast their first ballot for 0 at the convention. Once they start talking, the rest of the apparatus will crumble. Why? B/c by nature, politico’s, hacks, and the like who served as delegates lack the spine and fortitude to fight for something they know is fundamentally wrong. They are citizens just like you and me. They have reputations built on years of experience and would do whatever it takes to protect it. Their reputation is all they have, honestly, and without it they know they can’t make a living. Reputation is everything in the lobbying, activist, political hack world. In my mind, this is their Achilles heal. This is their breaking point. This is the first nibble.

    Thoughts?

    • 25 Renee August 18, 2009 at 10:35 am

      D2i, Hummmm…very,very good……Fan in my brain is whirling….

    • 26 drkate August 18, 2009 at 10:40 am

      Great commentary d2i. I agree that jbjd has been on this exactly for quite a while, and his/her continued work is essential as these cases go forward.

      I agree about the 10 states and the delegate switch, but, right now, who among those would come forward? Can we find the list of delegates and start there?

      As with many things jbjd pointed out, this should have started way back then. And yes, there were many signs that the process was fixed…and that people were threatened. It should have been a sign to us all, but, by that time everyone knew that the dems were going to float obama, no matter what. I recall being very concerned about the verbal violence and anger at all things HRC at the end.

      I agree, we nibble at the foundations. Let’s find those delegates and start talking.

      But I also think its time for a hostile takeover of the DNC, or alternatively, making sure they have NO funds to support their candidates.

      I hope one of these cases makes it. Prayer seems to be about the only thing we can offer now, in addition to keep keep keep talking.

      • 27 d2i August 18, 2009 at 11:37 am

        I concur with jbjd below when he states “he heard nothing about the binding state issue following the convention”. Neither have I. In fact, I found the silence deafening and spoke to some of Hillary’s delegates when they returned. One in particular expressed a “no big deal” kind of attitude, which greatly disturbed me.

        That said, I have written to Murphy over at PumaPac to see if she might have a list of delegates she would be willing to share. I’ll let you know if she responds favorably.

        Virginia is a “binding” state and I know of two delegates who held press conferences stating their switch publicly. There may have been more, but to be candid, I kinda tuned the noise out b/c it was so overwhelming and I was so ticked off.

        What I plan to do is write a follow-up letter to my AG, enclosing jbjd’s original letter, and requesting an update on the matter. I want to know what they did with jbjd’s information, if anything. There are a plethora of reasons why I want to know, but the main reason is we have a gubernatorial election in November. The Republican gubernatorial candidate is the AG jbjd wrote to. He resigned from that position to run for Governor. If he did nothing then that story needs to be told AND if he did do something then that story IS going to be told. Either way, I want to know how his office handled jbjd’s letter and what actions they took. It will, at a minimum, get the ball rolling, I hope.

        • 28 d2i August 18, 2009 at 11:44 am

          of course, jbjd, I’d only send a copy of your original letter with your permission. forgot to mention that.

        • 29 drkate August 18, 2009 at 1:15 pm

          This is an excellent idea. Let’s get this ball rolling, and let me know if you want to post it here or if you would like me to write something up.

    • 30 jbjd August 18, 2009 at 10:49 am

      “Incrementalism.” Like one small voice in the crowd exclaiming, ‘But the Emperor has no clothes!’ d2i, thank you for noticing my hard work. I sort of stumbled onto this issue of vote binding states, right before the Convention. Even so, people thought there might be one or two of these states; but going through the laws in all 50 (fifty) states, I found 13! I wrote to state A’sG in those states, BO and his troops are harassing these HRC pledged delegates to switch their votes to him, before the Convention! I provided examples. Then, citing to the law in that state, I pointed out to these A’sG, in these vote binding states, coercing HRC pledged delegates to vote for him is soliciting them to break the law. I said, I expected that, now they were on notice what was happening in their state, these coercive practices would end. (The GA AG put out a letter reminding those delegates to obey the law. I don’t know what was done about my charges, if anything, in the other states.) Ricki Lieberman, the well-known D activist in NY, put my info in her newsletter. And I was on the phone to another citizen activist during the Convention, desperately trying to get a floor vote, urging her to get to the pledged delegates in the vote binding states to hang in there and vote according to the law. I always thought BO’s concerted attack on pledged delegates was a really big deal but I never heard much about it after the Convention. Until now. (I think I should do another post on this, d2i.)

      • 31 drkate August 18, 2009 at 10:57 am

        jbjd, I agree please do another post on this. I had no idea that you had actually called state AGs on this. Inquiring minds want to know!!!

        Happy to cross post any of your work here.

        • 32 jbjd August 18, 2009 at 12:00 pm

          drkate, I actually wrote a letter to the A’sG, with copies going to the SoS and the Chair of the state D party. (Getting this information – names and fax/email numbers – was as arduous as looking up the laws!) Then, I had to find someone from that state to send the letters. In one state, GA, there was enough time to send copies to HRC pledged delegates – someone came up with a list – with this note: We have your backs.) I did not have my blog yet; too busy working to figure out how to set it up. I had to rely on others to post my project; and they were unwilling to share the spotlight. But if I hadn’t done the groundwork, I would not understand the pivotal role played by these pledged delegates from vote binding states, in cleaning up this election fiasco.

  10. 33 jbjd August 18, 2009 at 12:25 pm

    drkate, the article written by Lame Cherry cites Orly Taitz as coming up with the idea that military Plaintiffs have standing. As Team jbjd can attest, this was my idea, which I shared with her and all of the other attorneys formulating legal strategies to combat BO’s unlawful election. I spelled out the outlines of my strategy in a memo I posted on my new blog, in November 2008. I contacted all of the attorneys to inform them, if they wanted to bring a case in federal court, the way to establish standing would be to use military Plaintiffs. And the way to protect these Plaintiffs from retribution would be to use National Guard about to be deployed, because they were not subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice until they were federalized. I followed up with Orly, and drafted the military Complaint (also posted on the blog) based on her promise to file this case. She changed her mind; I told her I would post the case on the internet for anyone else to use. Any cases she has filed since that time vary in significant ways from my proposal so as to render all of those cases legally infirm.

    • 34 drkate August 18, 2009 at 1:14 pm

      Yes, this is what is maddening to me, especially regarding Dr. Taitz. It looks like they all got their military complaints and research from you, yet no credit, and what is worse, not following the recommendations as to strategy and filings.

      This was a lot of work, jbjd….is there a post I can write that highlights your work and gives you the proper credit? Or would you like to write a post like that?

      • 35 d2i August 18, 2009 at 2:56 pm

        You know, Dr. Kate, your willingness to correct the record means so much to me. I can remember jbjd politely trying to correct the record at TD’s blog, as well as asserting that Dr. Taitz not only ran with the idea, but did it recklessly (my word not jbjd’s) making the complaint worthless. All that ground lost simply b/c someone wouldn’t listen OR b/c someone wanted a fast way to make a name for themselves or some cash. I don’t wish to surmise what her motivation was, but at the time it struck me as odd that Taitz reacted and ran with what she believed was a winning course. She never provided credit nor would she listen to anyone’s free advice.

        I don’t know who jbjd is personally, but I do know who jbjd is as a blogger. He is consistent with all materials. Does not ask for anything other than recognition of efforts, and has remained steadfast in the cause. I count him as a friend and if he turns out to be a she, well then, I count her as my friend. For now, I believe he is a man. Don’t know why but always thought he was.

        Teo is right about one very important item in her post, that is, the right attorney is going to step in and file the correct complaint or suit.

        Personally, I believe that individual has been with us all along; from the very beginning. This person has a 20′ view and has been steadfast in their commitment to know and understand everything about the game that has been plopped into our world. This individual has a sharp legal mind, is studied, does not react, is steady and even handed in his postings, and that person is jbjd.

        I challenge jbjd to consider being that attorney Teo mentions in her post. I wholeheartedly believe you are the one to draft the correct complaint and take it to the SCOTUS.

        I would help in anyway I could as would so many posters from TD’s and now your site, Dr. Kate. There is a reason all of us have hung in here for the last year. I know my motivation has always been about getting to the truth and doing something about revealing that truth. In some odd way, we became a family, much more intimate than a community. And the one thing that brought us together and keeps us together was/is we’re former Hillary supporters and we KNOW the election was stolen from us. The bonus is that we later learned that 0 was ineligible. We know that without question. But it’s also been the one thing that has distracted us from the real game and that is the “binding” states delegates. I want to see a count prior to the convention. I want to know who crossed over. I want the hard cold numbers. This is the story. Everything else is just a distraction. Like Dr. Kate stated, how do we get our hands on the tally?

        Getting back to jbjd. Something tells me that jbjd is up for the challenge and the right individual to file the appropriate case. The only problem I have seen with jbjd is that he is slow to take credit and tends to enjoy the behind the scenes gig. It’s safe there. He loses nothing and gains everything. Anonymity is a powerful aphrodisiac. Coming out, however, jbjd may fear losing everything, and that does not bode well for a parent who must be responsible for the well being of their homem.

        However, jbjd is wickedly smart, dogged, politically and personally appropriate, I’ll bet good looking, determined and is driven by the truth. He’s an atypical lawyer, and trust me, I don’t like lawyers, at all. BUT, when one comes along like jbjd I tend to listen and respect what they have to say. And jbjd has demonstrated his commitment to seeking the truth since the summer of 2009.

        jbjd – I realize this post has come out of no where. I also realize that you do not see yourself the way I, and many others, see you. And, I realize that you have familial obligations that may challenge you in your decision making. Just think about it. I know you have. But think about it more. Tell us, your on-line family, what you would need in order to take this challenge on. What would it take to be the attorney who files the appropriate suit and brings this challenge face-to-face to the SCOTUS? You know you can do it. And you know what it would take for you to do it. Enlighten us.

        You know where to find me if you wish to discuss this privately.

        d2i

  11. 36 jbjd August 18, 2009 at 12:35 pm

    I am so sorry! The post I was critiquing was from the Birthers, and not Lame Cherry!

  12. 37 Miri August 19, 2009 at 9:54 am

    “Who ever gets standing what we must do is bow our heads in silent prayer for it is this person that the Divine Providence of Nature’s God has uncovered and, that the argument they present to the courts comes from the wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Let us take comfort that in the unseen assurance that the same Divine Providence that protected our nation throughout the Revolutionary War still waits to protect us if we have the faith to call upon the name of Nature’s God.”

    From your typing fingers to God’s ear. I have the timer set. I’ll be praying with you, drkate. God bless you for keeping up the good fight.

  13. 38 Miri August 19, 2009 at 10:40 am

    My bad: Teo Bear, I’ll be praying with you, and God bless you, too!

  14. 41 drkate August 19, 2009 at 12:13 pm

    An excellent read:

    if we can’t count on the office of the President to uphold the foundation to our liberty, we have little hope when the Congress is dead set on working in conjunction to so radically change America that we won’t recognize it when they’re done. Mr. President, may I say to you that you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, not tear it down

    http://drscoundrels.com/2009/08/you-took-an-oath-sir/

  15. 42 itooktheredpill August 19, 2009 at 12:20 pm

    I’m so encouraged by this. I believe that the citizens of this country are being awakened, and this awakening will be followed by revival. Spiritual revival first, with Constitutional revival following as a devine reward for our obedience.

    We would do well to go back and review what the mindset of some of our founders was less than four months before they signed the Declaration of Independence…

    In Congress, March 16, 1776

  16. 45 itooktheredpill August 20, 2009 at 1:54 pm

    The dark side of this day occurred 75 years ago in Germany when the position of the Führer was created by the simple majority of a democratic vote.

    At the appointed hour on the August 19, 2009 let us take courage from the deeds of our history and resolve never to allow the dark passions of a desperate world to stain our national soul by believing that any one man or group of men are above the Constitution that empowers them. Let us move forward in our sworn duty, “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence,” to guard our Constitution and our Republic from all enemies both foreign and domestic.

    That is why the simple majority of a democratic vote can be dangerous.

    That is why our founders did not create a Democracy, but rather a Republic.

    The only part of our government that the founders intended to operate as a Democracy was the House of Representatives.

    Neither Senators nor the President were intended to be chosen by a simple majority of “We the People”.

    The state legislatures were to pick Senators and decide how to pick electors for President. And in the 1789 election of George Washington as our first President, only 6 of the 10 states casting electoral votes chose electors by any form of popular vote.

    Our Constitution did not create a Democracy. It created a Republic. And when we pledge allegiance it is to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.


  1. 1 Republic, Not Democracy « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix) Trackback on August 26, 2009 at 11:22 am
Comments are currently closed.



August 2009
M T W T F S S
    Sep »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  

PROTECT OUR LIBERTY HERE!

Get Your Copy at drkatesview@gmail.com

Blog Archive

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Donate to DrKatesView!

Donate Now!

Since 8/15/09

  • 1,837,108 views

Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS The Post & Email

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Logistics Monster

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90
Site Build It!

%d bloggers like this: