Skip to content

Reeeeaaalllyyyy? You’re gonna love these!


And then this one, just to enthuse you a bit more:

Smile. There is a chance, however slight, that we may win without bloodshed. Well, much anyway.

  1. upaces88 permalink
    07/19/2013 08:23

    I do believe that the People in the Media are afraid of him. Bush lives quietly in a very expensive part of Dallas. People have been arrested trying to get onto his property.
    Congress and Senate both seem to either be in on protecting the fraud by FEAR and/or they are getting $$ out of it somehow.

    This guy is REALLY good!

  2. poetopoet permalink
    07/19/2013 08:32

    Eligibility proceeding hearing? This is only case I found that may matter here, I have never heard of it, but they did this guy the right to file for impeachment maybe?

    No. 10-10652
    Title: Jeffrey L. G. Johnson, Petitioner
    Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.

    Docketed: May 24, 2011
    Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
    Case Nos.: (11-1088)
    Decision Date: March 25, 2011
    Rule 12.4

    ~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    May 23 2011 Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 23, 2011)
    Jun 23 2011 Waiver of right of respondents United States, et al. to respond filed.
    Jun 23 2011 Supplemental brief of petitioner Jeffrey L. G. Johnson filed. (Distributed)
    Jun 30 2011 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 26, 2011.
    Oct 3 2011 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 7, 2011.
    Oct 11 2011 Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U. S. C. �1, and since the only qualified Justice is of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment is affirmed under 28 U. S. C. �2109, which provides that under these circumstances �the court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided court.�. The Chief Justice, Justice Scalia, Justice Kennedy, Justice Thomas, Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Alito and Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

  3. poetopoet permalink
    07/19/2013 08:36

    Here maybe the proof?

    “The House voted Wednesday (July 17, 2013) to delay key components of ObamaCare, in a bid by emboldened Republicans to chip away at the law after the administration acknowledged new problems with its implementation.

    Republican leaders swiftly organized the votes after the administration, in early July, said it would delay until 2015 a requirement that businesses with 50 or more workers provide insurance coverage or pay a penalty.
    The House voted 264-161 for a measure that would do exactly that. But they also voted >251-174 for a measure that would delay the individual mandate — the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance — for a year as well. < (dead bill) impeachment)
    Republicans argue that both delays are necessary. While they endorsed the delay for businesses, House Speaker John Boehner and other GOP lawmakers say it's unfair to deny everyone else a similar reprieve.

    "It is not fair that the president is choosing to protect big business from ObamaCare, but not hardworking American taxpayers," Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said on the House floor ahead of the vote.
    She also said the delay was an admission that "this is a trainwreck, and it is not ready for prime-time."

    But Democrats sharply disagreed, and accused Republicans of wasting time with yet another set of votes against the health care law. Rep. Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., said Republicans weren't simply trying to delay the requirements. "It is their intention to destroy the Affordable Care Act … to do away with it, to annihilate it entirely," Crowley said.

    President Obama has already threatened to veto the bills.
    The votes marked the 38th time the GOP majority has tried to eliminate, defund or scale back the program since Republicans took control of the House in January 2011.
    It is unlikely the Democrat-controlled Senate will advance the latest bills. However, Republicans sense an opening to potentially erode the law, and the administration was planning to step up its public defense of the law in response.

    White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama on Thursday will draw attention to the 8.5 million consumers who have received an average consumer rebate of about $100. Carney also highlighted reports that some states are already anticipating lower premiums under the Affordable Care Act.

    "Competition and transparency in the marketplaces, plus the hard effort by those committed to making the law work, are leading to affordable, new and better choices for families," Carney said.

    The goal of the health care law was to provide coverage to nearly 50 million Americans without health insurance in a massive overhaul of the current system. Just months before enforcement, the Obama administration announced a one-year delay in the employer mandate, citing businesses' concerns about the reporting requirements.
    "We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively," Treasury Assistant Secretary Mark Mazur said in a blog post. "We have listened to your feedback, and we are taking action."
    Republicans said that was fresh evidence that the law is unworkable and should be repealed. The GOP also accused the president of favoring businesses over average Americans, who will still be required to carry health insurance starting next Jan. 1 or risk fines.

    In an example of strange political bedfellows, Republicans highlighted a letter from three unions to congressional Democratic leaders criticizing the health care law and demanding that the administration address problems stemming from the law.
    Specifically, the unions — International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and UNITE-HERE — complained that the law's requirements have created an incentive for employers to cut workers' hours to avoid providing health care coverage.

    The law created a new definition of full-time workers, those putting in 30 hours or more.
    "Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it. The unintended consequences of the ACA (Affordable Care Act) are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios," the union leaders wrote.”

  4. poetopoet permalink
    07/19/2013 08:38

    She may have actually done it too?

    “Today, February 15, 2013, Attorney Orly Taitz brings her request to move the Obama eligibility challenge from conference to the oral hearing stage at the US Supreme Court. She is moving forward in spite of the fact that four African-American Supreme Court clerks refused to allow Taitz to see the signature of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who denied her petition originally. “But I resubmitted to Justice Roberts, and he sent it to the conference,”

    Taitz said.

    The California attorney is asking “…how do we know that he (Kennedy) ever saw the brief?” In no uncertain terms, clerk James Baldin told her that “I (Taitz) [was] not allowed to see the signature.” This denial of her right to see Kennedy’s signature “does not make any sense.” Perhaps her Russian ancestry and background knowledge of the suppression of citizens caused her to note similarities with DC police actions that blocked “more and more streets” during Obama’s State of the Union address. The group of eligibility challengers were pushed farther and farther away, making it impossible for the public to see or question those who attended the event. When school students touring the buildings came up to the Taitz group to ask questions, their teacher was said to have made them leave!”

  5. poetopoet permalink
    07/19/2013 09:35

    Our White Arab African president is a no good SOB, and our elected leaders are not much better.

  6. 07/19/2013 10:58

    Reblogged this on Taking Back America.

  7. upaces88 permalink
    07/19/2013 11:03

    I have very little hope that anything will come from the BC legal issues. He has THREE of his on the Bench. Does anyone really think they will go against him?

  8. 07/19/2013 11:05



  1. SCOTUS OKs Obama Impeachment Proceedings? | The Mad Jewess

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: