- I've received quite a few emails since Obama/Soetoro
gave his State of the Union address regarding the recent U.S. Supreme Court
ruling. The headlines splashed 'Alito mouths not true' and he was right.
- Obama/Soetoro lied. Every time he opens his mouth he
lies. I expect nothing else because I knew what that hustler was all about
long before the pretend election.
- Judge Andrew Napolitano has provided a superb legal analysis
of that decision which can be read here:
- Updated January 28, 2010
- Justice Alito Was Right
- By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
- "Despite claims made by the president, last week's
Supreme Court opinion on campaign finance specifically excludes foreign
nationals and foreign-owned corporations from its ruling."
- You can read the court's full ruling here:
- I have to wonder how the 'conservatives' on the court
felt while the Great One stood at the podium with the world watching and
slammed them. In particular, Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. Let us not
forget that Roberts met in private with Obama/Soetoro on January 14, 2009,
when Roberts knew Obama/Soetoro was the subject of litigation that would
come before the court:
- "To say I was floored when I read the news item
is an understatement. A 'ceremonial' meeting between a president elect
and justices of the Supreme Court is somewhat traditional. HOWEVER, in
this instance, it's flat out wrong. Chief Justice Roberts has cases on
the docket where Obama is the defendant or is the subject of the litigation.
Roberts and the other eight justices have already held two 'Distribution
for Conferences' on the Donofrio and Wrotnoski cases on Obama's citizenship
ineligibility. They just turned away one of Phil Berg's cases a few days
ago; that one is still in the Third Circuit. Tomorrow is the fourth case;
another from Phil Berg.
- "On Wednesday, Roberts meets with the man at the
heart of that case in private. Two days later, he sits down to discuss
the case with the other justices after having a closed door meeting with
the defendant! There is still the Lightfoot v Bowen case to be heard in
conference, January 23, 2009. Again, Chief Justice Roberts will sit in
that private meeting to discuss whether the case should go to oral arguments.
- "Does anyone see major conflict of interest here?
How can Chief Justice Roberts meet with Obama behind closed doors under
such circumstances? Even if they just chatted up the weather, it is highly
inappropriate in my humble opinion. Roberts should have notified Obama
that under the circumstances, he would not be able to meet with him, private
or with photogs in attendance. There must be zero appearance of any bias
or preference when it comes to judges and justices of the Supreme Court."
- And, speaking of campaign finance, in 2008, I wrote several
letters to U.S. Attorneys. I want Obama aka Soetoro aka Dunham and so forth,
to be indicted and put on trial for wire fraud. He solicited campaign funds
when he knew all along he was ineligible to run as president. Some $700
MILLION bux came in and a ton of it from foreign sources.
- "In the late 70s and early 80s, federal prosecutors
often sought to indict and convict corrupt state officials by contending
that such officials engaged in a "scheme to defraud the citizens of
a particular state of those public servants' honest services. But in 1987,
the Supreme Court held in McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987),
that the mail and wire fraud statutes could not be stretched to encompass
such a legal theory.
- "In response, Congress adopted 18 U.S.C. §1346
to cure this defect in statutory language. Lots of corrupt local officials
have been indicted and convicted for using the mails and wires to carry
out a "scheme to defraud" the public via their "dishonest
services." See, as an example, United States v. Frega, 179 F.3d 793
(9th Cir. 1999).
- "The wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. §1343, provides
- "Whoever, having devised or intending to devise
any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by
means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits
or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication
in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures,
or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If
the violation affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined
not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.
- There are groups petitioning the FEC (Federal Election
Commission) to investigate Obama/Soetoro's campaign donations, but so far,
the answer has been a flat no. Gee, why am I not surprised? Well, we shall
- You might also wish to read this article; millions more
came in after it was published:
- Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign
- "In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked
the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor
identified as "Will, Good from Austin, Texas.
- "Mr. Good Will listed his employer as "Loving
and his profession as "You.
- "A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual
contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered
1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.
- "In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.
- "Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign
records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back
to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed
a net cumulative balance of $8,950 " still well over the $4,600 limit.
- "There can be no doubt that the Obama campaign noticed
these contributions, since Obama,s Sept. 20 report specified that Good
Will,s cumulative contributions since the beginning of the campaign were
- "In an e-mailed response to a query from Newsmax,
Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt pledged that the campaign would return
the donations. But given the slowness with which the campaign has responded
to earlier FEC queries, there,s no guarantee that the money will be returned
before the Nov. 4 election.
- "Similarly, a donor identified as "Pro, Doodad,
from "Nando, NY, gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them
for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer
as "Loving and his profession as "You, just as Good Will had
- "But in some of them, he didn,t even go this far,
apparently picking letters at random to fill in the blanks on the credit
card donation form. In these cases, he said he was employed by "VCX
and that his profession was "VCVC.
- The rot and corruption in Washington, DC at ALL levels
is like rancid meat baking in the sun.