Patriot Alert Forums

Wrong Court Ruled in the Arizona Lawsuit

Sat, 28 Aug 2010 20:26:17 +0000

I was forwarded this today by my Dad, thought you would like this. I have not heard anything on the news about it.

*****
This is extremely interesting. Can't find anything about it in the news
or online yet; but the constitution is quite clear (avail online, one link given below for you to read for yourself) - so we will have to wait and see what the legal scribes eventually say about this major constitutional gaff by Obama and Eric Holder !

The Wrong Court Ruled on Arizona Law !

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the State of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part, "Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don't read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder."

But this lawyer has read it, and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

"Article III, Sec. 2, second clause says: "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings in legal actions against a state. This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco , to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue. Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.

In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the federal government.

From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican border. This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.

The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense. This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases directly involving a state, should be ample legal basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance.

Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the> illegal bullying of an arrogant, lawless federal government. If Obama truly wants to 'seize power' in America - his hand has been called - by his own ignorant U.S. Attorney General ignoring the constitution. What will they do now???

PRAY for AMERICA !!
Forward for others to pray about a crisis that
could erupt in riots in the streets....

Read it yourself (III.2. second clause)
constitution.org

*********

Wonder if this will see the light of day.

A new plan

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:56:49 +0000

Now listen here's my plan,
Don't leak it to any Demokrats or Liberals

A.. Back off and let those men who want to marry men, marry men.

B.. Allow those women who want to marry women, marry women.

C.. Allow those folks who want to abort their babies, abort their babies.

D.. In three generations, there will be no Democrats.

Damn!! - I love it when a plan comes together

22 Cities In Danger of A Double-Dip Recession

Sat, 21 Aug 2010 16:06:46 +0000

You can just imagine how overjoyed I was to see my very own city listed as one of the 22. It's amazing anyone has had the sand to suggest this might happen at all. The signs we've seen here in town over the last 2-3 years have been screaming doom and gloom all along.

Well, check the link below and let us know if you're living in one of the 22.

http://finance.yahoo...e-dip-recession

Barack the Angry Negro

Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:41:40 +0000

Here's one I think you might enjoy.

I'm your Huckleberry!

And people think it can't happen

Fri, 13 Aug 2010 15:02:22 +0000

I hope everyone is getting themselves prepared for tough times to come. If you've been watching the moves our economy has been making, you already know the threat of hyperinflation is very real.

California vs. Arizona

Sat, 07 Aug 2010 16:53:39 +0000

California:
The Governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A
coyote jumps out, bites the Governor and attacks his dog.
1. The Governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie "Bambi"
and then realizes he should stop; the coyote is only doing what is natural.
2. He calls animal control. Animal Control captures coyote and bills the
State $200 testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it.
3. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the
State $200 testing it for diseases.
4. The Governor goes to hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for
diseases from the coyote and on getting his bite wound bandaged.
5. The running trail gets shut down for 6 months while Fish & Game conducts
a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is free of dangerous animals.
6. The Governor spends $50,000 in state funds implementing a "coyote
awareness" program for residents of the area.
7. The State Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat
rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.
8. The Governor's security agent is fired for not stopping the attack
somehow and for letting the Governor attempt to intervene.
9. Additional cost to State of California: $75,000 to hire and train a new
security agent with additional special training re: the nature of coyotes.
10. PETA protests the coyote's relocation and files suit against the State.

Arizona:
The Governor of Arizona is jogging with her dog along a nature trail. A
Coyote jumps out and attacks her dog.
1. The Governor shoots the coyote with her State-issued pistol and keeps
jogging. The Governor has spent $0.50 on a .45 ACP hollow point cartridge.
2. The Buzzards eat the dead coyote.
And that's why California is broke.

DIVORCE AGREEMENT

Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:59:59 +0000

THIS FROM A COLLEGE STUDENT,,,,,,,,BRILLIANT ~~

DIVORCE AGREEMENT

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar and bio-diesel. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.

We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.

We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.
We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem." I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" or "We Are the World".

We'll practice trickle down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.
Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,

John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P. S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbra Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.

P. S. S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

Forward This Every Time You Get It! Let's Keep This Going, Maybe Some Of It Will Start Sinking In.

Why get upset?

Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:24:47 +0000

This got my attention, it made me realize how many times I'm asked for ID, I never thought about it before. Now that I have, I can't for the life of me see why anyone would get upset.
**********************************************

I'm a legal American citizen and I must show my ID when:

1. Pulled over by the police.
2. Making purchases on my credit card.
3. When I show up for a doctor's appointment .
4. When filling out a credit card or loan application .
5. When applying for or renewing a driver's license or passport .
6. When applying for any kind of insurance .
7. When filling out college applications .
8. When donating blood .
9. When obtaining certain prescription drugs .
10. When making some debit purchases, especially
if I'm out of state .
11. When collecting a boarding pass for airline or train travel .
12. When cashing a check at a bank or retail store.

I'm sure there are more instances, but the point is that we citizens of the USA are required to
prove who we are nearly every day!
Why should people in this country illegally , be exempt ???
Why shouldn't we guard our borders as closely as every other country in the world does ???
Go ARIZONA !!!

Only 68% will send this on... Should be a 100%! BET YOU'LL SEND IT!!!

I believe it's time we stand up for what we believe!

Hey from NE Ohio!

Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:10:17 +0000

I just joined, at Mike's invitation, because I'm fed up with what's happening in my country.
Nice to meet y'all!

A Third Depression

Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:45:54 +0000

Are we entering into a Third Depression era? Paul Krugman of the New York Times suggests we are, indeed.

"Recessions are common; depressions are rare. As far as I can tell, there were only two eras in economic history that were widely described as “depressions” at the time: the years of deflation and instability that followed the Panic of 1873 and the years of mass unemployment that followed the financial crisis of 1929-31.

Neither the Long Depression of the 19th century nor the Great Depression of the 20th was an era of nonstop decline — on the contrary, both included periods when the economy grew. But these episodes of improvement were never enough to undo the damage from the initial slump, and were followed by relapses.

We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost — to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs — will nonetheless be immense.

And this third depression will be primarily a failure of policy. Around the world — most recently at last weekend’s deeply discouraging G-20 meeting — governments are obsessing about inflation when the real threat is deflation, preaching the need for belt-tightening when the real problem is inadequate spending."

Read more...