Who Is Responsible for the Mess in Libya?

by Judge Andrew Napolitano

How many times have you heard the truism that in modern-day America the cover-up is often as troubling as the crime? That is becoming quite apparent in the case of the death of Chris Stevens, the former U.S. ambassador to Libya.

Stevens and three State Department employees were murdered in the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, last month, on September 11th. About an hour before the murders, the ambassador, who usually resides in the U.S. embassy in Tripoli but was visiting local officials and staying at the consulate in Benghazi, had just completed dinner there with a colleague, whom he personally walked to the front gate of the compound. In the next three hours, hundreds of persons assaulted the virtually defenseless compound and set it afire.

Around the same time that these crimes took place in Benghazi, a poorly produced, low-grade 15-minute YouTube clip was going viral on the Internet. The clip shows actors in dubbed voices portraying the prophet Mohammed and others in an unflattering light. The Obama administration seized upon the temporary prevalence of this clip to explain the assault on the consulate. Indeed, the administration sent U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to represent it on five Sunday morning TV talk shows on September 16th, to make the claim that the attack on the consulate was a spontaneous reaction to the YouTube clip, that it could not have been anticipated, and that the perpetrators were ordinary Libyans angry at the freedom moviemakers in America enjoy.


Don’t Miss the Debates. The Important Ones!

In an election year such as this, there is a sense in the air that the 2012 elections could be the most important ever.  However, it is not for the reasons the Republican and Democratic establishments like to tell us.  Whether Obama is reelected or Romney successfully makes him a one term President, whether current majorities in the House and Senate remain, one chamber changes parties, or they reverse, the way of DC will remain the same.  Authoritarian, top-down rule will be the name of the game.

So why is this year so important?  Why shouldn’t we miss the debates?  Because I’m not talking about the Presidential debates, even the third party ones that allow some discussion outside the “acceptable spectrum” as Tom Woods has called it.  We also have local debates and elections.  County and municipal elections will be occurring throughout New Jersey, and we need a major change, starting as locally as possible.

I personally will be attending the South Plainfield Borough Council debates.


Rejecting the Incorporation Doctrine

by Bill Evelyn, State of Georgia Tea Party

NOTE: The Following is a letter that was sent to Jerry Henry, Director of GeorgiaCarry.org

Dear Mr. Henry,

I heard on the news today that you have asked the Supreme Court to make a ruling on the ban of guns in churches in Georiga.  I want to prove to you that this is a very bad way to approach this issue.

The 2nd Amendment restrains the federal government from regulating arms and gives those powers to the state governments via the 10th Amendment.  In Georgia’s Bill of Rights the State government is restrained from prohibiting a person to arm themselves, but with regulations.  In essence the state legislature can outlaw all weapons in Georgia if is deems so, but those legislators would be risking their seats in the next election.  I don’t see this occurring.

The ban of guns in churches was passed by the Georgia legislature 143 years ago during reconstruction and can simply be repealed.  This is the way we should move forward on this matter.


Drone Warfare and we Wonder Why they Hate us.

On October 6, an unmanned drone flew deep into Israeli territory before it was shot down. The drone, now thought to have been sent by Lebanon, who acquired it from Iran, raises awareness of the sanctity of a nation’s airspace. As the violation of airspace has traditionally been seen as an act of war, Israel sent warplanes over Lebanon the next day. This brings to light how calloused and disrespectful of the air space of other countries we have been where we indiscriminately kill our enemies on their soil.

Drones are now our favored weapon of choice and we unleash them on suspected “terrorists,” without the permission of sovereign countries, throughout the Middle East. Moreover, we assume unto ourselves the right of surveillance of all potential adversaries on their soil. We get away with this because we are the “town bully.” Such would be acts of war if done on stronger countries. According to the Washington Post we have “secret facilities, including two operational hubs on the East Coast, virtual Air Force cockpits in the Southwest and clandestine bases in at least six countries on two continents” (Under Obama, an Emerging Global Apparatus for drone killing, by Greg Miller, Dec. 27, 2011).

The paper reported, “Senior Democrats barely blink at the idea that a president from their party has assembled such a highly efficient machine for the targeted killing of suspected terrorists.” What is worse, “officially, they are not allowed to discuss” this most secretive activity although it is not denied.

President Barack Obama can argue that he did not invent this sophisticated “killing machine.” George W. Bush was the first to use it but he limited its use to Pakistan “where 44 strikes over five years had left about 400 people dead.” This is true, but Obama has amplified its use by at least four times the number of strikes and death and proliferated the death to several additional countries in northern Africa and the Middle East and the above numbers are conservative, the paper revealed.


Second Michigan county says “NO!” to federal kidnapping

OAKLAND COUNTY, Mich. (Oct. 18, 2012) – The list continues to grow.

On Thursday, yet another local government condemned detention provisions written into the National Defense Authorization Act.

The Oakland County, Mich. Board of Commissioners unanimously approved its Support for the Preservation of Liberty resolution Thursday evening.

The Oakland County Board of Commissioners condemns in no uncertain terms Section 1021 of the 2012 NDAA as it 1) may repeal Posse Comitatus and authorize the President of the United States to utilize the Armed Forces of the United States to police the United States of America, 2) authorize the indefinite detention of persons captured within the United States of America without charge until the end of hostilities as purportedly authorized by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, 3) subject persons captured within the United States of America to military tribunals, and 4) authorize the transfer of persons captured within the United States of America to a foreign country or foreign entity.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners finds that the enactment into law by the United States Congress of Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, Public Law Number 112 81, is inimical to the liberty, security and well-being of the people of Oakland County and was adopted by the United States Congress in violation of the limits of federal power in the United States Constitution.

The resolution also calls on all county agencies to refuse cooperation with any federal agents attempting to implement indefinite detention under the NDAA within the county limits.


Judge Napolitano: Secrecy vs Transparency

Judge Napolitano on Drones: “There should be a bias in favor of transparency and people knowing what the government is doing.”

“Assassination by drone is profoundly unlawful and unconstitutional”

“The American people have a right to know what their government is doing – in their name, to their constitution, and with their resources.”

Missouri under the rule of Pendergast: Federal power vs. State Sovereignty

In the early years of the twentieth century, Kansas City and the rest of Missouri faced a bit of a crisis situation. No, it wasn’t from the threat of outside invasion, or tyranny in Washington, but from one of our own. Tom Pendergast, who was born in St. Joseph Missouri in 1873, would become an adept Kansas City businessman who owned such companies as “Wholesale Liquor Company”, and “Ready Mix Concrete”. Through utilizing backroom deals, monopolies, crime, strong-arm tactics, and the political experience of his older brother Jim – it wasn’t long before Tom had risen through the ranks of Kansas City Power to rule as “Boss”.

However, not content with Kansas City alone, Pendergast soon sought to exert his will on State Government and beyond through the backing of such figures like Missouri Governor Lloyd C. Stark and Harry S. Truman (See note below). While Pendergast’s considerable influence would help Kansas City prosper during the Great Depression – this came at a cost of increased violence upon the streets. One such incident was the Kansas City Massacre at Union Station in 1933, in which four police officers and their prisoner, Frank Nash, was gunned down in broad daylight.

In 1934, President Roosevelt appointed local man Maurice M. Milligan (1884 – 1959) to serve as U.S. District Attorney for the Kansas City based Western District of Missouri. Mr. Milligan became active in vigorously prosecuting voter fraud in 1936, and would go on to build a case against Tom Pendergast’s political machine. Because of Milligan’s work – which centered on a $750,000 insurance payoff scam and failure to pay federal income taxes from 1927 to 1937 – Pendergast ultimately pled guilty to two charges of income tax evasion, was fined 10,000, and went to federal prison for 15 month. Mr. Milligan would later run for U.S. Senate in 1940 against Harry S. Truman, but lost.


The Fifth Amendment Protects Everyone, Not Just Citizens

by Jacob G. Hornberger via the Future of Freedom Foundation

When defenders of civil liberties condemn President Obama’s assassination program, some of them place a greater emphasis on the constitutional right of American citizens to be protected from assassination as compared to foreigners. However, as much as they might wish that the Constitution limits its protection to citizens, such is simply not the case. In protecting people from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, our American ancestors did not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens. Under the express terms of the Fifth Amendment, whatever protections inure to Americans inure equally to non-citizens.

Here’s the Fifth Amendment in pertinent part: “Nor shall any person … be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

Notice that the amendment does not say: “Nor shall any citizen … be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” It says person.

Keep in mind that the Constitution was originally enacted without any amendments. Calling the federal government into existence, the idea was that the government would not have the power to do whatever federal officials wanted to do. Instead, the idea was that the federal government’s powers would be limited to those enumerated within the document itself. If the power wasn’t enumerated, the federal government could not exercise it.

Why were Americans so concerned about limited the powers of the federal government? Because they were concerned about calling into existence a national government that would end up doing bad things to them — such as enslaving them, confiscating their money and property, or taking them into custody, torturing them, and killing them.

Many Americans were opposed to calling the federal government into existence precisely for that reasons. They were content to continue living life under the Articles of Confederation, which had a federal government whose powers were extremely weak.

Finally, Americans went along with the deal, but only on the condition that as soon as the Constitution was adopted, it would be amended to provide for express restrictions on the powers of the federal government.


Article II Section 4: The Impeachment of Eric Holder

Through Article II section 4 of the Constitution, the people have delegated a great power to Congress to remove certain members of government from office.  A careful reading of this section shows that Congress has the power to remove not only the President and the Vice President but ALL civil officers.  One standard for removal is conviction of a high crime or misdemeanor.   The language of this clause is very clear even using legally demanding language.   This clause in the Supreme Law of our land demands Congress to act as they did when Former President Clinton was impeached for contempt.

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes andMisdemeanors~ Article II Section 4 US Constitution

We know Presidents and Vice Presidents are impeachable, but have we forgotten the third category of people in this clause: all civil officers?  Eric Holder is a civil officer.  Eric Holder is a civil officer that has been found in contempt.  

The Constitution therefore DEMANDS that Congress remove Eric Holder from office.