PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS
CONSTITUTIONAL OR CRIMINAL?

Commentary By:
Dwight Kehoe

April 24, 2013 TPATH- As new polls indicate that only 4% of Americans think more gun control is an important issue, and the United States Senate, even if just temporarily, did the right thing and voted to stop further infringement of the the 2nd Amendment, this illegal and imperial President has indicated he intends to "write law" via yet another unconstitutional Executive Order.

Article II does not give any President the authority to write legislation or to adjudicate laws which effect the citizens of this country.  The executive order can only be used, constitutionally, for the administration of government operations and employees.  Article I, specifically gives legislation over the people to only the Congress.

A common misconception which has been used to excuse the unlawful use of the Executive Order is that every President, including George Washington has used them.  While this is "factually" correct, it is not true that George Washington abused it.  His EO's were limited to the operation of the Executive Branch and did not ever legislate laws for anyone outside of the government.

However, the most wide reaching violation of the Executive Order came from one of this country's greatest Presidents, Abraham Lincoln.  His Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863 was, for certain, noble, just and something long needed and overdue.  For that reason, that Executive Order met small and disorganized opposition from the legislative branch and....... the precedent was set.

Other Presidents then began ignoring the Constitution while the Congress sat by like twiddle-dee and twiddle-dumb.  The Executive Order issued on December 7th, 1941, by the left's most popular and loved President, FDR, ordered the rounding up of and imprisoning American citizens.  This order was not only unconstitutional relating to Article I, but it violated every right and protection our Constitution guaranteed to the people.

Over the years, because neither the Congress nor the Courts have stepped in to stop the power grab by the executive branch, the violations of our Constitution, by most Presidents, has persisted, increased and now is on the verge of creating and Imperial Dictatorship.

It has become so pervasive and common that the implementation of Executive Orders is described thusly:
"Regulations issued by the president that do not require Congressional approval, become law after 30 days."
First of all, where did that decree come from? Its certainly not found in the Constitution. And notice how they so cavalierly confront the Consitution by pronouncing the order as " becoming law", an authority the President does not have.

When an executive order creates or amends Federal regulations or creates or amends existing law, those orders are illegal and are impeachable offenses.  The executive order was intended to give authority to the Chief Executive to set rules for how the executive branch would operate.  Not to a allow the circumvention of the authority of the other two branches.

As TPATH has stated on other occasions, if any aspect of our Constitution is ignored, for any reason, all aspects of it are in jeopardy. 

Congress, over the decades, having neglected their legal oversight concerning legislation and more recently allowing the eligibility requirements as defined in Article II, Section 1, to go unenforced, has endangered our country to the point where calling it a Republic seems almost ludicrous.

If we are to survive, not as wards and serfs of the state, but a free people, the Congress had better step up and stop the illegal use of the Executive Order and thereby halting this dictator "wannabe" before its too late.  If its not already.

FBI Releases Fake Boston Bombing Surveillance Video

Friday, April 19, 2013 10:27

0

(Before It's News)

Why Did FBI Release Fake Surveillance Video of the Boston Bombing Suspects?
The so-called video the FBI released that is supposed to be surveillance video is actual a digitally doctored slide show of still photos that makes it look like a real video.
The question of the hour is why? Why would they go through all of that trouble instead of just releasing clips of the real surveillance video?

Is there something in the missing frames they are hiding from the public they don’t want them to see?
Why?
This video shows exactly how the FBI made the doctored video from still photos to make it look like an actual video.


 

THEY WERE SET UP!

With the 24-hour manhunt for the second suspect of the Boston bombing closed, RT remembers its conversation with the parents of the Tsarnaev brothers, who claimed all along their children were set up.
Follow the Boston bombing suspects manhunt LIVE UPDATES

Zubeidat Tsarnaeva maintains her younger son is innocent and like so many of the brothers’ acquaintances, claims they were good, courteous kids and model students – especially the younger 19-year-old Dzhokhar. A US citizen who is presently in the Russian Republic of Dagestan, she revealed to RT some suspicions of her own.

Grief-stricken at the latest developments in the case, Zubeidat expressed her dismay at the allegations, recounting Dzhokhar’s life in the US and talking of his status among his peers and friends: he was an honors student, loved by many of his friends and teachers. And his older brother Tamerlan was a star athlete and student, whose ambition was to one day appear on the US Olympic wrestling team.

But her biggest suspicion surrounding the case was the constant FBI surveillance she said her family was subjected to over the years. She is surprised that having been so stringent with the entire family, the FBI had no idea the sons were supposedly planning a terrorist act.

Tsarnaev brothers (FBI/AFP Photo)

“They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me…they were telling me that he [the older, 26-y/o Tamerlan] was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him. They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites… they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step…and now they say that this is a terrorist act! Never ever is this true, my sons are innocent!”
When asked if maybe she didn’t know about some of her sons’ more secret aspirations and dark secrets, she said “That’s impossible. My sons would never keep a secret.”
Finally, she said that if she could speak to her youngest – Dzhokhar, she would tell him, “Save your life and tell the truth, that you haven’t done anything, that this is a set up!”

The suspects' father, Anzor Tsarnaev

In an interview with Russian television the brothers’ father Anzor Tsarnaev also claimed that they are innocent and somebody might have set them up.
“I’m sure about my children, in their purity. I don’t know what happened and who did this.  God knows and he will punish them,” he told Zvezda channel. “Somebody might have set them up. I don’t know who and because of their cowardice killed the boy.”
The father said he was unable to contact his sons or other relatives. “Everything is switched off. I can’t reach my brother there either. I can’t reach anyone! I just want information. Now I fear for my boy, that they will now shoot him dead and then will say 'He had a gun'.”
“I fear for my son, for his life. They should arrest him, bring him, but alive. Justice should investigate who is right and who is wrong,” he said.
Mr Tsarnaev recently spoke to his elder son, Tamerlan [Suspect #1], telling him that he should take care of his younger brother. Speaking of the Boston marathon bombing he told his son “Ok, Thanks to Allah you were not close to there and did not suffer.”
“I remember I even asked “Who could do something like that?”
“We just talked. I asked him about our Dzhokhar [Suspect #2], how was he. I told him, he should help him out and keep an eye on him, so that he studies well. I told him ‘You left school, got married too early, but the kid should finish [his education]’. Because this is life – those who don’t study work a lot and work hard. That’s why I was telling them study”.
Russian 'Alpha' Special Forces team-veteran and vice-president of its International Association, Aleksey Filatov, believes there is more to the case than meets the eye. He emphasizes, firstly, that the origin and religious beliefs of the suspect, along with the specifics of the bombing, have all been carefully pre-meditated and planned by someone within the United States in order to distract the public from the true identity and long-term aims of the actual planners.

“Putting a young Chechen in those shoes was top-notch professionalism in distracting everyone from the true identity and motives of the planner,” he told RT.

“The executors were chosen to confuse the American public and simultaneously untie the White House’s hands in a way that would justify a departure from the rhetoric of non-involvement in military action on foreign territories.”

Boston Marathon explosions: Show us the evidence, says Toronto aunt of bombing suspects

Friday, April 19, 2013 20:24

0

(Before It's News)

A multi-partisan activist group established to expose and resist US imperialism, corpora-terrorism, and the New World Order ShareThis
Boston Marathon explosions: Show us the evidence, says Toronto aunt of bombing suspects –Aunt of bombing suspects 'knew them as angels' and does not believe they were responsible for the attack. 19 Apr 2013 In the lobby of her Etobicoke apartment building, the aunt of the two Boston bombing suspects shouted one word over and over as reporters questioned her about her nephews — one dead, the other leading police on a chase Friday that effectively shut down Boston. “Evidence,” Maret Tsarnaeva said repeatedly, her voice high with emotion. “I can't lightly accept this kind of accusations without supporting evidence. Forgive me, but I cannot.” Tsarnaeva, is aunt to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, and his older brother Tamerlan, 26. “I don’t know them in a way that they could be capable of this,” she said. She would not rule out the possibility that the photos showing the brothers at the scene had been staged.

2013-04-19 20:16:23
Source: http://www.legitgov.org/Boston-Marathon-explosions-Show-us-evidence-says-Toronto-aunt-bombing-suspects

Top 5 Signs of a False Flag Terror Attack

Add caption

The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide,

Hello, I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. My new book, The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide, was released just days ago, hot off the presses. And timing is everything in life, because at this moment our economic survival is very much in question. Have you seen the latest numbers on jobs, workforce participation, retail sales and consumer confidence? One word sums it all up: disaster. Shouldn’t the American people have a right to know what our President’s real economic agenda is? Is he out to help us or hurt us? I have a story that sheds light on that life-or-death question.
President Barack Obama and I were college classmates at Columbia University, class of ’83. I know all too well how mindlessly radical and in many cases, anti-American and hostile to capitalism the leftist students and faculty of that institution can be, and Obama was certainly no exception. It is in this cesspool of intolerance that Obama and his Marxist cronies hatched a secret plan to destroy our country.
There are two things you need to know about Obama at Columbia University. First, he was pre-law and a political science major — just like me. I thought I knew everyone studying political science during my four years at Columbia. Not Obama. I never met him, never saw him, never even heard of him. Strange.
Same major, same career path and graduated on the same day. Where was he? Was he busy attending communist party meetings? No need to guess. In his autobiography he proudly admits attending Socialist Party meetings at Cooper Union in downtown Manhattan. He also admits publicly in his own book to not wanting to meet or befriend anyone at Columbia who wasn’t black, Hispanic, gay or a Marxist professor — his words, in print. So it’s possible he was so busy attending communist meetings and trying to avoid guys like me (white, straight, patriotic) that our paths never crossed.
But it’s the second thing you really need to know about Obama at Columbia. He says he graduated class of ’83. Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. I always have. Well, then, Obama had to attend the same political science classes as me. I can tell you, almost to a man, my classmates in the class of ’83 proudly called themselves Marxist, communist or socialist. They bragged of being “radical” like a badge of honor. They openly hated America, calling it racist. They hated capitalism and vowed to bring “the system down.”
In my class the typical Columbia political science student vowed to change America, bankrupt business owners and vaporize what they called “the white power structure.” For the most part these were children of wealth, given everything on a silver platter. Yet all they felt was anger and guilt. Their goal was to destroy their own fathers. They talked about it all day long.
So let me tell you a story that explains the anger, hate and radicalism. Back in 1981, I was sitting in a political science class. The President at the time was Ronald Reagan, a man reviled by the left just as viciously as any Republican is today. Suddenly, our lecture was interrupted by a door swinging open violently, whereupon a breathless fellow student raced into the room screaming: “The President has been shot! They’ve just assassinated President Reagan.”
Reagan was my hero. The news hit me like a ton of bricks. I instantly felt sick to my stomach and tears flowed down my cheeks. But it was the response of the rest of the class that I will remember for the rest of my life. They cheered. They clapped, they yelled, they high-fived and they whooped in sheer, unadulterated joy. My fellow classmates, the ones I was naïvely trying so hard to befriend despite their radical leftist views, were happy that my hero, President Ronald Reagan, was dead (or so they thought). They were celebrating what they thought was the assassination of America’s President. Incidentally, if Obama actually went to Columbia, he’d almost certainly have to have been in that class leading the cheers. Feel like you need a shower yet?
Lest you think I’m exaggerating, British leftists just celebrated and cheered upon hearing of the death of Margaret Thatcher only days ago. It was all over the news. Some Brits held parties celebrating her death. Nothing has changed.
But wait, the most frightening and eye-opening revelation is still to come. You see, political science students at Columbia were taught a detailed plan designed by two former Columbia professors named Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven to bring down “the system,” destroy capitalism and turn America into a socialist state. We discussed it in class, wrote about it and debated it outside class. It was a hot topic of discussion around the halls of Columbia for four years.
The plan was revolting, but brilliant. Cloward and Piven taught that America could be destroyed only from within. Only by overwhelming the system with debt, welfare and entitlements could capitalism and the American economy be destroyed. So the plan was to make a majority of Americans dependent on welfare, food stamps, disability, unemployment and entitlements of all kinds. Then, under the weight of the debt, the system would implode and the economy collapse, bankrupting business owners (i.e., conservative donors). Americans would be brought to their knees, begging for big government to save them. Voilà! You’d have a new system: a system based on fairness, equality and social justice. It’s called socialism.
Sound familiar?
Lo and behold, one of my classmates was elected as President. And it’s clear as a bell that he is using that plan right now to destroy America, capitalism and the U.S. economy right in front of our eyes. It’s the exact plan hatched at Columbia University in our college days — exact in every way.
Under Obama, 660,000 Americans dropped off the job rolls… just last month. Ninety million working-age, able-bodied Americans are no longer in the workforce. Almost 50 million Americans are on food stamps (20 percent of all eligible adults). Fourteen million are on disability. Millions more are on welfare, unemployment and so many different categories of entitlements that my head is spinning. Now, add in free healthcare, plus 22 million government employees. Record-setting numbers of Americans are emptying their retirement accounts to survive. Student loan debt is a national disaster — with defaults up 36 percent from a year ago. Some 16.4 million Americans live in poverty… in the suburbs.
Liberals joked about Sarah Palin seeing Russia from her home in Alaska. Well, I’m betting Obama sees Cloward and Piven from every window at the White House.
Remember the plan from Columbia? Overwhelm the system with debt. Obama promised to cut the deficit in half; instead, he gave us five consecutive trillion-dollar deficits. He promised to spend responsibly; instead, he now owns the title of “biggest spender in world history.” He called Bush’s $4 trillion in debt over eight years reckless, then proceeded to pile on $6 trillion in only four years. He added 6,118 new rules, regulations and mandates in just the past 90 days. He claimed taxes are low, yet he just raised taxes to the same level as bankrupt EU countries like Greece, Spain, Italy and France. Our Federal income taxes are now far higher than the former Soviet Republics’.
Now, I ask you: Does this sound like a man trying to “save” us? Folks, this is Cloward and Piven. This is Karl Marx, who despised the middle class and vowed to wipe it out. This is Saul Alinsky (Obama’s mentor) who dedicated his book — Obama’s favorite book by the way — to Lucifer, the devil.
This is no accident; nor is it the work of an economically inept liberal. This is a purposeful plan to drown the nation in debt and hook a majority to government handouts, happening in front of our eyes. It’s crystal clear Obama’s plan was hatched in our college days at Columbia, class of ’83.
While I never met Obama at Columbia, I can certainly put him at the scene of the crime. He either went to Columbia, or he didn’t. If he didn’t, he’s a fraud. If he did, he knew the Cloward and Piven plan like the back of his hand. He studied it. And his goal — like almost all my classmates’ — was to use it to bring down the U.S. economy and destroy capitalism to create what they consider to be “equality, fairness and social justice.”
Why would anyone want to purposely collapse the economy you might ask? Alinsky taught the ends justify the means. A bankrupt America wipes out the middle class and small business. That wipes out the majority of donors to conservatives causes, meaning Obama has no opposition. It creates “equality” by putting everyone on equal footing (shared misery). It causes panic; and in panic, voters often make hasty decisions — like choosing big government to save them.
The destruction and devastation we see happening right now is the plan we learned, studied and discussed day and night at Columbia. This is the Marxist attack from within designed by Cloward and Piven. And it’s working. Obama has been working on his plan for 30 years (our 30th Columbia class reunion is next month).
Now it is time for us to get to work. It’s time for battle.
It all starts with the battle plan in my new book, The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide. America’s survival is in doubt, but yours doesn’t have to be. You have a duty to survive, to protect your assets, to save your family. You must create your own “booming personal economy,” no matter what Obama does to the American economy. Your mission is to survive, thrive and prosper despite Obama. I’ve got an 18-point plan called Y-PODS that empowers you to do that. Y-PODS stands for Your Personal Obama Defense Shield.
You can find my book, The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide, at Amazon.com, where it is already a best-seller. It hit No. 1 of all conservative books, No. 1 of all finance books and No. 28 of all 3 million books sold at Amazon before it ever came out. That is how frightened people are at what Obama is doing to America and our economy.
You can also find it at any major book seller such as Barnes & Noble, Costco or Sam’s Club. Or you can find more information in the box right under this article. Just look for the book cover of The Ultimate Obama Survival Guide to order your very own copy.

I’m Wayne Root for PersonalLiberty.com. See you next week. Same time, same place. God bless.

Filed Under: Conservative Politics, Personal Liberty Digest™

Wayne Allyn Root (W.A.R.) is a former Presidential candidate, the 2008 Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee and a Tea Party favorite. He is the ultimate capitalist evangelist: a blue-collar S.O.B. (son of a butcher) turned small businessman, entrepreneur, CEO, home-schooler and citizen politician. Root is a talk-show host, bestselling author, business speaker and TV/radio commentator on business, economics, entrepreneurship and politics. He is a regular guest on Fox News, as well as on hundreds of radio shows across the United States. Root's opinions reach tens of millions of Americans as a regular columnist and commentator for many of the most popular political and business websites, including FoxNews.com. He also writes regularly for The Washington Times. He is the bestselling author of seven books. Root serves as national spokesman for several companies, including Asset Strategies International, a global precious metals company, and Senior Economic Advisor to Wealth Masters International, a global financial services company. He is also well known in the television and media industries. Root started his career as an anchorman and host for CNBC (then known as Financial News Network). He has hosted, starred and produced many television shows. Today, he is a producer of the highest-rated television show on Travel Channel, "Ghost Adventures."  Because of his success in the diverse fields of business, media, sports, entertainment and publishing, Root was awarded his own 180-pound granite star in the Las Vegas Walk of Stars. Only 50 legends in the history of Las Vegas have received a star on Las Vegas Boulevard. Root joins Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra, Wayne Newton, Liberace and Dean Martin, along with other icons of business and entertainment. Root's star can be viewed in front of New York New York Resort. A native New Yorker and graduate of prestigious Columbia University, this capitalist evangelist proudly resides in Nevada, a State with no personal or business income tax. His website is ROOTforAmerica.com.

obama is so wrong... again!

Checking the Logic of Background Checks: Would a Broader Screening Requirement for Gun Buyers Reduce Violent Crime?
By Jacob Sullum
Wednesday, April 17, 2013

Urging Congress to expand background checks for gun buyers, President Obama claims the current system has "kept more than 2 million dangerous people from getting their hands on a gun" during the last two decades. If you understand why that claim is misleading, you will understand why background checks are not an effective way to stop criminals from obtaining weapons.  
 
It's true that more than 2 million gun sales have been blocked since 1994 as a result of the background checks mandated by the Brady Act. But judging from the way law enforcement officials treat them, these people typically are not dangerous.  
 
Anyone who buys a firearm from a federally licensed dealer has to fill out a form attesting that the transaction is permitted by federal law, which bars gun ownership by felons, fugitives, illegal drug users, illegal immigrants and people who have been involuntarily committed to mental hospitals, among other prohibited categories. Although lying on this form is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison, sales blocked by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) rarely result in a federal investigation, let alone prosecution.  
 
According to a 2004 report by the Justice Department's inspector general, the most common reason the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) chooses not to pursue these cases is that the buyer does not seem to pose a threat. "The special agents we spoke with generally commented that they do not consider the vast majority of NICS referral subjects a danger to the public," the report said, "because the prohibiting factors are often minor or based on incidents that occurred many years in the past."  
 
The ATF's handling of NICS referrals reflects two facts commonly ignored by background-check enthusiasts. First, the criteria for stripping people of their Second Amendment rights are absurdly (and unfairly) broad, sweeping pot growers, hubcap thieves, and guys who got into a bar fight 20 years ago together with violent predators. Second, criminals generally do not buy their weapons in gun stores.  
 
Even in surveys conducted before the Brady Act, only a fifth of state prisoners who had used guns to commit crimes said they bought them from licensed dealers. In a 2004 survey, the share was just one-tenth.  
 
Furthermore, a criminal turned away by a licensed dealer can always steal a gun, buy one from someone who does not run background checks, or ask someone with a clean record to buy one for him. Obama is therefore doubly wrong to equate blocking sales through NICS with preventing "dangerous people" from "getting their hands on a gun."  
 
Given these realities, it is not surprising that a 2000 study by criminologists Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig found no evidence that the Brady Act had an impact on homicide rates. But according to supporters of expanded background checks, the problem is that the Brady Act did not go far enough.  
 
One difficulty with that argument: As Cook and Ludwig note, most people who use guns to commit crimes — including almost all mass shooters — could pass a background check. But what about the rest? Would they be thwarted by a broader screening requirement?  
 
Probably not. Forcing private sellers at gun shows to arrange background checks with the help of licensed dealers is relatively straightforward. But in that 2004 inmate survey, less than 2 percent of respondents said they had bought weapons at gun shows or flea markets. 


Three sources accounted for almost nine out of 10 crime guns: friends or family (40 percent), the street (38 percent) and theft (10 percent). It is hard to see how any national background check requirement, even one applying to all private transfers, can reasonably be expected to have a significant impact on these sources. As usual with gun control, the attempt to enforce such a requirement would impose costs and uncertain legal risks on law-abiding gun owners while leaving criminals free to go about their business.  
 
Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason magazine. Follow him on Twitter: @jacobsullum.