Can it be? Donofrio makes sense?

Leo Donofrio is making some sense. I still think he's an idiot and probably hallucinating, but he seems to know that sticking your hand in a rat trap is a Bad Thing. Doc Orly doesn't seem to get that and will probably send Donofrio to the outer darkness, where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I originally thought that this was going away after the inauguration, but I forgot the When Prophecy Fails scenario. Judging from that and other similar cults, once Easterling gets court-martialed, Donofrio will be attacked as an agent of the enemy.

Military POTUS Eligibility Madness

A few weeks ago, I suggested hypothetically that active military might have standing to bring a class action to question Obama’s POTUS eligibility. After reviewing various sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice pointed out to me by various readers, I came to the conclusion that such a law suit would probably not only fail, but would also subject soldiers to potential court martial.

I decided to have nothing to do with any such law suit involving military plaintiffs. Their burden is already so large. This is our burden.

Then, after seeing a consent form issued by Orly Taitz within which active military were being asked to state that they might disobey orders from President Obama, I realized that these men were truly being put in serious jeopardy. I responded with a blog which suggested that any soldiers who had a problem with Obama’s eligibility should consult a JAG lawyer or their personal attorney rather than going to the internet for advice.

I hoped the issue would go away, but it didn’t. This week an active military officer signed a consent form to be a plaintiff in a future law suit brought by Orly Taitz. Besides erroneously reporting that the officer had defied a Presidential order, the officer’s name was released and inflammatory and contemptuous statements were also released via World Net Daily, Orly’’s blog and the Drudge Report.

I complained vehemently and eventually the incorrect headline which grossly and erroeneously stated that the officer had defied a Presidential order was changed at all three sources.

Unfortunately, the damage had already been done. Review the following statement by the officer:

“Until Mr. Obama releases a ‘vault copy’ of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor…”

This statement should never have been made public. If Orly Taitz is going to solicit active military to join her potential law suit and sign consent forms thereto, then she should be charged with the responsibility of knowing the exact punishment her clients will be subjected to, and she should be protecting them from any unnecessary jeopardy.

The Easterling thing is exploding nicely

Military.com - Officer Calls Obama 'Usurper' President

"We are taking a look at that ourselves right now," Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said. "We are always trying to balance our ... military requirements under the Uniform Code of Military Justice versus critical freedoms that all Americans enjoy."

Welp, looks like Lt. Easterling will probably enjoy a nice dishonorable discharge.

While I'm here, I'd like to note Doc Orly's response:

Open Letter Response to the Lt. Easerling (sic) story covered by Bryant Jordan of Military.com

Can't even get her own client's name right. I'm sure there's a metaphor or something in there.

1. In a letter you questioned the very existence of officer Easterling and Mr. Tulley stated that information was given by a third party with an ax to grind. As a reporter you could check Officer Easterling's existence, instead of questioning that. Mr. Tulley claimed that I am a party with an ax to grind. Based on what? His imagination. That is a defamatory statement and I expect retraction and apology.

If there were one way to describe Orly, axe to grind would not be it. Obviously biased would be the phrase I prefer.

Also, for those of you looking for point #2, there is no point #2. Point #3 is, presumably, No Pooftahs.

As far as the last comment goes, about Chief of staff saluting Obama, I don't know if I should respond seriously or laugh. In Germany chief of staff saluted Hitler, didn't make him legitimate. In our recent history chief of staff saluted Nixon, as he was getting into helicopter and leaving office disgraced during Watergate.

Doc Orly apparently missed a few days in history class. See, while Nixon did use dirty tricks to get validly elected, Hitler was actually validly elected without any dirty tricks (well, unless you want to count Dolchstoßlegende, in which case, it was the fault of the voters for not thinking critically). In both cases, the election was valid and they were president and chancellor, respectively. Which was the point that the original author made.

I don't think that's proper address

Dr. Taitz's Military Action Welcomes' Officer Easterling

You don't address military officers as "officer." You use whatever rank that particular officer is. Otherwise, you can't tell a lowly second or first lieutenant from a colonel or a general. I wonder what rank he is...

I was promoted to 1LT on Feb. 2, 2009

Ah! First Lieutenant. An O-2 pay grade, the second lowest in the officer corps (which he joined straight out of basic training in this case).

Wake me up when you have a captain. I probably won't pay any attention then, either, but at least you won't be embarrassing yourself.

You say you want a revolution...

Tea Party revolution brewing

The kettle’s whistling. Tea Parties are popping up all over the country. People are flocking to these sites which have cropped up practically overnight in search of information about rallies, demonstrations and Tea Parties in their cities. The revolution is brewing!

You know, for self-proclaimed patriots, these people seem positively giddy at the thought of personally killing their fellow countrymen (and women).

Screwing for chastity

What will YOU do when “they” come for your neighbor???

So someone puts up a sign saying that Obama is a traitor and someone should make a citizen's arrest. Given that the person in question does not live in North Carolina, the only state to allow citizens' arrests, I can see how someone might get the wrong idea and why they might send for the Secret Service, though I think that's taking things way too far.

And then, hang on a tick...

THIS is exactly why we need to organize on a local level first!

Oh.

RESISTERS

Ah.

Are you going to RESIST or are you going to sit at your computer writing letters that are ignored, or planning for your ‘big protest’ several months from now??

Uh, well maybe she only means...

What WILL you do WHEN they come for your neighbor?? What will you want your neighbor to do when they come FOR YOU??

Uh... nevermind.

Yes, Yes This Is Cause For Alarm Is Cause For Alarm

Yes This Is Cause For Alarm

Greg on his blog justly pointed at the need to restore the Militia of the several States as if we are to restore, defend and uphold the Constitution, and thereby the Constitutional Republic, against current conspiracy of usurpation and tyranny from within it is essential we work on State and Country level.

Yeah, that sounds an awful lot like treason.

It's that time again!

Hey! Did you hear about the bill that some guy introduced to repeal the 22nd Amendment? Interestingly, the author of the article appears to have at least one brain cell, because he notes that the same people introduce the same bill every for Congress, since Reagan.

(Ditto the bill to reintroduce the draft. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of a perennial bill to reintroduce Prohibition.)

The angriest dog in the world

[Someone here said they liked the Fire Joe Morgan style of analysis I did. I like that too, so I'm doing this, even though it's not strictly treason. I started this as a way to deal with the crap I see from the birthers, and I think this still falls under that category. I don't even know who Joe Morgan is. I stole this style from Sadly, No!, who do have Fire Joe Morgan on their blogroll. --Ed.]

Rob Lamb wrote an Open letter to Eric (beeping) Holder
Posted on February 20th, 2009 by David-Crockett

I know what you're thinking. (bleeping) means fucking, right? In fact, careful analysis suggests that the term is not fucking. I'll leave you to figure out what it is.

Coward? You say that I am a coward? SCREW YOU.

Aww, how cute! Ron Lamb shows that the biggest words can come from the littlest penis of all.

Years ago, while one day opening my business, I was robbed at gunpoint by four BLACK men of thousands of dollars, and I was shot in the chest.

Apparently, he was robbed by very stupid criminals, who rob a store in the morning, i.e. when the store has no money. A store that has thousands of dollars in the morning isn't necessarily raking in the dough, but if you need more than $2000 in the morning, you'll probably have at least ten large by noon. I used to work as a cashier for a news stand, and each day, I started with $250 in the drawer. For an eight hour shift, I'd usually make a drop of no less than $500 once a shift--often I'd have them drop $1000 or more. At three registers and more in the safe in the back, we probably started each day with $1000 and left each day with $10,000--probably closer to $20,000 since we did Western Union and that money didn't go into out till.

Unless, of course, they were four crazed junkies who needed money for their next fix and were willing to stake out this guy's store and wait until morning but not to wait until later in the day when the business would actually have some real money.

The four men were caught, but never accused, never arraigned, never tried, never forced to repay what they stole from me, never required to help with my medical bills, and they sure as hell didn‘t pay my mortgage.

In addition, they were never brought to civil court and ordered to pay damages to this guy because he's a nice guy and decided not to press charges. Psst, Rob! In order to get damages, you have to sue them. Also, this case is an attorney's wet dream. Even Lionel Hutz could sleepwalk through such a case. About the only way that I could see you losing such a case would be to hire the auto expert from the car wax infomercials who sets fire to the hoods of cars and who is also a master chef in the cookware infomercials.



Above: I cannot guarantee that he would win your case.

But I tried to keep my little business afloat, to pay the bills for my very young family. I ended up with thousands of dollars in medical bills, thousands more in bills from the business, I could not pay back. We lost our home, we lost automobiles, we lost everything but our family, and our dignity, because

because you didn't know that lawyers (and especially personal injury lawyers) don't need retainers and often work on a contingency basis?

because I eventually repaid everybody.

Oh! So close.

But the cowards got off scot free.

because Rob refused to sue them.

NO, HOLDER, THE COWARD IS YOU.

The tiniest penis of all is hard! And big! Well, OK. Maybe not big, but certainly hard! Rob suffers from feelings of inadequacy, and he will use everything he can to convince you that his is not the tiniest penis of all!

All of you have been made aware that there is a huge issue with Soetoro’s legitimacy to hold the office of President.

He's got a point. I mean, Soetoro can't be president. I hear there's some other guy named Barack Hussein Obama that they got to do the job.

The cowardice that comes from the too many millions of people who do not have the intestinal fortitude to pay attention in school, work hard, do the right things in life, get a job, any job, stand up for themselves, and start their lives with heads held high; instead they blame drugs, alcohol

Rob, Rob! Yoo-hoo! You're kinda getting off the topic, such as it was. Do you have a point, or at the very least, a theme? This diatribe, it's going to be shorter than the speech from Atlas Shrugged, right? Please?

and a vile, contemptible, loathsome system which has been gone for over a hundred and forty years.

Ah! You do have a theme. Let me see if I have this right.

Holder is a coward. Holder is a coward because he did not pay attention in school. Attorney General Holder does not have a job. Holder also has not started his life with his head held high. Holder blames the fact that he doesn't have a job on the fact that he uses drugs and alcohol. He also blames this on the fact that his ancestors were slaves in the United States.

Do, um...do I have that right?

Millions of Americans of all colors do the right thing every day, but there are far too many who use the cowardice of ‘injustice’ to write off all their lack of self esteem.

If anything says lack of self-esteeem, it has to be the office of Attorney General.

Injustice? Sure, there are still injustices. Just remember, I received no ‘justice.’

Because you refused to sue the imaginary people who fake shot you to fake steal thousands of imaginary dollars from your phantom business.

TAKE YOUR COWARDICE AND SHOVE IT.

The littlest penis of all demands attention! Rob is mad and he will stand here looking petulant until the world grovels at his feet!

You can read the rest. It's really not worth it.

Is that a threat?

Keyes: Stop Obama or U.S. will cease to exist

OK, folks. He's got a doomsday device, and he's not afraid to use it!

10th Amendment treason

I've been more or less silent on this issue, since the 10th Amendment issue is something between the several states and the federal government, and I surely don't want to get involved in a debate between them. But a recent post has suggested that...well, see for yourself:

In respect to a situation in which, the man holding the office of President, and a majority of men holding the offices of Representatives and Senators in Congress, and a majority of men holding the offices of Justices of the Supreme Court should all league together in a conspiracy of usurpation and tyranny, they would be breaking the law, Dr. Viera justly pointed out that:

Under these circumstances, the Constitution would ex necessitate empower and require “the Militia of the several States” “to execute the Laws of the Union” against the conspirators and their henchmen and hangers-on,

Oh, goody. I do love me some armed revolution.

Make Conspiracies Fast!

Phil Berg is going Amway:

I hereby request all of obamacrimes.com supporters to

1. go to your computers;
2. send a message to everyone on ‘your address’ book to go to obamacrimes.com and read it;
3. ask everyone on ‘their address’ book to read and send on to everyone on their address book; and
4. if they can, make a contribution to obamacrimes.com [on our web site to donate online or mail in]. I am requesting donations of asking four [4] friends to contribute $15.00 each or donate $60.00 themselves

Sorry. Carry on.

Dirty bomb planned by slain Neo-Nazi applicant

I think that would fall under the category of treason, though I'm not sure where he thinks Obama was born.

(and no, he's not a Neo-Nazi. The FBI found an application to become a Neo-Nazi, so presumably he never sent one in.)

Lincoln's birthday

I see Citizen Wells is talking about Lincoln's birthday. A lot.

Which suggests that they may have something planned for the 12th.

Procrastination theatre, day two

I just can't bear to face it. The treason brigade is getting obvious, and it's depressing.

So have a brief intermission.



In 1956, Leon Festinger wrote a book called When Prophecy Fails. Basically, Festinger followed a UFO doomsday cult around until the day when the end of the world was supposed to come, and then followed them around after it failed to occur.

What would happen when it became obvious that they were wrong? Would they simply go back to their jobs and families? Sadly, no. They actually became more vocal in their beliefs and sought out media attention that they had shunned before.

The treason brigade certainly never shunned media attention, but they do seem to be getting much more vocal as their cases keep getting denied. I don't know what the endgame for the cult was, but I think we can expect something very similar with the treasoners.

Now playing: Farewell Ferengistan

I'm not dead, just trying to take a weekend to relax.

It seems to be working, by the way. I've found some more treason, but I'm so happy right now and don't want to spoil it.

Treason should resume tomorrow.

Blast from the past

Dr. Conspiracy (are you reading Dr. Conspiracy's blog? You should.) reminds me of this fun bit that used to be at Doc Orly's blog, but was since removed:

If the law enforcement and government of this country does not step up to the plate and doesn’t announce official investigation of this matter immediately, we need to protect ourselves, we need civilian militia, we need our own investigating services, we need new government.

I suppose I can't say anything about wanting a militia. It's one of our rights per the Constitution, and I do not want to abridge any of those rights. But when you talk about new government...well, I think someone else said it better than me:

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world...

But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out...

You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money
for people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait...

You say [it's from] the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead

Violence! Violence! Ooh!

New Hampshire talks Civil War against feds!
The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step today by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a "breach of peace" with the states themselves that risks "nullifying the Constitution."

This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war!

Unclosed parenthesis in original.

This is it folks! Doc Orly is gearing up for war. Funny, though. The bill doesn't seem to say anything about war. In the interest of fairness, I checked, and this doesn't seem to be the sort of perennial legislation like bills designed to reinstate the draft or repeal presidential term limits, so it's not necessarily drafted by a crank who does nothing but this one issue over and over.

I have reported on thisblog for quite some time that we here in the United States are heading toward Civil War. Many of you told me I was a nut for thinking that.

The simple fact is that we are long overdue for another Rebellion in this nation and I heartily endorse the idea of having one again very soon; preferably starting THIS year!

Full disclosure: I, too, think that the US is headed for a breakup. Few countries last this long without a breakup. The only counterexamples I can think of are the Ottoman Empire and a few of the Chinese dynasties. Rome, Greece, Britain, Austria-Hungary all lasted a few centuries and then broke up, and we're reaching that age and starting to show signs of strain.

But that's very different from Civil War. I think if we continue our backbiting ways of politics, we may well see a civil war in a few decades. But we may also see something analagous to the Velvet Divorce--an agreement to split up the country into smaller countries or administrative regions larger than states but with more cultural cohesion.

There's certainly no need for war.

Also, we are not overdue for a rebellion. Orly endorses the concept of millions of people fighting and dying? Would she like to have her friends or loved ones on the front lines? Sadly, given her pathological perspective, I suspect the answer would be yes.

And this year? I'm sorry, but I've got other things planned for this year. Try back in a decade or two. No, frankly we're going to need more elections to heighten the tension in the country to a warlike level.

And one more thing: if you're going to start a war this year, how are you going to train your troops for the battle in time? Unless, of course, you're telling trops that they should disobey orders, which you said you weren't doing.

It's not treason, by jingo!

Maybe I misjudged Doc Orly. She says I've got it all wrong.

More False Rumors in regards to the military

Mr. Kreep has told me and later has forwarded an e-mail from a gentleman that goes by name John Jay, though I don't believe that this is his real name.

No kidding. A guy's named after the Committee to Re-Elect, and you think it's a pseudonym?

OK, that was a cheap shot, but you have to take humor when you can get it in this subject.

Mr. John Jay (or whoever he is, probably part of Obama administration)

Yes. Because anyone who disagrees with you is obviously part of the Obama administration. Which reminds me, I should probably talk to Barack Obama and see if I can get paid for this blogging. I've always wanted to be part of a presidential administration.

is sending e-mails to different people, saying that I just urge members of the military to disobey orders, that for no reason I am just telling people to disobey orders.

Well, color me shocked. That's exactly what I was saying. If he's wrong, then I guess I must be wrong, too! Let's read on.

This is not saying to disobey orders

Good! I'm glad. Dr. Orly, I do humbly and sincerely apolo--hang on, there's more.

If members of the military are following orders of somebody, who is a foreigner and not a legitimate President and commander in Chief, they are following illegal orders and can be subject to court martial.

Uh. So let me get this straight. You claim that you're not telling people to disobey orders, but you're also telling people that if they obey orders, they'll be court-martialed for following illegal orders?

That, uh... that sounds like you're telling soldiers to disobey orders.

Surprise, surprise, surprise

Citizen's grand jury! Citizen's grand jury!

We need volunteers to coordinate and form citizen's grand juries all over the country.

As I read more and more of this half-wit's drooling commentary, I find myself increasingly at odds with the ideas I've had before. It is, after all, a good idea to have independent grand juries. This is, of course, not what Orly wants. Orly wants a group of people to indict Obama, and if they don't, it will only be proof that those people are in on the conspiracy.

Two things

Thing one: I'm starting to see a lot of nObama blogs pointedly stating that military personnel should not refuse to follow orders. It's a step in the right direction, but they started the whole thing to begin with.

Thing two: Donofrio doesn't seem to be in full possession of his mental faculties. In fact, I think I've seen this guy before.

Deer Genral Riper, pleez comit treeson

More international treason!

Obama, Oaths of Allegiance, the UCMJ, Unlawful Orders, Joe the Private, and a Call to Protect the Republic
Written by Zach Jones

So the question becomes, when does an individual soldier, Joe the Private, have sufficient reason to know or believe that an order flowing down the “chain of command” from the Office of the President constitutes an “unlawful order”?

Ooh! A multiple choice quiz!

Does it happen when an individual member of the military comes across reports on the internet of more than 30 lawsuits challenging the eligibility of the current occupant of the Oval Office?

Does it happen when some bozo on the internet says that he totally knows that the president is a replicant? I'm going with no.

Does it happen when superior Officers such as Lt Col. Earl-Graef start raising their heart felt concerns?

Does it happen when a retired officer outside of his chain of command issues a lawsuit of indeterminate merit? I'm going with no, again.

Does it matter that the main stream media may be deliberately ignoring the issue for their own purposes?

Geez, I think I'll have to say no.

What should the individual soldier do if he or she in their heart of hearts believes the President of the United States is a fraud and cannot issue any “lawful order”?

Speak to a superior officer, and either get straight or get busted out of the service.

The soldier could be determined in a Court Martial to be fulfilling the obligations of their oaths or they could be found to be committing mutiny or sedition under the UCMJ!

You don't say!

There is however another important group of people (besides the civilian Judges) who, I believe, have the power to investigate and resolve Obama’s ineligibility issue. If just one person of this group has courage and conviction for the truth, he or she can remove the possibility that a another member of our armed forces, acting alone, would decide that they must as a matter of conscience refuse to obey an “Order” coming from Mr. Obama.

This group is made up of every person in the military chain of command that has the power to convene a “Court of Inquiry” under the Uniform Code of Military Justice!

He goes on to explain the group of people who are so entitled:

(1) the President of the United States;
(2) the Secretary of Defense;
(3) the commanding officer of a unified or specified combatant command;
(4) the Secretary concerned;

No, no, no, no.

(5) the commanding officer of a Territorial Department, an Army Group, an Army, an Army Corps, a division, a separate brigade, or a corresponding unit of the Army or Marine Corps;
(6) the commander in chief of a fleet; the commanding officer of a naval station or larger activity of the Navy beyond the United States.
(7) the commanding officer of an air command, an air force, an air division, or a separate wing of the Air Force or Marine Corps;

That would be a L. Colonel or above, a Commodore or above, and I believe a L. Colonel again.

(8) any other commanding officer designated by the Secretary concerned; or
(9) any other commanding officer in any of the armed forces when empowered by the President.

No, and no.

So you want to tell a lieutenant colonel to start a court-martial against the president? I do realize that your poster boy for this, Earl-Graef, is a retired L. Colonel, but you're going to have to show me somebody who is active duty before I believe that anyone is that stupid.

It is NOT my intention to express anything that could be remotely be interpreted as an “intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority”!

Uh huh. Should have thought of that before you expressed an intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority.

Oh, no. Not another blog

I was hoping I wouldn't have to follow the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler blog. The sewage that that idiot pumps out is absolutely disgusting. Honestly, would you want to read this sort of thing all day?

Now that the jug-eared, lawn-jockey and house negro for the dhimmicrat party has his scrawny ass parked in the Oval Office...

But Sadly, No! links to an article, and I feel like I should follow up on it:

Until Barack Hussein Obama has proven his eligibility for the office, he is not my president.

Funny, see, that's not true. The interesting thing about the government is that once you elect it, it's the government, regardless of what issues you think there may be with it. Furthermore, if you do think he's ineligible, you can take it up with the courts, which have routinely laughed this crap out of their courts. But until you actually succeed in the conviction of impeachment hearings, Barack Boogedy-boogedy Obama is still your president.

Until Barack Hussein Obama’s paid henchmen in ACORN have been investigated thoroughly and, if found guilty, punished to the full extent of the law, he is not my president.

Okay. You're going to have to explain this one. Richard Nixon sabotages Muskie's campaign. But I don't think you're stupid enough to claim that Spiro Agnew was the president. See, no matter what electoral shenanigans went on during the campaign, it doesn't change the outcome. You can't unring the bell and the people won't forget the information that they learned during the campaign. And they won't change their votes.

He can play president all he wants, ignorant fools often get a huge kick out of indulging in their delusions, and his mindless followers can bleat and bray about their Anointed One at the top of their lungs, but he still isn’t my president.

Uh huh. Can you show me an Obama supporter who talks about the Anointed One?

His every word, his every deed, every “law” that his Congress passes shall be weighed, by me, against the words put down by our Founders centuries ago and, if found wanting in any way, I shall ignore them as I would ignore a fly hitting the windshield of my car.

And if he and his tyrannical henchmen try to force me to obey his illegal orders, laws and regulations, I shall meet them with force as well. If I die, I shall die a free man. If I live, I shall have done my country a great favor.

Oh, goody. Here's treason. So until he can personally prove to you that he meets whatever standard you so choose, you won't acknowledge him as president? And if you wind up breaking the law, you'll fight the law by force?

I remember people like Gandhi and Thoreau and Jesus, who opposed the state because it was unjust (though in the case of Jesus, He was more or less indifferent to the civil authorities). And now, it's come to this?

If you had said that you opposed all civil authority, you might have a point, but you suggest that some people would be acceptable presidents, but this guy, for some unintelligible reason, isn't. I get so tired of these piddly little schoolhouse games.