Thursday, July 5, 2012


Obama told to back off U.N. gun treaty

Lawmakers join general in declaring pact a threat to freedom

Over 100 members of Congress appear to share the concerns of a former Army general who has sounded the alarm over efforts by the Obama Administration to push through the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT.

As WND reported, retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin earlier this year, in a video in which he claimed Obama was leading America down the path of a quiet, Marxist revolution, blasted the ATT, also known as the small arms treaty, saying it would regulate private gun ownership.

“There has been a decree by the administration by the president and the secretary of state saying that our president will sign the United Nations small arms treaty, which is about how we will buy sell and control individual private weapons,” Boykin warned. “That means the United Nations, an international body will decide how you and I as Americans can buy and sell our weapons, how we control those weapons, who is authorized to have those weapons and where they are. This is a dangerous trend.”

Now some 130 lawmakers, consisting of mostly Republicans, but also including Democrats such as Reps. Jason Altmire, Sanford Bishop, Jerry Costello, Danny Davis and Peter DeFazio sent off a letter to the Obama administration opposing the treaty.

The letter states that Congress is concerned the treaty could “pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.”

The letter goes on to declare that the Second Amendment guarantees the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms” and the U.S. has no business supporting a treaty that infringes on the Bill of Rights.

The ATT would specifically require signatories to identify and trace, in “a timely and reliable manner,” illicit small arms and light weapons. The information would be required to be submitted to the United Nations.

The treaty was opposed by the Bush administration, but President Obama’s administration reversed direction on the treaty. U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said the United States would support talks towards ratifying the treaty.

While the treaty is still in a draft stage, the United Nations is beginning a month-long process beginning this week to craft the final details of the treaty.

Supporters say the treaty is necessary to prevent rogue countries from being able to purchase guns from arms dealers. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said concerns about the treaty restricting individual rights are “misplaced” and that he supported its goals.

Critics of the treaty have long maintained that the treaty would lead to mandatory registration of all firearms and every sale; even those between individuals.

The congressional letter also takes issue with the “moral equivalence” of comparing America to totalitarian regimes and calls upon the administration to break consensus and reject the treaty. It goes on to remind the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that “the Constitution gives the power to regulate international commerce to Congress alone.”

This is not the first time Congress has sent letters to the administration opposing the small arms treaty. Last year, Congress sent off a similar letter addressing many of the same concerns. This letter was signed by 12 Democrats who joined 45 Republicans in opposing the treaty.

The letter stated, “The Arms Trade Treaty must not in any way regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sale of firearms or ammunition.”

It went on to state, “The establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”

While that letter was been touted in the mainstream media as an indication that Democrats are now opposing gun control, some pointed out that the letter actually proved the opposite. The Senators stated they support the general concept of the treaty but believe countries such as the U.S. should have “exclusive authority to regulate arms within their own borders.”

Critics point out that this statement indicates that the senators believe firearms registration is acceptable provided it is initiated by individual governments.

President Obama face WH photo SC Outrageous: Judge Decides Law Doesnt Apply To Obama

A Circuit Court has decided that Florida election law applies to everyone but Barack Hussein Obama. In response to a suit brought by Florida resident and Democrat Party member Michael Voeltz challenging Obama’s eligibility to the Florida ballot, Circuit Court Judge Terry Lewis ruled that Florida election law “…is not applicable to the nomination of a candidate for Office of President of the United States.” 

This means that the Florida Statute which says, “the… nomination of any person to office…may be contested in the circuit court…by any elector or any taxpayer…” is null and void when it comes to Mr. Obama’s nomination to the presidency.

“If the plaintiff was challenging the candidate’s eligibility for any other office, his analysis would be correct and [the law] would apply,” said Lewis of Voeltz’s suit. However, according to the Judge, “…Political parties determine their [presidential] nominee at a national convention pursuant to rules that the parties draft and approve…”  In short, Mr. Voeltz’s contest of Barack Obama’s eligibility will NEVER be permitted in a Florida court; for voters do not nominate the president, political parties do in balloon filled convention halls!

With this ruling, Lewis has spared Barack Obama the necessity of having to prove his eligibility for office as no Florida voter will have the right to question it, the language of the state’s election law notwithstanding!

Lewis also passed judgment on the natural born citizen challenge of plaintiff Voeltz, ruling that as Barack Obama is a citizen of the United States, he is also a NATURAL BORN citizen and therefore meets that  constitutional requirement. “The judge equated being a ‘citizen’ with a ‘natural born citizen’ and cited no authority to conclude the two terms are the same,” exclaimed a stunned Larry Klayman, the attorney who handled the suit for Mr. Voeltz.

Perhaps the most remarkable of Lewis’ contentions was his statement that “it is the plaintiff’s burden…to allege and prove that a candidate is not eligible.” For the judge did not allow Klayman the right of discovery–the right to subpoena Obama for proof of his eligibility!  “How can you say we have the burden of proof, then not allow discovery?” Klayman asked. “He says we have burden, but doesn’t allow us to meet it.”

Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch, went on to say “The decision issued today by Judge Terry Lewis was poorly reasoned and written.”  “It goes against prior Florida Supreme Court precedent in particular, thus making our chances on appeal great.”

The bias and lack of honor displayed during the past year by the American legal system represents not only a threat to the Constitution, but to the continued existence of the Republic. When citizens mistrust the integrity of the court, they lose faith in their right to expect and receive justice. Klayman said “…if the Florida courts ultimately decide to obey their own election law, we will prevail in the end.” Unfortunately, ignoring both the law and the Constitution has become standard fare for the nation’s judges. Mr. Klayman may need a miracle if he expects the law to be fairly applied in his client’s appeal.

Building Homes for America's Bravest

To all my fellow patriots,

In these hard times very few of us have extra dollars to donate to all the worthy causes out there. However, the Gary Sinise Foundation has a special project, that when I saw the report on FOX about it a few minutes ago, I had tears running down my face.

Mr. Sinise has started an adjunct foundation called 'Building Homes for America's Bravest.' This foundation builds specially equipped homes for our brave men and women in uniform who have returned from the war with missing limbs or NO limbs at all, and it builds them at NO cost to them.

And what makes this even more poignant is that every troop who spoke on the FOX report said they have NO regrets, and would do what they did again even if they knew this was to be their fate. They ALL said the price of freedom overrode their personal sacrifice.

Now this is the stuff real heroes are made of. And now we patriots have a chance to help these heroes live some semblance of a normal life. These specially built, specially equipped homes are very expensive to build because they are tailor-made to suit each individual's special needs.

And, all these homes are built with donations from you and me.

So I ask all my fellow patriots to please contribute whatever you can, even if it's only a dollar, five dollars, whatever. These brave men and women gave so much to keep us safe and free at's our chance to pay them back for all their sacrifices, to make their lives just a bit more normal, and to say to them, 'job well done, thank you.'

And please, share this with everyone you know so we can get some real momentum going. These brave men and women need to know that We the People' have NOT forgotten them even if our current administration has.

Thanks in advance for all your help.

Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor 

Click on this link to go directly to the Gary Sinise Foundation and  Building Homes for America's Bravest.
Executive Privilege...Obama’s big mistake 
By: Diane Sori

Executive Privilege...that once overlooked term has now been thrust into the limelight with Obama’s throwing the Executive Privilege blanket over Eric Holder in regards to the Fast and Furious investigation. 

Did Obama have justification in asserting Executive Privilege to protect his Attorney General, the very man who withheld subpoenaed documents he claimed needed to be kept secret for security reasons?  I don’t believe Obama did nor does Speaker of the House John Boehner.   Boehner is going full steam ahead with a civil suit against Holder and the DOJ to try and get those very documents.  Boehner is left with no choice because the DOJ will NOT prosecute Holder (their boss), nor will they release those documents even with Holder being found in both civil and criminal contempt of Congress.   And while he’s at it, Boehner is also going after Obama for extending Executive Privilege to Eric Holder, a questionable move at best.

Gee, I wonder what they’re hiding, wink, wink.  Let me guess...could these documents give away Barack Hussein Obama’s hand in Fast and Furious...or could these documents be the ones that lay the groundwork for Obama’s trying to implement gun control and take away our Second Amendment rights...what other reasons could there possibly be to withhold a word, NONE.

With his asserting Executive Privilege to protect Holder, Obama is saying that this privilege can cover not only himself but his department heads as well.  However, this privilege is usually asserted only for documents and correspondence between the president and his senior advisers NOT for documents and correspondence between the president and a head of a government agency.  Executive Privilege does, however, allow Obama to withhold from Congress documents revealing internal communications within the Executive branch of government that he wants to remain confidential, and unfortunately, the DOJ falls into this realm.

In a letter to Obama, Committee Chair Darrell Issa said, "Courts have consistently held that the assertion of the constitutionally-based executive privilege ... is only applicable ... to documents and communications that implicate the confidentiality of the president's decision-making process."

“The president’s decision making process.”

Did Barack Hussein Obama actually implicate himself in the Fast and Furious scandal by mistakenly asserting Executive Privilege to protect Holder...I believe he most certainly did.

And while the DOJ is technically part of the Executive branch of our government does that give Obama the right to issue Executive Privilege when it’s being used to hinder the investigation into the murder of one of our Border Patrol Agents?  Personally, I don’t believe it does nor should it, as finding who murdered Border Agent Brian Terry must be made top priority with all information that could lead to that finding turned over immediately.  What gets me is why our president would even want to hinder such an investigation.

Again, we can pretty much guess why.

But the main question is can Executive Privilege be overturned by showing a definitive need for the documents subpoenaed and the information they contain.  And the answer is YES.   An issuing of Executive Privilege can indeed be overturned by using the process of Judicial Review, because while a subpoena by Congress cannot override claims of Executive Privilege, the privilege itself is considered ‘qualified.’  Therefore, Executive Privilege does not protect statements that can be proven to have been made with malicious intent, as in a cover-up, instead of being ‘absolute’ where the president and those under the Executive Privilege blanket cannot be sued even for malicious intent.  

Bottom line...Speaker Boehner is well within the law in trying to challenge and have revoked Barack Hussein Obama’s issuing of Executive Privilege to protect Eric Holder and, let’s cut to the chase, to protect himself, because we know, and he knows we know, that he is knee-deep in Fast and Furious.

Let’s just hope that the White House doesn’t 'get' to Speaker Boehner, and that he follows through and is successful in getting this privilege revoked.  And I can most assure you that Barack Hussein Obama will be one very unhappy camper if Boehner does indeed succeed.