Tag Archives: Clinton

“Comey’s Law” Revisited

BY JIM O’NEILL

As outlined in Comey’s speech exonerating Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing “Comey’s Law” may be summarized as follows: “Unless one intends to break the law, then no law has in fact been broken…unless they are not, in which case they are.”

That last bit refers to the fact that if one is not a Clinton then the first part of “Comey’s Law” does not apply, and the individual in question is indeed guilty of breaking the law, whether they did it intentionally or not.  (See “Exhibit A” former US Navy sailor Kristian Saucier).

After stating that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges against Hillary Clinton, Comey helpfully clarifies things by adding the following caveat:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

“To be clear” — yes, by all means let’s be clear about all this.  (Helpful hint: by “security or administrative sanctions” Comey means being thrown into prison).

At the beginning of his statement Comey informs us that “Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that [i.e. Clinton’s] personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way…” (italics added).

To be clear, Comey later informs us that Clinton did not act in a “grossly negligent” manner, but merely in an “extremely careless” manner.  Apples and oranges, right?  Who could ever confuse the two?

To be even more clear, Comey tells us that in no way did Clinton intend to break the law, ergo she is obviously innocent (as any reasonable prosecutor would tell you).

All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct…or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

To be clear, apparently the intention to break the law needs to be present, and/or “vast quantities” of classified material needs to be involved in order to break the law.  Seems a shame that Kristian Saucier’s lawyer was unaware of these legal statutes.

I have to admit to being puzzled however by Comey’s statement that “We do not see those things here” – referring to “intentional misconduct or efforts to obstruct justice.”  Did not Clinton’s minions “willfully and intentionally” attempt to hide tens of thousands of subpoenaed emails, BleachBit hard drives, and physically smash others to bits?  Why is that not considered obstruction of justice?  Oh well, I guess as Director of the FBI Comey must have known what he was talking about, right?

Let’s be clear.  Comey knew what he was talking about all right.  His stunning exoneration of Clinton, filled with duplicity and verbal razzle-dazzzle, will no doubt stand as a prime example of legal-weaselese for future students of law.

As We the People prepare for the IG’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton server “matter,” I thought that a refresher on “Comey’s Law” might be in order.  Laus Deo, power to the people!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trump Follows Constitution, Withdraws From Paris Accord

There is no proof that carbon dioxide is causing or precedes global warming…All indications are that the minor warming cycle finished in 2001 and that Arctic ice melting is related to cyclical orbit-tilt-axis changes in earth’s angle to the sun.  John Williams, agricultural scientist, researcher, author, and educator, University of Melbourne

The Constitution gives the President the power to commit the United States to treaties – but only with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the US Senate, and only if the agreement does not contravene the Constitution. Keep that in mind as we look at Obama’s actions with the signing late in his presidency of the Paris Accord.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signature of Paris Accord Unconstitutional

Obama claimed that the Paris Agreement was not a treaty, thus he did not submit the Agreement to the Senate for approval. The problem is that the Paris Agreement is certainly a treaty, but it was a unilateral act by President Obama that had no basis in the U.S. Constitution.

It should have and would have required Senate ratification by a two-thirds majority, under the Constitution’s Treaty Clause (Art 2, Sec. 2, Clause 2). That’s how the Framers of the Constitution understood the Clause.

The reason we’re being told that the Paris Accord is a nontreaty is because it evades the requirements of the Constitution to ratify it. Why? Because of something called the “Treaty on Treaties.”

What Makes Paris Accord a Treaty?

The Paris agreement is a treaty as defined by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, i.e., “an international agreement concluded between two or more States in written form and governed by international law….”

So why does Senate confirmation matter? Our Framers wisely believed that it would be unsafe to give one man alone the power to bind the country through a treaty, and they were right, because the Senate would not have ratified the Paris Accord!

So, how did we legally bypass the Constitution and get a treaty?  Well, we can thank former President Nixon.

Nixon’s Treaty on Treaties

In 1970, President Richard M. Nixon signed a monstrosity known as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It is referred to as the “Treaty on Treaties,” — even though our Constitution is clear that a treaty requires a supermajority of two-thirds of the Senate to ratify.  The U.S. Senate has not given its advice and consent to this treaty either, so it should be withdrawn as well.

Don’t start nodding off, this is important…hang in there with me. Under Article 18 of this Treaty on Treaties, once a nation signs a treaty — or merely does something that could be interpreted as “expressing its consent to be bound by the treaty” — that nation is “obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty.”  Here’s what it says:

Article 18. OBLIGATION NOT TO DEFEAT THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE

OF A TREATY PRIOR TO ITS ENTRY INTO FORCE

A State is obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty when:

(a) It has signed the treaty or has exchanged instruments constituting the treaty subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, until it shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty; or

(b) It has expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, pending the entry into force of the treaty and provided that such entry into force is not unduly delayed.

In other words, the Constitution notwithstanding, once a presidential administration signs or otherwise signals assent to the terms of an international agreement, the United States must consider itself bound – even though the Senate has not approved it, even though it has not been ratified.  Totally unconstitutional.

The Treaty on Treaties claims the equivalent of Senate ratification. Obama’s signature is what triggered the Treaty on Treaties obligation to follow it, even though it hasn’t been ratified.

Clinton signed Kyoto and Bypassed Senate

Of course, presidents don’t like going to the Senate for approval of their pet projects. Back in 1998 Bill Clinton signed the Kyoto Treaty on global warming without submitting it to the Senate for ratification. He knew that if he did so the treaty would be DOA.

President George W. Bush withdrew the signature of the United States from the treaty in 2001, even as Donald Trump backed out of the Paris Accord. In both cases there was a lot of huffing and puffing from the left, but Mr. Bush and Mr. Trump were simply doing what their voters wanted. They were also more faithful to the Constitution than Clinton or Obama had been.

Basically, Obama’s signing of this Agreement had no Constitutional standing whatsoever, so President Trump’s withdrawal was officially burying a legally dead horse.

Some Claim Withdrawal Takes Years

Any number of leftist articles have claimed that actual withdrawal from this agreement would take three or four years with considerable administrative and legal costs.  They also claim we’re the highest per capita emissions producer, but they forget China is in a pollution league by itself accounting for 30 percent of worldwide emissions.  Article 28 of the Agreement purported to prohibit any signatory nation from withdrawing until three years after its entry into force on Nov. 4, 2016. But that restriction—like the entire Agreement—was constitutionally null and void.

Other articles claim the agreement is fundamentally symbolic, which we also know is hogwash, it would have thoroughly destroyed America’s economy.  Link

This Treaty on Treaties is a mechanism to commit the United States to things that are drastically, horribly detrimental to us without going through the constitutional process that ratifies such treaties. It substitutes verbal consent of agreement in principle, as the equivalent of a signature and two-thirds of the Senate voting to affirm. The American people are being told, “It’s only symbolic, just a piece of paper, means nothing.” They’re also being told that Trump would gain a foothold with the left if he kept it in force.  What nonsense!  The left is the enemy, we need to defeat them at every turn.

Andrew McCarthy is Right

Here’s what he wrote in his article, Don’t Stop With Paris!

President Trump should not stop at Paris. While he’s at it, he should affirmatively withdraw the United States from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. We don’t need an international convention on that. We have a Constitution that renders multilateral boondoggles unbinding in the absence of super-majority Senate consent. Want to put “America first?” Then it is past time to rectify our sovereignty and the rule of law — our law.

Famous Presidential Lies Contest

 

Famous Presidential Lies Contest

Written by, To The Point News

LBJ:

  • None of our boys will die on foreign soil

Nixon:

  • I am not a crook

GHW Bush:

  • Read my lips – No New Taxes

Clinton:

  • I did not have sex with that woman… Miss Lewinski

GW Bush:

  • Iraq has weapons of mass destruction

Obama:

  • I will have the most transparent administration in history.
  • The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.
  • I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.
  • The IRS is not targeting anyone.
  • It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.
  • I will put an end to the type of politics that “breeds division, conflict and cynicism”.
  • You didn’t build that!
  • I will restore trust in Government.
  • The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.
  • The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk
  • It’s not my red line – it is the world’s red line.
  • Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.
  • We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.
  • I am not spying on American citizens.
  • Obama Care will be good for America.
  • You can keep your family doctor.
  • Premiums will be lowered by $2500.
  • If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan.
  • It’s just like shopping at Amazon.
  • I knew nothing about “Fast and Furious” gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels.
  • I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups.
  • I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi.
  • I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago.
  • And, I have never lived with that uncle. He finally admitted (12-05-2013) that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him.
  • If elected I promise not to renew the Patriot Act.
  • If elected I will end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan within the 1st 9 months of my term.
  • I will close Guantanamo within the first 6 months of my term.
  • I will bridge the gap between black and white and between America and other countries.

And the biggest one of all:

  • “I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.”

I believe we have a winner

Obama Is Not the Problem

By Jim Sumpter

The act of overt treason on the part of the Republican members of the House of Representatives that is in the process of being forced upon ‘We the People’ is without precedent in the history of our country. Whether it passes or fails, the great sin is the RINOs who are so comfortable in selling out the principles they have been elected to represent.

Obamatrade is nothing short of handing complete dictatorial powers to a man who has given every indication of his commitment to the implosion of the USA – financially and foundationally – a man who has already assumed the position of a de facto dictator.

The problem is not Obama. The only people surprised by Obama’s actions are those who are either terminally stupid or perpetually and willfully ignorant.

The problem is the wussie boy Republicans who, in fact, are not adherents to Republican principles but rather claim the Republican appellation as a matter of convenience. Owned by special interests and/or compromised by personal corruptness, they are nothing more than useful idiots for the Obama Agenda – unable and unwilling to stand in defense of the Constitution they, by oath before God and ‘We the People’, swore to uphold and defend.

The biggest media voices continue to mislead their listeners and viewers by concealing their purposeful misdirection presented with just enough truths to make them palatable while refusing to bring accountability to the politicians they have access to.

It is imperative for patriots to recognize this absolute truth: The only reason anyone in the media has access to any member of the House or the Senate is because the elected elites know there will be no questions of accountability.

Big name hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, et al may rail about the ‘Republican weasels’ in DC, but fawn all over them on the air. No one, and I mean absolutely no one, will confront Ted Cruz, or Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal (should he announce) about their ineligibility to be president because none of them are natural born citizens of the United States of America and every one of them do it with full knowledge of the law as it exists. If the question comes up at all, it’s gently finessed or played with using Saul Alinsky-type tactics of ridicule.

We have foolishly created a political class dedicated not to upholding and defending the Constitution but, rather, to doing the bidding of those who fund their elections and lifestyles.

I frequently am asked, “What can we do to stop this?”

There’s a more powerful question that must be addressed by the electorate in order for the nation to be preserved as a Constitutionally-based representative republic and it is this: Do you have the courage to seek and speak the truth with a commitment equal to the determination our ruling class has in order to stop them?

We must demand immediate deportation of anyone who is in the country illegally. This social re-engineering of our demographics is the ultimate, fastest, and least-resistant path to the dumbing down of the electorate and solidifying the control the ruling elites have captured of almost every aspect of our lives. The swarm of illegal aliens creates a new class of ‘takers’ – those who are willing to be virtual wards of the state – waiting for their instructions from the elites as to what they should believe, how they should behave, and for whom they should vote.

We must demand immediate impeachment of any elected official who will not support the enforcement of the law – starting with the double-talking RINOs who capitulate to the wishes of sell-out Republican leadership and all the others who march in near lock step with Obama. Obama should have been impeached long ago. I hear chatter that “…we can’t impeach the first black president.” Obama’s anti-American approach to governance has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with his ideology. Obama hasn’t been impeached for the same reason Clinton wasn’t removed from office – the Senate is too corrupt to cast a vote of honorable conscience. Impeach the most offensive RINOs in the House and then never, ever, ever again vote for an incumbent – regardless of party, promises made, or a misguided sense that “my guy’s a good guy.” The elites will quickly get the message if ‘We the People’ put them on notice that “We are term limits”.

There’s more to be done, but “Gee whiz, Wally, wouldn’t this be a great start?”

Of course, there is a third option: Buy into Obama and his trons’ approach to governance, and blissfully believe that everything’s gonna be fine.

The enormous amount of change that Obama and his Republican co-conspirators have forced upon our country and all of it against the will of the majority of the people is about to reach critical mass as it all transitions from dormant law to ever-encroaching implementation by force.

The end result of Obama’s success is the end of government of, for, and by the people to the new approach to governance that is of, by, and to the benefit of the elected and appointed elite and the hyper-monied evil-doers who financed and orchestrated all of this.

But even this grand conspiracy – that is almost complete – still needs the stamp of approval of ‘We the People’ that only our apathy can provide.

 

Jim Sumpter is a 43-year broadcast industry veteran who has been a disc jockey, program director, general manager, group executive vice president, as well as involvement in radio station ownership and consulting. Until recently, he was a nationally syndicated talk show host on the USA Radio Networks. He’s a Marine Corps veteran who spent 22 months in Viet Nam. Father of four and grandpa to many more.

Website: www.jimsumpter.com Email: jim@jimsumpter.com Facebook: facebook.com/TheJimSumpterShow

AMERICA’S AXIS OF IDIOTS

This is an oldie of J.D.Pendry’s, but it still is spot on, and you’ll love reading it.  It was sent to me by my best friend who has really taken to Pendry’s wonderful posts.

Jimmy Carter, you’re the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You’re the runner-in-chief.

Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia, and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately they grew bolder, until 9/11.

John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You’ve accused our Soldiers of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You’re a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam is another war that you were for, before you were against it.

John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can’t win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof. And said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa John? And the Democrats call you their military expert. Are you sure you didn’t suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You’re a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You’re not a Marine sir. You wouldn’t amount to a pimple on a real Marines butt. You’re a phony and a disgrace. Run away John.

Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanimo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned South East Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? See Dick run.

Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster sized pictures from Abu Grhaib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraq’s torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news this week Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated real torture for you again. If you truly supported our troops, you’d show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of the perpetrators of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You’re a bloated fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al ad nauseam. Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied. That the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers. That we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers – the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers – cause to think that we’ll run away again and all they have to do is hang on a little longer.

American news media, the New York Times particularly. Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can’t strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.

You are America’s axis of idiots. Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don’t ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home, as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies. Yes, I’m questioning your patriotism. Your loyalty ends with self. I’m also questioning why you’re stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing. You don’t deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform. You need to run away from this war – this country. Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.

No Commander in Chief, you don’t get off the hook either. Our country has two enemies. Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within. Your Soldiers are dealing with the outside force. It’s your obligation to support them by confronting the axis of idiots. America must hear it from you that these people are harming our country, abetting the enemy and endangering our safety. Well up a little anger please, and channel it toward the appropriate target. You must prosecute those who leak national security secrets to the media. You must prosecute those in the media who knowingly publish those secrets. Our Soldiers need you to confront the enemy that they cannot.

They need you to do it now.

Copyright © J.D. Pendry 2006 “