Search This Blog

De Omnibus Dubitandum - Lux Veritas

Showing posts with label Arpaio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arpaio. Show all posts

Monday, July 29, 2019

Larry Klayman joins his clients in preserving freedom

By Larry Klayman WND July 28, 2019
 
The phrase that I use these days to explain the sorry and frightening state of the nation's body politic — where leftist radical and establishment interests employ whatever means they feel justify their ends — is "This is the world we live in!"

Whether it's the leftist Muslim and anti-Semitic, anti- Christian and anti-white radicals in Congress such as Ilhan Omar, Rashida Talaib, or even establishment hacks like Representatives Jerold Nadler, Adam Schiff and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, or Senators Chuck Schumer and Mark Warner, the leftist Carter, Clinton and Obama appointees who inhabit the federal bench, or leftist bar associations which seek to retaliate against and destroy lawyers who support President Donald Trump, but ignore ethical abuses by leftist lawyers who aspire to take him down — and of course the leftist social and print media — there is one thing certain: Unless these leftist forces are forcefully opposed head-on, the vision of our Founding Fathers is doomed to cease to exist.

Today, I am writing this column on my laptop from my birthplace in Philadelphia. I'm sitting in a cafe in front of Independence Hall. There, on July 4, 1776, a free nation was born, one that was to be a nation of laws and not men, in the words of our great Founding Father and second American president John Adams....................To Read More.........

Monday, September 4, 2017

Former Prosecutor and Sheriff Arpaio Attorney: Trump Was Perfectly in His Right to Pardon Him

Rachel Alexander  Sep 04, 2017

Many are criticizing President Trump for pardoning former Maricopa County Sheriff Arpaio. Even some on the right have chimed in against the pardon. Arpaio used to be the most popular sheriff in the country, and until just a few years ago, no one had a problem with him arresting illegal immigrants. Now, a federal judge has convicted him of criminal contempt for “racially profiling” illegal immigrants.

I am a former prosecutor with Maricopa County who briefly represented Arpaio in 2010. For the latter, I have been viciously targeted through the legal system ever since. I could have easily turned on Arpaio after all the misery I’ve been through, but I know the truth and won’t take the easy way out. Trump didn’t do anything wrong, nor did Arpaio. This was political. Not criminal. It comes down to this description by Arpaio’s lead attorney, “What the sheriff’s trial is actually about was a non-existent crime for not following a preliminary injunction that was unclear to everyone who read it except the federal judges......To Read More.....

My Take - This is another example of why Larry Klayman wrote the book, WHORES: Why and How I Came to Fight the Establishment, demonstrating the federal judiciary is filled with political hacks.  And another example of why there needs to be a 28th Amendment creating age and term limits for the federal judiciary. 

Sunday, September 3, 2017

Sen. Flake Denounced Trump’s Pardon of Sheriff Arpaio—But Applauds Obama’s Pardon of Cuban Terrorist/Spies

"Regarding the Arpaio pardon, I would have preferred that the President honor the judicial process and let it take its course,”  Jeff Flake on Twitter. 

Humberto Fontova Posted: Sep 02, 2017

Well, this very judicial process also convicted a Cuban terrorist/spy named Gerardo Hernandez for –among other crimes--conspiracy to murder U.S. citizens. The judicial process so revered by Jeff Flake then sentenced the Cuban terrorist to two consecutive life terms. In fact, these convictions were upheld all the way to the Supreme Court.  Yet Sen. Jeff Flake was a gleeful accessory to Obama’s pardon (by any other name) of this communist spy/murderer/terrorist and his release back to Cuba as a conquering hero........To Read More....
 

Monday, March 19, 2012

The Birth Certificate Saga, Part 3

_________


This is a copy of an e-mail sent to Jon Ray, publisher of Dissecting Leftism and Greenie Watch, from Lord Monckton. RK

Lord Monckton on Obama's computer-generated "Birth certificate"

I have watched Sheriff Arpaio's press conference in AZ and have examined some of the evidence directly. It is clear - as Alex Jones rightly said on the day when Obama first put up his faked "long-form birth certificate" on the White House website - that a fraud has been committed, and that, absent a valid official record of Obama's birth or a very good explanation of the anomalies in the published version, he is not qualified to stand for re-election as President.

The main point of the fraudulent "birth certificate" is that it is layered in such a way that all four of the rubber stamps (three dates and one recording officer's certification) are on separate layers, allowing them to be moved about on the document at will. A scanned document could not behave this way, and there is no way this could have happened accidentally. However, Sheriff Arpaio has some reason to fear that the Hawaiian authorities are in Obama's pocket.

There are two other pieces of impressive testimony. First, when the Sheriff's office asked the National Archives to produce the immigration records of flights into the US, and specifically into Hawaii, for five years either side of Obama's alleged birth date (4 August 1961), the one week in 1961 in which the records were unavailable was the week of -- you guessed it - 1-7 August. This is beginning to look like a widespread, high-level fraud.

Secondly, the White House had previously told enquirers from the media that no long-form birth certificate existed: all they had was a certification from Hawaii that there was a birth certificate on file.

The Sheriff plainly has enough evidence to warrant further investigation by the appropriate authorities (presumably the FBI), but he seems to be genuinely terrified of how far the corruption might have spread, and does not seem to know where to go or what to do next. A lawyer whom I have consulted says that no public authority or court will move against a sitting president who has been elected, but it seems to me that the evidence of malfeasance is now strong enough to overcome this objection.

###