Friday, July 30, 2010

Leo Donofrio is still going after the fraud obama with Steve Pidgeon via the old chrysler dealships

Leo Donofrio and Steven Pidgeon were in the forefront of exposing obama as a FRAUD before the 2008 presidential election. Leo Donofrio had an ironclad lawsuit that would have prevailed if the US Supreme Court had heard the case. The Court would not because of standing etc. The US Supreme Court did not want to answer the question: Is barack obama a natural born citizen and qualified to be president. The court ignored the facts of the case that without a doubt proved obama is NOT a natural born citizen and therefore is a FRAUD and IMPOSTER president.

Fraud has also occurred in the case involving the Chrysler dealers that lost their dealerships because the Bankruptcy Court records, including thousands of pages of hearing transcripts, clearly establish that Old Chrysler made the decision to cut the dealers on their own with no insistence or pressure by the Government or Fiat.

"Well, as we looked at filing bankruptcy, and knowing that being over-dealered has been an issue for Chrysler for some time, and it has been a process that was there prior to me in trying to get dealer consolidation, not only in Chrysler but in the industry, it presented an opportunity to accelerate the plan."

The bottom line is the "old" chrysler destroyed dealerships not because of filing bankruptcy but because "old" chrysler used the "crisis" to purge those dealerships as they needed.

Obama closed Chrysler dealerships to payoff his political cronies.

Obama closed Chrysler dealerships to payoff his political cronies.

If you go back and understand what happened to the old chrysler dealers and who benefited the most you see a pattern of corruption under the control of obama.

The government can say they didn't force the closings of the old chrysler dealers but obama did benefit from the closings that were never required in the first place.

Michelle Malkin made a small mistake inluding the name chrysler when she said the gov forced the closings. She was correct when she said the gov forced the closings of many gm dealerships.

Chrysler was taken over by obama. After the purge of dealerships "Project Genesis" was put into action.

Chrysler dealerships lost millions because of the chrysler purge that had nothing to do with the chrysler bankruptcy. It had everything to do with the fact obama used the "crisis" to pay off his fellow thugs in the form of new dealerships etc.

If the truth can be exposed and obama can be held accountable for the purge of the chrysler dealships because of financial gain this would be enough to impeach the imposter obama. (Story Reports)

.........................................................................................

Shoddy Reporting Concerning Closed Chrysler Dealers:What the TARP Inspector General Report Does NOT Say.

Posted in Uncategorized on July 23, 2010 by naturalborncitizen

The TARP Inspector General’s office, SIGTARP, recently released a report entitled, “Factors Effecting The Decision of General Motors and Chrysler To Reduce Their Dealership Networks“. This report set off a firestorm of shoddy reporting, which, if left unchecked, will confuse those familiar with the Chrysler Dealers’ pending litigation on appeal in federal district court. This blog posting has been designed to educate the public as to the truth of the SIGTARP Report.

My assertion of shoddy reporting is levelled specifically at The New York Times, the AP, and unfortunately also at Michelle Malkin who has been a staunch supporter of the dealers throughout. Regardless, her recent discussion of the SIGTARP report is fundamentally flawed and damaging to the case we have brought in our federal appeal to the Southern District of New York (where a Court ordered oral argument is scheduled for July 28, 2010, a fact the media doesn’t seem remotely interested in mentioning).

Malkin specifically urged her readers to read the entire SIGTARP Report, but it appears she failed to read the full report herself since she erroneously reported:

“The independent review of how and why the Obama administration forced Chrysler and General Motors to oversee mass closures of car dealerships across the country reveals grisly incompetence, fatal bureaucratic hubris and Big Labor cronyism.”

Nowhere in the SIGTARP Report does it say that the Government “forced” (as Malkin put it) Chrysler to reduce its dealership network. As to GM, yes the Government did specifically urge dealership reductions, but as to Chrysler the Government did not. The SIGTARP Report is very clear on this point.

The GM Bankruptcy was a vastly different beast than the Chrysler Bankruptcy. And the SIGTARP Report stresses this point in multiple citations throughout the 45 page document. It is repeated multiple times that the Government did not insist upon dealer reductions for Chrysler. For example, on pg. 5, the SIGTARP Report discusses the pre-bankruptcy viability plans offered by both GM and Chrysler, stating:

“In contrast to GM’s plan, the Chrysler restructuring plan did not contain any specific details about planned dealership closures, such as how many dealerships would close, or what factors would be considered in deciding which dealerships to retain. However, the plan referred to Project Genesis, an ongoing Chrysler effort to reduce the number of Chrysler dealerships…”

The “contrast” between GM and Chrysler was entirely skipped over by Malkin and the rest of the media reports. Chrysler was already reducing its dealership network years before the auto industry crisis hit, years before TARP even existed.

On pg. 7 of the SIGTARP Report, it lists five key factors the Government told GM to focus upon when submitting their updated viability plans. Accelerated dealership restructuring was listed as one of the five factors stressed by the Government for GM to accomplish if it expected future financial assistance. However, in contrast to GM, the five factors the Government stressed for Chrysler’s viability – listed on pgs. 7-8 of the SIGTARP Report – do not include dealership reduction at all.

In fact, on pg. 13 of the SIGTARP Report, it is unequivocally stated that in contrast to GM’s situation, the Government’s analysis of Chrysler’s viability did not address dealership reductions:

“GM was given 60 days to submit a ‘more aggressive plan’ overall, including planning for their dealership terminations, and was provided an additional $ 6 billion of TARP funds…Treasury also listed five challenges for Chrysler in a separate viability determination…The Viability Determination for Chrysler did not address dealership terminations.” (Emphasis added.)

The SIGTARP Report acknowledges that the concepts behind dealership restructuring were openly discussed by GM, Chrysler and the Government. It’s no secret that the Obama administration’s Auto Team were in favor of restructuring GM’s dealership networks and so they insisted upon it. As to Chrysler, the SIGTARP Report only mentions that the Obama Auto Team encouraged a continuation of the pre-existing dealership restructuring Chrysler had begun years before.

There’s a huge difference between suggesting/encouraging a course of action and forcing a course of action. As to GM, the Government forced dealership reductions. As to Chrysler, the Government did not force or insist upon dealership reductions. The SIGTARP Report is very clear about this issue. If one reads the entire 45 page report, one understands this important distinction.

But let’s not lay the blame entirely on Malkin, who has certainly proved to be an ally of the Chrysler and GM auto dealers. The New York Times and AP also printed stories pertaining to the closing of the auto dealers which highlighted the SIGTARP Report. Unfortunately, these reports have also created a false impression.

The AP was misleading in the following statement, “The Treasury Department failed to consider the economic fallout when it told General Motors and Chrysler to quickly shutter many dealerships as part of government-led bankruptcies, a federal watchdog found.“ Again, the SIGTARP Report makes it clear that Chrysler was never ordered to “shutter many dealerships”.

Nick Bunkley of the New York Times published the following on July 18th: “President Obama’s auto task force pressed General Motors and Chrysler to close scores of dealerships”. Bunkley also failed to mention the important contrast between GM and Chrysler laid out in the SIGTARP Report.

WHY THE CONTRAST IS SO IMPORTANT TO FORMER CHRYSLER DEALERS

Nothing in the SIGTARP Report nor in the underlying record of the bankruptcy case supports Old Chrysler’s decision to cut the dealership network once bankruptcy was filed. Old Chrysler had no sound business purpose in doing so. The bankruptcy court records are very clear and the SIGTARP Report includes nothing to counter the underlying record of the case. SIGTARP actually confirms our position.

The Bankruptcy Court records, including thousands of pages of hearing transcripts, clearly establish that Old Chrysler made the decision to cut the dealers on their own with no insistence or pressure by the Government or Fiat. Old Chrysler’s CEO and Chairman, Robert Nardelli, testified on May 28, 2009 as follows (at pgs. 389-390):

Q. And approximately fifteen days later, on May 14th, Chrysler filed a motion to reject approximately 800 dealers, is that correct?

A. That’s correct.

Q. So prior to — the deal originally with Fiat would have been Chrysler bringing in 3,200 dealers into the alliance; however, now Chrysler is giving only 2,400 dealers to the Fiat alliance; is that correct?

A. That’s correct.

Q. Who asked for that change?

A. Well, as we looked at filing bankruptcy, and knowing that being over-dealered has been an issue for Chrysler for some time, and it has been a process that was there prior to me in trying to get dealer consolidation, not only in Chrysler but in the industry, it presented an opportunity to accelerate the plan.

Q. Did the UAW ask for this dealer reduction?

A. No.

Q. Did the American government ask for this dealer reduction?

A. No.

CEO/Chairman Nardelli clearly stated that the Government did not ask for Chrysler dealer reductions. Furthermore, every piece of testimony in the case confirmed this to be true. For example, review key Fiat executive Alfredo Altavilla’s May 27, 2009 testimony on this point:

Q. To your knowledge, in any of your discussions with the United States Treasury, has the United States Treasury requested or demanded any reduction in the dealer network?

A. U.S. Treasury has never demanded such a restructuring, at least in presence of Fiat.

Q. Are you aware of any request by any government agency, including the Auto Task Force, that has demanded a reduction in Chrysler’s dealer network?

A. We have never been part of a discussion in which the Treasury has requested the restructuring.

Peter Grady was the Chrysler executive in charge of dealer restructuring, who testified as follows (May 28, 2009 transcript at 517):

Q. At whose request was this done?

A. At whose request what was done?

Q. The rejection? The idea to reject all these dealers?

A. Well, it’s after consultation with our attorneys. And we had an opportunity to restructure the network.

Q. Was this brought up in connection with any meetings — I believe you testified that you attended some meetings with the Treasury Department?

A. I was on some conference calls and one meeting with the U.S. Treasury — the auto task force.

Q. Now, did they insist that this process be carried out?

A. What they insisted was that we restructure our business in total back in December or February when we originally put forth our viability plan.

Q. Well, my question goes to the more specific point of whether or not the task force instructed Chrysler in your presence to reduce the number of dealers –

A. No.

All of the sudden concern with dealer closings in the press has the appearance of providing a counter-point to the issues we have raised in our appeal to the Southern District of New York. These media reports appear to provide a basis by which Old Chrysler would have been under pressure by the Government to cut the dealership network, a position which, as we have demonstrated in our filings (by testimony as quoted above) is not supported by the record.

The rejected Chrysler Dealers’ current appeal relies upon the fact that Old Chrysler was not under forced pressure by the Government as lender, or Fiat as purchaser, to cut the dealership network. Without forced pressure, Old Chrysler’s decision to cut 789 dealers does not stand up to scrutiny and should not have been approved by the Bankruptcy Court. These erroneous media reports are having the effect of revising history and confusing the issues.

The SIGTARP Report does say that decisions of the auto task force led to thousands of job cuts, and that is what we have said all along as well. But this goes back to the use of TARP funds by the Government to enter the private sector as pseudo venture capitalists. That decision was the general decision that ultimately caused the auto industry to be restructured, but the specific decision to cut the dealership network – according to key Chrysler executives Grady and Nardelli, was Chrysler’s decision alone.

And if that were not the case, Mr. Nardelli and Mr. Grady might be subject to perjury charges. But that won’t happen because the record and the SIGTARP Report are clear and consistent; the Government did not order Chrysler dealerships to be shut down. Only the media is confused.

Michelle Malkin finished her piece with a quote from the SIGTARP Report which highlights a response by Ron Bloom, the key bankruptcy expert employed by the Obama Administration’s Auto Team to oversee the auto industry restructuring:

“…[W]hen asked explicitly whether the Auto Team could have left the dealerships out of the restructurings, Mr. Bloom, the current head of the Auto Team, confirmed that the Auto team ‘could have left any one component (of the restructuring plan) alone,’ but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President’s mandate for ‘shared sacrifice.’ ”

The term “shared sacrifice” with regard to Chrysler had nothing to do with dealer reductions. Instead, that term concerned expectations by the Government and Old Chrysler that the Chrysler Dealers would – in order to help Chrysler avoid bankruptcy – take on additional inventory in buying more cars and parts than they normally purchased.

The testimony offered by Chrysler CEO/Chairman Nardelli in the Bankruptcy Court hearings (pgs. 195-196) established that the dealers rose to that challenge of shared sacrifice by taking on extra inventory in the hope of saving Chrysler from bankruptcy. Nardelli testified that right up until the evening before bankruptcy was filed, April 29, 2009, “the dealers certainly responded in kind“.

Meanwhile, unbeknownst to these dealers who were valiantly buying up extra inventory, Old Chrysler was concurrently contemplating kicking them to the curb with no obligation to buy back the extra inventory which the rejected dealers – post rejection – were forbidden from selling to the public.

That’s the dirty little secret of the so-called “shared sacrifice” mentioned by Herr Bloom.

Frankly, I don’t appreciate the timing of these shoddy news pieces concerning the SIGTARP Report. But if any media outlets are truly interested in the cause of justice here, they ought to mention that 82 rejected Chrysler dealers will have their day in court on this very issue before the Honorable Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein – who ordered oral argument sua sponte – on July 28, 2010 at 12:30 PM in the Southern District of New York, 500 Pearl Street, New York, N.Y.

I also encourage the media to read the entire SIGTARP Report and to provide an accurate assessment of the issues discussed in this post.

by Leo Donofrio, Esq. for the law firm of Pidgeon & Donofrio GP

Obama closed Chrysler dealerships to payoff his political cronies.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Obama describes himself as a mongrel Jul 2010 and a mutt Nov 7 2009




On Nov 7, 2008 obama called himself a mutt. On Jul 29, 2010 obama called himself an african american mongrel. So out of his own mouth Americans are to think of obama as a mongrel mutt. I prefer to refer to obama an a fraud and imposter.

mongrel

A derogatory term for a variation that is not genuine; something irregular or inferior or of dubious origin.

Obama admits he is a mongrel. Someone who is not genuine, a FRAUD. Obama's origin has been in question since he was certified by the DNC as a "natural born" US citizen. Hawaiian law required obama to be a "natural born citizen" to get on the presidential ballot.. Obama has defined what he thinks a natural born citizen is. A citizen whose parents were both Americans at the time of birth. Obama has admitted his father was a Kenyan citizen at birth therfore obama is not genuine and IS of a DUBIOUS origin. Obama lied to Hawaiian officals and committed FRAUD!

Obama said, "I can be—you name it". I'll name it. A FRAUD and IMPOSTER! (A nervous belligerent little mongrel dog who has called himself a mutt.)

An extreme insult to muslims is calling someone a "dog' or mongrel. Obama insulted african Americans and the American public in general when he informed us we are mongrels or dogs. Obama knows this is an extreme insult but most Americans don't know he insulted them in an extreme way. Obama considers Americans "unclean" or mongrels.

I consider BO unclean. Even his initials point to the fact he has an aroma that is to be avoided. Obama's aroma is the stench of death. When I look at obama I see a freak who is out of control.

"Americans are a mongrel people, half Jewified, half Negrofied" Adolf Hitler

"We are sort of a mongrel people." Barack Hussein Obama
.......................................................................................
Obama says African Americans are mongrel people

Obama dropped the mongrel comment on the view:

"Part of what I realized was that if the world saw me as African-American, then that wasn’t something that I needed to run away from. That’s something that I could go ahead and embrace. And the interesting thing about the African American experience in this country is that we are sort of a mongrel people. I mean, we’re all kind of mixed up. Now, that’s actually true for white America as well but we just know more about it. And so I’m less interested in how we label ourselves and more interested in how we treat each other. And if we’re treating each other right, then I can be African American, I can be multi-racial, I can be—you name it. What matters is, am I showing people respect. Am I caring for other people. That’s, I think, the message that we want to send."

A quote from the self described mongrel mutt, barack hussein obama, imposter and fraud.
........................................................................................
Rush Limbaugh Transcript

Rush Limbaugh
Thur Jul 29, 2010

RUSH: I was asking myself the other night, -- I'm serious about this -- you can have a political figure or a celebrity involved in one of the most embarrassing, illegal or borderline legal things, take your pick, truly despicable things, and yet they become famous, they become the focus of even more attention, they become wealthy, with genuine reprobate behavior. I was asking myself, "At what point in our culture did it change?" It used to be that there was a stigma, an embarrassment to being a reprobate, or to have broken the law or to have just engaged in utter moral depravity. When did it change that this became a resume enhancement? I can't put my finger on it. All I know is that ever since I started this show in the late eighties, early nineties, I have watched this happen, and I have watched this deviancy in our culture get defined downward. We've just given up. As Moynihan said, "We've defined deviancy down." We can't fix that so it's now normal. Bad behavior, we can't stop it so we're just going to say it's normal now.

(Rush is right. The abnormal behavior of obama talking about himself as a mongrel is now "normal" to some people. Obama's behavior as a self described mongrel mutt is accepted as normal by people who are abnormal themselves. It becomes clear when you think of obama supporters as the product of the deviancy in our culture. The lie becomes the truth. Fiction becomes fact. Obama is a lunatic that represents the growing population in America. Its not just liberal vs conservative, its insane people representing themselves as sane. Its also sane people being represented as insane. Obama the insane imposter represents his insane supporters.) Story Reports

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Miracle Gel Will Help People Who Have Been Denied A Dentist Visit Because Of An Obamacare Panel


(This gel could be big on the "black" market that will be created as the result of obamacare. At least if a person is denied dental care by one of obama's medical panels they could possibly get some "miracle gel" to rub on their teeth.) Story Reports

Gel that can help decayed teeth grow back could end fillings

Gel that can help decayed teeth grow back could end fillings

Pat Hagan

A gel that can help decayed teeth grow back in just weeks may mean an end to fillings.

The gel, which is being developed by scientists in France, works by prompting cells in teeth to start multiplying. They then form healthy new tooth tissue that gradually replaces what has been lost to decay.

Researchers say in lab studies it took just four weeks to restore teeth back to their original healthy state. The gel contains melanocyte-stimulating hormone, or MSH.

We produce this in the pituitary gland, a pea-sized gland just behind the bridge of the nose.

MSH is already known to play an important part in determining skin colour - the more you have, the darker your flesh tone.

But recent studies suggest MSH may also play a crucial role in stimulating bone regeneration.

As bone and teeth are very similar in their structure, a team of scientists at the National Institute for Health and Medical Research in Paris tested if the hormone could stimulate tooth growth.

Their findings, published in the American Chemical Society journal ACS Nano, could signal hurtnot just an end to fillings, but the dreaded dentist drill as well. Tooth decay is a major public health problem in Britain. Around £45m a year is spent treating decayed teeth and by the age of 15, teenagers have had an average of 2.5 teeth filled or removed.

Decay is caused by bacteria, called streptococcus mutans, that live in the mouth and feed on sugar in the diet. Once the bacteria stick to the enamel, they trigger a process called demineralisation - they turn sugar in the diet into a harmful acid that starts to create holes in the teeth.

For decades, the main treatment for cavities has been to 'drill and fill'. However, an estimated one in five Britons suffers from dental phobia, a fear of dentists which means some would rather endure pain and suffering than face the prospect of having their teeth drilled.

The new treatment is painless. And although fillings halt decay, they can come loose and sometimes need refilling.

Experts believe new tooth cells would be stronger and a permanent solution.

The French team mixed MSH with a chemical called poly-L-glutamic acid. This is a substance often used to transport drugs inside the body because it can survive the harsh environments, such as the stomach, that might destroy medicines before they get a chance to work.

The mixture was then turned into a gel and rubbed on to cells, called dental pulp fibroblasts, taken from extracted human teeth. These cells are the kind that help new tooth tissue to grow.

But until now there has been no way of 'switching' them back on once they have been destroyed by dental decay. The researchers found the gel triggered the growth of new cells and also helped with adhesion - the process by which new dental cells 'lock' together.

This is important because it produces strong tooth pulp and enamel which could make the decayed tooth as good as new.

In a separate experiment, the French scientists applied the gel to the teeth of mice with dental cavities. In just one month, the cavities had disappeared. The gel is still undergoing testing but could be available for use within three to five years.

Professor Damien Walmsley, the British Dental Association's scientific adviser, said the gel could be an interesting new development, but stressed it is unlikely to be able to repair teeth that have been extensively damaged by decay.

'There are a lot of exciting developments in this field, of which this is one,' he said. 'It looks promising, but we will have to wait for the results to come back from clinical trials and its use will be restricted to treating small areas of dental decay.'

(The only way to afford this gel would be to get it on the "black" market. Obama will also tax or outlaw this gel if possible.) Story Reports

Monday, July 26, 2010

DECORATED ARMY PHYSICIAN LT. COL. TERRENCE LAKIN APPEALS ARMY’S DISPARAGING FITNESS REPORT



Court Martial Process Proceeding

Washington, D.C., July 16, 2010. Army Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who is being court-martialled for his principled stance in refusing to obey what he feels are illegal orders because they are given by a chain of command headed by a President who may be ineligible under the United States Constitution, has today released his appeal of the Army's version of a “fitness report” which disparages him unjustly. The “Officer Evaluation Report,” or “OER,” as it was originally drafted praised LTC Lakin as one of the top 10% of all Army medical department officers and recommended him both for promotion to full Colonel and for medical clinic command. A few days later it was redrafted and said he was unfit for continued military service. Only one event had intervened.

On March 30, 2010, the American Patriot Foundation posted on YouTube a video (which has now been viewed more than 200,000 times) of LTC Lakin stating: “I am today compelled to make the distasteful choice to invite my own court martial, in pursuit of the truth about the president's eligibility under the Constitution to hold office.” LTC Lakin then refused to deploy to Afghanistan as he had been ordered, until the issue of the President's eligibility has been resolved.

The revised OER failed to note Lakin’s reasons for his position and failed to indicate that all soldiers are trained that they must disobey illegal orders. Lakin has appealed the Army's pejorative and unfair OER that now recommends he in effect be thrown out of the Army, as the Army could do even if the Court Martial proceeding were dropped.

The American Patriot Foundation, a non-profit group incorporated in 2003 to foster appreciation and respect for the U.S. Constitution, has received more than a thousand donations to the legal defense fund it set up for LTC Lakin.

Art. II, sec. 1 of the U. S. Constitution explicitly provides that only “natural born” citizens can serve as president and commander-in-chief. Mr. Obama’s continuing refusal to release his original 1961 birth certificate has brought Lt. Col. Lakin to the point where he feels his orders are unlawful, and thus MUST be disobeyed.

Press Release: Lakin Appeals Army's Fitness Report

.......................................................................................
Lt. Col. Lakin is correct in disobeying orders that are issued by an imposter who calls himself president.

The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 was revised.

(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

Obama was an ILLEGAL ALIEN for 33 years until The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 was revised. On this date obama became a US citizen but not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Obama’s "American citizen parent", Ann Dunham, had to have been a resident of the United States for 10 years, at least five of which were over the age of 14. Dunham did not meet that requirement (of the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June, 1952) until her 19th birthday in late November of 1961, almost four months after Obama was born.

If 17 year old Ann Dunham gave birth to a child on foreign soil whose father was not an American citizen, then the Immigration and Nationality Act at that time denied Barack Obama any right to American citizenship of any kind. Obama's mother Stanley Ann Dunham was born Nov 29, 1942. Obama was born on Aug 4, 1961 as his undocumented "cerfication of live birth" shows. Obama was born 18 years 8 months after his mother was born.

The "certification of live birth" obama has presented to the world is issued to persons who are not born in hospitals and most likely were born outside of the US. This is why his "birth certification" does not list a hospital, doctor or registrar name.

Obama has FAILED to present proof he was born in an Hawaiian hospital. The "certification of live birth" he presented on the web does not indicate this information. Obama has not presented ANY conclusive proof he is a US citizen!

Obama has only prseented a "certification of live birth" on the web that is a flawed document. The "proof" obama has presented to the world has not and cannot be verified by anyone in the United States. DECORATED ARMY PHYSICIAN LT. COL. TERRENCE LAKIN KNOWS THIS and is willing to put his life on the line for Americans.

Obama does not even qualify under the 14th amendment because he has failed to prove he was born or naturalized in the United States. The cut and pasted "certification of live birth" obama displayed to the world is an unvalidated document. It appears to be a forged document designed to deceive Americans into believing obama is a legitimate US citizen.

Anyone who believes obama's BC is legitimate ignores the facts about the cut and pasted web based forgery. Obama is illegitimate in more ways than one.

I believe obamacare and the massive tax increases can be made null and void.

I also believe every rule, regulation and law obama has signed can be made null and void.

This can be accomplished if obama is exposed as a fraud and imposter.

When obama is exposed as an illegitimate president everything he has done will become null and void as law.

I believe the answer to the obama nightmare is exposing him as the fraud and imposter he is.

I agree with Lt Col Lakin and attempt to prove obama is an imposter explaining why he must hide his true identity.

Obamacare Tax Increases For 2011

Jan 2011 The Largest Tax Hikes in History Begin. They will hit families and small businesses in three great waves on January 1, 2011:

Obamacare Tax Increases For 2011 And Beyond

Americans for Tax Reform

First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief

In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. These will all expire on January 1, 2011:

Personal income tax rates will rise. The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:

- The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
- The 25% bracket rises to 28%
- The 28% bracket rises to 31%
- The 33% bracket rises to 36%
- The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut.

The return of the Death Tax. This year, there is no death tax. For those dying on or after January 1 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.

Higher tax rates on savers and investors. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011. The dividends tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.


Second Wave: Obamacare

twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare

There are over twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare. Several will first go into effect on January 1, 2011. They include:

The Tanning Tax. This went into effect on July 1st of this year. It imposes a new, 10% excise tax on getting a tan at a tanning salon. There is no exemption for tanners making less than $250,000 per year.

The “Medicine Cabinet Tax” Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).

The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike. This provision of Obamacare increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Brand Name Drug Tax. Starting next year, there will be a multi-billion dollar tax assessment imposed on name-brand drug manufacturers. This tax, like all excise taxes, will raise the price of medicine, hurting everyone.

Economic Substance Doctrine. The IRS is now empowered to disallow perfectly-legal tax deductions and maneuvers merely because it judges that the deduction or action lacks “economic substance.” This is obviously an arbitrary empowerment of IRS agents.

Employer Reporting of Health Insurance Costs on a W-2. This will start for W-2s in the 2011 tax year. While not a tax increase in itself, it makes it very easy for Congress to tax employer-provided healthcare benefits later.

Third Wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes

When Americans prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2011, they’ll be in for a nasty surprise—the Alternative Minimum Tax won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief provisions will have expired. These major items include:

The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up from 4 million last year. According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center, Congress’ failure to index the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 28.5 million. These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers.

Small business expensing will be slashed and 50% expensing will disappear. Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or “depreciate”) equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way down to $25,000. Larger businesses can expense half of their purchases of equipment. In January of 2011, all of it will have to be “depreciated.”

Taxes will be raised on all types of businesses. There are literally scores of tax hikes on business that will take place. The biggest is the loss of the “research and experimentation tax credit,” but there are many, many others. Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax relief will cost jobs.

Tax Benefits for Education and Teaching Reduced. The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses. Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.

Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer allowed. Under current law, a retired person with an IRA can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly to a charity from their IRA. This contribution also counts toward an annual “required minimum distribution.” This ability will no longer be there.

(Obama has caused the national debt to vastly increase for the purpose of stripping Americans of their freedom through federal taxation. Obama is spreading the wealth around. These new taxes are also a form of reparations through taxation. Obama is using the power of the federal government to grow the federal government and destroy the private economy through regulations and massive tax increases.) Story Reports

Reparations for slavery is a proposal that some type of compensation should be provided to the descendants of enslaved people in the United States, in consideration of the coerced and uncompensated labor their ancestors performed over several centuries.

This compensation has been proposed in a variety of forms, from individual monetary payments to land-based compensation schemes related to independence. The idea remains highly controversial and no broad consensus exists as to how it could be implemented.

(Reparations in the form of individual monetary payments, income tax, has been implemented by barack obama.) Story Reports

Judges on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals suddenly have abandoned plans to assess damages against attorney Mario Apuzzo



The Daily Kos Obama Certification, which is on obama's fight the smears web site, is compared to a BLANK image that is of dramatically higher resolution and quality. I can see why obama does not want to show this as his proof of US citizenship in court. Story Reports

WND
.......................................................................................
If obama was born outside of the US he became an illegal alien at birth and for 33 years until 1994 when he became a citizen because of The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 revised. Obama's only proof presented to the world indicates he was born outside of the US. BO's BC does not identify the Hawaiian Hospital he was born in nor the doctor name etc.

Judges on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals suddenly have abandoned plans to assess damages against attorney Mario Apuzzo.

The decision came from Judge Dolores Sloviter in the Kerchner vs. Obama case handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo. The court had ordered Apuzzo to explain why defense costs shouldn't be assessed against him for the "frivolous" appeal.

Attorney Mario Apuzzo argued that if there was to be punishment, he would have the right to know whether the defendants could have mitigated their injury by publicly releasing Obama's birth documentation.

Judge Dolores Sloviter in the Kerchner vs. Obama newest order denied Apuzzo's request to reconsider the case and stated "based on Mr. Apuzzo's explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause."

The case was filed against Obama, Congress and others just before Obama was sworn into office, arguing that Obama was a British subject and not a U.S. citizen.

"We further contend that Obama has failed to even conclusively prove that he is at least a 'citizen of the United States' under the Fourteenth Amendment as he claims by conclusively proving that he was born in Hawaii," the lawsuit claims.

Apuzzo is saying obama has not qualified under the fourteenth amendment. Apuzzo is correct. Obama has only prseented a "certification of live birth" on the web that is a flawed document. The "proof" obama has prsented to the world has not and cannot be verified by anyone in the United States.

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in part:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."

The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. It was written in a manner so as to prevent state governments from ever denying citizenship to blacks born in the United States. But in 1868, the United States had no formal immigration policy, and the authors therefore saw no need to address immigration explicitly in the amendment.

The United States did not limit immigration in 1868 when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified. Thus there were, by definition, no illegal immigrants and the issue of citizenship for children of those here in violation of the law was nonexistent.

Granting of automatic citizenship to children of illegal alien mothers is a recent and totally inadvertent and unforeseen result of the amendment and the Reconstructionist period in which it was ratified.

My point is obama does not even qualify under the 14th amendment because he has failed to prove he was born or naturalized in the United States. Story Reports

........................................................................................
The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 was revised.

(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.

Obama was an ILLEGAL ALIEN for 33 years until The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 was revised. On this date obama became a US citizen but not a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Obama’s "American citizen parent", Ann Dunham, had to have been a resident of the United States for 10 years, at least five of which were over the age of 14. Dunham did not meet that requirement (of the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June, 1952) until her 19th birthday in late November of 1961, almost four months after Obama was born.

If 17 year old Ann Dunham gave birth to a child on foreign soil whose father was not an American citizen, then the Immigration and Nationality Act at that time denied Barack Obama any right to American citizenship of any kind. Obama's mother Stanley Ann Dunham was born Nov 29, 1942. Obama was born on Aug 4, 1961 as his undocumented "cerfication of live birth" shows. Obama was born 18 years 8 months after his mother was born.

The "certification of live birth" obama has presented to the world is issued to persons who are not born in hospitals and most likely were born outside of the US. This is why his "birth certification" does not list a hospital, doctor or registrar name.

Obama has FAILED to present proof he was born in an Hawaiian hospital. The "certification of live birth" he presnted on the web does not indicate this information. Obama has not presented ANY conclusive proof he is a US citizen!

Story Reports
........................................................................................

Apuzzo case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

The district court rejected the case based on issues of "standing" and never addressed the core issues presented. The appellate court did the same.

Attorney Apuzzo:

"So that I may have a meaningful opportunity to present defenses to defendants' claim of damages and costs, including showing that defendants have failed to mitigate their claimed damages, I am requesting limited discovery of Obama's (certificate of live birth), his 1961 long-form birth certificate, and any documents that may be relevant in showing where Obama was born, along with a hearing on the record at which I will have a fair opportunity to present witnesses, evidence and defenses to the defendants' claim of damages and costs," he wrote.

The court's response was to drop the "Order to Show Cause" almost immediately, referencing only Apuzzo's "research."

(This part is what is interesting. The court would have had to require obama to prove his claim of damages and costs. Since obama CAN'T PROVE he is a citizen the court DROPPED the "Order to Show Cause" almost immediately. I think the court was really afraid of this. They really didn't want to risk Mr. Apuzzo having a legal reason to get BO's BC. This in itself is PROOF obama is a FRAUD!) Story Reports

If obama was born outside of the US he became an illegal alien at birth and for 33 years until 1994 when he became a citizen because of The Immigration and Nationality Corrections Act (Public Law 103-416) on October 25, 1994 revised

Original intent of the 14th Amendment

Blogger admits Hawaii birth certificate forgery, subverting Obama claims

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Deepwater Horizon alarms were switched off

(I've said all along the oil spill in the gulf was done on purpose to futher the agenda of obama. Bp is obama's partner. Its not going to get any better until the thug obama is removed from office.) Story Reports


Deepwater Horizon alarms were switched off 'to help workers sleep'.

guardian.co.uk

Transocean is under scrutiny after it emerged that Deepwater Horizon’s safety systems were off when it exploded.

Vital warning systems on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig were switched off at the time of the explosion in order to spare workers being woken by false alarms, a federal investigation has heard.

The revelation that alarm systems on the rig at the centre of the disaster were disabled – and that key safety mechanisms had also consciously been switched off – came in testimony by a chief technician working for Transocean, the drilling company that owned the rig.

Mike Williams, who was in charge of maintaining the rig's electronic systems, was giving evidence to the federal panel in New Orleans that is investigating the cause of the disaster on 20 April, which killed 11 people.

Williams told the hearing today that no alarms went off on the day of the explosion because they had been "inhibited". Sensors monitoring conditions on the rig and in the Macondo oil well beneath it were still working, but the computer had been instructed not to trigger any alarms in case of adverse readings.

Both visual and sound alarms should have gone off in the case of sensors detecting fire or dangerous levels of combustible or toxic gases.

The evidence of deliberate dilution of the rig's safety mechanisms is likely to have wide ramifications for BP and Transocean, the world's largest offshore drilling company. It switches the spotlight of blame away from BP and towards the subcontractor which took the decisions. Of the 126 crew on board the rig on 20 April, seven worked for BP and 79 for Transocean.

Williams said he discovered that the physical alarm system had been disabled a full year before the disaster. When he asked why, he said he was told that the view from even the most senior Transocean official on the rig had been that "they did not want people woken up at three o'clock in the morning due to false alarms".

Williams' testimony will raise questions about whether lives could have been saved had the alarms been properly set and the disaster mitigated.

He also revealed that a crucial safety device, designed to shut down the drill shack in the case of dangerous gas levels being detected, had been disabled, or bypassed as it is called.

(This story would lead you to believe the disaster was caused by Transocean. Remember BP leased the rig from transocean. Also remember the obama administration waved all the inspections of the rig that would have discovered the safety violations.

BP, Transocean and obama conspired to make sure this disaster could not be averted. The state run media are not talking about the fact BP set this disaster up . BP deliberately affected the disaster. Bp was given a green light by obama.) Story Reports

When he saw that the system had been bypassed, Williams protested to a Transocean supervisor, Mark Hay, who dismissed his concerns. Hay responded: "Damn thing been in bypass for five years. Matter of fact, the entire [Transocean] fleet runs them in bypass."

In a third significant disclosure, Williams also revealed that a computer system used to monitor the drill shack was constantly freezing up, and on one occasion even produced wrong information. The system failed to indicate that a vital valve inside the blowout preventer, the device designed to shut down the well in case of problems, had been damaged.

Pressure is now likely to mount on Transocean to explain the discrepancies.

The New York Times reported earlier this week that a survey of workers carried out by Transocean shortly before the blast suggested key safety practices had not been followed.

Workers said that, while they were aware of unsafe practices on the rig, they were afraid to report mistakes for fear of reprisals.

A BP spokesman said last night: "The investigations continue to demonstrate that a range of things went wrong and that responsibility lies with a whole load of different companies."

(BP and obama are in bed togeather. They produced this disaster. A crisis obama could use to move his radical agenda forward. It was a setup from the beginning. The state run media is covering for obama and BP.) Story Reports


Deepwater Horizon alarms were switched off 'to help workers sleep'