SCOTUS on the unique power of Grand Jurors


My recent post concerning the 5th Amendment right of we the people to use the “presentment” power to investigate criminal activity on our own volition to review Government activity and bring all criminality to justice was very well received.  It seems to have woken alot of people up to the possibility of reviving the Constitution.  The power of  “presentment” is not some fanciful concept but a very real provision stated unequivocally in the 5th Amendment.   There’s no legal reason why we can’t use it.

That being said, the question of how we can use it must be tackled.  But always keep this in mind when the naysayers start harassing you.  25 people sitting on Grand Juries is the way we do all criminal indictments in the US.  If somebody is facing the death penalty or life in prison, they must first be brought before a Grand Jury and if 13 of the 25 agree that the person should stand trial then that’s what happens.


This will be your mantra.  Don’t forget it.  Say it every day.

And as a teaser let me present to you some interesting SCOTUS language.

In United States v. Morton Salt, 338 U.S. 632 (1950), Justice Jackson said this:

The only power that is involved here is the power to get information from those who best can give it and who are most interested in not doing so. Because judicial power is reluctant, if not unable, to summon evidence until it is shown to be relevant to issues in litigation, it does not follow that an administrative agency charged with seeing that the laws are enforced may not have and exercise powers of original inquiry. It has a power of inquisition, if one chooses to call it that, which is not derived from the judicial function. It is more analogous to the Grand Jury, which does not depend on a case or controversy for power to get evidence, but can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even just because it wants assurance that it is not.

Ok, now let’s review the obstacle in our path.  Read my first article again and educate yourself regarding Note 4 to Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure wherein this Note to a Rule has been used as the executioner of our Presentment rights.  Basically, this note – which has no legal power to reverse a Constitutional provision – has been used to declare our 5th Amendment “Presentment” power  as “obsolete”.  Obsolete is a clever use of wording.  Obsolete doesn’t mean “illegal” or “cancelled by law”… obsolete simply means that it hasn’t been used recently, but “not being used” doesn’t mean we can’t use it.  We can.

In UNITED STATES vs. WILLIAMS 504 U.S. 36 (1992) the Court discussed a case wherein the defendant in a criminal action sought to overturn a Grand Jury indictment since the Prosecutor failed to provide exculpatory evidence to the Grand Jury.  Defendant relied on a rule which the 10th Circuit had enacted which required disclosure of exculpatory evidence by the  prosecutor to the Grand Jury.  But SCOTUS did not accept the argument. Justice Scalia wrote the following:

Respondent does not contend that the Fifth Amendment itself obliges the prosecutor to disclose substantial exculpatory evidence in his possession to the grand jury.

Ah, please note the Court’s concern for the construction of the 5th Amendment.  SCOTUS tells us here that the 5th Amendment trumps the 10th Circuit disclosure Rule.  Scalia goes on:

Instead, building on our statement that the federal courts “may, within limits, formulate procedural rules not specifically required by the Constitution or the Congress,” United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499, 505 (1983), he argues that imposition of the Tenth Circuit’s disclosure rule is supported by the courts’ “supervisory power.” We think not. Hasting, and the cases that rely upon the principle it expresses, deal strictly with the courts’ power to control their own procedures. See, e. g., Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657, 667-668 (1957); McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943). That power has been applied not only to improve the truth finding process of the trial, see, e. g., Mesarosh v. United States, 352 U.S. 1, 9-14 (1956), but also to prevent parties from reaping benefit or incurring harm from violations of substantive or procedural rules (imposed by the Constitution or laws) governing matters apart from the trial itself, see, e. g., Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914). Thus, Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250 (1988), makes clear that the supervisory power can be used to dismiss an indictment because of misconduct before the grand jury, at least where that misconduct amounts to a violation of one of those “few, clear rules which were carefully drafted and approved by this Court and by Congress to ensure the integrity of the grand jury’s functions,” United States v. Mechanik, 475 U.S. 66, 74 (1986) (O’Connor, J., concurring in judgment). [n.6]

We did not hold in Bank of Nova Scotia, however, that the courts’ supervisory power could be used, not merely as a means of enforcing or vindicating legally compelled standards of prosecutorial conduct before the grand jury, but as a means of prescribing those standards of prosecutorial conduct in the first instance — just as it may be used as a means of establishing standards of prosecutorial conduct before the courts themselves. It is this latter exercise that respondent demands. Because the grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists, and that the disclosure rule applied here exceeded the Tenth Circuit’s authority.

So what does that mean to the Presentment issue?  It means that no Federal regulation can trump the Constitution.  The Constitution says we the people can bring “Presentments”.  A footnote to a Rule of procedure that attempts to set aside a Constitutional power granted to we the people has no legal effect whatsoever.

Then check out Scalia as he goes on to cement the fact that the Grand Jury is a separate branch of Government:

“[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo American history,” Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It ” `is a constitutional fixture in its own right.’ ” United States v. Chanen, 549 F. 2d 1306, 1312 (CA9) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F. 2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825 (1977). In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 6(a).

The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised. “Unlike [a] [c]ourt, whose jurisdiction is predicated upon a specific case or controversy, the grand jury `can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ ” United States v. R. Enterprises, 498 U. S. ___, ___ (1991) (slip op. 4) (quoting United States v. Morton Salt Co., 338 U.S. 632, 642-643 (1950)). It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. Blair v. United States, 250 U.S. 273, 282 (1919). The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, see Hale, supra, at 59-60, 65, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day to day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. See Calandra, supra, at 343. It swears in its own witnesses, Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 6(c), and deliberates in total secrecy, see United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc., 463 U. S., at 424-425.

True, the grand jury cannot compel the appearance of witnesses and the production of evidence, and must appeal to the court when such compulsion is required. See, e. g., Brown v. United States, 359 U.S. 41, 49 (1959). And the court will refuse to lend its assistance when the compulsion the grand jury seeks would override rights accorded by the Constitution, see, e. g., Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 (1972) (grand jury subpoena effectively qualified by order limiting questioning so as to preserve Speech or Debate Clause immunity), or even testimonial privileges recognized by the common law, see In re Grand Jury Investigation of Hugle, 754 F. 2d 863 (CA9 1985) (same with respect to privilege for confidential marital communications) (opinion of Kennedy, J.). Even in this setting, however, we have insisted that the grand jury remain “free to pursue its investigations unhindered by external influence or supervision so long as it does not trench upon the legitimate rights of any witness called before it.” United States v. Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1, 17-18 (1973). Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said that the Fifth Amendment’s “constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body `acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge’. . . .” Id., at 16 (emphasis added) (quoting Stirone, supra, at 218).

This is what you need to run with the ball, USA.  If your Government is breaking laws, then start using the law that is available to you.




64 Responses to “SCOTUS on the unique power of Grand Jurors”

  1. Leo, from the bottom of my heart, thank you for posting again. I have learned so much here. I sent an e-mail to Orly back when you were quite and said this. It is sad to see Leo disappear, his blog was very informative and factual. No bull, No spin and based on Historical Truths.

    Leo please, please continue posting as you are and have been and please don’t change your style. You may not realize it yet, the impact that you have had. I will go out on a limb here with an old saying. “It WILL be one for the history books”

    Thanks Leo

  2. Leo Rugiens Says:


  3. mamak1717 Says:


    I here you saying the 5th amendment could probably be used to push the eligibility issue. What I don’t understand is how it works? What are procedures to get the ball rolling? What has to be included in a presentment? What does a present actually look like?

    BTW, welcome back!

  4. Leo, remember me?

    I was the guy who shared federalistblog site with you back in November, after I had stumbled upon it that very day. I called you when you were a guest on Plains Radio.
    And you thanked me for that url.

    I need your help now, Leo.

    I am now a once-a-week talk host, focusing primarily on the definition of a naturaal born citizen, which YOU taught me and others.

    I need your help.

    I need you to be a guest on my internet program, “The Liberty Pole”, to dicuss Grand Jury. You have an electrifying presence, and America could use such a boost!

    My program is on Plains Radio, and I am aware of your past with it.

    But this is ME, Leo, asking you for help, for me and for the USA.

    Thank you for considering it. You have my email.

    Ken Dunbar

    [Ed. I’m not doing any radio right now. But thanks.]

  5. Millie O'Riley Says:

    Handbook for Federal Grand Jurors:

    What District would the Federal Grand Jury have to be in?

  6. […] Donofrio, Plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, presents a follow-up to his first article (as linked on this site), “The Federal Grand Jury (5th […]

  7. Leo, as I read I just kept saying, “wow, wow, wow!” The light has come on in a powerful way for me. No more petitioning to an unresponsive and impotent Congress or SCOTUS. We did that to no avail. Remember the little ditty we used in typing school waaaay back: “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country”? That time is here! Leo has turned on the light in this vast darkness. Let’s get going!

    Okay, so we need a plan of action, and attorneys and lay people alike to help out. Once we get a cadre of people to help out on this, we can set up something like a pert chart to get us going and to chart our course. We are pioneers resurrecting our constitutional rights without benefit of precedent, so we will have some obstacles to overcome.

    God bless you, Leo. We’re with you on this. Perhaps you and other lawyers, who are interested in defending our Constitution and taking a hallowed place in history, will join with you in laying out the legal framework for this grand jury action of the people. As a lay person, lover of truth and integrity, I pledge to work my fingers to the bone to help in any way in an investigation to see whether crimes were committed or not in this matter at hand. Nothing less than the foundation of our country is at stake.

    By the way, as a federal employee I swore an oath to defend and support the U.S. Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. . .and guess what? I never “un-swore” that oath. I meant it then, and I still mean it now.

  8. Joe E. Sheldon Says:

    IIRC (If I Recall Correctly), not all states allow GJs and the composition varies by state (presumably including DC). For example, I think that IL has a pool of 23 grand jurors with 16 required as a quorum to do business and (possibly 12 or so for a decision). GJ members are normally selected from the citizenry by the us of the same methods as used for petit (“normal” trial) juries.

    There are several helpful links which can be googled up such as:

    A reader should keep in mind that these (and other) links may be “submissive” to the “obsolete” (so-called) idea of GJ generated presentments.

    Wonderful to see you back and on message Leo. Keep up the keepin’ up!

  9. Ok, but how does one impanel a Federal Grand Jury? Obviously no judge or attorney general wants to touch this or they would have already stepped up. With that in mind is there not also a requirement to consider some cross section of the community? Dr. Orly’s meeting in Dallas tentatively set for April would seem a good place to establish this if at all possible.

  10. Jacqlyn Smith Says:

    Like mamak1717 I too want to know how to proceed with the Grand Jury thing and how we initiate it and get our government out of the way??? Please tell us how to do that!! I am ready to help where I can.

    [Ed. See previous comments. I had such a crush on this particular Charlies Angel.]

  11. Seems to me that if 12 to 15 of those who filed cases convened to discuss a quorum of indictment that this would constitute a Grand Jury..

  12. The letter below is what I just sent off to my Congressman. If anyone cares to give appropriate feedback to their own deaf, dumb, and impotent congressmen, feel free to use any part of my letter as your own.

    Dear Congressman __________,

    Thank you for your two letters dated Jan. 13 and 14 of 2009. Since the Jan. 14 nullified the Jan. 13 letter, I will address the former.

    First, the 14th Amendment makes no distinction between natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens. They are both, of course, citizens of the U.S.; however, the Constitution does make the distinction and clearly specifies that one of the eligibility requirements to be POTUS is to be a “natural-born” citizen, not a naturalized one. Obama is, by his own admission and due to inheriting his father’s British citizenship, either a naturalized citizen, or an illegal alien, if he never was naturalized as a U.S. citizen after his adoption as an Indonesian.

    Also, in regards to Ms. Fukino’s statement on the birth of Obama, as you know she only states that Hawaii has his original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. It doesn’t take even a careful reading to know that she nowhere states that he was born in Hawaii.

    You state that you believe it is fully appropriate that citizens receive official verification of credentials for office holders. You sir, had the authority to do just that on the behalf of Colorado citizens at the electoral count held in the Congress on Jan. 8, 2009. You failed to do that, even after you had been petitioned to do so.

    You did not need to wait for a favorable outcome of the SCOTUS Dec. 8, 2008 hearing of one of the many lawsuits on Obama’s ineligibility to take action as a Congressman. The Congress has authority invested in that body to take action independent from the office of President or the Supreme Court, but you and all the other members of Congress turned a deaf ear to your constituents.

    I am only writing to let you know that I received both your letters, and that I will not be petitioning you or any member of the impotent Congress again. Congress and the Supreme Court have showed the American people that both branches of government are really unconcerned with upholding and defending the U.S. Constitution as every member of both bodies swore to do. And we have a usurper posing as President in the third branch of government, so you’ve all collectively put us in a place where we have to take matters into our own hands.

    What an unforgivable travesty has been brought down on this country. An ineligible man of questionable character and associations has been enthroned as a usurper ruler over this land, while the corrupt, self-serving Congress and Supreme Court fiddle away and play soothing and self-medicating tunes to themselves while a fire has been set under America.

    You will be hearing from us at the polls next time around on this matter. We are through with elected officials wooing us until they get elected and then just ignoring us. That will stop.

    There is a revolution that We The People are joining to take back the power that has been vested to us in the Constitution. It will be done peacefully and in accordance with the law, but it will set this country upside down. The clarion call has gone out and we the people are responding and we will be in this fight for the long haul.

    I’m sorry you could not see past your own self-interest to be a part of this historic movement. You sir, will find yourself to be on the wrong side of history in this matter.



    Next I will write to the SCOTUS.

  13. roy bleckert Says:

    Leo a ? if citizens org. a federal common law GJ , are they going to try to hang this up with the 10th amendment and say its a states right issue to convene a common law GJ

    [Ed. We’re not operating under the common law. As Scalia told the Federalist Society, we follow national law. The common law is dead. Certain things from the common law remained in the Constitution and so they are national law now – NOT common law. Presentment power is codified in the 5th amendment. The language is clear and unambiguous.

    It mentions both “indictments” and “presentments”… It can’t be changed without an amendment.

    I’m starting to get the impression we are headed for a Constitutional show down. I can feel the energy this concept is freeing into people’s minds. Run with it. I suggest everybody stop worrying about how to make it happen and just sit back and dream it up a bit. Let the artist in you run with possible scenarios – stream of thought. Somebody will jackpot this thing. Don’t stress on it. Just free your mind and your ass will follow. ]

  14. Voco Indubium Says:

    I don’t want to sound negative, but what is the actual procedural mechanism?

    Both the low and high courts are hell-bent to protect BHO’s secret. The old administration was not interested and the new one will be even less inclined. Is this at all feasible? Don’t you need the support of the GOP as a minimum (so far not interested as well)?

    [Ed. There was another post just like this that I deleted by accident. I think it was by a woman. I apologize for deleting it. The answer is the same for both questions.

    Forget the GOP. Forget the DNC. These are two faces of the same cult. And we the people are not members of the cult and never will be. I imagine the whole concept would be best put in place if the conceptual we the people Grand Jurors had a prosecutor who was brave enough to sign a Presentment. It’s not necessary under the Constitution but it would be the fastest route to test the theory.]

  15. roy bleckert Says:

    Leo i agree with you the citizens of the US need to grab the legal football and play offense with regards to our constitution and our country we need to think outside the box and use every provision in the constitution the founding fathers gave us to defend our rights as free people

  16. Schvenzlerman Says:

    Federal grand juries have a minimum of 16 and maximum of 23 persons, with 16 effectively being a quorum – Rule 6(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

  17. Schvenzlerman Says:

    As I understand it, our task now is to find people who are presently serving on federal grand juries, ask them to investigate this matter and to do so on a “runaway” jury basis; i.e., kick their U.S. attorneys out of their jury meeting room and do not communicate with them concerning information they (the jury) develops.

    What I do not understand is how such grand jury would compel a U.S. attorney to file charges, say, against, Obama, upon its presentment to said attorney.

    [Ed. Well, it’s not just about the Obama thing. We’re talking about a Federal Criminal Grand Jury investigation. I don’t believe Obama is a natural born citizen because of his dual nationality at birth, but his running for President and taking the office are not criminal acts unless he was fraudulent under oath regarding his place of birth. Assuming he was born in Hawaii, I don’t see that he violated any laws. The issue of nbc was a first impression issue and without precedent, Obama was free to believe he was a nbc if born in Hawaii. I disagree with that assessment but there’s nothing illegal about it.

    Now, if you look at the BC posted at Obama’s web site and if you believe a fraud was perpetrated thereto then a GJ would certainly be able to investigate that issue.

    But why focus just on that. there are many possible crimes perpetrated by Government over the last 8 years. Think bigger than just this election. Think about a citizen revolution that fires no guns or bullets at all. An intellectual revolution of laws.

    Now, go out and find the prosecutors who believe in the Constitution. They exist. Find them. Talk to them about “presentments”. Once “we the people” get a taste of victory in a GJ setting… it could change the world.]

  18. Tom Andersen Says:

    Great info Leo! You DESERVE A MEDAL!!

    I have been trying to teach people about the Grand jury and the Petit jury for years and try to inform people they shouldn’t be trying to get out of jury duty, but instead, VOLUNTEERING for it. Most people do not understand their rights and duties as a juror and believe exactly what the judge tells them. Well, when a citizen becomes a juror, the judge then becomes a referee and the JURORS become the judge and judge the LAW AND THE FACTS (U.S. Vs. Dougherty) and if they find the law unsatisfactory or just outright illegal, they can vote NOT GUILTY and eventually the law will no longer be enforced because juries will not convict. This is called Jury Nullification! This is why prohibition was abolished, the gov’t didn’t want the citizenry learnig their powers as jurors!

    Please KEEP UP the articles as we need as much ammunition as possible to defend our rights!

    Good luck on the poker as I am a professional card counter and played BJ for a living for many years!

    Thanks for being a PATRIOT!!

  19. The South Says:


    You have been an inspiration to thousands of Americans in this battle to take back our county.Before this election year, i was never very much into politics (as i’m sure many of us in the fight were not), but this has been a real eye opener to say the least.

    I never really paid that much attention to the U.S.Constitution, until this election year (as i’m sure many others in this fight have not).I remember studying it while in school, but never really comprehended it’s true intent.

    I’ve got to say, that the United States Constitution is the most amazing piece of literature ever written by man.The overwhelming wisdom, and foresight they had when writing those documents in 1776 in unfathomable.
    The checks and balances they included in that document to make damn sure that our Government would never get so big that it overthrew the people of this nation, is beyond me.They were truly ‘wise-men’!

    I hope that you will stay in this fight with us, and get in contact with Dr.Edwin Vieira (if you haven’t already) and share your ideas with him.He has talked a lot lately about reviving the states ‘militia’, and i’m sure there are thousands of us from each state that would join.

    This is NOT going to be easy, as the BIG government is going to laugh at us as soon as we start this journey, but i believe the hearts and souls of Freedom loving Americans will once again ‘rise to the occasion’.

    Thanks for all you have done to help educate us bro, it’s appreciated more than you will ever know.Your wisdom and ability to comprehend those words in that document, and relay them in a very understandable way, has helped the masses to understand them as well.

    The South

    [Ed. I don’t believe in militias. I dont want nothing to do with violence.
    The war can be won on an intellectual level. I believe that. If I’m wrong, I’m happy to be slaughtered trying to prove my point. I will never condone any violence in any way shape or form. It’s not what Im about. I believe in miracles. I believe in Jesus, the lamb of God.]

  20. I don’t mean to throw a wet towel on all of this, but the lack of caring and downright closedmindedness that most people express when confronted with the argument that BO is not qualified is astounding. Most figure that he is POTUS so he must be qualified, and anyone saying otherwise is Nuts. They go to unreal extreems in validating his legality in the face of every damning fact. What makes you think that a majority of a group of 16 or 23 citizens in a given federal distict are not already absorbed with seeing the Emporer’s New Clothes, and no matter what facts are put in front of them will defend the Usurper?

  21. roy bleckert Says:

    Leo i agree there are bigger fish to fry than the last election but are you suggesting we work with the existing grand juries and prosecutors or start the process of returning to a common law grand jury or both and believe me i am not stressing personally about this but my opinion we need to change the thinking in the court of public opinion to get or country back on the right track and i think you can help that.

    [Ed. Both scenarios are possible. But we need to stop calling it a “common law” grand jury. It’s a “Constitutional Grand Jury”. The common law concept was carried into the Constitution and is codified there. This makes is Constitutional not common law. It has its origins in the common law but the framers made it national law. Calling it common law gives the uninformed an out. The Presentment power is ours right now if we want to take it.]

  22. roy bleckert Says:

    Leo i also need to ask the ? how is common law dead

    [Ed. It’s dead in the federal courts in that it’s been replaced with National Law, ie The Constitution.]

  23. Looking for info about Federal Grand Juries, I ran across this article written
    by a criminal attorney who has done alot of Federal Grand Jury work!!

    His name is Solomon L. Wisenberg. Perhaps he would be a good source to

  24. I forgot to add to my post above that at the end of the article, the
    following is added…

    “For specific technical or legal advice on the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.”



  26. I attempted to post a commentary on your recent posts here regarding the 5th amendment on the forum. I was banned. The reason given was “self-promotion of my blog” and “being less than truthful with a moderator.” I contacted the webmaster and got zero response.

    The last place I thought I would find socialist-style censorship was on the hannity site.

    I am starting to believe that common sense has been banned in this country.

    [ed. Hannity is part of the cult of power. You’ve got to see the matrix before your eyes. Hannity? Give me a break. Shill.]

  27. bob strauss Says:

    The entire effort to promote and elect Obama looks like one giant fraud. It is not a mistake, by Obama, that he mistakenly believes he was NBC. The DNC, Nancy Pelosi, Clair McCaskil, and others are all aware of his lack of NBC. This giant fraud is a CRIME!, clear, and simple. The whole scenario is based on getting their handpicked “man” into position.” What! he’s not an NBC and doesn’t qualify to be President? No problem we’ll pass Senate resolution 511, and in our efforts to make Obama eligible we’ll screw that up too, now he appears to be even less eligible, damn, what do we now to cover up this fraud?” And so it goes, the fraud continues. Obama’s lack of NBC credentials, and the cover up. 32 lawsuits, in courts all over the country, millions of people on the internet all know the NBC problem, law professors urging action to obey the law, citing the consequences an usurper will cause. Everything done is invalid because it is not done in accordance with the Constitution. Crime? Yes! Break out the grand jury and let’s have an investigation. How about a military trial? After all he is The Usurper In Chief.

  28. I believe that the signers of the Declaration of Independence, which was in fact a declaration of war, believed also in Jesus, the lamb of God. Jesus is not JUST the lamb of God, but Jehovah God himself. He’s the same one that wrote the moral law, which is the basis for all righteous law. The moral law is a transcript of the mind of God. Jesus is the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords. He is the lawgiver of all lawgivers. He is the government of all governments. The patriots that plunged us into the blood bath of the Revolution knew this same God, Jesus. Is this the same Jesus you believe in, Mr. Donofrio?

    [Ed. Not going to turn this into a religious debate… but just for the record, I believe there is God and there is Jesus and they aren’t the same being… Jesus prayed to God many times. He wasn’t praying to himself. That’s my opinion. No need to respond to it because I won’t print anymore about it. Just want people to know where I stand. Peace and love.]

  29. roy bleckert Says:

    Leo thanks for clarifying your GJ interpretation under the 5th amendment please post any ideas on how to put these plans into action

  30. Leo:

    I am married to an attorney and want to help start your Grand Jury idea.
    However, I have no idea where to begin.

    He was a prosecutor for years so I will prod him. Wives are good at that!
    He will probably say I have lost my mind, I don’t know the law and it’s impossible to call a Grand Jury. My work is cut out for me.

    USE IT OR LOSE IT. I am going to try. Leo.

    Thank you. Jesus is my Lord and Savior and I am Catholic. How’s that for a statement. I learned that from the evangelicals! We can all learn from one another if we have the right intention.


  31. Leo:
    Militias or Committees of Safety, as many call them today, in their well-regulated state form are just as constitutional, if not more so, as grand juries. Coming from a Reagan type philosophy, “Peace through Strength”, there is no need to assume that a well-regulated state militia is synonymous with violence. However, if the Obamanation administration forms a civilian security force and elects to crack down on dissenters, who will stand up to the abuse if we the citizens are entirely passive? You can’t say it won’t happen because history shows it has happened many times.

    [Ed. I see your point. I respect it. Militias are in the Constitution. I just have to keep saying it over and again though that I do not advocate violence in any way shape or form.]

  32. Leo,

    Interesting read regarding Grand Jury presentments.

    However, I would like to back up just a bit. In accordance with NJ R. 4:69-1, you stated that the original complaint filings did bear the designation “In Lieu of Prerogative Writs”. Last we left off, The Judge in the Superior Court decided to treat your action not as a complaint in Lieu of Prerogative Writs but a Notice of Leave to Appeal, with obvious nonjusticiable motives that can be seen in the end political result. You countered with a judicial misconduct complaint with the NJ Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.

    Could you expound on the results of this portion of the case a bit? What has the advisory committee done to review the allegations against improper judicial conduct? What actions, if any, were taken? I believe this too is an important avenue to combat corruption in the judicial system, but I’m at a loss as to what happened when you persued that jurisdiction of checks and balances.

    If you have time, could you also comment on any actions taken against Mr. Bickell in the Supreme Court and follow up on what had happened as a result of those complaints, too?

    The story is a fascinating one but I still seem to be at a loss as to the gaps in this particular part of the justice system. I’m wondering whether or not we are missing some vital avenues to persue in this regard. I would much appreciate if you could fill in the blanks I am looking for.


    Mike (NJ)

    [Ed. That matter has been officially deemed “Confidential”. Sorry. I can’t talk about it.]

  33. Well Leo, here is my take on this. If we can convey a fed grand jury and start the ball rolling thier is alot of mess to clean up before we the people will be able to let the f g j go home the laundry list is very long. just a few thoughts.

    laundry list.

    Correct every ammendment that has been shoved down our throat that has been miss worded or has never been ratified 16th he he he.

    Bust every congressmsn ass for not upholding the constitution (per thier oath. (some treason)

    When we the people get done correcting all the corrpution and the constitutional murder . there won,t be anyone left that is thier now .

    while we are at it we can let the sky be the limit as to how we can protect oursefls (we the people) from these monsters forever.

    Oh and the sweeeeetest of all will be to get to the men behind the curtian that controlls all of the puppets on capital hill !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Once this machine starts we are in for some fire works .

    When this thing is done our new goverment all three branches will be new as maybe one sc justice can be a leader for he has watched out for us in his own way.

    Leo thanks , help take the bull by the horns and bring it down.

  34. And while we are at it, we will look at the 2 boarder officers case again this will be so much fun to watch.

  35. JIM most of this is about the men behind the curtian..

  36. Leo, Jim’s (comment 1/27/09 8:07 AM) experience on the forum was the same as mine. I started a thread about the NBC and mentioned the Petition site and I was immediately “TURNED IN” by someone, then I got banned and was told I was an “activist” and would NEVER be able to post again. This was like throwing a wet blanket on me
    and I was shocked to death. My husband and I Always watchED Hannity
    (Past Tense) and I’m writing to ask if you could please elaborate on what
    you posted to JIm (1/27/09) That Hannity is part of the “Cult of Power”.
    I am so Very Interested in what you mean and would appreciate this very much. My husband is becoming a backslider to the Hannity TV program. Old habits die hard and I really want to understand what you refer to about Hannity. Thank You

    [Ed. You’ve experienced it firsthand. You know it without my saying anymore about it.]

  37. Leo, your reply incited my curosity beyond what I could bear. I was so caught up on WHY…Why S Hannity would be a hypocrite…For what reason? I Apprecaited the Guy FOR MANY YEARS. THEN, the Light Bulb went on….Thank You SO MUCH for guiding me to use my Brain. It’s Not ONLY who owns the Network, BUT ALSO, I Must Say, when the Election ended, I found it VERY ODD that S Hannity was still on the SAME REPUBLICAN RAMPAGE ROAD he’d been on without the
    slightest rest. Especially Odd Since There is NO REPUBLICAN PARTY – it’s Been Completely Dismantled, without the slightest Hint of a Real Leader, YET Hannity Marches on…and Now I GET IT. So Thank You for setting me straight so I don’t waste any more time with my hopes on any of these characters.

    I also want to Thank You for continuing your website, it’s one of the Few Places in these dark days, that we can find comfort , shelter and Truth and a really great Moderator . Thank You

    [Ed. People are waking up to the cult all over the world. And don’t by the SNUGGIE… it’s their official uniform.]

  38. I am really impressed with the fervor and knowledge of the commenters on this site! It gives me hope to know there are other like-minded people who are truly aghast at the coup that has taken place. The Constitution has been eroded over the years, but this situation of a bogus potus not only being elected, but being protected on all sides (congress, scotus, msm, democrats everywhere, republicans with no backbone or a clue, et al) causes me to reflect when I wake up in the morning, that this is a country that I am quickly finding to be alien to what I have experienced heretofore in my life. Sometimes it feels like I am living in a foreign country.

    As a Christian who seeks to follow Jesus Christ, I know that I am just a sojourner here anyway, but never felt that as acutely as I have for several months now. It’s not the Lamb that rises up in me over this huge travesty that has co-opted the whole country, it is the Lion of Judah. (You almost have to refrain from cheering when you read about Jesus cracking the whip, overthrowing the money changers’ tables of corruption and driving from the temple! Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus!)

    I feel such a sense of anger and betrayal, and that is why I commit whatever I can give of myself to this presentment grand jury issue. I pray that God raises up the legal expertise to put this together. I will hlep with whatever grunt work is required. It looks like we truly have no other place to go.

    I was reading a comment on Orly’s site this morning from a retired military member who has friends in the FBI, CIA and intelligence community. From his report, those friends have been told that if they bring up Obama, they will be fired. Boy, I wish one of them would, so there could be a hearing or trial to bring the matter to light. And I’ve been thinking of that. What could someone do (not speaking of violence)to instigate court against that person and thus cause his/her defense attorney to order whatever documents needed for discovery purposes?

  39. It is true that the forums have restricted any talk of Leo Donofrio’s case into one consolidated “birth certificate” thread, even though Donofrio’s case really has nothing to do with Berg. I think they do it on purpose to discredit the merits of Donofrio v. Wells.

    It is common knowledge at this point that the Hannity representatives have publically stated they want nothing to do with any of these actions.

    It may quite possibly have to do with the fact that Sean Hannity was a big supporter of John McCain and still is. Even Rush makes this conclusion in a video that is right on the front page. It’s also no secret that Bobby Jindal was being considered for the 2012 race, who is also not a natural born citizen. To bring this point up on clearly doesn’t bring either of those campaigns much credibility, so they choose to use the “one-thread or be banned” tactic. In this way, they discourage people from bringing up any new issues to the Constitutional forefront.

    Is this really surprising to anyone? I’m watching Plains Radio do the same thing when they question Ed Hale now. Some of those people truly need to grow up and cease using Hannity-style tactics against people who are searching for answers. If I hear one more person thrown to the wolves and labelled an “OBOT” for disagreeing or questioning Ed, I’m seriously going to walk away from anyone who engages in it. I will tune you out completely, just as I have Plains Radio. Even Orly Taitz has gone off the deep end lately and needs to walk away from this for awhile as she too is promoting drama instead of professionalism. It doesn’t bode well for those looking to be taken seriously.

    For the record, Plains Radio does not have millions of listeners as stated by Ed Hale. Anyone with a modicum of research skills could see that his peak was 400 listeners and was probably due to having Mr. Donofrio on his show that the public wanted to tune into. See:

    Leo, if you ever do return to radio again, I hope you consider returning to the Scott Hennen Show. That was an excellent interview you gave with a very professional host. I listen to Scott now on a regular basis because of that initial interview you had with him. No drama. Good summaries. Excellent feedback in a short period of time.

  40. So, how exactly is a federal grand jury created? Who can form one? Can we the people form one? and if so, what is the process? Or must we influence a federal prosecutor or something to that effect in order to get one formed?

  41. Could the following be a way to get at the truth and expose it, whatever it may turn out to be?

    1. Every state has its own statute (law) regarding the placement of political candidates’ names on the ballot.

    2. Nancy Pelosi, on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) signed a “Certification of Nomination” that was sent to all 50 states in observance of those state laws. That document certified that Obama and Biden met the constitutional qualifications to hold the offices to which they hoped to be elected.

    3. Nancy Pelosi made a false statement on each of those 50 documents and had her signature notarized. (Another person from the DNC also signed the document.)

    4. Nancy Pelosi should be charged by each of the 50 states’ attorneys general with violation of that state’s statute regarding placement of the names of political candidates for elective office on the ballot.

    5. Perhaps it is only a civil infraction; it doesn’t matter if it’s not technically a “crime,” because she can still be held to task for the false statement and thus the misrepresentation to each of the 50 states.

    6. How do we know she lied about having verified Obama’s constitutional qualifications? We know she lied because if she had been able to verify his qualifications, Obama would not be doing what he is doing (hiding the truth).

    God bless America and those who love her.

  42. Has anyone seen this info from WND:

    But of the Supreme Court’s actions now may become the subject of further questions, because Obama visited with the justices in their private chambers in a meeting closed to the public just before his inauguration. Taitz said a defendant in a legal action meeting with the judges who are deciding the case without have a representative from the other side is unprecedented – and unacceptable.

    “I will file a motion to the chief justice to compel the records of this private meeting, that was held only a few days before my case was supposed to be heard,” Taitz said in a posting on her website.

    “I would like to get information about what was discussed,” she told WND in an interview. “It’s unheard of for the Supreme Court to meet with [one] party when a case is pending.”

    Multiple reports confirmed Obama met in private with eight of the nine justices. Justice Samuel Alito was absent.

    The meeting, wrote Taitz, was “only a few days before my case was supposed to be heard, where the plaintiffs state that Mr. Soetoro-Obama is illegitimate for [the] presidency due to the fact that his father was a foreign subject and there is no evidence that Mr. Obama was really born in Hawaii, since the state of Hawaii statute 338 allows foreign born children of Hawaiian residents to obtain Hawaiian certification of live birth and such certification can be obtained based on an affidavit of one relative only.”

  43. Tom Andersen Says:


    The first person charged with some type of crime against obama should be provided with an attorney who knows and agrees with the BC issue and use it for an in to a motion for discovery. Let’s say someone gets caught trying to take Obama out, if he is charged with ANYTHING related to an offense against the PRESIDENT, then that charge can be challenged for Obama to prove he is the president. I don’t belive or condone violence, but there’s a lot of nut jobs out there and if someone took out a great guy like Kennedy, who knows what’s going through the minds of weirdo’s regarding our ILLEGAL ALIEN POTUS!

    Keep on keeping on here Leo! DOn’t abandon the ship captian, because the crew is staying no matter what!

  44. Nick (1/28/09 – 2:48 PM), I was going to point out the same thing you
    did for Leo’s entertainment

    It’s the ULTIMATE ARROGANT Move of ALL of the Usurper

    On the Right Side of Life Website, there’s a blog that Orly Tatz is “demanding” the records of the private meeting that Obama and Biden had with 8 of the 9 justices, JUST BEFORE HIS INNAUGUARATION, and a few days before Orly’s case was scheduled to be heard.

    Seriously, we are done. a Deep recesssion…the Massive Layoffs happening , the Gov blowing every cent to non-stimulating agendas, Constituents being Silenced, Our Voices being ignored, SCOTUS, Congress & Senate looking after their own seats, Corruption everywhere, what more do we need to spell out what’s happening swiftly before us. It’s another issue, but if Franken gets seated, there’s not a prayer left. They are salivating for Socialism and it’s right at our door. Every Freedom at stake and they change (there’s that word) the rules of the game in mid-stream without a real working plan, except for the covert agenda unfolding.

    Thanks for Listening. ( I’m soon to go off the deep end) The whole thing is one sad, obvious mess we’re in and I’m sure there’s more fun to come.

  45. I agree Mike (12:38PM), Plains radio claimed success for themselves with
    Leo’s sweat and gave him little credit. Their eagerness to attend the SCOTUS Vigil was purely a selfish move, in my opinion. They really didn’t believe the case(s) would win- they were laughing it up with L Lamphere. They saw a Hot topic coattail to fly on. So they’ve had their 15 Minutes when they wanted a “big Break” Lifetime. They didn’t fool anybody.
    I’ll never tune in to Plains radio.

  46. I am linking your blog post here to my State Senator and letting him know this is where WE THE PEOPLE” are headed!


  47. Hello Leo!

    Thank you for all your wisdom, insight and legal expertise. As for myself, I have zero knowledge regarding the legal system. I am just your typical lay person who wants to help. I have a deep passion to help KEEP THE CONSTITUTION ALive and kicking. A couple weeks before Thanksgiving my grandmother – GiGi (97yrs old) now with hospice, decided to pass down the responsibility of our family heritage/tree. It was then that I realized my how important & scared my family heritage was. I did realize our family was tied into the Constitution. My GGGGGG father – Col Joseph Snyder/Snider (1827-?) was a hero of the Union Army during the Civil War and later became a lawmaker in West Virginia. In 1860 he switched from being a Democrat to a repulican that opposed the Secession of slavery. He was a member of the 1st Wheeling Convention and later served in Legislature of the Restored Govenment. In 1871 Col Snider was elected a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1871, legislature of 1872-73 and of 1875.

    Ok! Sorry so long winded on family history. But, I never knew this tid bit of information. And, my knowledge of The Constitution and The Bill of Rights like many Americans is very minute. I live in Huntsville, AL and I want to help with the grunt work/behind the scenes stuff. I work part-time for a local Bankruptcy Attorney. So, I have some free time available. I just don’t know who to offer up my volunteer work too??? Any Attorney that you may know of in the Northern Alabama area – just point me in that direction or visa versa.

    And, last but not least. I too have 2 letters sent back to me from both my AL Senators that I had asked them to please not cast their electoral votes to POTUS due to the fact that he did not meet the (3) basic Constitutional requirements of eligibility which are (a) must be a natural born citizen, (b) over the age of 35 and (c) must have lived 14 or more years in the US. Their responses were that they were aware of all the legal cases involving this matter and that they knew what the Constitutional requirements were. The kicker that got me was that they stated “Senate Ethic rules” would not allow them to become “personally involved” in this matter. What ever that is supposed to mean. But, I thought that was there job……….
    I have emailed scanned copies of those letters to Attry Berg, Attry Orly, Team Sarah, and Attry Puzo. What now can I do to help? Can I as a local citizen email or call my AL SOS and ask for a copy of the signed “Certification of Nomination” from Pelosi that was sent to SOS in AL? Is that something to get started? I do not know how to start a FGJ.

    Another off the wall Question? What is your feeling or opinion about displaying the American Flag with the union upside down as a sign of “DISTRESS?” Just curious! We as a Nation are under “Distress” because we do not have a legitimate Potus and/or a Comander In Chief for the armed forces.

    Thank you for your knowledge, insight, opinions and for your time. It is more than greatly appreciated. I know I am not as well versed as your other Lawyer counterparts comments above. But, anyway – welcome back. May God continue to bless you and continue to open the eyes of those that cannot see, open the ears to those that cannot hear, open the hearts of those that have grown cold, and give a voice to those who have lost theirs. Just Remember – GOD IS IN CONTROL, NOT MAN. We are only a vessel for him to use as he sees fit.

    [Ed. Two things didn’t happen that I thought would happen:

    1. I thought Obama would produce a long form BC and shut everybody up and then that would have had a negative PR effect on my case. Obama never produced the long form BC and this has really made me wonder about his place of birth.

    2. I thought SCOTUS would issue an opinion on the merits, at least by one brave soul dissenting… I was thinking Clarence Thomas would have do that. But that didn’t happen either.

    All I can say now is that we have a POTUS nobody really knows anything about. The cult sees this a a great victory over the Constitution. At the same time, they NEVER thought the dual citizen issue would come forward at the last minutes as it did. That info was buried under the COLB at Fight The Smears and all along they knew it was the genuine issue which could cause them problems. So, in their arrogance they put it right under your noses, literally right under your noses. And it ended up hurting them. Their arrogance caused them trouble this time. Now their secret is out and they will never be able to pull of the grand illusion. Oh sure, they’ve got their man in the POTUS, but that’s as far as it goes. And what’s worse for them is that after this whole nbc thing got so big, now they actually have to do some good to prove all the nbc crowd wrong. It’s like a catch 22 for them. So that’s good for us and for the world.

    Obama also doesn’t have the mandate he was supposed to have. You have to remember that I was saying all along he would produce a long form BC, but if he had done that the focus then would have completely shifted to the dual citizen issue and in bringing a long for forward it would have made a prophet out of me. So, perhaps they had to change their plan on that level as well.

    The point is that if you are using the law and if you understand the law then there are ways to fight the cult even if they have the law all locked up right to the top of the hill.

    The issue was aired out on all major networks, MSNBC, CNN, FOX, ABC, AP… holy crap. The law suit was everywhere. Why? Because SCOTUS conferences happen in private with only the 9 present and NOBODY could know what all 9 had to say. And the POTUS job was actually in their hands on December 5th. After my case was denied, the referral of the other cases just seemed to water down the importance of my case having got that far. But that first strike caused them so much trouble. It messed up their whole ruse.

    While they tried to control it, it got legs. Thanks to the readers and listeners following the story on the web and thanks to Clarence Thomas for referring it to the full court. I do believe that caught them all be surprise. I still am very upset there was no written dissent, but perhaps I’m missing something. I just can’t believe Clarence Thomas is part of the cult.

    Anyway, the point I’m getting at is that people can make a difference.
    But asking me how to do it may be a frustrating exercise. I’ll put legal concepts up at this blog, ie nbc and Grand Jury (and more to come), but I can’t tell everyone exactly what to do. It’s frustrating not being able to answer these questions and give clear direction and mobilize the energy. That’s never been my strong suit. I am a researcher, a puzzle solver… mystery buff, etc. But I’ve never been the managerial type. I’ll have to leave that to others.]

  48. JudyP, I think the litigation demanding records of the SCOTUS meeting with Obama and Biden is going nowhere. There are no records. The meeting was private.

    I share Leo’s concerns that too many cooks spoil the broth.

    “The Cult” is an interesting adage Leo uses in that it’s common sense that these events did not happen due to one, sole person named Barack Obama. No, he had help. But you need evidence. Evidence that the MSM could have provided with their resources if they weren’t too busy having chills up their legs. Perhaps some ardent journalist will read this blog and see the potential of seeking out much of the unfound evidence.

    There have been some who ventured in that direction, but it’s hardly tapped and complete. One group followed up the corruption involved with this article, which was based on many discussions held here. – Devvy Kidd added her contribution to it, citing this work at her website –

    In the former article, you’ll notice a reference to James Madison and pointing to the warnings about using the legislative branch for nonjusticiable, political means. It’s interesting because it dawned on me that the very principle of this type of governing power was BORN back then with James Madison. You could gloss over it if you don’t read the former article carefully, but the hint is there – to find the law that succeeded from the premise of James Madison and use it together with the evidence found that the MSM did not cover, which shows this was a planned, politically inspired event. That is the “cult” I believe Leo is referring to.

    The Grand Jury presentment idea falls hand in hand with having that evidence, which is crucial to decisions Grand Juries make. To be clear, you just can’t hold a Grand Jury with no evidence. Likewise, you need case law that backs up James Madison and holds the legislative branch accountable when they abuse their power for political gain.

    So instead of focusing on repeating the work of Donofrio v. Wells or Berg v. Obama in redundant litigations, perhaps the key is in focusing on more than just Obama. Focus on the evidence to prove that there was significant corruption among bipartisan players in the Congress, priming these events to occur. And then leave it to the lawyers to focus on the law that gives the people the right to object to the way the legislative branch orchestrated those events.

    I don’t mean go off on Annenberg and Bush, Sr.’s NWO. I mean seek out and find what the Congress was doing before November 5th occurred. Therein lies your evidence for a Grand Jury. Of course, this is just my take on things. Perhaps Leo has his own.

  49. LEO,
    Thanks so much! Sorry to put you right on the spot. Didn’t mean to do that. Thank GOD that he made everyone Unique/Different for a reason. It is one’s prayer that we find our Spirtiual Gifts and use them for HIS purpose ie. Like now in this current situation. By all means we need people like you with the vision, we need people to delegate the vision and we need people like myself to go out and do the ground work. I hope and pray GOD points us all in one direction to form the PERFECT CIRCLE. I know He will & my Faith and past experiences lead me to believe HE Will! Just keep doing what you are doing. God will raise up the rest of us and point us in the right direction. Bless You & Bless America.

  50. Interesting Note…there is an article in the MSM today, saying Obama
    may be setting Precedent by not wearing a suit jacket to meetings.

    It says, the real reason why is because he’s turned up the Thermostat
    in the room.

    He needs to stay warm, because, it says, “after all”, he was born in Hawaii.

    What a CROCK OF …

    A Slap in the Face to every NBC Lawsuit that MSM Failed to Cover
    regarding his real birthplace. Level I Propaganda rearing it’s ugly head as well.


  52. “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…”

    There is nothing here that says a Grand Jury cannot be formed for other purposes. It only says that in certain cases, a Grand Jury MUST be used. US citizens should file an application for the formation of a federal grand jury for the purposes of investigating complaints into the legality of Obama as POTUS, or any other complaint into the behaviour of your elected officials. These kinds of investigations is why Grand Juries exist.

    Criminal Grand Juries are usually formed from an indictment by the prosecutor which the Grand Jury will accept or deny. But civil grand juries are used all the time and are usually formed at specific times (and can request the formation of a criminal grand jury) where citizens can forward complaints and topics for investigation. A Federal Grand Jury for civil (and civic) purposes is not forbidden by the Constitution and nowhere is it stated that they should be different in the first place at this level. It’s worth a shot and has plenty of legal precedence at the state level. Why not make an application to have one at the federal level too?

    Need to find a prosecutor or judge that will allow one.
    State Grand Juries don’t have jurisdiction into federal agencies, so forming a federal grand jury will be the biggest hurdle. It should be important to simply form a Federal Grand Jury (and not label it civil or criminal).

    [Ed. Feel free to put some research on this together and I’ll post it.]

  53. Its not lady like to say this but we need a prosocuter with some steel ones that will help get it together.
    Leo, I am like you, a researcher, I am the researcher that put the presidents genealogy together a few months back.
    I would like to discuss something with you as soon as possible

  54. Leo:

    Well, I have to say this-like it or not. Jesus Christ has two natures-He is human and He is Divine. We know this from the earliest Christian writers. Everyone has to go back and read the early Church Fathers ( St. Alexander of Alexandria, St. Ambrose, St. Athanasius, St. Augustine to name a few.)

    We can then realize that the covenant of the Old Testament is fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ, the third Person of the Blessed Trinity (God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit) He is God the Son. What is truly amazing and wonderful and beyond all understanding is that He is truly present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in all the Catholic tabernacles throughout the world. Transubstantiation. I talk to Him all the time. No, I am not demented.

    We have to only ask Him to help America and He will. America is dedicated to the Immaculate Conception and His Mother will also help us-if we ask and believe.

    Remember the apparition at Fatima? “In the end my Immaculate Heart will reign.” It’s all there and we are now living in her warning. I keep repeating-over 50,000,000 babies aborted in the womb. We are suffering because Revelation has told us what is to happen. It’s all there.

    I hate violence, too. I especially hate it in the womb against our human family members.

    Leo, help us return personhood to the unborn. That is where we as a coountry went terribly astray.


    [Ed. I was raised Catholic all my life, but I have no faith in that organization any longer. I just believe in Jesus and God. Jesus prayed to God. He wasn’t praying to himself. The Catholic Church takes the word and distorts it. There is no line of succession from Peter to any other Pope. Jesus may have built his Church on Peter but to say there should be a succession and formal Governing body living in riches and gold is nowhere in the Lord’s words. I am strict constructionist when it comes to the Word of Jesus.]

  55. Agreed Again, Mike (9:21 AM) I don’t believe that Orly’s move to demand records (that would be Public record) of a private meeting (if any were kept) will amount to anything, however, I give her much credit for Trying and for bringing the matter into the Light.

    My point for posting was to point out BHO’s Arrogance, and Let’s not Leave out, Audacity for bringing his butt for a Private meeting with the Supreme Court, while case(s) against him are pending in the supreme court. As Orly pointed out, the Move was Unethical. (what else is new)
    Whatever he had to say to them, couldn’t be done with a MEMO? (Cocktails anyone?)
    And the Timing for the meeting, just before his inauguration, was
    all too coincidental.
    Reminds me of that unexpected trip to Hawaii as Andy martin was appealing to the Hawaiian court.

    I’m entertained that in the latest news of yesterday, BO, The Usurper,
    uses the word, “shameless”, to describe OTHER PEOPLE’S actions.

    [Ed. It’s a complete takeover by the cult and they are thumbing their arrogance in your face. Get used to it America. Change has come.]

  56. Leo, there are sparks of Righteousness bursting out around us since yesterday, in attempts to uphold the Constitution. (Like a Half Hours Worth of Encouragement, yet it’s SOMETHING to Build On)

    Not Only the Military’s Involvment that You Posted about Today (I read about it Yesterday and was thrilled that you posted it (BRAVO! To You) – and that Brave Soldier coming forth, But also the Brave Lawyer who is
    Challenging H Clinton’s SOS Seat as Unconstituional, in the news Yesterday (MSM didn’t not leave THAT STORY up- NOT 2 Days!)- we need to stay tuned to this outcome and throw the constitution in their face as a fightback if this Lawer wins out

    Also, A Gore’s (Cult Member) global warming Propaganda was rebuked
    BIG TIME by scientific weathermen, in a story yesterday – (states man-man global warming is FRAUD and they are “Calling” A Gore on it!)
    Yet all quiet on the homefront Today from the A Gore Camp! Story also
    not given a 2nd viewing today by MSM

    Next is the BO “stimulus” package in a battle to fight BO’s every whim.

    As I read about these Righteous things unfolding, I felt ashamed at
    my own arrogance, in FORGETTING…God is still at Work and we know
    How Much God Loves to Break-Through, if only we all Invite Him, we would see more results. I myself, want to move over and allow God to
    do HIS THING…simply means having no ulterior motives (such as the GLEE I would personally feel for BO to walk back to Kenya with his tail between his legs) I’ll repent on that in exchange for God’s Righteousness and protection to Prevail in America. “Thy Will be Done on Earth as it is in Heaven” and no ulterior motive, but I sure do enjoy watching evil go down.

  57. Can we prove “obstruction of justice”?

  58. Mike Says 1/29/09. I agree with you. It starts with McCain and the first law suit that was brought, on the Natural born eligibility requirement. This led to the sham investigation and SRS 511. All my research takes me back to that. If you know anybody who wants to work on your suggestion let me know and I will do all I can to help.

  59. Leo:

    I believe your recent story about harassment is true. Your love for Jesus is sound, but please read this and know this is just an earthly pilgrimage. Heaven awaits us-if we earn it.

    HomeLoginRegisterEmailCE StoreAbout CE
    Make CE Your Homepage
    Ave Maria Meditations
    CE Notebook
    CE On Time
    Friends of CE
    The Edge
    Touched By Grace
    Arts & Entertainment
    Canon Law
    Catholic Bioethics
    Catholic Man
    CE Recommends
    Dating & Singles
    Faith & Morals
    Faith Questions
    Inside the Vatican
    The Integrated Life
    Media & Culture
    Money & Economics
    Parenting & Family
    Theology of the Body
    Viewer Letters
    Cheryl Dickow
    Chuck Colson
    Daniel Pipes
    Fr. Frank Pavone
    George Weigel
    Heidi H. Saxton
    Marcellino D’Ambrosio
    Mark Shea
    Marybeth Hicks
    Patrice Fagnant-MacArthur
    Russell Shaw
    Doreen Truesdell
    Faith and Life
    Prayer Requests
    Touched By Grace
    Christ’s Authority
    January 31st, 2009 by Fr. Jerome Magat · Print This Article ·ShareThis

    Upon hearing Christ’s teaching, the crowds are mesmerized by Jesus’ words. They are impressed less with His style and more with the authority with which He teaches. Jesus’ teaching and His authority extend far beyond rhetorical skill – His authority is such that He performs exorcisms and creates fear among the demons who recognize Him.
    His hearers and the witnesses of these exorcisms compel them to remark that they “have never seen anything like this.” By these exorcisms, Jesus demonstrates that He is far greater than a mere teacher – His actions place a claim on His divinity.
    Our Lord does not possess this authority for Himself. Instead, He chooses to impart this authority upon His Apostles and gives them authority to bind and loose sins; to exorcise demons; and to teach and preach in His name. These are all functions of the Catholic Church.
    Jesus reminds the Twelve that whoever hears them hears Him. In other words, Jesus explicitly chooses to identify Himself with His Church. He proves His identification with the Church when He asks St. Paul on the road to Damascus, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” It should be observed that Jesus is not asking Paul why he is persecuting the Church. Instead, Jesus asks Paul why he is persecuting Him.
    Clearly, Jesus considers any persecution of the Church to be a persecution of Him. This concept is the antithesis of those who claim to have a relationship with Jesus but reject His Church. They claim, “I am close to Jesus, but I don’t need organized religion.”
    Moreover, many people have difficulty accepting authority in general and the authority of the Church in particular. There exists an inner rebellion that fights against authority. Perhaps the reason for this is the confusion of two terms: authoritarian and authoritative.
    In The Courage to be Catholic, papal biographer George Weigel parses out the distinction. To be simply authoritarian means the imposition of force or brute power over another. It is a type of willfulness that does not give reasons for decisions or commands and does not allow for input from the entity receiving the command.
    By contrast, the Church teaches authoritatively. The bishops, successors of the Apostles, are custodians of the deposit of Faith handed down through the ages. The word “tradition” comes from the Latin “tradere,” which means “to hand on.” The teaching authority of the Church does not rest on the whims of the episcopacy. Instead, the authoritativeness of the Church rests on the authority given to her by Christ Himself and is exercised in service and love, not by coercion.
    As Catholics, we should rejoice in the authority of the Church. After all, since our salvation relies on the truths espoused by Christ’s teachings as communicated by the Church, we should want the Church to be authoritative so that our hope in Christ is definitive and secure. Who would want their salvation to rest on anything less than authoritative teaching? Rather than rebel against authoritative teaching, we ought to embrace it as a gift and open our hearts to the Lord Jesus who saves us.
    Fr. Magat is parochial vicar of St. William of York Parish in Stafford, VA.

    (This article courtesy of the Arlington Catholic Herald.)

  60. theBuckWheat Says:

    Somebody would help this process by suggesting a course of action someone could follow should they be called to serve on a GJ.

    Another question that comes to mind would be: how can someone serving on a GJ gain supporting help. Is there a mechanism for the GJ to hire its own attorney, for example?

    As to militias: the lesson with the miltias in Iraq should be that there can only be one CIC and that anyone who joins a militia in times of peace risks being part of a criminal conspiracy should any of the militita’s leaders do anything to break the law.

    I hope we have not exhausted all peaceful means of restoring the Constituion in Exile.

  61. 08hayabusa Says:

    There is no way this man isn’t aware that he has committed fraud. After all Obama’s staff back in 2006 investigated the NBC clause before he perpetuated this colossal fraud.

    And besides, didn’t he love to speak to the fact that he was a Constitutional professor before we called him on that lie?

  62. William Henry Harris Says:

    Great information! I have never been involved with a “Grand Jury” state or Federal. Anyone out there who can fill us in on moving forward with this idea or G.J.??? Thank you for the posting…-whzh-

  63. […] – Scotus on the unique power of grand jurors […]

  64. The question of HOW the Constitution was altered has been detailed by Mr.Leo C. Donofrio, J.D.

    Now there is a WHY it is needed

    It is important to not only identify the who, what, when, and how, but the why (plural) is the fuel to ignite the passion to drive the effort to see the restoration of the Presentment power achieved.

    To that end, as a veteran police sergeant with an un-impeachable work record, I can compliment Mr. Leo C. Donofrio, J.D.and others foundation by providing an inside investigation of one State’s corruptive breakdown due to the unavailabilty of this critical tool.

    The runaway criminality of all three governmental branches was easily discernable and due to my training and experience, I was able to professionally detect and document it. The fact that I was a victim of corruption simply put me. In a bad place at the right time.I also collected and vetted dozens of other victims, as equally innocent and as equally harmed to refute any claim that the misconduct was not systemic.

    Seperate from the Presentment argument, and actually without knowing of it, I pursued access all the way to the Third Court of Appeals. Each court brazenly decided not against me only, but against the Law. But what it showed was the falseness of the government in its pretense that access to the Grand Jury was still possible for citizens to redress government corruption.

    Without further digression, allow me to provide a link to my Grand Jury legal action so it ce used as needed to substantiate WHY we need to undo the intentional get-out-of-jail rigging and shell game.

    ed. I look forward to reading your document. Thanks for posting about your efforts. – Leo

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: