Americans who are â€œsuspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual libertyâ€ deemed domestic threat
A new study funded by the Department of Homeland Security characterizes Americans who are â€œsuspicious of centralized federal authority,â€ and â€œreverent of individual libertyâ€ as â€œextreme right-wingâ€ terrorists.
EntitledÂ Hot Spots of Terrorism and Other Crimes in the United States, 1970-2008Â (PDF), the study was produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland. The organization was launched with the aid of DHS funding to the tune of $12 million dollars.
While largely omitting Islamic terrorism -Â the report fails completely to mentionÂ the 1993 World Trade Center bombing â€“ the study focuses on Americans who hold beliefs shared by the vast majority of conservatives and libertarians and puts them in the context of radical extremism.
The report takes its definitions from a 2011 study entitledÂ Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism, produced by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, in which the following characteristics are used to identify terrorists.
– Americans who believe their â€œway of lifeâ€ is under attack;
– Americans who are â€œfiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)â€;
– People who consider themselves â€œanti-globalâ€ (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);
– Americans who are â€œsuspicious of centralized federal authorityâ€;
– Americans who are â€œreverent of individual libertyâ€;
– People who â€œbelieve in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty.â€
The report also lists people opposed to abortion and â€œgroups that seek to smite the purported enemies of God and other evildoersâ€ as terrorists.
As we have exhaustively documented on numerous occasions, federal authorities and particularly the Department of Homeland Security have been involved in producing a deluge of literature which portrays liberty lovers and small government advocates as terrorists.
The most flagrant example was the infamous 2009 MIAC report, published by the Missouri Information Analysis CenterÂ and first revealed by Infowars, which framed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as potential terrorists.
The rush to denounce legitimate political beliefs as thought crimes, or even mundane behaviors, by insinuating they are shared by terrorists, has accelerated in recent months.
Under the FBIâ€™s Communities Against Terrorism program, theÂ bulk purchase of foodÂ is labeled as a potential indication of terrorist activity, as isÂ using cash to pay for a cup of coffee, and showing an interest in web privacy when using the Internet in a public place.
As we have documented on numerous occasions, the federal government routinely characterizes mundane behavior as extremist activity or a potential indicator of terrorist intent. As part of its â€˜See Something, Say Somethingâ€™ campaign, the Department of Homeland Security educates the public that generic activities performed by millions of people every day, including using a video camera, talking to police officers, wearing hoodies, driving vans, writing on a piece of paper, and using a cell phone recording application,â€ are all potential signs of terrorist activity.
The DHS stoked controversyÂ last year when it released a series of videos to promote the See Something, Say Something campaign in which almost all of the terrorists portrayed in the PSAs were white Americans.
Since 1871 the United States president and the United States Congress has been playing politics under a different set of rules and policies.Â The American people do not know that there are two Constitutions in the United States.Â The first penned by the leaders of the newly independent states of the United States in 1776.Â On July 4,Â 1776, the people claimed theirÂ independenceÂ from Britain and Democracy was born.Â And for 95 years the United States people were free and independent.Â That freedom ended in 1871 when the original â€œConstitution for the united states for Americaâ€ was changed to the â€œTHE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAâ€.
The Congress realized that the country was in dire financial straits, so they madeÂ a financial deal with the devil â€“ international bankers â€” (in those days, the Rothschilds of London ) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers.Â The conniving international bankers were not about to lend the floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a way of taking back control of the United States and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.Â With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia.
With the passage of Â â€œthe Act of 1871â€Â a city state (a state within a state) calledÂ the District of ColumbiaÂ locatedÂ on 10 sq miles of land in the heart of Washington was formed with its own flag and its own independent constitution â€“ the United Statesâ€™ secret second constitution.
The flag of Washingtonâ€™s District of Columbia has 3 red stars, each symbolizing a city state within the three city empire. The three city empire consists of Washington D.C., London, and Vatican City. London is the corporate center of the three city states and controls the world economically. Washingtonâ€™s District of Columbia city state is in charge of the military, and the Vatican controls it all under the guise of spiritual guidance.Â Â Although geographically separate, the city states of London, the Vatican and the District ofÂ Columbia are one interlocking empire called â€œEmpire of the Cityâ€
The constitution for the District of Columbia operates under tyrannical Vatican law known as â€œLex Foriâ€ (local law). When congress passed the act of 1871 it created a separate corporation known as THE UNITED STATES and corporate government for the District of Columbia. This treasonous act has unlawfully allowed the District of Columbia to operate as a corporation outside the original constitution of the United States and in total disregard of the best interests of the American citizens.
POTUS Obama at the Vatican Corporate headquarters
POTUS is the Chief Executive (president) of the Corporation of the United States operating as any other CEO of the corporation â€” governs w/a Board of Directors (cabinet officials) and managers (Senators/Congress) Obama as others before him is POTUS â€” operating as â€œvassal kingâ€ taking orders once again from â€œThe City of Londonâ€ through the RIIA (Royal Institute of Intl Affairs).Â The Illuminati (founded by the The Society of Jesus or Jesuits, the largestÂ RomanÂ Catholic Religious Military Order headed by the Black Pope) created the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in 1919. The American equivalent to the RIIA is the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). The RIIA and CFR set up Round Table Groups (based on the King Arthur myths).
What did the Act of 1871 achieve?Â The ACT of 1871 put the United States back under British rule (which is under Vatican rule).Â The United States people lost their independence in 1871.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the constitution of the incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it governs the Republic. It does not! Capitalization is NOT insignificant when one is referring to a legal document. This seemingly â€œminorâ€ alteration has had a major impact on every subsequent generation of Americans. What Congress did by passing the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government.
Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed under the organic Constitution, we the people now have â€œrelativeâ€ rights or privileges. One example is the Sovereignâ€™s right to travel, which has now been transformed (under corporate government policy) into a â€œprivilegeâ€ that requires citizens to be licensed â€“ driverâ€™s licenses and Passports. By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed TREASON against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and decrees of the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution.Â The Act of 1871 became the FOUNDATION of all the treason since committed by government officials.
As of 1871 the United States isnâ€™t a Country; Itâ€™s a Corporation! In preparation for stealing America, the puppets of Britainâ€™s banking cabal had already created a second government, a Shadow Government designed to manage what â€œthe peopleâ€ believed was a democracy, but what really was an incorporated UNITED STATES. Together this chimera, this two-headed monster, disallowed â€œthe peopleâ€ all rights of sui juris. [you, in your sovereignty]
The U.S.A. is a Crown Colony. The U.S. has always been and remains a British Crown colony. King James I, is not just famous for translating the Bible into â€œThe King James Versionâ€, but for signing the â€œFirst Charter of Virginiaâ€ in 1606 â€” which granted Americaâ€™s British forefathers license to settle and colonize America. The charter guaranteed future Kings/Queens of England would have sovereign authority over all citizens and colonized land in America.
After America declared independence from Great Britain, theÂ Treaty ofÂ Paris, signed on September 3,Â 1783Â was signed.Â That treaty identifies the King of England as prince of U.S. â€œPrince George the Third, by the grace of God, king of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, duke of Brunswick and Lunebourg, arch- treasurer and prince elector of the Holy Roman Empire etc., andÂ of the United States of Americaâ€œâ€“ completely contradicting premise that America won The War of Independence.
Article 5 of that treaty gave all British estates, rights and properties back to Britain.
It is agreed that Congress shall earnestly recommend it to the legislatures of the respective states to provide forÂ the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscatedÂ belonging to real British subjects;Â and also of the estates, rights, and properties of persons resident in districts in the possession on his Majestyâ€™s armsÂ and who have not borne arms against the said United States. And that persons of any other decription shall have free liberty to go to any part or parts of any of the thirteen United States and therein to remain twelve months unmolested in their endeavors to obtain the restitution of such of their estates, rights, and properties as may have been confiscated; and that Congress shall also earnestly recommend to the several states a reconsideration and revision of all acts or laws regarding the premises, so as to render the said laws or acts perfectly consistent not only with justice and equity but with that spirit of conciliation which on the return of the blessings of peace should universally prevail. And that Congress shall also earnestly recommend to the several states thatÂ the estates, rights, and properties, of such last mentioned persons shall be restored to them, they refunding to any persons who may be now in possession the bona fide price (where any has been given) which such persons may have paid on purchasing any of the said lands, rights, or properties since the confiscation.
And it is agreed that all persons who have any interest in confiscated lands, either by debts, marriage settlements, or otherwise, shall meet with no lawful impediment in the prosecution of their just rights.
It is becoming increasingly apparent to American citizens that government is no longer being conducted in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, or, within states, according to state constitutions. While people have recognized for more than 150 years that the rich and powerful often corrupt individual officials, or exert undue influence to get legislation passed that favors their interests, most Americans still cling to the naive belief that such corruption is exceptional, and that most of the institutions of society, the courts, the press, and law enforcement agencies, still largely comply with the Constitution and the law in important matters. They expect that these corrupting forces are disunited and in competition with one another, so that they tend to balance one another.
Mounting evidence makes it clear that the situation is far worse than most people think, that during the last several decades the U.S. Constitution has been effectively overthrown, and that it is now observed only as a faÃ§ade to deceive and placate the masses. What has replaced it is what many call theÂ Shadow Government â€“ created with the illegal passing of the Act of 1871. It still, for the most part, operates in secret, because its control is not secure. The exposure of this regime and its operations must now become a primary duty of citizens who still believe in the Rule of Law and in the freedoms which this country is supposed to represent.
When the president takes the oath of office he is swearing to defend the Constitution of the District of Columbia, the INCORPORATED government. He isnâ€™t promising to preserve, protect and defend the original Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776. See for yourself â€“ â€œI do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.â€ It doesnâ€™t state â€“ â€œConstitution for the United States of Americaâ€ which was drafted for â€œWe the People of the United Statesâ€.
It is for this reason that Obama never got a declaration of war from Congress for Libya. He didnâ€™t need one. Under the corporation constitution, the Constitution of the United States, Obama is the CEO and master of his corporate domain called the United States. His loyalty is to the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government which is financially controlled by London and their Federal Reserve bankers, which is controlled by the Vatican. Obama is president of corporate America â€“ looking out for its corporate interests.
When the International bankers (London) wanted more money they had their banks Goldmen Sachs and Bank of America (taken over by Bank of Italy in the 1920s) falsely declare $billions in Â losses. The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve revealed that London has received more than $16 trillion in U.S. funds under the guise of government bailouts. $16 trillion had been secretly given out to US banks and corporate interests and international bankers everywhere from Germany, Italy, France, Sweden, the UK, and Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and September 2011, the Federal Reserve had secretly laundered out over $16 trillion to international banks, corporations, and on the take governments.
If the American people want to know where their money went take a look at the Vatican. The Vatican bank is where most of that $16 trillion went to. Their vaults hold secret numbered accounts (Roman numerals of course) for George W Bush, Bill and Hillary Clinton, George HW Bush, Barack Hussein Obama, Timothy Geithner, Henry Paulson, Tony Blair, David Cameron, Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel (born Angela Dorothea Kasner). Look also at Citigroup â€“ that bank is used to money launder $billions to the CIA (Knights of the Holy See) for arms dealing, drug trafficking and covert terrorist operations against the United States people â€“ CIA code named al Qaeda. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner ignored President Barack Obamaâ€™s order to consider dissolving Citigroup because it is the CIAâ€™s financial pipeline.
THE ACT OF 1871
CLICK ON THE DOCUMENT TO READ MORE
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Every single year, Americans take the day off on July 4th and they celebrate everything that is good about America.Â We tend to be very proud of our achievements and we generally are not shy about talking about them.Â For example, today CNN is running a piece entitled â€œ100 great things about Americaâ€œ.Â And you know what?
There are a lot of great things about this country.Â I am not afraid to say that I love America.Â In many ways it has been a great light for the rest of the world since it was founded.Â However, things have changed.Â The United States has greatly fallen from where it once was.Â The truth is that America is rotting and decaying in thousands of different ways.Â We need to repent and go back to doing the things that once made this country great.Â The road that we are currently on is a path that leads to national suicide.Â So to be honest now is not really the time for happy celebrations.Â Rather, now is the time for weeping, mourning and deep reflection.Â We need to turn from our profligate ways and we need to return to the fundamental principles that the early Americans understood so well.Â As a nation we need to look into the mirror and understand just how bad our decline has been.Â We are a complete and total mess, and it is time to admit that.
The following are 70 reasons to mourn for Americaâ€¦.
1. Most Americans know much more about Kim Kardashian than they do aboutÂ the Federal Reserve.
2. The way that the TSA abuses travelers is a national embarrassment.Â One TSA agent recentlyÂ sifted her finger through the ashes of someoneâ€™s dead grandfather and then spilled his ashes all over the airport floor.
3. Many young people in America are willing to wait in line to pay aÂ 400% markup on new Kanye West sneakers, but most of those same young people cannot even tell you how many members of Congress there are.
4. Many Americans seem to be far more interested in American Idol and Dancing With The Stars than they are in dealing with the very serious economic, political and moral problems facing this nation.
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
5. A recent survey found thatÂ 61 percent of all Americans believe that â€œpaying your fair share of taxesâ€ is being patriotic.
6. We currently have the worst president in U.S. history, and there is a chance that we may have to endure another 4 years of his insanity.
7. We have a Supreme Court that appears to haveÂ very little respect for the U.S. Constitution.
8. The financial center of our country, Wall Street,Â is full of psychopaths.
10. The highways of America are rapidly being turned intoÂ a high tech prison grid.
11. American children today are very spoiled, very undisciplined and most of them wouldnâ€™t know a day of hard work if it came up and bit them on the behind.
12. Today, approximatelyÂ 25 million American adults are still living with their parents.
14. Of all the major industrialized nations, America isÂ the most obese.Â Mexico is in second place.
15. According to one recent survey, onlyÂ 25 percent of all Americans have 6 months of emergency savings stored up.
16. The United States leads the worldÂ in credit card fraud.
17. You know that things are bad in America when even the U.S. Secret Service has developed â€œan Animal House reputationâ€ for partying wildly while guarding Barack Obama during his vacations on Marthaâ€™s Vineyard.
18. In many areas of the country crime is getting worse and thieves are stealingÂ just about anything that is not bolted down.
19. One recent poll found that onlyÂ 70 percent of Americans agree with the Declaration of Independence.
20. The average American watchesÂ 28 hours of television every week.
21. There are moreÂ school shootings in America than anywhere else in the world.
22. Authorities are warning thatÂ ATM thefts are on the rise again.
23. Incredibly,Â 85 percent of the stuff sold at the biggest retailer in the United States is made outside of the country.
24. The average American drinksÂ more than 600 sodas every single year.Â That is by far the most in the world.
25. The United States has the mostÂ lawyers per capita in the entire world.
26. ApproximatelyÂ 50 million babies have been slaughtered in hospitals and abortion clinics in America since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973.
27. The media is now trying to convince us that killing off our elderly grandparents when they get sick is the â€œright thingâ€ to do.
28. According to one survey,Â 50 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 cannot find the state of New York on a blank map.
29. Americans take moreÂ prescription drugs than anyone else on the planet.
30. The percentage of women taking antidepressants in AmericaÂ is higher than in any other country in the world.
31. The United States has the highest rateÂ of illegal drug use in the entire world.
32. Faith in almost every major American institution is nearÂ an all-time low.
34. Our food is rapidly being transformed into absolute garbage.Â As I wrote aboutÂ the other day, at this pointÂ more than 70 percent of all processed foods sold in the U.S. contain at least one ingredient that has been genetically modified.
35. More people have been diagnosed withÂ mental disorders in America than anywhere else on earth.
37. Our public schools have become horribly repressiveÂ indoctrination centers.
38. The United States produces more pornographyÂ by far than any other nation in the world does.
40. The United States has the highestÂ divorce rate in the world by a very wide margin.
41. American families are rapidly getting poorer.Â According to the Federal Reserve, the median net worth of families in the United States declined â€œfrom $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010â€œ.
42. According to one study,Â one out of every four teen girls in the United States has at least one sexually transmitted disease.
43. The United States has the highestÂ teen pregnancy rate on the entire globe.
44. The United States leads the worldÂ in eating disorder deaths.
45. Nobody has more airport security thugsÂ groping women and children than America does.
46. Many Republicans still believe that George W. Bush was a â€œconservativeâ€ and that he was a â€œgood presidentâ€.
47. The Obama administration is considering plans toÂ unilaterally slash the size of the U.S. nuclear arsenalÂ by up to 80 percent.
48. The United States hasÂ the most complicated tax system on the entire planet.
49. All over the United States, chaplainsÂ are being banned from praying in the name of Jesus.
50. The United StatesÂ exports more arms to other countries than anyone else in the world.
51. The United States has the highestÂ child abuse death rate on the entire globe.
52. Every single year, the United States hasÂ the largest trade deficit in the world by far.
53. The United States was once ranked #1 in the world in GDP per capita.Â Today we have slippedÂ to #12.
54. One of the most popular movies in America right now is aboutÂ men dancing around and taking their clothes off.
55. Americans spend more timeÂ sitting in traffic than anyone else in the world.
56. According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans now have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americanscombined.
57. The percentage of Americans that consider the Bible to be importantÂ continues to fall.
58. Some schools in America have decidedÂ to start using RFID tracking chips to monitor the movement of their students.
59. Society is starting to collapse all around us and it seems like the number of psychos in AmericaÂ is multiplying.
60. The poverty rate for children living in the United States is nowÂ 22 percent.
61. Nobody in the world getsÂ more plastic surgery done than Americans do.
62. Many young people in America todayÂ are not afraid to viciously verbally abuse those that are elderly.
64. The U.S. governmentÂ wastes more money than any other government on earth does by far.
65. All over America, peopleÂ are being attacked by mobs simply because of the color of their skin.
66. Today, the United States actually has aÂ higher percentage of workers doing low wage work than any other major industrialized nation does.
67. America has pushed God out of every corner of public life and now we are really starting to really feel the consequences of that.
68. In Colorado, many people returned home after the recent wildfires only to find that their homesÂ had been looted.
69. There is more hate and division in America today than at any other time in recent memory.
70. The U.S. national debt is rapidly approaching 16 trillion dollars and the total amount of debt in the country is rapidly approachingÂ 55 trillion dollars.
So what do you think about the current state of America?
Please feel free to post a comment with your opinion belowâ€¦.
- 30 Reasons Why 2011 Is Going To Be Another Crappy Year For Americaâ€™s Middle Class
- 10 Reasons Why Devastating U.S. Jobs Famine Will Suck Hope Out Of America
- 12 Reasons To Be Extremely Pessimistic About The Direction That The Economy Is Headed
- Fading optimism in â€œnew normalâ€ America
- 10 Reasons Why America Is A Failed Terrorist State
- 15 Reasons Why The Obamacare Decision Is A Mind Blowing Disaster For America
- USA #1? 40 Embarrassing Things That America Is The Best In The World At
- 10 Reasons America Will Be Judged as the Most Brutal Empire in History
- The Obama Jobs Plan: 10 Reasons Why It Is A Bad Joke
- Liberty Lovers Mourn This Independence Day, but Hope Remains
- 18 Crazy Facts Which Show That No Nation On Earth Is More Doped Up On Prescription Drugs Than America Is
- 24 Facts That Prove That America Is A Nation Of Slobs
Tag Archives: 18 USC 241
Putting His Posse Camouflage Training To Good Use, Zullo Agreed To Meet Corsi By The Old Juniper Tree
Ever since I learned that Jerome â€œJerryâ€ Corsi of World Net Daily (WND) and Deputy Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse (CCP) had a pre-existing book deal when the investigation began, I have wondered if the sleeziness of such an act crossed the line into possible criminal activity. It just doesnâ€™t seem right that an law enforcement investigator has a pecuniary interest in the outcome of an investigation. Well, I am not a lawyer but I play one on my blog sometimes. So here are my thoughts.
First, there is a Federal law which addresses a conspiracy against the rights of a person, 18 U.S.C. 241:
ConspiracyÂ AgainstÂ Rights (18 USC 241)
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so securedâ€”
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
The United States Department of Justice says about this statute:
Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights conspiracy statute. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes, Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime.
The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
Well, despite the Image above, which is for humor, I donâ€™t think they went in disguise. But did they:
conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same
Obama certainly qualifies as any person. Is running for the presidency or being the president a right or privilege??? According to a set of Federal Pattern Jury Instructions I found, the range Â of rights is pretty broad. Â The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, which includes Arizona, has general instructions to the jury, but none specifically tailored to individual offenses. Â However, I did find some for the Federal District Court in South Carolina. Â Each page there was a separate pdf file, so I combined them as text files in a word processor, and then repubished them as one pdf document. I also made minor cosmetic changes to make it easier to read. Here is the pdf file:
I also included the instructions for Color of Law abuses. If you want to double check these instructions, here is the link to the South Carolina Federal District Court, where they run from page 50 to page 56:
Now, back to whether running for the presidency is a right or privilege, we find on pages 52 and 53:
Other protected rights include the following:
The right to vote, United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 323 (1941), but the issueÂ of voter bribery and an honest election falls under 42 U.S.C. Â§ 1973i, United StatesÂ v. McLean, 808 F.2d 1044, 1046 (4 Cir. 1987);
The right to report a crime, In re Quarles, 158 U.S. 532, 535 (1895);
The right to testify at trial, United States v. Thevis, 665 F.2d 616, 626-27 (5 Cir.1982);
The right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment, United States v. LaVallee,Â 439 F.2d 670, 686 (10 Cir. 2006);
The right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law. This right includes the right to be kept free from harm while in official custody. â€œNo person Â may ever be physically assaulted, intimidated, or otherwise abused intentionallyÂ and without justification by a person acting under the color of the laws of any state.â€ United States v. Bigham, 812 F.2d 943, 949 (5 Cir. 1987);
The right to enjoy public accommodations, 42 U.S.C. Â§ 2000a. The presence of electronic video games turns a convenience store into a supplier of entertainment and therefore a place of public accommodation. United States v. Baird, 85 F.3d 450 (9 Cir. 1996). In United States v. Piche, 981 F.2d 706, 716 (4 Cir. 1992), the defendant was prosecuted for interfering with Asian-American men because they were enjoying the goods and services of a public facility. The district court correctly charged the jury that â€œ[a] place of public accommodation is any establishment that is used by members of the general public for entertainment, that is, recreation, fun, or pleasure, and in which the sources of entertainment move in interstate commerce.â€
You also find the range of rights to be fairly broad from these cases cited on page 51 of the Instructions:
â€œThe right to choose is the right of qualified voters to cast their ballots and have themÂ counted at Congressional elections. [T]his is a right secured by the Constitution [and] isÂ secured against the action of individuals as well as of states.â€ United States v. Classic, 313Â U.S. 299, 315 (1941). This includes primaries for Congressional elections.
Â§ 241 embraces a conspiracy to stuff the ballot box at an election for federal officers,Â and thereby to dilute the value of votes of qualified voters. The government does not haveÂ to prove an intent to change the outcome of the federal election. The intent required is toÂ have false votes cast and thereby to injure the right of all voters in a federal election toÂ express their choice of a candidate and to have their expressions of choice given full valueÂ and effect. Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211, 226 (1974).
Therefore, it appears to me, a non-lawyer, that Obama having the right to run for President is a right belonging to any natural born citizen, and subject only to the Constitutional limits imposed by Article II, Section , Clause 5. The recent ruling of the FEC regarding non-natural born candidate Abdul Hassan seems to confirm a citizenâ€™s right to run for office, but not the right to receive matching campaign funds.
There does not seem to be a color of law requirement element in violations of the Conspiracy section. Here is the actual jury instruction from page 50:
Title 18, United States Code, Section 241 makes it a crime to conspire with someoneÂ else to injure or intimidate another person in the exercise of his civil rights. A conspiracyÂ is an agreement between two or more persons to join together to accomplish the unlawfulÂ purpose. It is a kind of partnership in crime in which each member becomes the agent ofÂ every other member. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government must prove eachÂ of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that two or more persons agreed to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidateÂ any person;
Second, in that personâ€™s free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilegeÂ secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of hisÂ having exercised his right or privilege [the right or privilege should be identifiedÂ and explained to the jury]; and
Third, that the defendant knew of the agreement and willfully participated in theÂ agreement.
Now the question becomes whether or not the actions of The Cold Case Posse and any potential co-defendants had an unlawful purpose. In other words, is the mere act of investigating Obama an unlawful purpose, such as to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate anyone. This issue has come up before when the police are involved. In a recent 2011 case, a Memphis police officer, Arthur Sease was accused of violations of BOTH Section 241 Conspiracy and Section 242 which is actually depriving someone of their rights under color of law:
Seaseâ€™s convictions are based on fourteen separate incidents. The incidents Â follow the same basic plan. Sease would arrange for a drug buy or a drug sell (using Â drugs taken in a previous incident) using a non-officer contact as the front person. As the deal was occurring, either Sease or one of his fellow co-conspirator officers would arrive at the scene to make a purported arrest and seize the money and drugs involved in the deal. The participants would then be released, and Sease and his conspirators would split the proceeds without reporting the incidents.
Sease argued on appeal:
Sease is correct that his appeal is properly understood as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. The offenses for which Sease was charged and convicted are predicated on the illegality of the searches and seizures he conducted. For example, Seaseâ€™s convictions under 18 U.S.C. Â§ 242 for deprivation of rights under the color of law require the government to show that the defendant â€œdepriv[ed] [any person] of [the] rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States . . . .â€ If Seaseâ€™s actions were in fact legal, the government could not prove the deprivation of rights element of the offense, and the convictions must be overturned.
Sease argues that this case is governed by Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996). In Whren, plain-clothed officers made a traffic stop on an individual who stopped for an unusually long time at a stop sign, and then dashed off at a high rate of speed. Whren, 517 U.S. at 808. Because the officers were working a high-drug area, they believed that individuals in the car were engaging in drug activity, but they did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to make a stop on that basis. Id. at 809.
According to the petitioners in Whren, the police officers had improper motives, in the sense that the officers conducted a stop for the purpose of investigating drug offenses for which they did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion, using the traffic offenses for which they did have probable cause as a pretext. Id. at 810-12. These improper motives, the petitioners argued, made the stop a constitutional violation. The Supreme Court rejected this approach, citing previous case law to â€œforeclose any argument that the constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops depends on the actual motivations of the individual officers involved.â€ Id. at 813 (citing previously, e.g., Scott
However, the Sease Court distinguished between improper actions in the course of duty and non bona-fide activitities:
Whren, however, presumes that the officers are engaging in bona fide law enforcement activities when they make the stops. However improper it may be to use a traffic violation as a pretext to look for drugs, there is no question that making trafficÂ stops and looking for drugs are valid and appropriate law enforcement activities. It isÂ only arguably improper if the officers lacked the required probable cause or reasonableÂ suspicion under the specific facts of the situation. By contrast, it is inherently improperÂ for officers to set up drug deals for the purpose of taking the money and drugs forÂ themselves, regardless of the context. Seaseâ€™s actions are improper in an entirelyÂ different way and to an entirely different degree than the actions of the officers inÂ Whren.
Unlike the actions of officers in cases such as Whren, Seaseâ€™s conduct was thoroughly and objectively illegal from start to finish.
Then, the Sease Court went deeper into the differences, and the burdens of proof:
[S]imply, the Fourth Amendmentâ€™s concern with â€˜reasonablenessâ€™ allows certain actions to be taken in certain circumstances, whatever the subjective intent.â€ Whren, 517U.S. at 814.
However, this balance shifts in the context of a Â§ 242 prosecution. SectionÂ 242 is a punitive statute designed to punish officers who willfully violate constitutionalÂ rights under color of law. The punitive purpose would be undermined were the court toÂ allow a corrupt officer to hide behind the policy goals of the exclusionary rule.Â Accordingly, although for the purposes of the exclusionary rule the subjective intent ofÂ the officer is irrelevant, in the context of a Â§ 242 prosecution, the courts may inquireÂ whether the officer acted with a corrupt, personal, and pecuniary purpose.1 In addition,Â unlike in the exclusionary rule context, the court must already inquire into the subjectiveÂ intent of the officer because willfulness is an element of an offense under 18 U.S.C.Â Â§ 242. Accordingly, there is no additional evidentiary burden to justify ignoringÂ subjective intent.Â 1
In other words, actions that may be legal on their surface, may be a violation if there was a corrupt,personal and pecuniary purpose. There is some question where the line is to be drawn. Â Not all corrupt, personal, and pecuniary purpose constitutes a violation under Section 241 and/or Section 242. From Sease, here an acquittal:
Finally, while there are fortunately few reported cases that deal with this level of officer misconduct, those that do exist all agree that purely illegal activities by law enforcement constitute a constitutional violation. In United States v. Bradfield, we considered a series of raids of crack houses by Detroit police officers. 225 F.3d 660, 2000 WL 1033022 (6th Cir. July 18, 2000) (unpublished table decision). During the course of the raids, officers would take a portion of the money, drugs, and guns for themselves, while reporting the rest for forfeiture. Bradfield, 2000 WL 1033022, at *1.
We upheld the judgment of acquittal, via a review of the quantum of evidence supporting the individual charges against the officers. Id. at *4-10. However, implicit in our analysis is the premise that the actions of the officers would amount to constitutional violations, if supported by sufficient evidence.
Also reported in Sease, among several other cases, is this one:
[I]n United States v. Contreras, a Laredo police officer arrested a woman, raped her, and attempted to kill her to avoid having her testify against him. 134 F. Supp. 2d 820, 823 (S.D. Tex. 2000). On habeas review, Contreras argued that his stop was proper pursuant to a provision in federal law authorizing municipal police officers toÂ make stops based on reasonable suspicion that the detainee is an illegal alien, and thusÂ his 18 U.S.C. Â§ 242 conviction should be overturned. Id. at 825. The district courtÂ dismissed Contrerasâ€™s contention stating â€œContreras did not arrest [the victim] becauseÂ he had probable cause to believe she was an illegal alien; he arrested her so he couldÂ rape her.â€ Id.
In my non-lawyer opinion, that is where any such action against the CCP and others would end up. Trying to determine the intent of the parties. Is the investigation of Obama based on any objectively realistic probable cause, or is it just a cover to get him, in violation of his rights??? One thing mentioned on page 51 of the jury instructions is that â€œthe government is permitted to present evidence of acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy even though they are not specified in the indictment. (United States v. Janati,Â 374 F.3d 263, 270 (4 Cir. 2004)).Â This means any book deals and other quid pro quos could be introduced as evidence.
It is unlikely that Obama would ever make the complaint against the Cold Case Posse and any accomplices, because at this point in the game, it is probably politically expedient to let them run around in hysterics. But I think I have shown that a viable legal option exists. A violation of the conspiracy statute seems easier to prove. No actual harm is required, nor any overt act. The whole thing is going nowhere, so there will probably never be a violation of Â Section 242.
I would certainly appreciate any input from real lawyers on this. In the mean time, make up your own mind whether or not the lines have been crossed.Â As for me, I assure you any Defendants would certainly not want me on any jury.
Note . Jury Instructions for 18 U.S.C. Section 242. From page 53, here are the jury instructions for this section:
Title 18, United States Code, Section 242 makes it a crime to deprive any person of hisÂ civil rights under color of law. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government mustÂ prove each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that [name of victim] was present in [name of state];
Second, that the defendant deprived [name of victim] of a right secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States [the right infringed must be identified], or to different punishments, pains, or penalties on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color or race;
Third, that the defendant acted under color of law; and
Fourth, that the defendant acted willfully.
As I said above, I donâ€™t think the CCP et.al. can accomplish anything other than to sling mud. But I am not sure what this part means:
different punishments, pains, or penaltiesÂ
Do extra legal fees and emotional distress count???