LARRY THE CABLE GUYS EPIC TAKEDOWN OF OBAMACARE Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Repost: Republic New Declaration Of Independence Oct 2012 from Friday, November 16, 2012
Original posting: http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2012/11/republic-new-declaration-of.html
The New Declaration of Independence 21 October 2012
The New Declaration of Independence 21 October 2012
The men and women on the
Continental United States of America, bound together by their mutual knowledge
of the abuses to We THE People by the present corporate government has
assembled to fill the vacant seats of the lawfull de jure government of the United
States of America.
The corporate government that
people accept today as the government is not the Republican form of government that
the founders gave us. We The People assembled
in Michigan to restore the Republican form of government have met and completed
this task.
In the year 1861 when Congress adjourned
sine die (sine die means “without setting a return date”), it left the nation
without a congress to conduct lawfull business.
After determining the condition
of Michigan's federal legislative offices, the Assembly re-seated those de jure
offices and conducted the necessary functions to establish a working congress.
As a result, we have filled the office of the President of the United States of
America with an interim office holder.
The de jure republican form of government established the authority to
move the military by orders from the civilian authority to act in compliance
with the Oath to defend the Constitution and the Republic against all enemies
Foreign and Domestic.
This is the culmination of thirty-two
(32) months of assembly meetings, research, debating and recording the findings
of the members of the assembly to compile the evidence of the corporate United
States corruption and crimes perpetrated against We THE People. We THE People in general assembly determined
that the only resolution to the current situation was to populate the vacant de
jure seats of the Republic and notice and inform the corporate “ACTORS” their
authority does not apply to our form of government. The Michigan General Jural Assembly has
served "Notice" to corporate government officers at all levels
including Local, State, National and International notices under Affidavits of
Publication and direct service at their physical offices.
All levels of corporate government
have been served with notices that We THE People object to the lies and
deception. We THE People intend to
peacefully continue to fill the de jure seats of government which remains
unchallenged and to initiate a lawfull election to fill all legislative offices
of the Republic. It is also We THE
People’s intent to audit all government branches and to hold accountable all
corrupt politicians and others.
Enclosed:
·
The new Declaration
of Independence
·
The Orders
NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
The Orders
RPost Receipt
===========================================================
===========================================================
The New Declaration
of Independence 21 October 2012
The
men and women on the Continental United States of America, bound together by
their mutual knowledge of the abuses to We THE People by the present corporate
government has assembled to fill the vacant seats of the lawfull de jure
government of the United States of America.
The
corporate government that people accept today as the government is not the
Republican form of government that the founders gave us. We The People assembled in Michigan to restore
the Republican form of government have met and completed this task.
In
the year 1861 when Congress adjourned sine die (sine die means “without setting
a return date”), it left the nation without a congress to conduct lawfull
business.
After
determining the condition of Michigan's federal legislative offices, the
Assembly re-seated those de jure offices and conducted the necessary functions
to establish a working congress. As a result, we have filled the office of the President
of the United States of America with an interim office holder. The de jure republican form of government established
the authority to move the military by orders from the civilian authority to act
in compliance with the Oath to defend the Constitution and the Republic against
all enemies Foreign and Domestic.
This
is the culmination of thirty-two (32) months of assembly meetings, research,
debating and recording the findings of the members of the assembly to compile
the evidence of the corporate United States corruption and crimes perpetrated
against We THE People. We THE People in
general assembly determined that the only resolution to the current situation
was to populate the vacant de jure seats of the Republic and notice and inform
the corporate “ACTORS” their authority does not apply to our form of government. The Michigan General Jural Assembly has
served "Notice" to corporate government officers at all levels
including Local, State, National and International notices under Affidavits of
Publication and direct service at their physical offices.
All
levels of corporate government have been served with notices that We THE People
object to the lies and deception. We THE
People intend to peacefully continue to fill the de jure seats of government which
remains unchallenged and to initiate a lawfull election to fill all legislative
offices of the Republic. It is also We
THE People’s intent to audit all government branches and to hold accountable
all corrupt politicians and others.
Enclosed:
·
The new Declaration of Independence,
·
The Orders and
·
RPost Receipt
This
is your call to action:
We
THE People of Michigan encourage all remaining states to determine the status
of your 1861 federal legislators (senators, representatives), establish
original jurisdiction by reseating these members of congress and have them sign
onto the new Declaration of Independence and concur with the actions taken on
21st of October 2012.
For
those states that do not have an 1861 federal congress, they should determine
what congress was at the time of state hood for their particular state.
Please
note: we have reestablished the original 13th amendment which means
“NO LAWYERS”.
·
Operations
& Functions, Covenant , County Settlement, Montcalm County Settlement -
Affidavit of Publication
·
Declaration Of Intent, Declaration of Unalienable Rights, Jural
Covenant of Office
·
Letter to Judge Advocate General
·
Letter to Michigan Sheriffs
·
Hague List of Documents and receipt
·
Wall Street Journal Publication
8 comments:
- Seize the Mass Media by Constitutional orders, and tell them you will make the arrests of the Owners of the Mass Media government if they don't comply as they support the ILLEGAL Corporate!Reply
- AnonymousNovember 16, 2012 at 11:51 AMRobert November 16, 2012 11:39Reply
It's obvious that Dan has read the Founding Documents but it's to bad he does not understand them. It is always some person with a complete lack of the depth of obligation and duty we the people are given that has to critique the work of many and they have yet to demonstrate that they have contributed anything other than lip service. In order for anyone to make a statement like these needs to contribute their lawful standing and the references to back up their postulated actions otherwise they simple act as the Pied Piper leading people astray. - Bonnie in MichiganNovember 16, 2012 at 12:38 PMThe difference in what this group has accomplished is that along the 32 month process, notices have been published and sent with receipts of delivery to Local, State, Federal and International levels of the de facto government and not once has there been any rebuttal nor 'officials' show up at anyone's door to arrest them. This group has used the common law standard of giving public notice in print, and there has not been one counter to any notice. None of the other groups have gone through the process of giving lawful notice, that is why they can be ignored by the de facto and the military - they have not established their lawful standing, their lawful authority, their lawful rights and their lawful authority to exercise those rights. This group has. This will stand in any non-corrupt court of law.Reply
FYI: Since the Media is a privately owned industry, it can not be seized by Constitutional Orders.
- Well you can seize a private company if they refuse to STOP funding THE UNITED STATES, INC. an ILLEGAL government corporation!
AIDING AND ABETTING is a criminal offense!
Look at different charges available! - Freedom of the Press is NOT what the Mass Media is doing, they are MANIPULATING the NEWS toward the SUPPORT of the NWO!
- Well maybe you haven't read the Book that EVERY government official MUST SWEAR ON to take an Oath of Office, the HOLY BIBLE!Reply
A Devout Muslim, Obama, Swore on the Christian HOLY BIBLE to take an Oath, so he told Allah to shove it, therefore I see him as a Devout LIAR and HYPOCRITE, which Lucifer supports, therefore there is NO need to comply with Common Law for the NWO! - AnonymousDecember 3, 2012 at 2:09 AMSecession? There Is a Better Way to Restore Liberty!
http://www.freeamericanow.org/index.php/leadership
Union States Project Message from the union states project:
“And then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.”
That is the last line of a famous poem by the German theologian, Martin Niemoller, who spent eight years in German concentration camps for having an alternate point of view. Most of the population, out of fear or apathy, did not speak out when Hitler first came for the Jews, then the unions, then the sick and disabled, then, finally for the general population who did not serve their purpose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSIQPHrkcVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHWDwlEE85s
Are you ready to join your fellow Americans and finally say “Enough”?
This country as we know it is perilously close to a total collapse. When that happens, Martial Law will be instituted, and it is customary for the UN to move in as “peace keepers” and then they will be free to move forward with their new world order business. Ask yourself, who will they come after first?
There is a project underway that you should know about. It is called the union states project – a lawful, peaceful group of people who are simply re-claiming the de jure government that our forefathers innocently and unknowingly allowed to be replaced by what is known as “our government” today. That original government has been dormant for 134 years. It was recognized by international treaties and law. It is still there waiting for us to bring it forward.
We are merely claiming what was abandoned and bringing it forward by giving notice to the rest of the world by using a lawful process. If something is abandoned or lost, the true owner must stake his claim and give notice that he is the rightful owner – that’s us.
We are following the original format that was already laid out and recognized by the other nations. First, the original thirteen states are claiming their individual sovereign status, and, then they will join together in union under the Articles of Confederation. After that is completed, the rest of the states (now still territories over which the “federal government” has total authority) will join the Union.
The stakes are high and the time is short. Many organizations throughout the world are watching, hoping we will finally set the example for mankind. Our Military is waiting for us to complete this project also. They cannot generate their own agenda, lest they perform a military coup. Right now, they have no choice but to take orders from the de facto government.
For more information, please listen to the fifty minute introductory audio at: unionstatesproject.info.
Please join us every Wednesday and Friday 9:00 PM eastern 218-895-0970 pin 396109#
You can listen to recordings of our previous meetings, and view the paperwork used in the process at: unionstatesproject.org. This project is transparent and open to everyone. It is led by nobody but we, the People.
Who is going to step up? If not you, who? If not now, when?
In the name of all good things, and for the sake of mankind, please join us before it is too late.
unionstatesproject.org
http://unionstatesnewsletter.wordpress.com/ http://www.blogtalkradio.com/unionstatesassembly/2012/10/11/union-states-assembly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSIQPHrkcVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHWDwlEE85s
ONE MAJOR REASON OUR NATION IS IN SO MUCH TROUBLE
EXAMPLES OF THE IDIOTS 'VOTING' IN THE 'ELECTIONS' IN AMERICA
HOW OBAMA GOT 'ELECTED' - OUR NATION IS IN REAL TROUBLE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJLLfTR8I&feature=player_embedded
Monday, January 5, 2015
FOXNEWS Most Watched Cable News Net For 13th Straight Year… CNN facing all-time ratings lows… Struggling MSNBC eyes changes to fix ratings…
Here’s a good start : STOP LYING!
MSNBC played a deft round of Hide the Weenie the day before 2014 cable news ratings came out, when it leaked to the LA Times a memo from its president Phil Griffin to staff, in which he navel lint gazed about how “technology is continuing to drive unprecedented changes across the media landscape.” In the memo, Griffin said the cable news nets need to “be taking a hard, honest look at how we need to evolve along with it” — as though technology was the biggest of MSNBC’s problems and the reason it’s winding up the year behind Fox News Channel and CNN.
In a masterful bit of understatement, the LAT noted the release of the memo was an “attempt to get ahead of the bad ratings news” and acknowledged that Griffin did not reveal any specific plans to alter MSNBC’s lineup of left-leaning political talk-show hosts, except a vague promise to “invest more in programming and news coverage beyond the Beltway.”
CNN made a similar play last week, when it leaked a memo from chief Jeff Zucker,
in which he boasted CNN U.S. had a “terrific year,” though one that was
not without its challenges. The network, Zucker said, was ending 2014
in its best shape in many years, journalistically, competitively — and
financially, which might be owing in part to its end-of-year campaign to
cut roughly 8% of its staff – about 300 jobs — as part of parent Time Warner’s strategy to boost stock price.But CNN will close out 2014 with some all-time ratings lows. In primetime, the network has delivered its worst-rated year in total viewers and its second-lowest in the news demo. In total day, CNN clocked its worst-rated year in the news demo. On the bright side, it will wrap 2014 ahead of MSNBC in the news demo; through December 22, MSNBC lost 17% of its primetime news demo viewers, clocking a worst-since-2005 169,000 of them. To put this in perspective, this is roughly the size crowd as that of the Porcupine Caribou Herd in Alaska, Yukon and Northwest Territories, according to a recent photo census (which, unlike MSNBC, represents an increase in number — the largest population for the Porcupine Caribou Herd since the early 1990s).
CNN’s primetime news demo crowd — while bigger than that caribou herd, at 181,000 viewers — represents a 1% slide. Fox News Channel, meanwhile, is way out front with 302,000 primetime news demo viewers and, like the Porcupine Caribou Herd population, FNC’s population grew — by 3%.
READ MORE
Federal judge halts Arizona's Arpaio worksite raids
The injunction essentially prevents Arpaio from continuing to conduct his controversial worksite raids to arrest undocumented workers and Montgomery from prosecuting them.
However, Arpaio had already announced in December that he planned to disband his worksite unit at the end of January or in early February once they completed an ongoing investigation.
Since 2008, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office has conducted more than 80 worksite raids, which have resulted in the arrests of more than 700 undocumented workers.
The workers typically agreed to plead guilty to felony charges after being held behind bars for weeks under another state law that made undocumented immigrants charged with serious crimes ineligible to be released on bond. That law also has been thrown out in federal court.
Many of the arrested immigrants were turned over to federal immigration officials and deported. Their felony convictions virtually destroyed any chance of ever being able to return to the U.S. legally.
In Monday's ruling, U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell said that the two state laws that criminalize the act of identify theft for the purpose of obtaining employment are likely unconstitutional because they are pre-empted by federal law.
"We are thrilled that the ruling recognizes that the Maricopa County sheriff and Maricopa County attorney are not above the law," said Jessica Bansal, litigation director for the National Day Labor Organizing Network, one of several groups that filed a federal lawsuit challenging the ID theft laws.
"And we are very happy that the court has recognized the harm the raids were causing to the migrant community and offers them some protection" until the case is concluded, Bansal said.
In a statement, Montgomery said "today's ruling underscores yet again the consequences of federal inaction and the Obama Administration's indifference to the effects of unlawful immigration practices. While pretending to address the concerns of people admittedly violating the law, the victims of identity theft are deprived of the State of Arizona's protection."
He said his office is reviewing an appeal of the preliminary injunction
Attorneys representing immigrant-rights group Puente, the American Civil Liberties Union and several other plaintiffs filed the motion for a preliminary injunction shortly after filing a class-action lawsuit in June, which seeks to eliminate the last legal footing Arpaio has to conduct his own brand of immigration enforcement using workplace raids.
The motion sought to preclude the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office and County Attorney's Office from enforcing two state provisions in identity-theft laws that critics say are intended to target undocumented immigrants.
The two state laws in question, "taking identity of another person or entity" and "aggravated taking identity of another person or entity," were frequently cited as the legal backing behind Arpaio's workplace raids.
The suit alleges that the statutes, while purporting to enforce all varieties of identity theft, are thinly veiled mechanisms used to promote a broader, anti-immigration agenda.
Arpaio defended his practices and said that his investigations target identity thieves regardless of their immigration status.
But last month, Arpaio voluntarily disbanded the controversial criminal employment unit — a decision that plaintiffs hailed as a direct result of the lawsuit.
Earlier, Arpaio's office said the sheriff will disband the unit in early 2015 after "careful consideration" with command staff.
"The grant money issued to his office from the state of Arizona will be returned to the state, and the deputies assigned to the unit will be reassigned to other duties," the statement said. "Sheriff Arpaio stresses that ID theft and ID fraud remain criminal offenses under Arizona Revised Statutes. Deputies and detectives will continue to investigate these crimes."
Contributing: Michael Kiefer, The Arizona Republic.
Ferguson grand juror sues to remove gag order
A juror who sat on the panel that reviewed evidence in the August
shooting death of Michael Brown has filed suit, seeking to remove a
lifetime gag order that prevents members of the grand jury from speaking
publicly about the case.
The federal suit filed on Monday names St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch as the defendant, because he would be the person to bring charges against a grand jury member who violated the gag order. The plaintiff, who is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri, is identified in the lawsuit as "Grand Juror Doe."
The grand juror would like to talk about the experience of serving on the panel, which declined to indict former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the death of Brown, to contribute to the ongoing national conversation on race relations, according to the ACLU.
It is a crime, however, for members of a grand jury to speak out without permission from a court.
"The Supreme Court has said that grand jury secrecy must be weighed against the juror's First Amendment rights on a case-by-case basis," Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Missouri, said in a statement. "The rules of secrecy must yield because this is a highly unusual circumstance. The First Amendment prevents the state from imposing a lifetime gag order in cases where the prosecuting attorney has purported to be transparent."
McCulloch announced in November that the jury would not indict Wilson, who shot the unarmed Brown, 18, at least six times after a confrontation in the St. Louis suburb on Aug. 9.
Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, faced criticism for declining to replace McCulloch, whose police officer father was fatally shot in the line of duty, with a special prosecutor to oversee the case. Some activists have also charged that McCulloch presented evidence in a way to ensure that the jury would not return an indictment.
The case spurred nationwide protests, and after the verdict was announced dozens of businesses in Ferguson were burned and looted by rioters.
Edward Magee, a spokesman for McCulloch, said that the prosecutor had not yet been served with the lawsuit and had no comment. McCulloch will have 21 days to file a formal response with the court.
In the suit, the juror contends that "the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim (Brown) than in other cases presented to the grand jury." The juror also states in the lawsuit that explanation of the law was made in a "muddled and untimely manner" compared with other cases that were presented to the grand jurors, who began their service in May.
"In Plaintiff's view, the current information available about the grand jurors' views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges," according to the lawsuit. "Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors' view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff's own."
Under Missouri law, it is a misdemeanor for grand jury members to disclose evidence or information about witnesses who appear before them.
James Cohen, an associate professor at Fordham University School of Law, said the Missouri statute was designed to reflect the typical circumstance, where grand jury proceedings are held secretly. But in this case, the prosecutor's office spoke extensively about the process and published transcripts and other evidence presented to the panel.
"This is a grand juror who wants to say some things that are in contrast to how McCulloch represented the process," Cohen said. "It's going to be very hard — I'm not going to say impossible — for a judge to say credibly we're not going to let you do this."
Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the ACLU of Missouri, said the grand juror, if allowed to speak, could help state lawmakers as they review suggested legislation that has been proposed in the aftermath of Brown's death.
"Currently, our elected officials have only one side of the story," Mittman said. "They have the government's view and the Constitution doesn't permit that. In this case, we have a grand juror who respects the grand jury process and has said I have information that is important and that legislators need to know, that can inform the public about these important public policy questions."
Contributing: Yamiche Alcindor
The federal suit filed on Monday names St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch as the defendant, because he would be the person to bring charges against a grand jury member who violated the gag order. The plaintiff, who is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Missouri, is identified in the lawsuit as "Grand Juror Doe."
The grand juror would like to talk about the experience of serving on the panel, which declined to indict former Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the death of Brown, to contribute to the ongoing national conversation on race relations, according to the ACLU.
It is a crime, however, for members of a grand jury to speak out without permission from a court.
"The Supreme Court has said that grand jury secrecy must be weighed against the juror's First Amendment rights on a case-by-case basis," Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Missouri, said in a statement. "The rules of secrecy must yield because this is a highly unusual circumstance. The First Amendment prevents the state from imposing a lifetime gag order in cases where the prosecuting attorney has purported to be transparent."
McCulloch announced in November that the jury would not indict Wilson, who shot the unarmed Brown, 18, at least six times after a confrontation in the St. Louis suburb on Aug. 9.
Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, faced criticism for declining to replace McCulloch, whose police officer father was fatally shot in the line of duty, with a special prosecutor to oversee the case. Some activists have also charged that McCulloch presented evidence in a way to ensure that the jury would not return an indictment.
The case spurred nationwide protests, and after the verdict was announced dozens of businesses in Ferguson were burned and looted by rioters.
Edward Magee, a spokesman for McCulloch, said that the prosecutor had not yet been served with the lawsuit and had no comment. McCulloch will have 21 days to file a formal response with the court.
In the suit, the juror contends that "the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim (Brown) than in other cases presented to the grand jury." The juror also states in the lawsuit that explanation of the law was made in a "muddled and untimely manner" compared with other cases that were presented to the grand jurors, who began their service in May.
"In Plaintiff's view, the current information available about the grand jurors' views is not entirely accurate — especially the implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges," according to the lawsuit. "Moreover, the public characterization of the grand jurors' view of witnesses and evidence does not accord with Plaintiff's own."
Under Missouri law, it is a misdemeanor for grand jury members to disclose evidence or information about witnesses who appear before them.
James Cohen, an associate professor at Fordham University School of Law, said the Missouri statute was designed to reflect the typical circumstance, where grand jury proceedings are held secretly. But in this case, the prosecutor's office spoke extensively about the process and published transcripts and other evidence presented to the panel.
"This is a grand juror who wants to say some things that are in contrast to how McCulloch represented the process," Cohen said. "It's going to be very hard — I'm not going to say impossible — for a judge to say credibly we're not going to let you do this."
Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the ACLU of Missouri, said the grand juror, if allowed to speak, could help state lawmakers as they review suggested legislation that has been proposed in the aftermath of Brown's death.
"Currently, our elected officials have only one side of the story," Mittman said. "They have the government's view and the Constitution doesn't permit that. In this case, we have a grand juror who respects the grand jury process and has said I have information that is important and that legislators need to know, that can inform the public about these important public policy questions."
Contributing: Yamiche Alcindor
Jury selection begins in Boston bombing trial
BOSTON — Jury selection began Monday in the Boston Marathon bombing trial, where a panel of 12 ultimately will gather in a federal courthouse under tight security to determine whether suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is guilty and should be executed.
Judge George O'Toole said the trial will begin Jan. 26 and could take three or four months to complete. He earlier denied a defense request to move the trial out of Boston.
Tsarnaev, flanked by his attorneys, sat at the defense table wearing a dark sweater and khaki trousers. He sometimes gazed at the potential jurors, other times peering at O'Toole.
The explosion of two bombs, near the finish line of the 2013 Boston Marathon, was the largest act of terrorism in Boston's history. The attack, on April 15, left three people dead, injured more than 260 and led to at least 16 people having limbs amputated. The suspects were identified three days later as Chechen brothers Tsarnaev, now 21, and his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26.
As the manhunt unfolded, prosecutors say the suspects allegedly killed a Massachusetts Institute of Technology policeman, carjacked an SUV, and were involved in a shootout with police. Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed. Dzhokhar, who was wounded, was later found hiding in a backyard boat in nearby Watertown, Mass.
Massachusetts outlawed the death penalty in 1984, and no one has been executed in the state since 1947. But Tsarnaev could face death because he's being tried in federal court instead of state court.
Liz Norden, whose sons Paul and J.P. each lost a leg in the blasts, told the Boston Heraldshe wants to attend the trial -- and wants Tsarnaev executed. "I want justice to be served," she said, adding "He destroyed many families, many people, that day."
The father of the Tsarnaev brothers, speaking by phone to the Associated Press, expressed the family's distrust of the U.S. legal system.
"All the information that can refute the allegations against my sons is on the Internet," Anzor Tsarnaev said from Grozny, the capital of Chechnya. "I still have children in America, and I am afraid for them."
More than 1,000 residents of eastern Massachusetts are on a list of potential jurors. A litany of queries boils down to two essentials: Can you be fair? Can you impose the death penalty if conditions are met?
A 2013 Boston Globe poll found just 33% of Bostonians believe Tsarnaev should get the death penalty if he's convicted. Polls from the University of Massachusetts-Amherst found more support statewide: In 2013 and again in 2014, 59% of respondents said Tsarnaev should get the death penalty if he is found guilty.
"I have real concerns that no matter who sits on that jury, they have been impacted in some way by the events of the marathon bombings," said Michael Coyne, dean of the Massachusetts School of Law in Andover, Mass. "We hope that, at least in the second phase, we get someone to look at the factors objectively."
Contributing: Associated Press
Americans love getting guns for Christmas
Gun sales healthy in 2014
Unsurprisingly, guns were a popular Christmas gift for Americans this year.
The National Retail Federation predicted that gun sales would rise 4% in November and December as holiday shoppers sought firearms to put under Christmas trees. On Black Friday alone, 175,000 federal background checks were conducted — a record.
Comedian Joe Mande, who has more than 1 million Twitter followers, drew attention to the gun-as-gift obsession Thursday by highlighting some of the people tweeting about their new guns on Christmas morning. Some photos that he retweeted showed young children with their first guns in tow. Moms, dads, sisters and brothers celebrated their gifts.
I really hope my parents got me a new gun for Christmas. Last year my mom got a glock, I think it's my turn!
new toy
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
You will be considered a coup and terrorists so many will approve of Obama using the NDAA to make the criminal arrests on you!
I am in full support of the Republic, yet YOU NEED TO FORCE THE US MILITARY TO TAKE ACTIONS and not allow them to stall like Drake has been bringing up!
Do the US Military need 100's of pages of legal documents on the Bilderberg group, the Rothchilds, the Illuminati, and others?
I know that we have a ILLEGAL government in control and we CAN NOT ALLOW them to continue!
Go ahead and make the 'de jure' LEGAL Constitutional actions necessary and put it on the mass media, not just the internet!