http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/11/top-us-lawyer-andrew-mccarthy-obama-is-guilty-of-serial-fraud-impeachment-is-a-remedy-video/

Top US Lawyer: Obama Is Guilty of Serial Fraud – Impeachment Is a Remedy (Video)

Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, November 13, 2013, 8:38 PM

Top American lawyer and author Andrew McCarthy, who prosecuted the World Trade Center bombers after the 1993 attacks, accused Barack Obama of serial fraud tonight on The Kelly Files. Andrew told Megyn Kelly:
“If ever there has been a fraud on the entire American people it’s this one. And, I would say, Megyn, this business about, “you want your plan, you keep your plan,” is just the beginning of it… We’re talking about serial fraud on multiple levels and multiple level misrepresentations… This is an ‘in your face’ almost a crude fraud… The remedy the Framers gave us for reigning in executive excess especially if it gets this abusive is impeachment. Impeachment is a political remedy not a legal remedy… This is a big scandalous scheme and the more you look at it, systematic dishonesty is rife all the way through it.”
You must hear this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLU2XKfXwkg

*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]


To those who have taken the Oath, Remember the Oath!
To those who have not and believe in the Constitution,
Take a similar Oath now to the Constitution!
Remember that those who make laws contrary to the Constitution,
Those who enforce laws contrary to the Constitution,
And those who give orders contrary to the Constitution,
Have become domestic enemies of the Constitution!
It doesn't take a Judge or a lawyer to know the difference!

"I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; AND THAT I WILL OBEY THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE OFFICERS APPOINTED OVER ME, ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS AND THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE. SO HELP ME GOD."

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 164, 176. (1803)

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491. 

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton vs. Shelby County, 118 US 425, 442.

Teddy's Answer to Diversity!

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities.
— Theodore Roosevelt, speech before the Knights of Columbus, 1915, New York

Teddy's Answer to Bush!

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
— Theodore Roosevelt

Teddy's Answer to Bush & Congress

"We cannot afford to differ on the question of honesty if we expect our republic permanently to endure.  Honesty is not so much a credit as an absolute prerequisite to efficient service to the public.  Unless a man is honest, we have no right to keep him in public life; it matters not how brilliant his capacity."  — Theodore Roosevelt

Want to be on our lists? 

Click here

Write to usvfnews@charter.net  to be off lists!

It will take up to 72 Hours to take you off of lists!

Bill's Vietnam Memorial Page
http://www.wjpbr.com

Bank Run Fears: Customers Being Forced to Provide Evidence For Why They Need Cash

Bank Run Fears: Customers Being Forced to Provide Evidence For Why They Need Cash

In early 2013 the country of Cyprus locked down private banking accounts and restricted access to depositor funds. It was the first widely documented instance of a “bail-in,” as bank officials and European regulators determined that bad loans taken on by the banks were now the responsibility of the banks’ customers. This led to a country-wide confiscation of 10% or more of all customer funds. In the heat of the Cyprian financial panic banks limited cash withdrawals to around $300 and ramped up security to prevent angry Cypriots from breaking down the doors.

What happened in Cyprus was big news all over the world, but within a few news cycles, once European and American officials assured the people it was a limited-scope event, the general population swept potential fears under the rug. No one really reported on the fact that the European Union quickly instituted new regulatory policies that would force bail-ins across the entire continent should such a crisis take hold again. Likewise, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke assured Americans that the crisis in Cyprus and Europe posed no risk to the US financial system, citing FDIC insurance for U.S. bank depositors as the safety net that would prevent a similar situation in the United States.

The United States, Europe, China and all of the world’s developed economies are, if officials are to be believed, completely immune to what happened in Cyprus. The current belief by the best and brightest is that these countries are simply too big to ever be faced with a total collapse of their banking systems.

But what if they were wrong? What if private debt reached such obscene levels that the loans taken on by lenders could never be repaid? What if a country like China, which holds trillions of dollars in cash reserves and has modern central banking regulations, did face such a problem?

Couldn’t happen, right?

It turns out, that’s exactly what is happening right now, as Chinese banks struggle to cope with nearly $23 trillion worth of potentially bad loans. Yes, that’s Trillion, with a “T.” The Chinese, it appears, have mimicked the exact set of circumstances that led to the 2008 crisis in America. Remember all of those empty cities and malls in China – they housed no people or shopping venues, yet cost billions of dollars to develop? It looks like all those bridges to nowhere are catching up with the Chinese. And the panic has begun, as evidenced by capital controls and restrictive withdrawal policies now being implemented by one of the largest banks in the world all across China.

Want to know how a bank run starts? Look no further:

HSBC is imposing restrictions on large cash withdrawals raising a number of red flags. The BBC reports that some HSBC customers have been prevented from withdrawing large amounts of cash because they could not provide evidence of why they wanted it. HSBC admitted it has not informed customers of the change in policy, which was implemented in November for their own good: “We ask our customers about the purpose of large cash withdrawals when they are unusual... the reason being we have an obligation to protect our customers, and to minimise the opportunity for financial crime.” As one customer responded: “you shouldn’t have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It’s not theirs, it’s yours.”

“When we presented them with the withdrawal slip, they declined to give us the money because we could not provide them with a satisfactory explanation for what the money was for. They wanted a letter from the person involved.”

Mr Cotton says the staff refused to tell him how much he could have: “So I wrote out a few slips. I said, ‘Can I have £5,000?’ They said no. I said, ‘Can I have £4,000?’ They said no. And then I wrote one out for £3,000 and they said, ‘OK, we’ll give you that.’ “

He asked if he could return later that day to withdraw another £3,000, but he was told he could not do the same thing twice in one day.

...

Mr Cotton cannot understand HSBC’s attitude: “I’ve been banking in that bank for 28 years. They all know me in there. You shouldn’t have to explain to your bank why you want that money. It’s not theirs, it’s yours.”

Via: Zero Hedge

As in China, the debt party in the United States has returned in force. We are now very close to the same levels of personal and commercial debt as we saw prior to the crash of ’08, but rather than being concerned the experts say don’t fight it, embrace it.

But as is the case in China, the debt party will soon be coming to an end in the United States as tens of millions of Americans see their wealth and jobs wiped out. Like the people of China who took on loans they can’t repay, Americans are under the gun. And in the near future, the same credit problems that gripped the world before will do so again. And this time we’ll be footing the bill directly from our bank accounts (rather than the Federal Reserve’s printing presses).

We may not yet have official regulatory or bank policies for restricting cash withdrawals here in the USA, but just try to head to your local bank and withdraw $5000 or $10,000 and see what happens. You will invariably be met with stares from bank employees and questions about your intentions and why you need that much cash.

We’ve already seen how fast they can lock down the entire banking system. It’ll only take a push of a button and everything you think you have in your personal bank account could be seized.

But then again, as Ben Bernanke has said previously, there is no risk to the financial system. Moreover, the FDIC has insured your money, so if something does go wrong with the American banking system, all of your losses are totally covered by the roughly $50 billion in FDIC reserves. That should be plenty of money to handle the $9 trillion in US-based domestic customer deposits, plus the $300 trillion in derivatives bets made by the banks.

So, no need to worry, because the government’s got your back (and they would NEVER think of using your deposited funds to offset any bank losses).

But even though it is impossible to conceive that such a thing might happen we recommend preparing for it just in case. We know FEMA will be there to provide emergency cash, food and recovery tents. But in the off chance the credit system locks up again, ATM’s are limited to minimal withdrawals, and the banks do seize your money you might want to have some food, supplies, gold, and reserve cash on hand.

We realize such a thing could never happen – not in the world’s most developed and richest economy. Ben Bernanke, Janet Yellen, government officials and TV pundits say it can’t. So, these extra supplies would be just for fun and entertainment – something to show friends and family when they come over so you can have a laugh about all these crazy Doomsday scenarios.

The NSA and the 9/11 Deception

This piece, by my idol, James Corbett,

discusses a bold new citizen-led initiative

to nullify the NSA, which is now

gaining momentum around the

United States.

 

From its activities, it would appear that,

as far as the NSA is concerned, the

"Enemies of the State" were never

so-called terrorists from poverty-stricken

nations, half-way across the world.

The "enemies" were primarily a US

public that was informed about its

rights - and of NSA's crimes.

As former NSA Executive Thomas Drake

is quoted as saying, here: there were

those in his office, who referred to 9/11

as "a gift". Literally: a gift, which would

give them more justification to expand

their already-illegal activities, which had

nothing, whatsoever to do with their

mandate, which US Taxpayer dollars

were supposed to be subsidizing.

Two US Congressmen, Stephen Lynch

(D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-NC) are

now lobbying Congress to de-classify the

28 redacted pages of the Congressional

Investigative Report on 9/11.

 

If these redacted pages do reveal, as

alleged by Veterans Today Senior Editor,

Gordon Duff, that 9/11 was perpetrated

by at least two foreign intelligence

agencies, in collusion with the Bush (43)

Administration and NOT by 19 hijackers

wielding plastic box-cutters (puh-LEEZE!)

- and when we really take a look at just

who the NSA is *really* spying on - it

would not appear that they don't care

too much about monitoring Bedouins in

the Middle East but more about high-level

industrial secrets and the personal, possibly

blackmail-worthy private information of

the leaders of the US' purported allies.

Most of all, the focus of NSA's spying

effort seems to be directed toward every

activity of the US populace, itself.

THIS WOULD MAKE ALL THE SENSE IN THE

WORLD, IF AS SUGGESTED BY ALL OF

THE ABOVE, THAT 9/11 WAS A COUP D'ETAT

AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AND ITS

PEOPLE.

9/11 was enabled by perverted individuals

who held high positions of power in the US

Government, at that time - but these

"people" (if you can call them that) were

the mere minions of yet more powerful

entities, who would bring America crashing

down, just like the WTC Towers, which were

a grim illustration of a planned "Domino Effect",

which would ruin economies and Rule of Law,

in countries worldwide, so that this handful

of people could control everybody and

everything.

(Already, the top 85 most-wealthy

individuals on Earth earn the equivalent

wealth of the bottom 3.5 billion of this

planet's inhabitants).

 

If we are to regain any possibility of Rule

of Law, these 28 pages must be de-classified,

in order that the proper entities be legally

prosecuted, for their crimes against humanity.

Video (under 15 mins):

The NSA and the 9/11 Deception

http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001zWqxKJq1GDJTi_vE4XM33jr7nQBxljTDF6o2GGUfuQfA9OrB3aOfZ6C5f26PBMLepAx7lkXwq0QynJe9BRo_oKyCY0FUTPjiwALN_sNwKrwoaXx48dob25EAtKGxKnKh6upfS0mm7rLXl5ZUXo3nX5mmsItX4R81

OBAMA IS SHIPPING AWAY MORE US JOBS

OBAMA IS SHIPPING AWAY MORE US JOBS

Obama secretly signing away U.S. sovereignty

Despite the government shutdown, the Obama administration has continued secret negotiations to complete what is known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP.

The expansive plan is a proposed free-trade agreement between the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Chile, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

The agreement would create new guidelines for everything from food safety to fracking, financial markets, medical prices, copyright rules and Internet freedom.

The TPP negotiations have been criticized by politicians and advocacy groups alike for their secrecy. The few aspects of the partnership leaked to the public indicate an expansive agenda with highly limited congressional oversight.

Aaron Klein’s “Impeachable Offenses: The Case to Remove Barack Obama from Office” is available, autographed, at WND’s Superstore

A New York Times opinion piece previously called the deal the “most significant international commercial agreement since the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995.”

Last week, the White House website released a joint statement with the other proposed TPP signatories affirming “our countries are on track to complete the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.”

“Ministers and negotiators have made significant progress in recent months on all the legal texts and annexes on access to our respective goods, services, investment, financial services, government procurement, and temporary entry markets,” the White House said.

The statement did not divulge details of the partnership other than to suggest a final TPP agreement “must reflect our common vision to establish a comprehensive, next-generation model for addressing both new and traditional trade and investment issues, supporting the creation and retention of jobs and promoting economic development in our countries.”

Secrecy

In February, the Open the Government organization sent a letter to Obama blasting the lack of transparency surrounding the TPP talks, stating the negotiations have been “conducted in unprecedented secrecy.”

“Despite the fact the deal may significantly affect the way we live our lives by limiting our public protections, there has been no public access to even the most fundamental draft agreement texts and other documents,” read the letter.

The missive was signed by advocacy groups such as OpenTheGovernment.org, Project On Government Oversight, ARTICLE 19 and the Global Campaign for Freedom of Expression and Information.

The groups warned issues being secretly negotiated include “patent and copyright, land use, food and product standards, natural resources, professional licensing, government procurement, financial practices, healthcare, energy, telecommunications, and other service sector regulations.”

Lack of oversight

Normally free -trade agreements must be authorized by a majority of the House and Senate, usually in lengthy proceedings.

However, the White House is seeking what is known as “trade promotion authority” which would fast track approval of the TPP by requiring Congress to vote on the likely lengthy trade agreement within 90 days and without any amendments.

The authority also allows Obama to sign the agreement before Congress even has a chance to vote on it, with lawmakers getting only a quick post-facto vote.

A number of lawmakers have been speaking out about the secret TPP talks.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., recently proposed legislation requiring the White House to disclose all TPP documents to members of Congress.

“The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations, while representatives of U.S. corporations – like Halliburton, Chevron, PHRMA, Comcast, and the Motion Picture Association of America – are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement,” said Wyden.

However, Obama has so far refused to give Congress a copy of the draft agreement.

Regulates food, Internet, medicine, commerce

The TPP is “more than just a trade deal,” wrote Lori Wallach and Ben Beachy of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch in a New York Times op-ed last June.

“Only 5 of its 29 chapters cover traditional trade matters, like tariffs or quotas. The others impose parameters on nontrade policies. Existing and future American laws must be altered to conform with these terms, or trade sanctions can be imposed against American exports.”

Wallach and Beachy spotlighted several leaks in the proposed TPP text, including one that would regulate the price of medicine.

“Pharmaceutical companies, which are among those enjoying access to negotiators as ‘advisers,’ have long lobbied against government efforts to keep the cost of medicines down. Under the agreement, these companies could challenge such measures by claiming that they undermined their new rights granted by the deal.”

Amnesty International USA warned draft TPP provisions related to patents for pharmaceuticals “risk stifling the development and production of generic medicines, by strengthening and deepening monopoly protections.”

Another leak revealed the TPP would grant more incentives to relocate domestic manufacturing offshore, Wallach and Beachy related.

Jim Hightower, a progressive activist, wrote the TPP incorporates elements similar to the Stop Online Piracy Act.

Hightower wrote the deal would “transform Internet service providers into a private, Big Brother police force, empowered to monitor our ‘user activity,’ arbitrarily take down our content and cut off our access to the Internet.”

Indeed, Internet freedom advocacy groups have been protesting the TPP, taking specific issue with leaked proposals that would enact strict intellectual property restraints that would effectively change U.S. copyright law.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation argued the TPP would “restrict the ability of Congress to engage in domestic law reform to meet the evolving IP needs of American citizens and the innovative technology sector.”

In a petition signed by over 30 Internet freedom organizations, the group warned the TPP would “rewrite global rules on intellectual property enforcement.”

With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott