Group items tagged

Judge Andrew Napolitano at his best: summary: "Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn't." America's founding fathers saw freedom as a part of our nature to be protected-not to be usurped by the federal government-and so enshrined separation of powers and guarantees of freedom  in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. But a little over a hundred years after America's founding, those God-given rights were laid siege by two presidents caring more about the advancement of progressive, redistributionist ideology than the principles on which America was founded. Theodore and Woodrow is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's shocking historical account of how a Republican and a Democratic president oversaw the greatest shift in power in American history, from a land built on the belief that authority should be left to the individuals and the states to a bloated, far-reaching federal bureaucracy, continuing to grow and consume power each day. With lessons rooted in history, Judge Napolitano shows the intellectually arrogant, anti-personal freedom, even racist progressive philosophy driving these men to poison the American system of government.  And Americans still pay for their legacy-in the federal income, in state-prescribed compulsory education, in the Federal Reserve, in perpetual wars, and in the constant encroachment of a government that coddles special interests and discourages true competition in the marketplace. With his attention to detail, deep constitutional knowledge, and unwavering adherence to truth telling, Judge Napolitano moves through the history of these men and their times in office to show how American values and the Constitution were sadly set aside, leaving personal freedom as a shadow of its former self,  in the grip of an insidious, Nanny state, progressive ideology.

Judge Napalatano The Campaign for Liberty Tea Party Group is holding patriotic meetings throughout the USA. Libertarian icon Judge Andrew Napolitano is a frequent and much requested speaker at these meetings. In this speech, the third part of a three part series, the Judge calls out to this generation of patriots to stand up for freedom; to defend liberty. Excellent speech. A fitting conclusion to parts one and two. Many thanks to Frank for this find!

My experience with Napolitano, as a retired lawyer, is that his present role is as a propagandist, willing to lie to make his central point. I've often caught him saying things about the law that he either knows are false or knows that he lacks sufficient knowledge to claim that one of his legal conclusions is true. (He is, however, a very effective orator.) This speech is no different. His premise is false, that there is no language in the Constitution authorizing a host of general welfare laws. First, we find in the Constitution's Preamble it's statement of purpose: "We the People of the United States, *in Order to* form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, *promote the general Welfare,* and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Note the distinction made between "promote the general Welfare" and the securing of Liberties. So the Constitution has a purpose beyond securing liberties that falls in the category of promoting the general welfare. Next we move on to Article 1 section 8, which itemizes the Powers of the Congress. In that section's first clause we find: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and *provide for the* common Defence and *general Welfare* of the United States;" But Napolitano's speech mistakenly brands a host of general welfare laws as abuses of the Commerce Clause, which only supplements the General Welfare Clause in relevant regard. His discussion of the meaning of "regulate" at the time of the Constitution's adoption is irrelevant. The far more pertinent question is what was meant at that time by the term "general Welfare." Napolitano simply ducks that question by ignoring the General Welfare Clause and pretending that it does not exist. That is not principled argument, in my humble opinion. Moral o

Liberty's backlash -- why we should be grateful to Edward Snowden By Judge Andrew P. Napolitano Published August 01, 2013 FoxNews.com Last week, Justin Amash, the two-term libertarian Republican congressman from Michigan, joined with John Conyers, the 25-term liberal Democratic congressman from the same state, to offer an amendment to legislation funding the National Security Agency (NSA). If enacted, the Amash-Conyers amendment would have forced the government's domestic spies when seeking search warrants to capture Americans' phone calls, texts and emails first to identify their targets and produce evidence of their terror-related activities before a judge may issue a warrant. The support they garnered had a surprising result that stunned the Washington establishment. It almost passed. The final vote, in which the Amash-Conyers amendment was defeated by 205 to 217, was delayed for a few hours by the House Republican leadership, which opposed the measure. The Republican leadership team, in conjunction with President Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, needed more time for arm-twisting so as to avoid a humiliating loss. But the House rank-and-file did succeed in sending a message to the big-government types in both parties: Nearly half of the House of Representatives has had enough of government spying and then lying about it, and understands that spying on every American simply cannot withstand minimal legal scrutiny or basic constitutional analysis. The president is deeply into this and no doubt wishes he wasn't. He now says he welcomed the debate in the House on whether his spies can have all they want from us or whether they are subject to constitutional requirements for their warrants. Surely he knows that the Supreme Court has ruled consistently since the time of the Civil War that the government is always subject to the Constitution, wherever it goes and whatever it does. As basic as that sounds, it is not a universally held belief am

The NSA is sharing personal data with the DEA, IRS and Homeland Security. the new Diigo SUCKS!!!! Whenever you click off the diigo dialog, either to the page being bookmarked, or, another browser window, the diigo dialog closes!!! Who is the damn MORON behind this god awful design???????? MORON!! Three times I have tried to bookmark the Judge Napolitano interview, with notes on his comments. And three times the dialog blew up and disappeared. The morons at diigo don't seem to have a clue as to how end users collect information into a dialog. No clue whatsoever!

Another excellent commentary on NSA spying and the USA Constitution from libertarian icon, Judge Andrew Napolitano.  He has some very interesting arguments about the FiSA Courts and their legality under the Constitution.

"However, now we - at least those of us who pay attention - know, thanks to Glenn Beck, the Saudi person of interest is not just some innocent bystander after all. Just hours after the April 15 bombing, Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi was put on a terror watch list and had an event file created that indicated he was armed and dangerous; and actions began that would lead to his deportation. Alharbi, who is related to a number of terrorists now residing in Gitmo and/or listed as part of al-Qaida, was admitted to the United States under a "special advisory opinion," indicating someone pulled some strings for him. His strings go a long way - all the way to the White House, where Alharbi was a frequent visitor (seven times since 2009). His file contained one prior event, indicating he was already in the terrorism watch list system. Yet even though he's marked as a terrorist, he was allowed in. Perhaps that explains Michelle Obama's hospital visit. Alharbi and the Obamas are friends. After news of his possible deportation leaked, government officials backtracked. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refused to answer questions from a Congressman about Alharbi. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement official told Beck a different Saudi was in custody but not connected to the bombing. Someone altered Alharbi's file on April 17 in a way that disassociated him from the bombing, according to Beck, but an original had been printed out and saved. The change happened around the time that first Secretary of State John Kerry and then President Barack Obama met with the Saudi foreign minister - a meeting that wasn't on Obama's schedule. There are photographs on the Internet that purport to show Alharbi with two other Saudis near the bomb site. If the government will lie about who Alharbi is and whether his is a suspect, what else about the official narrative is a lie? Despite initial claims by the FBI that included a request to help identify the two men

"Whatever the impression Trump may have given you -- a carnival barker, a hero, a jerk, a courageous leader -- he brilliantly tapped into a deep vein of millions of American men and women who believe they have been forgotten by the government they pay for. These good people have been alienated by the elites who dominate American government and culture and civic life. On Tuesday night, they found a home. The forgotten man believes that the Obama administration doesn't care about him. The forgotten man knows that the government put into place regulations of economic activity that put him out of work or into a lower-paying job. These forgotten men and women resent the Obama administration's telling them they must have health insurance or they will be taxed for it and then so incompetently manipulating the marketplace as to cause the cost of that insurance -- often an unwanted product -- to skyrocket. These good folks cringed when their family doctor told them that he could no longer afford to treat them because the feds had overregulated the practice of medicine. They simply couldn't believe that their own government would make the practice of medicine so expensive that doctors in droves could not afford to stay in business. And they were outraged when their doctors told them the feds could see their medical records and dictate their medical treatment. The forgotten man has profound resentment for a government that is telling him how to live. The forgotten man's union dues have shot up. His union leaders use his dues to support political candidates he doesn't know or like. Yet he has usually voted for the Democrats -- out of a traditional belief that the Democrats would think of him and his needs when framing federal legislation. They haven't. The forgotten man speaks his mind but isn't drawn to lofty arguments about the freedom of speech. The forgotten man wants the government to work but couldn't tell you which aspects of its behavior are unconstit

Former FBI agent and author of Black Banners - the inside story of 911. Ali Soufan on The Colbert Report January 4, 2012 Ali Soufan on The Colbert Report Ali Soufan on Charlie Rose December 23, 2011 Ali Soufan on Charlie Rose Ali Soufan Testifies Before British Parliament December 13, 2011 On Tuesday October 18, 2011, Ali Soufan gave oral evidence before the House of Commons' Home Affairs Committee, on the "roots of radicalization." Read the testimony here: http://soufangroup.com/news/details/?Article_Id=191 Anthony Franks on The John Batchelor Show November 3, 2011 Anthony Franks interviewed on the John Batchelor radio show. The interview covered the recent Atmospheric report that examined the current local dispute over gas fields in the Eastern Mediterranean off the island off Cyprus involving U.S. Noble Energy Inc., and how the complex Turkish, US, and Israeli national interests intersected - and then how the interplay of regional energy politics impacts on the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as it seeks ways to maintain regional influence through an intelligence and military presence in Turkey and Kuwait. Ali Soufan on AC360: Anwar al-Awlaki October 1, 2011 Ali Soufan talks to Anderson Cooper about Anwar al-Awlaki and al Qaeda in Yemen Ali Soufan on Anderson Cooper September 28, 2011 Talking about The Black Banners and harsh interrogation techniques Ali Soufan on Hardball with Chris Matthews September 23, 2011 Talking about the relationship with Pakistan's ISI. Ali Soufan talks with Martin Bashir on MSNBC September 15, 2011 Could the CIA have thwarted the 9/11 Plot? Fox: Judge Napolitano Interviews Ali Soufan: Eyewitness to the War on Terror September 15, 2011 Former FBI agent Ali Soufan recounts his eight years of counterterrorism work for the FBI and explains why 9/11 could?ve been prevented as well as why torture doesn't work. Ali Soufan on Morning Joe: The Interrogator September 13, 2011 Ali Soufan visits MSNBC's Morning Joe to discuss "The Black Banners

Great speech Great speech!  Wonderful connection with today's events and the history of liberty.  Worth reading!   excerpt: "If tyranny might have been predicted, history also tells us that the ideas of liberty remain steadfast and pure, and repeatedly these ideas take form and flight, and agitate the status quo. Periodically in our own history, we have seen a resurgence of the ideas of Freeborn John. We are seeing them in the Republican Party, most specifically in the person and message of Dr. Ron Paul. We've seen them in the relatively young Libertarian Party. These ideas - of self-ownership, of religious toleration, of the right of free association, and of equality under the law, and ideas that oppose government influenced, government created, and government subsidized monopolies - these are old ideas, and they are right ideas. Today, we live under a constitution that in words, embraces liberty. And yet what we have in terms of a government, a president, a Congress, and a judiciary is arrogant and unrestrained. Just this week, we witnessed a mild example of actual constitutional process. A federal judge permanently blocked the detention of Americans by the executive branch. Section 1021 of the NDAA provides for the detention of any American indefinitely without habeas corpus or trial on executive order. It clearly contradicts the Constitution. Yet, when a federal judge explained this and blocked the practice, within hours of the ruling, the Obama administration filed an extensive and panicked appeal. Judge Napolitano wrote a scathing article this week, wondering what our choices were in terms of a change of national leadership. He basically asked, "What if the principal parties' candidates for president really agree more than they disagree?" He concluded with another question: "If elections change nothing, what do we do about it?"

"What the hell just happened? That is the question that many Americans should be asking themselves following the news conference where Obama unveiled his plan for destroying the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. At first glance it appeared to be a case of Obama shamelessly using the deaths of innocents, and some live children as a backdrop, to push for the passage of radical gun control measures by Congress. Most of these have no chance of passing, yet, Obama's signing of Executive orders initiating 23 so called Executive actions on gun control seemed like an afterthought. Unfortunately, that is the real story, but it is generally being overlooked. The fact is that with a few strokes of his pen Obama set up the mechanisms he will personally use to not only destroy the Second Amendment to the Constitution, but also the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments. It will not matter what Congress does, Obama can and will act on his own, using these Executive actions, and will be violating both the Constitution and his oath of office when he does it. Here are the sections of the Executive Order that he will use: "1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background-check system." What exactly is relevant data? Does it include our medical records obtained through Obamacare, our tax returns, our political affiliations, our military background, and our credit history? I suggest that all of the above, even if it violates our fourth Amendment right to privacy will now be relevant data for determining if we are allowed to purchase a firearm. "2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background-check system." This should be read in conjunction with section 16 of the order that says: "16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors

Judge Napolitano raises an interesting point: Did Barack Obama realize that his conversations with 35 foreign national leaders were being wiretapped? General Alexander says not. 

Andrew Napolitano, in what I view as his best essay I have read, explains the significance of "jurisdictionally based judicial ruling on the cellphone aspect of the domestic spying that former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed last spring" as compared to the non-jurisdictional rulings of the FISA court.

From the Tenth Amendment Center:   "On Tuesday, April 9th, the California Assembly Public Safety Committee will hold a hearing and do-or-die vote on AB351.   Passage of this bill would be a serious setback to those advancing the power of "indefinite detention" in the United States. AB351 NEEDS YOUR HELP RIGHT NOW TO PASS. 1. CALL all the members of the Public Safety Committee.  Call in the evenings or on the weekend as well.  We want them to have a flood of messages in support by the time they have the hearing on Tuesday.  Be VERY respectful, but be strong. Urge each of them to vote YES on AB351. Tom Ammiano, chair (916) 319-2017 Melissa Melendez, vice-chair (916) 319-2067 Byron Jones-Sawyer, Sr. (916) 319-2059 Holly J. Mitchell (916) 319-2054 Bill Quirk (916) 319-2020 Nancy Skinner (916) 319-2015 Marie Waldron (916) 319-2075 "

Citibank chose Obama's 2008 cabinet. Why am I not surprised?