OBAMA KILLS THE LAW
Should a person be President of the United States who knowingly and deliberately violates the Constitution and their Oath of Office by supporting law enforcement officers using falsified audio/video recordings to wrongfully incriminate a citizen of crime?
If you answered yes to that question then you need to remove Obama from the White House for Obama’s right hand men and women aided and abetted the use of falsified audio/video recordings and taser guns by the Palo Alto Police to falsely incriminate a U.S. citizen of a crime.
“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
Obama cannot refute the allegation; he chooses to ignore it validating his culpability.
There is a law in California that makes it illegal for a person to conceal a felonious act of another person. There is another law in California that makes it illegal for a person to conspire with another to commit a crime.
Supported by California laws PC 32 and PC 182, herein after the Obama administration, encompassing Attorney General Eric Holder all they way down to the beat cop Kelly Burger, shall be referred to as “Obama.”
Why did Obama do this to a U.S. citizen? Obama did this because he believes he is a superior human being then his fellow American.
If he believes he is superior to just one, by way of reason he must believe his is superior to many Americans.
How do we know Obama believes he is superior to most Americans, we know because Obama would not want done to him what he has done has done to another.
If he is willing to use falsified videos against one American citizen for any reason, then he is willing to use falsified videos against any citizen.
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.” Abraham Lincoln
Obama would not have persecuted the citizen and violated the Constitution as he did if the citizen whom he persecuted had the financial resources to defend himself and the Constitution.
Obama exploited the citizen’s economic liability with un-restrained cops shredding the Constitution in the process.
Obama would not have eviscerated the Constitution had it been someone of Obama’s economic class who was impaled on the wrong end of a taser. Obama picks on the weak, the vulnerable, the powerless, those who are no challenge to his power revealing that he is not only a bully but also a coward who fears the truth.
LAW:
What is the purpose of law enforcement? Why do we have agents of the law roaming the streets?
When a man robs a bank and goes home with his loot, does he turn himself in? When a man assaults another with steel barbs and electricity does he walk into the jail because he knew he violated the law?
We have a justice system put in place because those who would harm their fellow citizens typically don’t hold themselves accountable.
Are those American citizens who have been entrusted with carrying out the law morally superior to any other American citizen? Have they escaped the natural human flaws that are common to all? Do they somehow possess a superhuman ability to hold themselves accountable which no other American citizen has? The answer is no. So if those who have been granted the power and the control mechanisms to carry out the laws violate the laws that they are to enforce, who holds them accountable? When the Attorney General violates the law who holds him accountable?
"A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody, ought not to be trusted by any body." Thomas Paine
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." James Madison
If those who have ascended to the position of power entrusted to enforce the Rule of Law and the laws governed refuse to enforce the Rule of Law upon themselves then the Rule of Law is not their master but their servant to do their bidding.
"Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals." George Washington
RULE OF LAW:
What is the Rule of Law? The Rule of Law is state of being when the Law is King of the Nation denying any person whether it be the president, a judge, a cop or a street sweeper the ability to arbitrarily apply the law for his or her own benefit.
Obama and the Palo Alto Police used falsified evidence, audios and videos to incriminate a citizen of a crime. Using falsified evidence, audios and videos is a violation of California law. Obama, the Palo Alto police, moved and destroyed evidence in order to falsely incriminate a citizen of a crime. Moving and destroying evidence to secure a wrong and false conviction is a violation of California law.
Equal Protection of the law secured through the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments is the state of being when all men and women are equal before the law, whether it be the president, a judge, a cop or a street sweeper. It is the true state of the Law blindfolded to the political, economic, occupational and social status of the parties while using objective 20/20 vision when evaluating the evidence and the facts in order to apply the law fairly between all citizens regardless of social status.
Obama, the enforcers of the Law, decided that a private citizen was not equal before the Law with the officer who tortured that citizen unnecessarily in violation of California and U.S. law. Obama, the enforcers of the Law, decided that because this citizen was not equal to the police officer, they were and are justified in violating other laws to cover up the initial crimes of the police officer and to falsely incriminate the citizen of a crime which is another violation of the Law. In committing the former acts of actually deliberately violating the law Obama is upposed to enforce and picking and choosing when, where and how to apply the Law based upon personal preference, Obama has usurped the King of the Nation and placed himself above the Rule of Law. The only time that the Rule of Law exists is when the Rule of Law is King, since the Rule of Law is no longer King, the Rule of Law is dead. By is own actions Obama has killed the Rule of Law and replaced it with his own subjective dictates.
We write laws to protect ourselves from each other, to protect the innocent form the guilty.
If a private citizen were to tamper and falsify evidence in order to wrongfully incriminate a police officer of a crime, Obama would put that private citizen in prison for violating the law. Yet when a police officer commits the very same act, Obama covers up the officer’s crime and helps him place the private citizen in prison by using that falsified evidence.
If the Rule of Law is no longer the Objective enforcer of the laws replaced by the subjective dictates of Obama, then no one is safe and no one is truly free.
“The Constitution... is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” Thomas Jefferson
Is there any reason, any set of circumstances, any deplorable person which would justify police officers falsifying videos to incriminate a citizen of a crime? Obama thinks so. Those who hold to Obama’s amoral existence and immoral acts because those acts were perpetrated on others reveal that their own position lacks legitimacy, for if you were to ask any one of them if Obama had done to them what he has done to the citizen they would condemn it, for no sentient being possessing a conscience would condone his or her own physical torture and the use of falsified evidence to incriminate him or her of a crime. Should they continue in their position of supporting Obama’s hypocrisy, they place themselves into the boat of superiority alongside Obama doing to others that which they would not want done to themselves that which they would not want done to their children and grand-children, mothers and grand-fathers.
HYPOCRICY:
Much of Obama consists of descendants of African American heritage whose recent ancestors suffered numerous persecutions and violations of body and soul similar to that of which Obama has committed against the citizen.
Having obtained the rights and acceptance to become an enforcer of the law, Eric Holder has chosen to persecute a law abiding citizen whom he as deemed as an inferior human being due to his economic status just as the enforcers deemed Eric Holder’s grand-parents as inferior human beings due to the color of their skin.
Having ascended to a position of power Judge Ware has revealed that his character is no better then the men who would lynch his grand-parents for being black.
In fact, if Judge Ware’s great-grand parents were alive today, if Frederick Douglas were alive today they would be fighting against the immoral, the depravity of Judge Ware’s acts.
"Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves." D.H. Lawrence
There are some, maybe many who will look at the evidence and come to an opposite conclusion put forth here not based upon the legitimacy of the evidence but as a result of self-interest and emotional ties overlooking the offensive acts of the men and women in order to secure future favors. Who can deny the evidence of a police chief admitting to violating the law?
They say, “whatever Obama does to another is okay so long as he doesn’t do it to us; it’s better that one man, one citizen, lose his rights and perish then to have Obama’s entire administration exposed as a fraud and we lose our rights.”
Those who hold to Obama’s principle of the ends justifying the means demonstrate that they do not believe in the American ideal that, “All men are created equal,” that all men and women are equal before the law.
What they don’t realize is, is Obama didn’t violate one citizen when he violated the Rule of Law and the Constitution; he violated the rights of every citizen. At the same time he is openly telling us that he will help us and protect us and provide us with greater rights to obtain our support or re-election he is weakening and undermining rights of greater necessity to freedom.
In his right hand Obama provides gay marriage, but in his left hand he steals Due Process of Law. In his right hand he provides us health care, but in his left hand he imprisons us by using falsified evidence. What good is it to have the former without the later?
SPORTSMANSHIP:
Obama writes the rules of the game which everyone must abide by and we all, private citizens and agents of the government alike play the game. This time around Obama is going to lose to a million to one underdog so he resorts to cheating to ensure his victory. Unfortunately he gets caught, and will suffer an even greater loss. Refusing to accept defeat honorably and acknowledge the errors of his ways Obama pays off the refs to cover up his cheating and pays off the judges to not apply the rules. Obama wins, but had to cheat to win. Would we as a society be giving Obama a pass if he were a baseball player who used a corked bat to win a batting title or an MVP? Would we as a society be giving Obama a pass if he placed steal marbles in his gloves to beat down the smaller and weaker boxer?
SOLDIER:
Why does America send her sons and daughters to war?
Does America send her sons and daughter to war to ensure that the American government can use falsified evidence to incriminate her own citizens of crimes or does America send her sons and daughters to war to ensure that no other nation would subject America’s sons and daughters to prison by using falsified evidence?
What do you think an American soldier’s response would be if you asked him if he would be willing to put his life on the line so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate him of a crime?
Did 25,000 Americans die in the Revolutionary War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 625,000 Americans die in the Civil War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 405,399 Americans die in the World War 2 so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 36,516 Americans die in the Korean War so that Obama could use falsified evidence? to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 58,209 Americans die in the Vietnam War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 6,699 Americans die in Afghanistan and Iraq so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
If Obama can use falsified videos to incriminate American citizens of crimes then every American soldier who has given life and limb for freedom did so in vain.
Should a person be President of the United States who knowingly and deliberately violates the Constitution and their Oath of Office by supporting law enforcement officers using falsified audio/video recordings to wrongfully incriminate a citizen of crime?
If you answered yes to that question then you need to remove Obama from the White House for Obama’s right hand men and women aided and abetted the use of falsified audio/video recordings and taser guns by the Palo Alto Police to falsely incriminate a U.S. citizen of a crime.
“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
Obama cannot refute the allegation; he chooses to ignore it validating his culpability.
There is a law in California that makes it illegal for a person to conceal a felonious act of another person. There is another law in California that makes it illegal for a person to conspire with another to commit a crime.
Supported by California laws PC 32 and PC 182, herein after the Obama administration, encompassing Attorney General Eric Holder all they way down to the beat cop Kelly Burger, shall be referred to as “Obama.”
Why did Obama do this to a U.S. citizen? Obama did this because he believes he is a superior human being then his fellow American.
If he believes he is superior to just one, by way of reason he must believe his is superior to many Americans.
How do we know Obama believes he is superior to most Americans, we know because Obama would not want done to him what he has done has done to another.
If he is willing to use falsified videos against one American citizen for any reason, then he is willing to use falsified videos against any citizen.
“Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.” Abraham Lincoln
Obama would not have persecuted the citizen and violated the Constitution as he did if the citizen whom he persecuted had the financial resources to defend himself and the Constitution.
Obama exploited the citizen’s economic liability with un-restrained cops shredding the Constitution in the process.
Obama would not have eviscerated the Constitution had it been someone of Obama’s economic class who was impaled on the wrong end of a taser. Obama picks on the weak, the vulnerable, the powerless, those who are no challenge to his power revealing that he is not only a bully but also a coward who fears the truth.
LAW:
What is the purpose of law enforcement? Why do we have agents of the law roaming the streets?
When a man robs a bank and goes home with his loot, does he turn himself in? When a man assaults another with steel barbs and electricity does he walk into the jail because he knew he violated the law?
We have a justice system put in place because those who would harm their fellow citizens typically don’t hold themselves accountable.
Are those American citizens who have been entrusted with carrying out the law morally superior to any other American citizen? Have they escaped the natural human flaws that are common to all? Do they somehow possess a superhuman ability to hold themselves accountable which no other American citizen has? The answer is no. So if those who have been granted the power and the control mechanisms to carry out the laws violate the laws that they are to enforce, who holds them accountable? When the Attorney General violates the law who holds him accountable?
"A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody, ought not to be trusted by any body." Thomas Paine
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." James Madison
If those who have ascended to the position of power entrusted to enforce the Rule of Law and the laws governed refuse to enforce the Rule of Law upon themselves then the Rule of Law is not their master but their servant to do their bidding.
"Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals." George Washington
RULE OF LAW:
What is the Rule of Law? The Rule of Law is state of being when the Law is King of the Nation denying any person whether it be the president, a judge, a cop or a street sweeper the ability to arbitrarily apply the law for his or her own benefit.
Obama and the Palo Alto Police used falsified evidence, audios and videos to incriminate a citizen of a crime. Using falsified evidence, audios and videos is a violation of California law. Obama, the Palo Alto police, moved and destroyed evidence in order to falsely incriminate a citizen of a crime. Moving and destroying evidence to secure a wrong and false conviction is a violation of California law.
Equal Protection of the law secured through the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments is the state of being when all men and women are equal before the law, whether it be the president, a judge, a cop or a street sweeper. It is the true state of the Law blindfolded to the political, economic, occupational and social status of the parties while using objective 20/20 vision when evaluating the evidence and the facts in order to apply the law fairly between all citizens regardless of social status.
Obama, the enforcers of the Law, decided that a private citizen was not equal before the Law with the officer who tortured that citizen unnecessarily in violation of California and U.S. law. Obama, the enforcers of the Law, decided that because this citizen was not equal to the police officer, they were and are justified in violating other laws to cover up the initial crimes of the police officer and to falsely incriminate the citizen of a crime which is another violation of the Law. In committing the former acts of actually deliberately violating the law Obama is upposed to enforce and picking and choosing when, where and how to apply the Law based upon personal preference, Obama has usurped the King of the Nation and placed himself above the Rule of Law. The only time that the Rule of Law exists is when the Rule of Law is King, since the Rule of Law is no longer King, the Rule of Law is dead. By is own actions Obama has killed the Rule of Law and replaced it with his own subjective dictates.
We write laws to protect ourselves from each other, to protect the innocent form the guilty.
If a private citizen were to tamper and falsify evidence in order to wrongfully incriminate a police officer of a crime, Obama would put that private citizen in prison for violating the law. Yet when a police officer commits the very same act, Obama covers up the officer’s crime and helps him place the private citizen in prison by using that falsified evidence.
If the Rule of Law is no longer the Objective enforcer of the laws replaced by the subjective dictates of Obama, then no one is safe and no one is truly free.
“The Constitution... is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” Thomas Jefferson
Is there any reason, any set of circumstances, any deplorable person which would justify police officers falsifying videos to incriminate a citizen of a crime? Obama thinks so. Those who hold to Obama’s amoral existence and immoral acts because those acts were perpetrated on others reveal that their own position lacks legitimacy, for if you were to ask any one of them if Obama had done to them what he has done to the citizen they would condemn it, for no sentient being possessing a conscience would condone his or her own physical torture and the use of falsified evidence to incriminate him or her of a crime. Should they continue in their position of supporting Obama’s hypocrisy, they place themselves into the boat of superiority alongside Obama doing to others that which they would not want done to themselves that which they would not want done to their children and grand-children, mothers and grand-fathers.
HYPOCRICY:
Much of Obama consists of descendants of African American heritage whose recent ancestors suffered numerous persecutions and violations of body and soul similar to that of which Obama has committed against the citizen.
Having obtained the rights and acceptance to become an enforcer of the law, Eric Holder has chosen to persecute a law abiding citizen whom he as deemed as an inferior human being due to his economic status just as the enforcers deemed Eric Holder’s grand-parents as inferior human beings due to the color of their skin.
Having ascended to a position of power Judge Ware has revealed that his character is no better then the men who would lynch his grand-parents for being black.
In fact, if Judge Ware’s great-grand parents were alive today, if Frederick Douglas were alive today they would be fighting against the immoral, the depravity of Judge Ware’s acts.
"Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves." D.H. Lawrence
There are some, maybe many who will look at the evidence and come to an opposite conclusion put forth here not based upon the legitimacy of the evidence but as a result of self-interest and emotional ties overlooking the offensive acts of the men and women in order to secure future favors. Who can deny the evidence of a police chief admitting to violating the law?
They say, “whatever Obama does to another is okay so long as he doesn’t do it to us; it’s better that one man, one citizen, lose his rights and perish then to have Obama’s entire administration exposed as a fraud and we lose our rights.”
Those who hold to Obama’s principle of the ends justifying the means demonstrate that they do not believe in the American ideal that, “All men are created equal,” that all men and women are equal before the law.
What they don’t realize is, is Obama didn’t violate one citizen when he violated the Rule of Law and the Constitution; he violated the rights of every citizen. At the same time he is openly telling us that he will help us and protect us and provide us with greater rights to obtain our support or re-election he is weakening and undermining rights of greater necessity to freedom.
In his right hand Obama provides gay marriage, but in his left hand he steals Due Process of Law. In his right hand he provides us health care, but in his left hand he imprisons us by using falsified evidence. What good is it to have the former without the later?
SPORTSMANSHIP:
Obama writes the rules of the game which everyone must abide by and we all, private citizens and agents of the government alike play the game. This time around Obama is going to lose to a million to one underdog so he resorts to cheating to ensure his victory. Unfortunately he gets caught, and will suffer an even greater loss. Refusing to accept defeat honorably and acknowledge the errors of his ways Obama pays off the refs to cover up his cheating and pays off the judges to not apply the rules. Obama wins, but had to cheat to win. Would we as a society be giving Obama a pass if he were a baseball player who used a corked bat to win a batting title or an MVP? Would we as a society be giving Obama a pass if he placed steal marbles in his gloves to beat down the smaller and weaker boxer?
SOLDIER:
Why does America send her sons and daughters to war?
Does America send her sons and daughter to war to ensure that the American government can use falsified evidence to incriminate her own citizens of crimes or does America send her sons and daughters to war to ensure that no other nation would subject America’s sons and daughters to prison by using falsified evidence?
What do you think an American soldier’s response would be if you asked him if he would be willing to put his life on the line so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate him of a crime?
Did 25,000 Americans die in the Revolutionary War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 625,000 Americans die in the Civil War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 405,399 Americans die in the World War 2 so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 36,516 Americans die in the Korean War so that Obama could use falsified evidence? to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 58,209 Americans die in the Vietnam War so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
Did 6,699 Americans die in Afghanistan and Iraq so that Obama could use falsified evidence to incriminate American citizens of a crime?
If Obama can use falsified videos to incriminate American citizens of crimes then every American soldier who has given life and limb for freedom did so in vain.
Copyright © 2012 by Joseph Anthony Ciampi
All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the U.S Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in a data base or retrieval system without prior written permission of the publisher, Joseph Anthony Ciampi, P.O. Box 1681 Palo Alto, CA 94302.
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. September 24, 2012
No portion of this website, writing or speech may be reproduced in any manner on any website, periodical, newspaper, media outlet, book pamphlet or any other form of publication whether for profit or not without the express written consent of the author, Joseph Anthony Ciampi.
All rights reserved. Except as permitted under the U.S Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, or stored in a data base or retrieval system without prior written permission of the publisher, Joseph Anthony Ciampi, P.O. Box 1681 Palo Alto, CA 94302.
Copyright © All Rights Reserved. September 24, 2012
No portion of this website, writing or speech may be reproduced in any manner on any website, periodical, newspaper, media outlet, book pamphlet or any other form of publication whether for profit or not without the express written consent of the author, Joseph Anthony Ciampi.