Tag Archives: backlash

U.S. Federal Court Hits President Barack Hussein Obama With Three Charges Of Abuse Of Office

President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks about the death of Trevyon Martin at the beginning of the daily White House briefing in the Briefing Room of the White House in Washington, Friday, July 19, 2013. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

 

It’s Official: Obama Impeachment Starts Here…

 U.S. Federal Court hits President Barack Hussein Obama with three charges of abuse of office. The charges present…ed are detailed and damning. The indictments assert that President Obama “acted as a dictator” to exceed his powers of office to appoint officials behind the back of Congress during a recess period.

Via: Diana Nottingham In a staggering announcement an Associated Press report declared: “President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.”

Mr. Lyndon Larouche, a well-connected journalist and political activist characterized the court’s assessment as “probably the greatest indictment ever seen on a standing president throughout history.” White House press secretary Jay Carney reacted strongly against the charges declaring, “we believe that the president’s recess appointments are constitutionally sound.” However, the federal court seems to disagree having put in place ” a list of charges presented as conclusions” according to Larouche.

The court appears to take the view that no such recess was in place. As such, the president was in violation of Section 5 of Article 1 of the Constitution that stipulates that a president cannot make appointments without the consent of the Senate. The failed Obama gambit had hoped to apply the section of the Constitution that reads: “The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.”

The Washington Post reports on the seriousness of this abuse of office, “is more than an unconstitutional attempt to circumvent the Senate’s advise-and-consent role. It is a breathtaking violation of the separation of powers and the duty of comity that the executive owes to Congress.” Crucially, no other president in history has ever tried to force through such alleged “ recess appointments” while Congress is still in session.

The offenses occurred last year when President Obama opted to bypass Congress and unilaterally appoint three people to seats on the National Labor Relations Board . He also made Richard Cordray (pictured with Obama) head of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (after the Senate blocked action on his nomination). Cordray’s appointment, made on the same date, has been challenged in a separate court case.

Lyndon Larouche has characterized the events as probably the worst violation by any sitting president trying to use a “procedural loophole.” Jubilant Republicans are already looking to set in motion impeachment proceedings. Larouche, who studied the court indictments, believes Obama’s offenses are “far graver” than those that led to the impeachment and removal from office of disgraced Republican president, Richard Nixon, after the Watergate scandal.

Read more Here.

Facebooktwitterrss

Obama to Cut Medical Benefits for Active / Retired Military – Not Union Workers

Irs takes your money, congress uses it to arm your enemies then they use it to fight the enemies they armed

It is not unconstitutional to cut benefits for military men and women, however, I do believe that it is unconstitutional to use the military as it has been used over the past several decades, leading us to perpetual debt and increasing taxation. It’s at the very least immoral the way the military has been used recently and how badly they are begin treated currently.

I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy involved in the decision making process. Why do we cut individual benefits for people but still maintain unconstitutional and unnecessary wars that are fought immorally for no good reason except lining rich people’s pockets?

If we had smaller military but payed them well and gave them good benefits to protect OUR borders rather than posting them in every country across the globe where some wealthy American might have something to gain we would be protecting our land and our citizens without killing and provoking others overseas to hate us and want to retaliate.

At this point the United States arms people that hate us and then waits for them to attack us and then uses the attack that we enabled as an excuse to occupy a country that we don’t need to be in for the security of the United States, but only for natural resources and economic gains (for some people but at a loss for taxpayers).

Shouldn’t our government be accountable to give people what they have already promised to give them? Many people have worked many years in the armed forces to provide for their families and have a secure retirement. I think for the people who are already serving, they should get the benefits they were expecting.

Obama to Cut Medical Benefits for Active / Retired Military – Not Union Workers

In an effort to cut defense spending, the Obama Administration plans to cut health benefits for active duty and retired military personnel and their families while not touching the benefits enjoyed by unionized civilian defense workers.

The move, congressional aides suggested, is to force those individuals into Obamacare, Bill Gertz reported at the Washington Beacon.

Gertz added:

The proposed increases in health care payments by service members, which must be approved by Congress, are part of the Pentagon’s $487 billion cut in spending. It seeks to save $1.8 billion from the Tricare medical system in the fiscal 2013 budget, and $12.9 billion by 2017.

Not everybody is happy with the plan, however.

Military personnel would see their annual Tricare premiums increase anywhere from 30 – 78 percent in the first year, followed by sharply increased premiums “ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.”

“According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048,” Gertz wrote.

Active duty military personnel would also see an increased cost for pharmaceuticals, and the incentive to use less expensive generic drugs would be gone.

Health benefits has long been a prime reason many stay in the military – but some in the Pentagon fear the new rules will hamper recruitment and retention.

“Would you stay with a car insurance company that raised your premiums by 345 percent in five years? Probably not,” one aide said.

John Hayward of Human Events adds:

Veterans will also be hit with a new annual fee for a program called Tricare for Life, on top of the monthly premiums they already pay, while some benefits will become “means-tested” in the manner of a social program – treating them like welfare instead of benefits for military service. Naturally, this is all timed to begin next year and “avoid upsetting military voters in a presidential election year,” according to critics.

There will be congressional hearings on the new military health care policies next month. Opposition is building in Congress, and among veterans’ organizations, including the VFW, which has “called on all military personnel and the veterans’ community to block the health care increases.”

Others are concerned about the double standard being set between uniformed military personnel – who are not unionized – and civilian defense workers who belong to public sector unions.

Gertz wrote:

A second congressional aide said the administration’s approach to the cuts shows a double standard that hurts the military.

“We all recognize that we are in a time of austerity,” this aide said. “But defense has made up to this point 50 percent of deficit reduction cuts that we agreed to, but is only 20 percent of the budget.”

The administration is asking troops to get by without the equipment and force levels needed for global missions. “And now they are going to them again and asking them to pay more for their health care when you’ve held the civilian workforce at DoD and across the federal government virtually harmless in all of these cuts. And it just doesn’t seem fair,” the second aide said.

At least one Congressman is standing with the military on this issue.

“We shouldn’t ask our military to pay our bills when we aren’t willing to impose a similar hardship on the rest of the population,” said Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), who chairs the House Armed Services Committee.

Irs takes your money, congress uses it to arm your enemies then they use it to fight the enemies they armed“We can’t keep asking those who have given so much to give that much more,” he added.

McKeon will be joined by some 5 million members of 32 military service and veterans groups, according to retired Navy Capt. Kathryn M. Beasley of the Military Officers Association of America, who called the plan “a breach of faith.”

The Beacon also noted the curious timing of the plan, which is set to begin next year – after the 2012 elections. Critics say this is designed so as not to upset military voters.

It’s one more reason Barack Hussein Obama does not deserve to be re-elected in November.

 

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-to-cut-medical-benefits-for-active-retired-military-not-union-workers?utm_content=buffer8b591&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Buffer

Facebooktwitterrss

Monsanto Sued for $7.7 BILLION Dollars by 5 MILLION Farmers | It’s About Time!

monsanto GMO FDA Food Safety

Monsanto sued by 5 million farmers for $7.7 billion dollars ( 6.2 Euros) after decades of unethical practices, abuse and government cooperation. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court seems sympathetic to Monsanto

Monsanto Sued for 7.7 billion dollarsLaunching a lawsuit against the very company that is blamed for a farmer suicide every 30 minutes, 5 million farmers are now suing Monsanto for as much as 6.2 billion euros (around 7.7 billion US dollars). The reason? As with many other cases, such as the ones that led certain farming regions to be known as the ‘suicide belt’, Monsanto has been reportedly taxing the farmers to financial shambles with ridiculous royalty charges. The farmers state that Monsanto has been unfairly gathering exorbitant profits each year on a global scale from “renewal” seed harvests, which are crops planted using seed from the previous year’s harvest.

The practice of using renewal seeds dates back to ancient times, but Monsanto seeks to collect massive royalties and put an end to the practice. Why? Because Monsanto owns the very patent to the genetically modified seed, and is charging the farmers not only for the original crops, but the later harvests as well.

Eventually, the royalties compound and many farmers begin to struggle with even keeping their farm afloat. It is for this reason that India slammed Monsanto with groundbreaking  ‘bio-piracy’ charges  in an effort to stop Monsanto from ‘patenting life’.

Jane Berwanger, a lawyer for the farmers who went on record regarding the case, told the Associated Press:

“Monsanto gets paid when it sell the seeds. The law gives producers the right to multiply the seeds they buy and nowhere in the world is there a requirement to pay (again). Producers are in effect paying a private tax on production.”

Further Lawsuits are Inevitable as Crimes Become Apparent

As the information continues to surface on Monsanto’s crimes, further lawsuits will begin to take effect. After it was ousted in January that Monsanto was running illegal ‘slave-like’ working rings, more individuals became aware of just how seriously Monsanto seems to disregard their workers — so why would they care for the health of their consumers? In April, another group of farmers sued Monsanto for ‘knowingly poisoning’ workers and causing ‘devastating birth defects’.
Will endless lawsuits from millions of seriously affected individuals be the end of Monsanto?

monsanto devastates farmers and evironmentMonsanto was the first corporation to ever be granted a patent for a seed in the United States. Under ordinary circumstances seeds cannot be patented due to a stipulation that “life” can’t be patented. Monsanto’s and their “Roundup Ready” genetically modified soybean (and other GMO products) are reviled by environmentalists and constitutionalists the world over for their manipulation of sound policy and devastating effects on the environment.

Monsanto Devastates Farmers and Environment

What is sometimes overlooked is the human carnage that lies in Monsanto’s wake. Many times farmers who DID NOT plant “Roundup Ready” products found that “Roundup Ready” seeds in ditches or neighboring fields inadvertently cross pollinated with their own(NOT Roundup Ready) plants. Monsanto agents have been known to go into farmer’s fields on farmers property and spray Roundup in their crops. If their plants DID NOT DIE and the farmer did not have proof of purchasing Roundup Ready products, Monsanto would sue them for theft of their patented product and keep them tied up in legal battles so long that they would eventually agree to pay Monsanto what it was asking in fees or end up losing their family farms due to inability to afford the lengthy legal proceedings.

Monsanto corporationNow many traditional crops are contaminated with GMO genetics due to cross- polinization that the farmers neither desired nor caused. Mexico’s corn supply has been contaminated beginning with their agreement to allow American corn into their country more than a decade ago.

Additionally, Monsanto and the EPA (Environment Protection Agency)  have a long and incestuous relationship. Many top paid executives at Monsanto have been hired into high paying positions at the EPA and vice versa. The end result is that many suspect that Monsanto has been extremely influential in legislation pertaining to farming over the past decades.

Supreme Court Sympathetic to Monsanto?

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court Seemed sympathetic to Monsanto on 2/21/2012. Only time will tell how this litigation will end.

The Supreme Court is expected to decide between now and July as to whether Mr. Bowman had the legal right to replant those crops, but reports from Tuesday’s hearing suggests that it will likely be a hard battle for the farmer to win. He last had his argument thrown out by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in September 2011 after it was decided that a second-generation seed constituted a “newly infringing article.”

According to Bloomberg News, Justice Stephen Breyer seemed to agree with that interpretation during Tuesday’s hearing and told Mr. Bowman’s lawyer, “What [the law] prohibits is making a copy of the patented invention, and that is what he did.”

Without strong patent protection, “Monsanto would have no incentive to create a product like this one,”added Justice Elena Kagan.

The Associated Press reports that Chief Justice John Roberts wondered “why anyone in the world”would invest time and money on seeds if it was so easy to evade patent protection.

Bill Freese, the science and policy analyst for The Center for Food Safety, tells the AP that a win for Monsanto is unlikely to hurt the company’s profits since most of their money is made off of cord, a seed that can’t be re-planted.

“So seed-saving would have no impact on the majority of Monsanto’s seed revenue,” he says.

Should Monsanto win, though, the Supreme Court ruling is likely to set a strong precedent for protecting patents, even those that are considered unfair by farmers like Bowman.

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!