Saturday, March 5, 2011
Friday, March 4, 2011
Judge orders Admin to file expedited appeallate review
Mark Levin
Like Obama, what you see isn't what you get.
Be careful of the State Run Media Spin.Vinson indirectly pointed out the Administration’s bad faith when he noted that DOJ lawyers said in their reply brief that the reason for the delay was because Vinson’s order needed “careful analysis.” Yet this was “contrary to media reports that the White House declared within hours after entry of [Vinson's] order that ‘implementation will proceed apace’ regardless of the ruling.” Judge Vinson also wrote that the government’s legal citation in its most recent motion “borders on misrepresentation.”
So today, Judge Vinson reaffirmed that he meant it when he said the law was unconstitutional and that he had expected the executive branch to abide by his decision. Judge Vinson said the language in his original order “seems to be plain and unambiguous. Even though I expressly declared that the entire Act was ‘void,’ and even though I emphasized that ‘separate injunctive relief is not necessary’ only because it must be presumed that ‘the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court,’ which means that ‘declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction,’ the defendants have indicated that they ‘do not interpret the Court’s order as requiring them to immediately cease [implementing and enforcing the act].’” The judge was obviously annoyed that the government has “reportedly continued with full implementation.” He went on to “clarify” his order that he expected his declaratory judgment to “be treated as the ‘practical’ and ‘functional equivalent of an injunction.’”
The plaintiffs had asked the judge to treat the DOJ’s motion to “clarify” as a motion for a stay and to deny the motion. Judge Vinson did treat the motion to clarify as a motion to stay his earlier judgment but then offered a clever compromise to the Obama Administration: He granted a stay for seven days but only on the condition that the Administration file an appeal within that period that requests expedited appellate review, either in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit or the Supreme Court. Judge Vinson also noted that the appeal could be expedited because the briefing on the underlying legal issues was already submitted in his court.
Like Obama, what you see isn't what you get.
Agent: I was ordered to let U.S. guns into Mexico - CBS Evening News - CBS News
Agent: I was ordered to let U.S. guns into Mexico - CBS Evening News - CBS News
Maybe the O' Regime plan isn't to stop gun trafficking, but to stop gun sales. Nay, not this regime.Vinson indirectly pointed out the Administration’s bad faith when he noted that DOJ lawyers said in their reply brief that the reason for the delay was because Vinson’s order needed “careful analysis.” Yet this was “contrary to media reports that the White House declared within hours after entry of [Vinson's] order that ‘implementation will proceed apace’ regardless of the ruling.” Judge Vinson also wrote that the government’s legal citation in its most recent motion “borders on misrepresentation.”
So today, Judge Vinson reaffirmed that he meant it when he said the law was unconstitutional and that he had expected the executive branch to abide by his decision. Judge Vinson said the language in his original order “seems to be plain and unambiguous. Even though I expressly declared that the entire Act was ‘void,’ and even though I emphasized that ‘separate injunctive relief is not necessary’ only because it must be presumed that ‘the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court,’ which means that ‘declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction,’ the defendants have indicated that they ‘do not interpret the Court’s order as requiring them to immediately cease [implementing and enforcing the act].’” The judge was obviously annoyed that the government has “reportedly continued with full implementation.” He went on to “clarify” his order that he expected his declaratory judgment to “be treated as the ‘practical’ and ‘functional equivalent of an injunction.’”
The plaintiffs had asked the judge to treat the DOJ’s motion to “clarify” as a motion for a stay and to deny the motion. Judge Vinson did treat the motion to clarify as a motion to stay his earlier judgment but then offered a clever compromise to the Obama Administration: He granted a stay for seven days but only on the condition that the Administration file an appeal within that period that requests expedited appellate review, either in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit or the Supreme Court. Judge Vinson also noted that the appeal could be expedited because the briefing on the underlying legal issues was already submitted in his court.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Colonel Hollister: Obama's Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants Comes Back as "Fail" and “SSN Not in File (Never Issued)” | Before It's News
Colonel Hollister: Obama's Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants Comes Back as "Fail" and “SSN Not in File (Never Issued)” | Before It's News
Obama’s use of the Connecticut-issued SSN can be readily verified by anyone as it is imbedded in his fraudulently created Selective Service System records.Who is Obama? What is Obama? When is Obama? Where is Obama?
Hollister provided this Examiner, with a copy of the results from the Social Security Number Verification System (www.SocialSecurity.gov) used by small businesses to verify employment eligibility, using Obama’s name, birth date and the Connecticut-issued SSN.
The results came back as “Failed” with a Verification Results Code 1, which is defined as: “SSN not in file (never issued).”
Mark Levin
Mark Levin
February 28, 2011
Categories:
On call, officials stress public options in health care shift
Jennifer Haberkorn reports that President Obama's move to allow states flexibility in spending health care funds is the "most significant change" since the law was enacted, and a potential gesture toward critics.
But a source on a White House conference call with liberal allies this morning says the Administration is presenting it to Democrats as an opportunity to offer more expansive health care plans than the one Congress passed.
Health care advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle and Stephanie Cutter stressed on the off-record call that the rule change would allow states to implement single-payer health care plans -- as Vermont seeks to -- and true government-run plans, like Connecticut's Sustinet.
The source on the call summarizes the officials' point -- which is not one the Administration has sought to make publically -- as casting the new "flexibility" language as an opportunity to try more progressive, not less expansive, approaches on the state level.
"They are trying to split the baby here: on one hand tell supporters this is good for their pet issues, versus a message for the general public that the POTUS is responding to what he is hearing and that he is being sensible," the source emails. (This CNN story reflects the public presentation.)
Much of the debate now focuses on the federal government's power, and perhaps health care legislation's critics wouldn't object to single payer -- in Vermont. But the prospect of a backdoor to a single-payer plan anywhere may also sharpen opposition.
UPDATE: An Administration official emails, “Administration official discussed how this legislation would help give states the opportunity to innovate. States have the flexibility to design plans in the way that works for them, so long as they meet the shared goals of reform. That could be any number of proposals from exchanges like the Utah model to other innovations that increase choice and competition.”
Financial terrorism suspected in 2008 economic crash - Washington Times
Financial terrorism suspected in 2008 economic crash - Washington Times
By Bill Gertz-The Washington Times
The Pentagon report states that the evidence of financial subversion revealed that the first two phases of an attack on the U.S. economy took place from 2007 to 2009 and “based on recent global market activity, it appears that the predicted Phase III may be underway right now.” The report states that federal authorities must further investigate two significant events in the months leading up to the financial crisis. The first phase of the economic attack, the report said, was the escalation of oil prices by speculators from 2007 to mid-2008 that coincided with the housing finance crisis. In the second phase, the stock market collapsed by what the report called a “bear raid” from unidentified sources on Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and other Wall Street firms.... Among the financial instruments that may have been used in the economic warfare scenario are credit default swaps, unregulated and untraceable contracts by which a buyer pays the seller a fee and in exchange is paid off in a bond or a loan. The report said credit default swaps are “ideal bear-raid tools” and “have the power to determine the financial viability of companies.” Another economic warfare tool that was linked in the report to the 2008 crash is what is called “naked short-selling” of stock, defined as short-selling financial shares without borrowing them. The report said that 30 percent to 70 percent of the decline in stock share values for two companies that were attacked, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, were results of failed trades from naked short-selling. The collapse in September 2008 of Lehman Brothers, the fourth-largest U.S. investment bank, was the most significant event in the crash, causing an immediate credit freeze and stock market crash, the report says. In a section of who was behind the collapse, the report says determining the actors is difficult because of banking and financial trading secrecy. “The reality of the situation today is that foreign-based hedge funds perpetrating bear raid strategies could do so virtually unmonitored and unregulated on behalf of enemies of the United States,” the report says....
Maybe the truth will eventually be revealed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
