You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Attorney General Eric Holder’ tag.

Obama’s Gun Ban List Is Out


Alan Korwin
Friday, March 13, 2009

Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.

Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.

Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
Olympic Arms PCR;
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12,
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity
of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America

Forward or send to every gun owner you know…
Watch This, If You Want More Proof:

A partial list of gun rights groups:

Gun Owners of America

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership


National Rifle Association

Second Amendment Committee

Second Amendment Foundation

Second Amendment Sisters

Women Against Gun Control

Research related articles:

  1. Bamalot: Obama Drafts Star-Studded Short List for Cabinet
  2. Man arrested with rifle said he had delivery for Obama
  3. U.S. terrorism watch list tops 1 million
  4. Rahm Emanuel, if you are on No Fly List, No Gun!
  5. CNN reporter criticizes TSA, finds self on terror watch list
  6. Ludicrous Terrorist Watch List Now Contains Over 1 Million Names
  7. Secret List of U.S. Military Bases to Replace Gitmo
  8. Are You On the Terror Watch List? Good Luck Getting Off It
  9. 2008 Bohemian Grove Guest List Obtained By 9/11 Truth Activists
  10. Bill to help remove people remove themselves from TSA watch list passes House
  11. Airport Gestapo: How Bush’s No Fly List is Making Americans Unsafe
  12. Mistakes on Terrorist Watch List Affect Even Children






By: Devvy
March 14, 2009
© 2008 –

Before I get into the how can we get this done, I would first like to make a statement to hopefully deflect an email box full of hate mail.

Please don’t misconstrue what I’m about to say as disparaging to any of the lawyers involved in these lawsuits. I have supported all of them and their efforts. I am not an attorney. I have no training in the law, but I can read and read I have. A million words in these lawsuits; the briefs as well as supporting documentation. That’s how I learn and hopefully make an informed decision. Not based on personalities, but what the law says.

Millions (not a thousand or a hundred thousand), but millions of Americans either know a lot about the Obama citizenship/birth certificate controversy or they know enough that it has raised serious questions in their mind.

Readers of this column and listeners to my radio show know that I have covered this extensively. They also know that I do not play favorites and would be fighting the same fight if McCain had allegedly been elected because McCain is also, in my opinion, constitutionally ineligible.

While some cases have received more attention than others, those receiving the most exposure have been cases filed by Phillip Berg, Dr. Orly Taitz, Leo Donofrio, Cort Wrotnoski, Stephen Pidgeon, Mario Apuzzo and the United States Justice Foundation. Dozens have been filed at the state level; too many to list here. Many of the cases have been brought by citizens and the rest by attorneys on behalf of their clients.

We are all aware of the outcome of those docketed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Denied with no comment on merit) and those that had at least a hearing of some sort in front of a judge. The issue of whether or not Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetoro aka and so forth, is badly dividing this country. The frustration and rage is escalating. Every piece of legislation he signs into law brings the potential of lawsuits that would be never ending – possibly thousands of them. Not to mention the destructive policies Obama is shoving down our throats. However, the issue at hand is not political or racial, but a matter of constitutional law.

Thousands of citizens have been doing everything humanly possible to get the courts to hear these cases on their merits. Of course, this is more than just a political hot potato, it is a volcano that could erupt in a nasty way. That’s why the courts won’t touch it – what judge wants to be responsible for removing an usurper president? Do they even have the legal authority to do so? An important question.

The situation can’t continue with another lawsuit filed on Monday, four on Wednesday, maybe three the following week. Then comes the endless wait while the defendants respond and the legal wrangling begins. When those fail in seven or eight weeks, a new round of lawsuits gets filed and again, months go by while the defendants answer the lawsuit and file motions that could go on for years. Leo speaks highly of Mario Apuzzo’s case, Kerchner v Obama and we hope it has a successful outcome. Mr. Apuzzo’s web site is here.

Obama has controlled the birth certificate issue from day one. He continues to do so. This keeps all of us wondering, filing Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits. I think even to the most staunch Obama supporter, it’s obvious by now that Obama refuses to release his vault birth certificate because he has something to hide. Or, maybe not. Maybe Obama’s refusal is simply to keep everyone running around chasing lawsuits. Remember, he can pull it out for release to the media anytime he wants. Timing in life is everything as they say – especially in politics.

There is also the issue of possible criminal activity by Obama and this is addressed on Orly’s web site where she is petitioning Attorney General Eric Holder for a special prosecutor; click here.

What do we do to bring this to an end as quickly as possible? I believe Orly was the first to bring up the issue of Quo Warranto, but I’m not 100% certain. There is so much activity and web sites to comb through besides reading all these legal filings. In any event, there are outstanding lawsuits waiting to be processed through the system. Many state representatives, active military and veterans have signed up to become plaintiffs for a possible lawsuit being initiated by Orly. They are all listed on her web site. Orly has also sent a letter of request to AG Eric Holder to undertake a Quo Warranto, as well as a new filing with the U.S. Supreme Court; click here.

Both Orly and Leo Donofrio were guests on my radio show last week to help us understand these legal issues. In a recent column, I provided a link to Leo’s three part hypothetical brief on Quo Warranto; click here. I concur that a Quo Warranto in the District Court in Washington, DC, FIRST is the best path to take, not the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you read the statute (see Leo’s brief), even if AG Holder and U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor decline to proceed, there is still the opportunity to go forward. In Part 3 of Leo’s legal analysis, you will see where he gives the statute and who can have standing. This has been done successfully in the past when the AG and US Attorney have failed to act. We also have to remember that this will be a jury trial. My biggest concern is that an action taken straight to the U.S. Supreme Court – especially in light of the fact that the Chief Justice, John G. Roberts, met behind closed doors with Obama – would likely be shot down and we lose. Personally, I believe on the Quo Warranto issue, the U.S. Supreme Court should be last in line.

I know the knee jerk reaction to a jury trial in the District Court in Washington, DC, because I’ve already had email: “You’re dreaming, Devvy, if you think jurors in Washington, DC, who worship the Messiah are going to do the right thing.” My response is to let the system work and do not underestimate the integrity of the American people when presented with solid facts. That statute is perfect for this issue. It is up to the AG and the U.S. Attorney to bring an action on behalf of the United States. No plaintiffs. Should they refuse, then the “third persons” or “interested persons” part kicks in and we proceed from there.

Many, many Americans have been forwarding their letters of request to Holder the past couple of weeks; Orly has been posting them to her web site. Thank you to all the people who wrote letters to Richard Durbin. Every one counts. We know that hundreds of thousands have signed petitions to the courts. If hundreds of thousands of Americans from all walks of life sent their polite requests to Holder and Taylor (including all those state legislators), something has to give. A small flame can turn into a huge fire if fanned properly.


This pdf file is my certified letter to U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Taylor. I provided a copy to Richard Durbin at the U.S. Attorney’s office in Austin, Texas and U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. That pdf file also contains Leo Donofrio’s letter of March 13, 2009, to U.S. Attorney Taylor. I put Leo’s letter in this pdf file to help people like me. I wear glasses and sometimes reading text off a web site with color back grounds makes it difficult on my old eyes.

I hope you will join me in sending U.S. Attorney Taylor a polite request to bring a Quo Warranto action. It is completely within either Holder or Taylor’s discretion. It can be one or the other or both of them. Time is of the essence and we simply must move this along to a resolution. The longer this lingers, the worst the situation will get for all of us and our republic.

Devvy on live radio: Solutions Not Politics
6:00 pm PST, 8:00 pm CST and 9:00 pm EST
Listen live:


United States Attorney Jeffrey Taylor
United States Attorney’s Office
555 4th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Eric H. Holder Jr., Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Web sites on lawsuits:

Listing of cases and actions
Dr. Orly Taitz
Leo Donofrio
Phillip Berg
Mario Apuzzo
United States Justice Foundation
Stephen Pidgeon

Free audio:

Leo Donofrio legal filings and the Wong Kim Ark case

© 2009 – – All Rights Reserved

Attorney General, Eric H. Holder Jr.

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530-0001 USA

March 1, 2009

Honorable Attorney General Holder

Re: Request a Special Assistant for the United States to relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama, II to Test His Title to President before the Supreme Court

Relators, Major General Carroll Childers, Ret; Lt. Col Dr. David Earl-Graef; Navy and Police officer Mr. Clinton Grimes; Lt. Scott Easterling, currently serving in Iraq; Major James Cannon, US Marine Corps, Ret; New Hampshire State Representative Mr. Timothy Comerford; Tennessee State Representative Mr. Frank Nicely, State of Alabama 2008 electoral college elector Mr. Robert Cusanelli bring information for Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama, II, testing his title to President per attached relation. Relators include:

Robert Cusanelli, Elector for 7th District, State of Alabama, in the 2008 Electoral College;

Frank Nicely, State Representative of Tennessee in his official capacity;

Timothy Comerford, State Representative of New Hampshire in his official capacity;

Major General Carroll Childers, 29th Infantry Div VA retired, lifetime subject to recall; Numerous decorations

1st Lt. Scott R. Easterling OD LG US Army on active duty in Iraq;

Clint Grimes, Sergeant Long Beach Police Officer & CDR/0-5 US Navy (Active Reserve). Numerous decorations, including two National defense medals, two Navy commendation medals

Dr. David Earl-Graef, Lieutenant Colonel Air Force MC, Military Surgeon- Active Reserve. Numerous decorations including Air Force outstanding unit with valor.

James Cannon Major US Marine Corps, Ret, lifetime subject to recall. Numerous awards, including Bronze Star with combat V and two Purple Hearts

Relator’s oath of office grants standing. Relators are affected by actions of Respondent Obama and the outcome of this Quo Warranto, and thus have interest above citizens.

Information on Quo Warranto against a Federal Officer is normally related to the Attorney General to raise on behalf of the United States in U.S. District court of the District of Columbia per DC Code 16-3502. However, the Attorney General defends the office of President and is appointed by the President. For the Attorney General to bring Quo Warranto on the President raises an intrinsic conflict of interest. USAM 3-2.170 Historically, a Special Prosecutor or Independent Counsel was appointed to eliminate such conflicts of interest, e.g., Attorney General Elliot Richardson appointed Archibald Cox as the Watergate Special Prosecutor over issues touching on President Nixon.

This information on Quo Warranto includes action between the United States ex rel. and the State of Hawaii over original birth records of Barack H. Obama II being withheld per Hawaii’s privacy laws. Hawaii’s action obstructs the constitutional duties of election officers to validate or evaluate President Election Obama qualifications to become President under U.S. CONST. art II – 1 and Amend. XX – 3.

As President Elect, Respondent Obama failed to submit prima facie evidence of his qualifications before January 20, 2009. Election officers failed to challenge, validate or evaluate his qualifications. Relators submit that as President Elect, Respondent Obama failed qualify per U.S. CONST. Amend. XX – 3.

Such negligence and misprision threaten to nullify these essential safeguards. Thus Relators request this Quo Warranto be related to the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction.

Enclosed is a summary motion for leave to file Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II aka Barry Soetoro, with the Supreme Court. The list of Questions Presented is attached. A full brief supporting this motion is in preparation.

1) Relators respectfully pray that the Attorney General recuse himself over bringing this Quo Warranto for the United States on Barack H. Obama II, by reason of intrinsic conflict of interest.

2) Relators pray the Attorney General appoint a Special Assistant (prosecutor) of Archibald Cox’s reputation and expertise, to relate this Quo Warranto to the Supreme Court per 28 USC 543.

3) Relators request that their attorney, Orly Taitz, ESQ DDS, assist in relating this Quo Warranto, being recognized at bar before the Supreme Court.

4) Relators further request the assistance of Patrick Fitzgerald, United States Attorney General for the Northern District of Illinois, as having familiarity with issues involving Barack H. Obama II while Senator from Illinois and as President Elect.

5) Relators request guidance from the Attorney General, within one week of receipt of this information, regarding his decision on whether to appoint such a Special Assistant.

With respect, in absence of such guidance, Relators will proceed to request leave from the Supreme Court to relate information for this Quo Warranto on Mr. Obama to test his title.

Yours Sincerely,

Orly Taitz, ESQ

Attorney for Relators

Encl. Motion to Supreme Court for leave to relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II, testing his


February 26, 2009 11:57AM

Geithner to NPR: Don’t Worry Regulators Have Been Watching This Toxic Stuff…Just Not Very “Carefully” or “Realistically”

By Cody Willard

I can’t believe the entire financial system is being run by this dude Timothy Geithner.

Don’t these almost back-to-back completely contradictory statements that he gave NPR last night absolutely underscore why the worthless bureaucrats at the Treasury and the crony regulators that pay them off will NEVER EVER fix the system UNTIL THEY GET OUT OF IT?

NPR: Now, I would think a fair number of citizens could say, wait a second, we’re — depending on when you start the clock, you know — two years or one year or six months into this horrible crisis and you’re telling me that the government doesn’t have a strong, forward-looking, hard-headed assessment of the health of the banking system?

Demi-god Geithner: Well, I think that, again, we want to make sure that it’s done more consistently and more realistically across banks and across the supervisors. So this is part of what banks do and what supervisors do. But, frankly, it needs to be done more carefully and with a more forward-looking, realistic approach.

NPR: I want to switch a little to these toxic assets. I mean, we at NPR and journalists around the world and certainly people in the regulatory world have looked at a lot of these toxic assets … these CDOs and CDO-squareds. And I’m just curious, have you spent or does your staff have a sense -– I mean, we’re talking about the overall banks’ capital structure and the overall banks’ ability to withstand shocks? But have you spent time looking at these toxic assets? Do you have staff sort of tracking down the mortgages that underlie some of the other more exotic asset-backed securities that underlie some of them?

Almost-Omnipotent Geithner: Well, the supervisors of the country -– you know, we have a complex network of bank supervisors, banking authorities, financial agencies -– they have examiners in these institutions examining the financial strength of these firms. And as part of that, of course, one of the central jobs they have is to look at the risk in a whole range of different loans and assets these guys have, not just those related to real estate that you are referring to, but everything else, too.

And that job is to try to make sure that, again, people are making appropriate judgments about what the risk in those assets are.

So, he wants to rest assured that “the supervisors of the country -– you know, we have a complex network of bank supervisors, banking authorities, financial agencies -– they have examiners in these institutions examining the financial strength of these firms” even though, “we want to make sure that it’s done more consistently and more realistically across banks and across the supervisors. So this is part of what banks do and what supervisors do. But, frankly, it needs to be done more carefully and with a more forward-looking, realistic approach.”

So the new stress tests full of old data and a few new assumptions by this nearly-all-knowing dude running the Treasury are going to give us all the information we needed to know about all those products and markets and derivatives and other asset classes and moving parts in the financial system even though we don’t need any of that because we’ve had regulators making sure this stuff isn’t junk anyway except that the regulators weren’t doing their jobs “carefully enough” or “realistically” enough.

I hate having to continually harp on this stuff — I mean, Treasury bureaucrats have always doubled-talked crony regulations.  But Treasury didn’t use to have a blank check to write to these cronies like Geithner does now.

Even if we assume he’s not corrupt…we can certainly once again ascertain just how nonsensical his statements and policies are.

And nonsensical policies that impact trillions of dollars of what used to be mostly private, profit-seeking markets are very destructive, no?

I yearn only for rule of contract law.

     Following the protocol for the continuity of government strategy. when President Barack Obama goes to Capitol Hill tonight to address the nation at a Joint Session of Congress, one key Cabinet member will be missing. Attorney General Eric Holder has been designated to be the Cabinet member who will remain in a secluded place during the President’s speech.

     With ALL of the top officials gathered in one place, it has been protocol to have one Cabinet member remain elsewhere to assume power in the event of an emergency at Capitol Hill. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had been designated during the Inauguration.

     Can we imagine an Eric Holder Presidency? Kind of like a Nancy Pelosi Presidency!