Ron Paul Our Last Hope

Ron Paul – Our Last Hope

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel

Ron Paul is one of the last of the great Patriots. There is simply no one in the running field that offers

any alternative to the nightmare we face. Ron understands the Elastic Money Supply at the Fed. He

understands the devious kill switch to the internet. He understands how corrupt the mainstream media

has become who refuse to acknowledge Ron as even a viable candidate. I simply cannot endorse anyone

other than Ron Paul. Ron is a person who cares about what is right and wants to change direction of the

country. Mainstream media hate his guts, may not as much as me, but damn close. They will elevate him

pg_0002

to attack mode if he starts to win. The only thing I fear is that they will rig the counting of the votes to

ensure he does not win.

I am shocked at the Obama Administration’s willingness to

take away all our rights. Obama, despite all the rhetoric, is

not a LIBERAL. If he were, he would be on the side of

people’s rights, veto the kill switch on the internet, and

veto the new Marshall Law where not only if the

government arrests you there will be no indictment, no

trial, and you will be denied a lawyer. This is precisely what

they did to me but George Bush, Jr.’s cousin was rolled out

to rule on my appeal John M. Walker, Jr., that this is an

inherent power of judges to deny the constitution as long

as they call it contempt. There are two types of contempt,

criminal used to enforce conduct in the courtroom and

civil which is not for the purpose of punishment but to

“coerce" people to do whatever the court demands. Judge Walker was not stupid, just corrupt. He

played a bait and switch calling the civil contempt an “inherent power", by using citations to the criminal

contempt power, which of course entitles you to lawyers and a jury trial. He blended the two creating a

new hybrid that NEVER existed in any court since 1637.

The Supreme Court has long recognized that "[c ]ertain implied powers must necessarily result to our

Courts of justice from the nature of their institution." United States v. Hudson, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 32, 34, 3

L.Ed. 259 (1812). "The most prominent of these is the contempt sanction, which a judge must have and

exercise in protecting the due and orderly administration of justice and in maintaining the authority and

dignity of the court." Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 764, 100 S.Ct. 2455, 65 L.Ed.2d 488

(1980) (quotation marks omitted); see also In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564, 595, 15 S.Ct. 900, 39 L.Ed. 1092

(1895), abrogated on other grounds by Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 L.Ed.2d 522

(1968) ("`The power to fine and imprison for contempt, from the earliest history of jurisprudence, has been

regarded as a necessary incident and attribute of a court, without which it could no more exist than

without a judge.'" (quoting Watson v. Williams, 36 Miss. 331, 341 (Miss.Err. & App.1858))); Sigety v.

Abrams, 632 F.2d 969, 976 (2d Cir.1980) (quoting the same). "The moment the courts of the United States

were called into existence and invested with jurisdiction over any subject, they became possessed of this

power." Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 505, 510, 22 L.Ed. 205 (1874); see also Anderson v. Dunn,

19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 204, 227, 5 L.Ed. 242 (1821) ("Courts of justice are universally acknowledged to be

vested, by their very creation, with power to impose silence, respect, and decorum, in their presence, and

submission to their lawful mandates."); NASCO, Inc. v. Calcasieu Television & Radio, Inc., 894 F.2d 696,

702 (5th Cir.1990), aff'd sub nom., Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27

(1991).

Armstrong v

Guccione, 470 F3d 89 (2d Cir 2006)

pg_0003

Judge Richard A. Posner is regarded as one of the greatest legal minds in

the country. Because he rules on what the Constitution really says,

Presidents avoid him like the plague when it comes to nominating for

the Supreme Court. Judge Posner warned that government is capable of

creating a "criminal punishment masquerading as civil contempt."

Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings Empanelled May 1988, 894 F2d 881,

885 (7th Cir 1989). Indeed, this is precisely what government did to me. Now with the new act allowing

the military to operate domestically, they no longer need to pretend to be “coercing" someone to justify

imprison them until they die, deny counsel, jury trial, rights to appeal, or anything that once

distinguished America as a “free" society. Both the establishment Democrats and Republicans are

transforming the United States into East Berlin all because they know what is coming with civil unrest

when they there is NO BID for their debt. We are preparing to use the military against civilians precisely

as we see in Syria right now. Here is what Posner wrote about contempt in this same case.

"The power to punish for contempts is inherent in all courts," Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 505,

510, 22 L.Ed. 205 (1874)--but this was said with reference to criminal contempt. Rather than being

deemed an inherent power of all courts, civil contempt --an ingenious method of coercion--originated, like

so many other devices operating on the person directly rather than on his assets, in equity, as a device for

enforcing compliance with equitable decrees. Mascolo, Procedural Due Process and the Reasonable

Doubt Standard of Proof in Civil Contempt Proceedings, 14 N.Eng.J.Crim. & Civ.Confinement 245, 250

(1988); Goldfarb, The Contempt Power 50 (1963); Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., 284 U.S. 448,

52 S.Ct. 238, 76 L.Ed. 389 (1932); cf. Louisiana Education Ass'n v. Richland Parish School Board, 421

F.Supp. 973, 976 (W.D.La.1976), aff'd without opinion, 585 F.2d 518 (5th Cir.1978); Landman v. Royster,

354 F.Supp. 1292, 1300 (E.D.Va.1973). It is still an equity procedure, Jacksonville Paper Co. v. Tobin, 206

F.2d 333, 335 (5th Cir.1953), and its remedies, such as incarceration, are subject to equitable defenses.

Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., supra, 284 U.S. at 457, 52 S.Ct. at 242; cf. Spallone v. United

States, --- U.S. ----, ----, 110 S.Ct. 625, 631-32, 107 L.Ed.2d 644, 58 U.S.L.W. 4103, 4106 (U.S. Jan. 10,

1990). So far as the right to a hearing granted by the rules of civil procedure is concerned, genuine issues

of material fact concerning remedy have the same status as genuine issues of material fact concerning

liability. Even if Dennis Freligh is in contempt of the district court, he is entitled, before being sanctioned, to

present to the district judge facts material to the scope and severity of the sanction, just as the defendant

in an injunctive proceeding is entitled to a hearing if there are contested issues of material fact bearing on

the scope and severity of the injunction, even if he concedes liability. A showing of genuine but

unreasonable and perhaps therefore easily dispelled fear might persuade the district judge that

incarceration for the statutory maximum was unnecessary to coerce Freligh to testify. Cf. New York State

National Organization for Women v. Terry, 886 F.2d 1339, 1353 (2d Cir.1989). It could be argued that the

right to a hearing in a civil contempt case is even broader than we have suggested: The purpose of holding

a witness in civil contempt is to elicit testimony. If it is perfectly clear that the witness, for whatever

reason, will not testify, there is--or so at least a number of cases have held--no ground for holding him. In

re Crededio, 759 F.2d 589 (7th Cir.1985); United States ex rel. Thom v. Jenkins, 760 F.2d 736, 740 (7th

Cir.1985); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 877 F.2d 849, 850 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam); Simkin v. United

States, 715 F.2d 34, 37 (2d Cir.1983). When that point is reached, the government's remedy for the

witness's contumacy is to proceed against him for criminal contempt.

Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings Empanelled May 1988, 894 F2d 881, 884 (7th Cir 1989)

pg_0004

Civil Contempt was codified as a statute by Congress 28 USC §1826 with a maximum term of

imprisonment of 18 months Which Walker ignored calling it “inherent power" that not even Congress or

the people of the United States have any right to tell a judge what to do. This demonstrates why we are

no longer a free society and why Judges have created a silent revolution for no matter what the people

enact, judges can ignore our democracy and turn the place into East Berlin by simply declaring it to be

so. Judge Posner wrote regarding this statute that to claim I could be held until I died without lawyers,

trial by jury, or a right to appeal as declared by Judge Walker to protect the New York Banks, bluntly

stated civil contempt was now appealable, and that "any assumption on which Congress built section

1826 (b) supersedes any contrary implications." Matter of Witness Before Spec. G.J., 722 F2d 349, 351

(7th Cir 1983). The Supreme Court is supposed to resolve differences between the circuit courts. So here

I had every other circuit against Judge Walker and New York and Judge Posner articulated the way a free

society is supposed to act – the legislative elected branch makes the laws (people) not unelected judges

who presume they are kings since they possess that throne for life. Had the Supreme Court not ordered

the government to respond, I would have died in prison to protect Goldman Sachs and their designs.

This is what this new bill is all about. What they did to me was unconstitutional. It offended every

principle of a free society and carried out a silent revolution eliminating our democratic foundation. This

is why Ron Paul had the courage to support me, and we should have the courage to vote for him

because he is TRULY our last hope. He would not be party as usual.

These people we pretend to elect are for the most part against everything America stands for. They are

brainwashed by the backroom dictatorship that never ends and remains intact regardless of what

happens at the polls. With two-thirds of the American people not trusting government, this may be your

last chance to save what is left. After Ron Paul, I know of nobody who would really change anything.

The U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless surveillance controversy

("Warrantless Wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United

States during the collection of foreign intelligence by the NSA as part of the war on

terror. These 19 guys and a camel have been used to take all our liberties away.

First was the "Warrantless Wiretapping" and then the kill switch for the internet,

and now it is the

National Defense Authorization Act that will authorize the military to

attack citizens like the Occupy Wall Street crowd and anyone else that protests about the destruction of the

Constitution and eventually what happens when government encounters the “ no bid day" and cannot sell its debt

any longer. They will need the troops to stem the civil unrest. They will never criminally charge Goldman Sachs for

(1) they did the reverse takeover of government and even ran Princeton Economics by court order, and (2) the

government needs them to sell their debt. Only Ron Paul has the courage to stand tall. The press tries so hard to

ignore him but the polls show he is the ONLY person who could beat

Obama, yet the Republicans ignore him. Obama talked a good game but did

nothing different from Bush. They are turning out the lights.

Ron Paul is our last hope before we go completely down the

rabbit hole. We have to turn politics on its head before it is too

late. It’s the debt and Goldman will fail keep it rolling forever.