Grand Jury: Obama Committing Fraud & Treason

Obama Committing Fraud and Treason: Multiple Grand Juries By Neil B. Turner

What everyone knows: Most of America knows (beyond any reasonable doubt) that Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Hussein Obama) is not Constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States (POTUS) and Commander in Chief (CinC) (per Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the U.S.). Most of America also knows (beyond any reasonable doubt) that the members of Congress (all 535 of them), the Federal Courts, the Supreme Court, and ALL the Media (including FNC) are either ‘in the tank for’ or ‘paid off or intimidated by’ the illegitimate, criminal and Treasonous presumed President and Commander in Chief, Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Hussein Obama) and his coterie of thugs.

Origins, history, and applicability of the citizen’s Grand Jury: The 5th Amendment of our U.S. Constitution provides that: … ‘No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.’ It doesn’t say ‘Federal’ Grand Jury, a ‘Grand Jury called and impaneled by a Judge, Special Prosecutor, or District Attorney’, nor does it say a ‘Government impaneled’ Grand Jury. The concept of a Citizen’s Grand Jury dates all the way back to the Magna Carta in 1215, and was included by the founders in our Constitution and Bill of Rights as a means for the people to reign-in an elected government run amok. It goes without saying that when a government is committing criminal and un-Constitutional acts, it can hardly be relied upon to bring charges and indictments against itself. Justice Antonin Scalia, in a 1992 ruling stated: "Rooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history, … the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right.." * In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people." Thus is the situation that we Americans find ourselves in now – the proverbial ‘fox’ is in charge of the ‘henhouse’, and it is devouring the rooster, the hens,

the chickens, and their eggs – on a daily basis!

The Citizen’s Grand Jury was a common feature of early American jurisprudence, but fell into disuse about 100 years ago, as the Government passed more and more unConstitutional laws and acts. In the mid 1940’s, some devious lawyers and judges felt they should try to bury the concept and any possibility of a Citizen’s (or People’s) watchdog group looking over their nefarious shoulders any longer, so they wrote into their system of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures the following: (Common Law Grand Jury) ‘… presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal Courts.’ The trouble is, you cannot change the U.S. Constitution by merely writing a rule! It must be by Amendment, a time-consuming, laborious and people-enlightening process, requiring ratification of the change, spelled out in detail, and the reasons therefore, by ¾ of the States (38 of the current 50 states at this time). Obsolete indeed! NOTE: Typically, courts and the judiciary issue ‘Indictments’, while Citizen’s Grand Juries issue ‘Presentments’, which, when formally presented to those sworn to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution, they must, by law, then issue an Indictment, and failure to do so makes them guilty of misprision of treason (the concealment of a treason or felony and failure to report it to the prosecuting authorities, by a person who has not committed it). As a result of this act of ‘misprision’, they could then be indicted themselves by future Citizen’s Grand Juries convened for just this purpose, much like the entire 535 members of Congress could be indicted for certifying the electoral votes for a known Constitutionally ineligible candidate for the presidency. Early in 2009, a brilliant Constitutional lawyer, Leo Donofrio, wrote a detailed dissertation on the renewed use and viability of the Citizens’ Grand Jury, especially in light of the dumbing-down of the American populace, and their adulation of a mesmerizing, opaque, and criminal Imposter usurping the Presidency (and Commander in Chief-ship) of the United States. By pulling off the greatest hoax in the 230+ years since the founding of our Country, Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Obama) puts Ponzi and Madoff to shame. http://americangrandjury.org/history_power.html First Citizen’s Grand Juryof the 21st century Oddly enough, before the on-again, off-again Leo Donofrio could convince his readers that the Citizen’s Grand Jury wouldn’t apply in the case of ousting this particular usurper/imposter, a number of motivated patriotic Americans had already seized upon the concept, and the 21st Century Citizen’s Grand Jury was born! On March 28th, 2009, Mr. Carl Swensson convened a panel of 25 sworn jurors in Stockbridge, GA, saying, ‘I’m no lawyer, and I’m not exactly sure what I’m doing, but I’m doing it anyway!’ Following an hour+ long presentation of documented

evidence of fraud, forgery, corruption, money laundering, stolen SS numbers, perjury, and Treason by both Barack and Michelle Obama (and their many aliases) given by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. (by phone, as she was in CA), the GA Citizen’s Grand Jury deliberated for an hour, and then came down with indictments/presentments (or a ‘True Bill’) against the presumed President of the United States, Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama. Dr. Taitz’ entire presentation of evidence was videotaped (by myself), and can be seen in its entirety @ youtube for use by anyone convening a Citizen’s Grand Jury anywhere in the U.S. The entire 150 page ‘dossier’ on the criminal and unconstitutional acts of these two hoax-sters has been sent to all 50 States’ Attorneys General. One of these dossiers is available for all who wish to be informed @ orlytaitzesq.com/blog1. No one can say, “but I didn’t know." http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=C48E5634034519C1 First Online Citizen’s Grand Jury The following month, using the power of the government-developed internet (how ironic), the world’s first online Citizen’s Grand Jury was launched by American patriot Bob Campbell of AZ, and the www.AmericanGrandJury.org was born. The first group of 25 vetted and sworn jurors studied the evidence online for a week, and on 29 April they voted a ‘True Bill’ of Presentments of Fraud (eligibility) and Treason against the defendant: presumed president of the United States, Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama. This was followed by 6 more online Grand Juries (to date, June 24, 2009). All have issued formal presentments of charges of Fraud (ineligibility) and Treason, and have begun to ‘Serve’ these indictments to Law Enforcement, Sheriffs, District Attorneys, Attorneys General, and District Courts all across the country. (I personally served my charges from being a juror on the May 9th, 2009 American Grand Jury, at the historic 1911 Williamson County District Courthouse in Georgetown, TX, while visiting there from CA on June 15th, 2009. My report on this ‘Serving’ can be seen at: http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/06/another-texas-obama-indictmentfiled.html). In the 2 ½ months since Carl Swensson’s first modern-day Citizen’s Grand Jury on March 28, 2009, there have been numerous online and on-the-ground State Grand Juries impaneled and deliberated (including TX, AR, & IL), with ‘True Bill’ indictment/presentment verdicts reached in every single one, and with over 200 ‘servings’ having been made so far. Soon there will be thousands served, too many for the press and media (Radio, Newspapers, & TV*) to ignore. Imagine the pressure on Mr. & Mrs. Soetoro (aka Obama) as they await that OMG moment when the truth that they have spent over a $million dollars to hide suddenly exposes them for the Treasonous frauds they are. http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/aka-obama-fans-all-together-now-sayomg.html To show by example just how treacherous the American Main Stream media is, even Fox News, the "champion of truth" will not show America the truth of Obama's birth, as evidenced by their silence on the phony Certification of Live Birth and their outright lies about it:

* Fox News Channel’s TV news anchor Shepard Smith recently announced that he is apparently the defacto expert on Barack Obama’s citizenship when he said on-air on June 10, 2009: “There are these crazies out there who want to pretend [Obama’s] not a citizen of the United States, who want to pretend that his religion is something they see as in some way troublesome to them and all of us. And there is a group perpetuating this thought, and there is a culture to which you can attach yourself very easily through the Internet. We know it’s absolutely – there is no truth whatsoever – zero – to any of those ideas, yet they live within the computer and they fester in people’s minds.” These insulting and ignorant-of-the-facts statements, broadcast publicly to millions of viewers by Mr. Smith, will soon come back to haunt him, when he and FNC are subpoenaed into court to show proof of the source of these outrageous statements. This year’s July 4th Independence Day celebrations should have some unusual fireworks indeed.

Suspension of Posse Comitatus/Mutiny or Treason? On March 10th, 2009, a frightening event took place in Samson, AL, when a deranged gunman went on a shooting spree. This led to an un-constitutional suspension of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (18 U.S.C. Section 1385), as a contingent of armed U.S. military forces took over the town in pursuit of this lone gunman. This blatant and treasonous violation of our Constitution and our laws was the last straw for Lt. Commander Walter Fitzpatrick, III, U.S. Navy, Retired (West Point 1975), subject to lifetime recall. So on March 17, 2009, LCdr Fitzpatrick served charges of Treason against the usurping Commander in Chief, knowing full well that if his criminal charges against the POTUS and CinC were false, he would have to be charged with Mutiny*! But if true, the usurper would have to be charged with Treason*, and if the prosecuting authorities who were aware of these charges failed to issue an indictment, they would also be complicit in (and guilty of) these acts of Treason!

* NOTE: Both Mutiny and Treason can be punishable by death. Commander Fitzpatrick has yet to be charged with Mutiny (over 3 months later), and Mr. Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Obama) has therefore, by his silence in this matter, ‘admitted’ to the charge of Treason. Commander Fitzpatrick’s criminal charges of Treason have been served, either on their own or in conjunction with the American Grand Jury presentments, all over the country, and can be downloaded after registering here, so that each and every patriotic American can serve these charges wherever they are in the U.S. as well. Never let a crisis go to waste

Remember the infamous words of the Great Imposter’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel when he said: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste, and what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you didn't think you could do before.” Well, we have a serious Constitutional crisis here, and YOU have an opportunity to do things that you never thought you could do before: OUST the IMPOSTER! All we need is for just ONE honest and patriotic judge, anywhere in these 50 United States, to order DISCOVERY! So when someone asks: ‘What can I, as just one person, do to help save our Constitution?’, don’t ask if it’s a rhetorical question or do they really want to know. Just send them to the www.AmericanGrandJury.org where they can click on ‘How To Serve Presentments’. Now let’s get to work and ‘Take Our Country Back!’ One County at a Time (www.CitizensGrandJury.org).

Obama Committing Fraud and Treason by Neil B. Turner Capt., United States Army-Aviation (1957-1964) www.YouTube.com/IroquoisChief Part 2......http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107912-0/ Part1........http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/01-07-2009/107897Obama_Fraud_Treason-0 Pravda.Ru _____________________________ http://americangrandjury.org/ Would any of you out there like to join in the movement to get rid of the Usurper? Becoming an American Grand Jury member is the best way to take action. Go to the link http://americangrandjury.org/ and send us a message telling us you would like to serve on a Grand Jury. For those of you out there that don’t think our goal is possible, just remember this: During the American Revolution 70% of the citizens were loyal to the King or apathetic. The other 30% founded a Nation. If you think we don’t have enough patriots in this country to remove the usurper from office, think again! _____________________________ AmericanGrandJury.org

Grand Jury Presentments and Serving

What is a Grand Jury? A Grand Jury when convened is responsible for reviewing evidence, naming a defendant and handing down presentments. A Grand Jury can only hear criminal charges. A Grand Jury is NOT a trial jury. Grand Juries can only hand down presentments, they cannot hand down a verdict like a judicial trial jury can.

What are presentments? Presentments are the actual charges handed down by a Grand Jury against the defendant. The presentments are reduced to writing so they may be served with a court or other party. The term "presentments" comes from the United States Constitution under Amendment 5 of the Bill of Rights. What do you do with presentments once handed down? You serve a court with the presentments. The court turns the presentments into a formal indictment and sets the criminal case over for trial. The court prosecutes the defendant named in the presentments or indictment.

Can presentments be served to others? YES. The court may be the final destination but presentments can be served on such parties as a sheriff, magistrate, police chief, mayor, judge, prosecutor, district attorney, legislator or others. Will these other parties be able to prosecute the case? NO. Only a court or court appointed prosecutor can prosecute the case. So why serve others? Other parties such as a sheriff, police chief or District Attorney have enormous powers when it comes to prosecuting criminals through the court system.

What does "serving" the presentments mean? People often confuse "filing" with "serving." American Grand Jury presentments are not a lawsuit, complaint or other such legal documents. Presentments are served or delivered to a court, sheriff, District Attorney, etc. We DO NOT file anything. We deliver or serve presentments. The job of the court is to accept the presentments and act upon them. This is a very key issue. By Constitutional law a court MUST accept the presentments. Will they always comply? NO. The courts like to think they are responsible only to their own rules, procedures or state laws. If the court operates under the Supreme law of the land, the Constitution, they can and should accept Constitutional Grand

Jury presentments.

How to get started serving presentments? # # # # #

First decide WHO you want to serve You can serve more that one party if you wish Research the address(es) for each party you want to serve Print and complete "presentments" for serving each party Physically deliver the presentments or mail them to each party

What is it like serving presentments? Any responsible person can serve American Grand Jury presentments. It is not difficult to serve presentments but does require a certain personality that is willing to experience a little discomfort when marching into a clerk's office to serve that court. I won't lie to you. Sometimes it is a piece of cake. Other times you run into court clerks that are ignorant, trying to run interference or just plain breaking the law should they refuse a service.

Two best methods for serving presentments? # Serve the documents in person # Mail documents by certified, return receipt

When you personally serve documents you actually hand-deliver the presentments to the party. You are like a "process-server" with no pay. If you live close to a court or sheriff and don't need to spend much in gas, personally serving documents can be exciting. If time and expense are a problem then you should go to the Post Office and mail the presentments by Certified, Return receipt. Mailing by Certified is not expensive, only about $7 to $8 per mailing.

I am ready to serve presentments. How do I get the documents from American Grand Jury? We have streamlined the process of getting an American Grand Jury "presentments" package. You can simply download the most current presentments in .PDF format, print them from your computer and you are ready to go. The download includes all instructions on how to complete the documents for serving. We have (3) command centers within the United States to help you if you have problems or need additional information. Contact information is included in the

instructions.

Go to AmericanGrandJury.org to request the presentments from American Grand Jury.

_____________________________ Another Texas Obama Indictment Filed - June 15th ARE YOU BEING SERVED? It was a broiling-hot 99 degree day in Georgetown, Texas, when I found myself in front of the Williamson County Courthouse, ready to ‘SERVE’ the May 9th, 2009 Grand Jury Presentments of Fraud and Treason against the ‘presumed’ President of the United States, Defendant Barack Hussein Obama, aka: Barry Soetoro. The receptionist informed me that there was no notary in the building, but directed me across the street to the Bank of America (recently cited and singled out by myself and other patriotic Americans for boycotting - for blatantly and openly giving home loans to illegal aliens in recent years). Undaunted and feeling like ‘it serves them right’, I ventured forth into the 99 degree heat to have a FREE welcoming cup of coffee and a FREE notarization of my ‘presentment’ cover letter by a pleasant and unquestioning ‘designated notary’ at the otherwise infamous B of A. I then returned to the historic Williamson County Courthouse, where the receptionist asked if the ‘complaint’ was civil or criminal. ‘CRIMINAL,’ I said, and she then directed me to the Courthouse Annex 3 blocks away. Another gentlemen, who had stepped back from his discussion with the receptionist (she told him she had been serving me just before him) said, “I wish you well, sir!” I proceeded by air-conditioned vehicle the 3 blocks to the Courthouse Annex, and found it just behind the Williamson County Jail! Feeling slightly intimidated, I ventured forth to the Courthouse Annex, where I was turned back at the 3-guard security checkpoint due to the knife on my keychain. After returning the offending weapon to my vehicle, I passed the checkpoint with flying colors, and proceeded to the District Clerk’s office, and presented my 11 page ‘Indictment’ to the clerk at the desk labeled ‘CIVIL’ (there was no ‘CRIMINAL’ sign, so I figured, WhatEVER!) She went to ask her supervisor what to do with it, and returned shortly to ask me to take a seat and wait. In order to speed things up, I gave her a copy of the Cover Page of the Lavaca County (Texas) Presentment by a Representative of Lone Star Grand Jury, Texas, and said, “I would like it filed like this one”. As I waited, I took some videos of the offices, the clerk taking my presentment to an office in the rear, and the CIVIL sign, then sat down. Shortly thereafter, I was approached by a security guard who came from the back office where my presentment was being discussed (I was, like Commander Fitzpatrick, hoping to be arrested so as to lead to ‘discovery’), and was asked if I was taking pictures there. I said ‘yes’, and was told that I could not take pictures in that facility.

I said, ‘OK’. ‘The camera is put away.’ And he left. After about a 15 minute wait, the clerk (a nice and pleasant young lady) returned with a copy of my FILED stamped Cover Page (plus my Lavaca County FILED page), and said ‘There you are.’ I smiled my best smile, said, ‘thank you very much’, and left. I also smiled broadly at the receptionist in the hall, and at the Security Guards who observed my departure from askance. Upon exiting the building, I made a small leap into the air as I let out a well-known Texas ‘YIPPEE!’ So here it is: The State of TEXAS, Jurisdiction: Williamson County; Grand Jury Presentments Re: Fraud (eligibility) and Treason. FILED at 10:46 o’clock am, June 15, 2009 /s/ Lisa David District Clerk, Williamson Co, TX Respectfully submitted, Neil B. Turner, Juror of May 9th, 2009 American Grand Jury Read the evidence against AKA Obama: Somehow, you know its coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans. “For nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that shall not be known and come to light.” Luke 8:17 http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/aka-obama-fans-all-together-now-sayomg.html Some people who do not read posts before they comment need to be reminded that AKA Obama and his co-defendants, the leaders of the Deomcratic Party, are open to a charge of election fraud in every jurisdiction that has a voting machine. Our goal is to present indictments in every jurisdiction of the union. It is highly unlikely that not even one jurisdiction will take action on the indictment. All we need is one jurisdiction to order “Discovery.” The case against AKA OBAMA is unique because it will be over in the Discovery phase, as the first step in a criminal complaint. The goal of the project I support is not to convict and punish AKA Obama but to discover what AKA OBAMA doesn’t want us to know, and why he doesn’t want us to know it. Our goal will be achieved without a trial or a verdict. Even if an independently convened grand jury is mistakenly seen as merely people assembling to exercise their Constitutional right to “redress their grievances,” or report crimes, that is no small thing. Hundreds of people in such “assemblies” will be examining evidence and presenting the results of their investigation to appropriate county, state, and federal authorities, some of whom will almost certainly form more conventional grand juries to indict AKA OBAMA. Can one honestly surmise that there is not one prosecutor or judge in the entire nation who questions AKA OBAMA’s eligibility to be President? The American Grand Jury organization with which I am affiliated is using

recognized expert witnesses with a long professional history of forensic testimony. The guiding principles for the project are the usual protocols of epistemology, scientific methodology, and rules of evidence. Any prosecutor or judge who ignores such evidence and testimony is at risk of being seen as acquiescent. _____________________________ The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government by Leo C. Donofrio, J.D. January 22, 2009

All of us may one day serve as grand jurors in federal court, and I hope this article will educate the reader to his/her true power as granted by the Constitution. For that power, despite having been hidden for many years behind the veil of a legislative fraud, still exists in all of its glory in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution. The US Supreme Court has confirmed and reinforced that power. So please, copy this report and paste it far and wide. It is not spin. It is not false. It is not for sale, it is not copyrighted by me, so paste and quote it freely. This report is the truth and we need truth, now, more than ever. The Constitutional power of "we the people" sitting as grand jurors has been subverted by a deceptive play on words since 1946 when the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were enacted. Regardless, the power I am going to explain to you still exists in the Constitution, and has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court despite the intention of the legislature and other legal scholars to make our power disappear with a cheap magic trick. Repeat a lie with force and repetition and the lie becomes known as truth. In the case of the 5th Amendment to the Constitution, the power of the grand jury, to return "presentments" on its own proactive initiation, without reliance upon a US Attorney to concur in such criminal charges, has been usurped by an insidious play on words. Most of this article is going to quote other scholars, judges and legislators as I piece together a brief but thorough history of the federal grand jury for your review. But the punch line is my personal contribution to the cause: UNITED STATES CITIZENS SITTING AS FEDERAL GRAND JURORS ARE THE FOURTH BRANCH OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. My input into this vital fight is no more than the analysis of a few carefully used words. It only took a small sleight of pen back in 1946 to hide our power, and it won't take more than a few words to take that power back. But a proper overview is necessary for most of you who are unfamiliar with the issue at hand. So let me provide you with some history and then we'll see what went wrong and how to correct it. HISTORY OF FEDERAL GRAND JURY POWER I want to draw your attention to a law review article, CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW, Vol. 33, No. 4 1999-2000, 821, IF IT'S NOT A RUNAWAY, IT'S NOT A REAL GRAND JURY by

Roger Roots, J.D. "In addition to its traditional role of screening criminal cases for prosecution, common law grand juries had the power to exclude prosecutors from their presence at any time and to investigate public officials without governmental influence. These fundamental powers allowed grand juries to serve a vital function of oversight upon the government. The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past." The 5th Amendment: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury." An article appearing in American Juror, the newsletter of the American Jury Institute and the Fully Informed Jury Association, citing the famed American jurist, Joseph Story, explained : "An indictment is a written accusation of an offence preferred to, and presented, upon oath, as true, by a grand jury, at the suit of the government. An indictment is framed by the officers of the government, and laid before the grand jury. Presentments, on the other hand, are the result of a jury's independent action: 'A presentment, properly speaking, is an accusation, made by a grand jury of its own mere motion, of an offence upon its own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before it, and without any bill of indictment laid before it at the suit of the government. Upon a presentment, the proper officer of the court must frame an indictment, before the party accused can be put to answer it.' " Back to the Creighton Law Review: "A 'runaway' grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today's "runaway" grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact "runaways," according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself." So, it's clear that the Constitution intended to give the grand jury power to instigate criminal charges, and this was especially true when it came to government oversight. But something strange happened on the way to the present. That power was eroded by a lie enacted by the legislative branch. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution still contains the same words quoted above, but if you sit on a grand jury and return a "presentment" today, the prosecutor must sign it or it probably won't be allowed to stand by the judge and the criminal charges you have brought to the court's attention will be swept away. And the reason for this can be found in a legislative lie of epic proportions. Mr. Roots weighs in again: "In 1946, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted, codifying what had previously been a vastly divergent set of common law procedural rules and regional customs.[86] In general, an effort was made to conform the rules to the contemporary state of federal criminal practice.[87] In the area of federal grand

jury practice, however, a remarkable exception was allowed. The drafters of Rules 6 and 7, which loosely govern federal grand juries, denied future generations of what had been the well-recognized powers of common law grand juries: powers of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The committee that drafted the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provided no outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing, the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit constitutional language."[88]" Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (FRCP): "An offense which may be punished by death shall be prosecuted by indictment. An offense which may be punished by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year or at hard labor shall be prosecuted by indictment." No mention of "presentments" can be found in Rule 7. But they are mentioned in Note 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules: "4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal courts." The American Juror published the following commentary with regards to Note 4: "[W]hile the writers of the federal rules made provisions for indictments, they made none for presentments. This was no oversight. According to Professor Lester B. Orfield, a member of the Advisory Committee on Rules of Criminal Procedure, the drafters of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 6 decided the term presentment should not be used, even though it appears in the Constitution. Orfield states [22 F.R.D. 343, 346]: 'There was an annotation by the Reporter on the term presentment as used in the Fifth Amendment. It was his conclusion that the term should not be used in the new rules of criminal procedure. Retention might encourage the use of the runaway grand jury as the grand jury could act from their own knowledge or observation and not only from charges made by the United States attorney. It has become the practice for the United States Attorney to attend grand jury hearings, hence the use of presentments have been abandoned.' " That's a fascinating statement: "Retention might encourage the grand jury [to] act from their own knowledge or observation." God forbid, right America? The nerve of these people. They have the nerve to put on the record that they intended to usurp our Constitutional power, power that was intended by the founding fathers, in their incredible wisdom, to provide us with oversight over tyrannical government. And so they needed a spin term to cast aspersions on that power. The term they chose was, "runaway grand jury," which is nothing more than a Constitutionally mandated grand jury, aware of their power, and legally exercising that power to hold the federal beast in check, as in "checks and balances." The lie couldn't be inserted into the Constitution, so they put it in a statute and then repeated it. And scholars went on to repeat it, and today, as it stands, the grand jury has effectively been lied into the role of submissive puppet of the US Attorney. The American Juror publication included a very relevant commentary: "Of course, no statute or rule can alter the provisions of the

Constitution, since it is the supreme law of the land. But that didn't prevent the federal courts from publishing a body of case law affirming the fallacy that presentments were abolished. A particularly egregious example: 'A rule that would permit anyone to communicate with a grand jury without the supervision or screening of the prosecutor or the court would compromise, if not utterly subvert, both of the historic functions of the grand jury, for it would facilitate the pursuit of vendettas and the gratification of private malice. A rule that would open the grand jury to the public without judicial or prosecutorial intervention is an invitation to anyone interested in trying to persuade a majority of the grand jury, by hook or by crook, to conduct investigations that a prosecutor has determined to be inappropriate or unavailing.'" [7] What is the result? Investigating seditious acts of government officials can be deemed inappropriate or unavailing by the prosecutor, or the judge can dismiss the grand jurors pursuing such investigations. Consequently, corrupt government officials have few natural enemies and go about their seditious business unimpeded. By the way, they made a rule to take care of runaways too, in 1946: Rule 6(g): "At any time for cause shown the court may excuse a juror either temporarily or permanently, and in the latter event the court may impanel another person in place of the juror excused." Now judges can throw anyone off a grand jury, or even dis-impanel a grand jury entirely, merely for exercising its discretion. Now let me add my two cents to this argument: Most of the discussion about Note 4 to Rule 7 of the FRCP takes for granted that the common law use of "presentments" (as codified in the 5th Amendment) was made "illegal" in 1946 by this act. Nothing could be more false. Note 4 does not contain language that makes the use of presentments "illegal," although it had chosen its words carefully to make it appear as if that is what the legislative branch intended. But let's look at Note 4 again: "4. Presentment is not included as an additional type of formal accusation, since presentments as a method of instituting prosecutions are obsolete, at least as concerns the Federal courts." The key word is, "obsolete." Obsolete means "outmoded,", or "not in use anymore", but it does not mean "abolished" or "illegal." And therein lies the big lie. The legislature knew it could not directly overrule the Constitution, especially with something so clearly worded as the 5th Amendment, which grants a power to the people which has a long and noble purpose in criminal jurisprudence. But the federal beast legislative branch sought more power to protect themselves from the oversight of "we the people," and in its vampire like thirst for more governmental control, it inserted this insidious Note 4 in the hope that scholars and judges would play along with their ruse, or in the alternative, their ruse would appear to be legally viable. Let's look at some authoritative legal resources which discuss Note 4: Susan Brenner, THE VOICE OF THE COMMUNITY: A CASE FOR GRAND JURY INDEPENDENCE: "Finally, federal grand juries' subservience to prosecutors was exacerbated when the federal system eliminated the use of presentments, which

allowed a grand jury to bring charges on its own initiative. (N35) Now, grand jurors cannot return charges in the form of an indictment without prosecutor's consent. (N36) Elimination of the presentment demonstrates historical trend towards elimination of proactive features in the grand system."

federal a the jury

Did Brenner fall for the lie or did she cleverly further it when she said, "[T]he federal system eliminated the use of presentments?" The federal system did no such thing. Note 4 said the use of presentments was "obsolete." First of all, Note 4 is not a law in itself. It is a Note to a law, and the law as written, does not have anything to say about presentments. You see the leap Brenner has made? The Constitution provides for "presentments", then the FRCP are enacted and the Rules therein do not mention presentments, nor do they ban presentments, and if they did, such a ban would be unconstitutional, since an administrative enactment regarding procedure can not overrule the Constitution. Regardless, it's irrelevant, since the FRCP does not mention "presentments." Note 4 simply states that "presentments" allowed for in the 5th Amendment of the Constitution have become "obsolete", or outmoded, which is not to say that they were "eliminated." Shame on you Susan Brenner. You know darn well that the Constitution can only be changed by an official Amendment to it. Nothing can be "eliminated" from the Constitution by an administrative note. The use of presentments had become obsolete because the grand jurors were not aware of their power. So the use of "presentments" became more and more rare, and then in 1946 the legislative branch seized upon the moment to make this power disappear by waving its magic wand over the Constitution. Mr. Root got it wrong in the Creighton Law Review as well: "Before the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which made independentlyacting grand juries illegal for all practical purposes, grand juries were understood to have broad powers to operate at direct odds with both judges and prosecutors." The FRCP did not make it "illegal for all practical purposes." That's patently false. I don't know if Mr. Root, and/or Susan Brenner, were acting as the magician's assistant, but I can't imagine how these educated scholars could be so incredibly ignorant of basic Constitutional law. Give me a break. But if enough people repeat the lie, the lie appears to be the truth. But we have it on good authority, the Supreme Court, that the lie has no legal effect. stated:

Justice Powell, in United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974),

"The institution of the grand jury is deeply rooted in Anglo-American history. [n3] In England, the grand jury [p343] served for centuries both as a body of accusers sworn to discover and present for trial persons suspected of criminal wrongdoing and as a protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental action. In this country, the Founders thought the grand jury so essential to basic liberties that they provided in the Fifth Amendment that federal prosecution for serious crimes can only be instituted by 'a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury.' Cf. Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 361-362 (1956). The grand jury's historic functions survive to this day. Its responsibilities continue to include both the determination whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the protection of

citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 686-687 (1972)." The Note 4 lie is smashed on the altar of the U.S. Supreme Court, "The grand jury's historic functions survive to this day." Take that Note 4! Antonin Scalia effectively codified the unique independent power of the Fourth Branch into the hands of all citizens sitting as federal grand jurors. In discussing that power and unique independence granted to the grand jury, the United States Supreme Court, in United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia, delivering the opinion of the court, laid down the law of the land: " '[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history, Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It "'is a constitutional fixture in its own right.'" United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825 (1977). ' " I submit to you that this passage sets the stage for a revolutionary new context necessary and Constitutionally mandated to "we the people," THE FOURTH BRANCH of the Government of the United States. Besides, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches, I submit that there is a fourth branch, THE GRAND JURY, and "we the people? when sitting as grand jurors, are, as Scalia quoted in US v. Williams, " a constitutional fixture in its own right." Yes, darn it. That is exactly what the grand jury is, and what it was always intended to be. Scalia also stated, that "the grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside." Id. And finally, to seal the deal, Scalia hammered the point home: "In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm?s length. Judges'direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(a). [504 U.S. 36, 48] " This miraculous quote says it all, "the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people." The Constitution of the United States, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, gives rise to a FOURTH BRANCH of Government, THE GRAND JURY. We the people have been charged with oversight of the government in our roles as grand jurors. And at this critical time in American history, we must, for the protection of our constitutional republic, take back our power and start acting as powerful as the other branches of government.

The law is on our side. So please spread this knowledge as far and wide as you can. We the people have the right and power under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution to charge this government with crimes by returning presentments regardless of whether the US Attorneys or the federal judges agree with us. As the Supreme Court has so brilliantly stated, we are the "buffer between the Government and the people." Take the reins America. Pass it on. The Fourth Branch is alive and kicking.

*