Domestic terrorist watch list not what you thought.

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”–Benjamin Franklin

He knew we would reach this point! My God, to hear politicians actually justifying the rape of the U.S. Constitution’s 4th Amendment to be free of illegal search of United States citizens literally made me ill.

AMENDMENT IV

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

No one needs a law degree to understand this sacredly held right. No means No, and any who argue otherwise should be treated appropriately with all legal means possible. It can’t be justified, but it must be aggressively opposed and there must be a resounding example made of any who subvert our rights!

I don’t need the NSA to tell me who is a threat to America! Its the NSA, not Mr. Snowden!
This voting roll call on the Amash Amendment on stopping NSA’s rampant, uncontrolled violation of EVERYONES Constitutional rights shows which politician is for or against America! If this doesn’t scare you that YOUR legislative representatives voted to let this traitorous government rape our Country, then check your pulse to see if you are still alive. Anyone who votes for their respective Senator to reelect them, God have mercy on your soul, because I won’t.

House Roll Call Vote:

The 217-205 roll call Wednesday by which the House rejected a challenge to the National Security Agency’s secret and blatantly illegal collection of hundreds of millions of Americans’ phone records, which translates to YOURS!

How convenient that NEW JERSEY Republicans and Democrats have allowed us to know Americas enemy’s, which is every one that voted NO to not stopping the NSA’s criminal conduct. Here is the terrorist watch list for NJ:

Democrats – Andrews, N; Holt, Y; Pallone, X; Pascrell, Y; Payne, N; Sires, N.

Republicans – Frelinghuysen, N; Garrett, Y; Lance, N; LoBiondo, N; Runyan, N; Smith, Y.

To Pallone, being absent doesn’t excuse you or allow you to be excused from being on the list.

James Monroe stated:

“Of the liberty of conscience in matters of religious faith, of speech and of the press; of the trial by jury;…of the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; of the right to keep and bear arms…

If these rights are…secured against encroachments, it is impossible that government should ever degenerate into tyranny.”

I’m thinking too late….

Dale M Baranoski Corruptionmatrix.com Contact: crossfireinvest@aol.com

Dear Senator Runyan,

As you know, one of the job descriptions and one also included in the oath of office you had to take, is the requirement and duty to protect the U.S. Constitution “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…” I am calling on it now. Now more than ever the Country needs accountability.
I discovered that our Constitution was “amended” without a legal Amendment. I am including my own writing describing what could be considered an act of treason, and a violation of numerous federal crime statues. Worse, I learned of this alteration after 15+ years of fighting massive public and legal corruption originating out of Burlington County, that has resulted in deaths, illegal prosecutions and unlawful imprisonment of actually innocent people, illegal searches and seizures, and a litany of other civil/criminal federal violations, aside from the State ones.
Please advise if you will take action to 1. Help me first stop the rampant offenses against citizens and prevent more as is ocurring and 2. Help those victims I have personnally vetted with my police training and experience, but especially the ones who are incarcerated yet are actually innocent and 3. Correct the area of the Constitution targetted and strengthen it to make it secure, viable, and usable.

Here is the description via my article. I am at your disposal for any questions you will have.

We don’t need no stinkin’ Amendment to change the Constitution!

If you were a dirty government employee like a politician, judge, prosecutor, IRS, etc., you’d want to remove any legal threat to your person or position if you could, right? Even if its part of the Constitution? Well, they did it!

Here is the first successful attack upon our Constitution, and so far, it has been successful. It was perpetrated domestically, by bad men who removed the ultimate anti-corruption tool our founding fathers gave us to deal with bad government, but it remains MIA because good people do nothing about it. It is the last chance measure before the need to change the Government becomes a necessity.

Why is this one aspect so important? Especially in light of all the other threats to other parts of the Constitution, like the 1st Amendment (Government seizing media records illegally), the 2nd Amendment (the overreaching of Government in barring, restricting, or even banning ownership of firearms), the 4th Amendment (NSA’s illegal monitoring and gathering of private information), and the 5th Amendment (Government perverted the Indictment process by targeting the innocent, protecting the guilty, etc.), and far too many others.

Because the Presentment Grand Jury was intended to be used against the offenders of ALL OF THE ABOVE VIOLATIONS! When Government IS the violator, this allows the People to bring it to account, and get it back in line. Government was never intended to have the final say on the People, the People always have the final say on Government, and this tool is specifically included in the Constitution to ensure just that!

So when those who are, and should be most threatened by the Presentment tool, like politicians, prosecutors, and JUDGES, subvert that tool, it makes the case as to intent and motive. In other words, it would be like the MOB arranging for the ending of RICO laws; Law Enforcement eliminating internal affairs; or the President removing the Impeachment process. Self protection and preservation of that which must not be protected or preserved!

There are explanatory links below, but so you can speak from personal knowledge and not third-party, everyone should do what I did; go see it for yourself. For the less Internet savvy, I include a guide further on below.

First, what does the Constitution actually empower and say?

The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says in part as follows: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury . . . .”

What is the difference between a presentment and an indictment?

An indictment is a written accusation of an offense presented, upon oath, as true, by a grand jury, VIA the initiation of the government. Presentments, on the other hand, are the result of a jury’s independent action:

A presentment, is an accusation, made by a grand jury of its own mere motion, of an offense upon its own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before it, and WITHOUT any bill of indictment laid before it BY the government.

In other words, a Presentment Grand Jury doesn’t use a Prosecutor or Judge to influence or direct WHO or WHAT does, or nowadays, DOES NOT get investigated. When needed, it is compromised much like the juries every American is familiar with, especially when the receive notices to report for jury duty. But after being formed, the similarities end as the Presentment jury is not overseen by a judge, nor is it led and fed by a Prosecutor. It is an investigative body with full subpoena powers.

The Founding Fathers wrote the grand jury into the Fifth Amendment, to specifically address bad government. These were men with more decency, integrity, intelligence, and patriotism in their little toes than all the politicians and judges combined! They would be outraged to have this last line of defense against tyranny messed with by those whose conduct it was intended to be used against.

Its use may have became less as America grew more “civilized” and the Indictment process became the more prominent tool, probably simply as a cost-saving move, or to avoid redundancy at a time when it was believed that the integrity of government wouldn’t need it, or that the three branches would keep a check on each other, or that there would always be honest prosecutors to indict the corrupt public officials. But simply because it wasn’t used, does not mean that is a basis to obstruct it, and intentionally use misdirection and slight-of-pen to change the Constitution!

What say you? Bolderdash you chide. Its well known that any change to the Constitution must be done legally and openly through an Amendment procedure! Au contrare my friend, not if you are of the despicable, craven kind, and you do it secretly, with a pen and via an obscure court rule.

How the dastardly wolves in robes committed the change.

Here is 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 “presentment.” because Note 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules says this: “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.”

Oh really? So sayeth the Federal court? As if Presentments and Indictments are both sides of the same coin?

Don’t take my word for it, see for yourself. Use on of the two guides I prepared.

Your helpful guide: just cut and paste “Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” into your browsers search bar, and scroll down to Notes, specifically #4.

Or super helpful guide: Google the “Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” and in the Table of Contents, it shows the Rule dealing with Grand Juries, which is Rule 6, and it starts on page 7. Extra help – “Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” (copy, paste, and insert into your browser) :
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/RulesAndPolicies/rules/2010%2520Rules/Criminal%2520Procedure.pdf&sa=U&ei=Q6l7UMLZF62u0AHImIH4BA&ved=0CEAQFjAH&sig2=9Zfa7wOXvrtj8yIP5ceK5Q&usg=AFQjCNGFnbTGN8R6SaKk5HBj3RhQap3KTA

On page 4 of the Forward of this Rule booklet, at the very end, it explains that if you want to see more details of a particular Amendment, to go to TITLE 18, APPENDIX—RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (if you Googled that, this is the link that would appear);

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-app-federalru-dup1-rule6.pdf&sa=U&ei=-617UNqkBobu0gHq84C4Dw&ved=0CBwQFjAB&sig2=P5E8cTIWq4cqVJHfEC03Yw&usg=AFQjCNG8hz0iPwQmVBuE-saoj_-RcrsGaQ

Note 4 is on page 42 and literally says that the part of the Constitution, the 5th Amendment, is being changed (aka amended) to NOT use “Presentments” because its “obsolete!”

Nothing in the Constitution ever becomes “obsolete.” Whether unused or not relevant to the current times, all such parts remain if only as a threat that can be used, and used if needed.

So while men and women, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, sacrifice(d) some or all, then or now, while that which they sought to protect was violated by the very people it was intended to be used against, the new organized mob, aka our government.

The sacrifices will have been in vain if you do nothing, starting now.

So, there you have it explained. The presentment power is “obsolete” because the Court so sayeth, and Government is a bunch of outlaws holding the sheriff hostage. Now whatcha gonna do bout it…? Rescue the sheriff is the only answer!

Sources:

The US Constitution

Federal Rules Rules of Criminal Procedure

Source articles:

http://www.clgj.info/the-4th-branch-of-government.html

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan195.htm

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/runaway.htm

Comply with oath of office

Comply with oath of office

Their hubris always makes room for the home to get deeper. … I’ve despised this man from his refusal to take on corruption even after I personally cornered him at a F.O.G. meeting where he boldly lied in front of his son about helping take on a corrupt county prosecutors office. Thank goodness I recorded his false promise.

Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer has everything to lose including going to Prison for Perjury for telling the truth; if that truth turns out to be a “lie.”  On the other hand Lieutenant Governor Kim Guadagno has everything to gain by being untruthful, in her attempt to contradict Ms. Zimmer.

 

As sure as the Sun would rise, Ms. Guadagno will be called to testify under Oath and at that time, it would be interesting to see how her statement then would contradict her “non-binding” statement during her Monday’s so-called News Conference where she made it clear, “she wasn’t going to answer any questions.”

 

Also on Monday evening, Dawn Zimmer stood her ground during an interview with Anderson Cooper and did not retract any statement or claims she has made. Ms. Zimmer also stated that the Committee did not vote for the allocation of funds until much later, hence the…

View original post 249 more words

We don't need no stinkin' Amendment!.

We don’t need no stinkin’ Amendment to change the Constitution!

PGJ-intro-pic.jpg

If you were a dirty government employee like a politician, judge, prosecutor, IRS, etc., you’d want to remove any legal threat to your person or position if you could, right? Even if its part of the Constitution? Well, they did it!

 

Here is the first successful attack upon our Constitution, and so far, it has been successful. It was perpetrated domestically, by bad men who removed the ultimate anti-corruption tool our founding fathers gave us to deal with bad government, but it remains MIA because good people do nothing about it. It is the last chance measure before the need to change the Government becomes a necessity.

 

Why is this one aspect so important? Especially in light of all the other threats to other parts of the Constitution, like the 1st Amendment (Government seizing media records illegally), the 2nd Amendment (the overreaching of Government in barring, restricting, or even banning ownership of firearms), the 4th Amendment (NSA’s illegal monitoring and gathering of private information), and the 5th Amendment (Government perverted the Indictment process by targeting the innocent, protecting the guilty, etc.), and far too many others.

 

Because the Presentment Grand Jury was intended to be used against the offenders of ALL OF THE ABOVE VIOLATIONS! When Government IS the violator, this allows the People to bring it to account, and get it back in line. Government was never intended to have the final say on the People, the People always have the final say on Government, and this tool is specifically included in the Constitution to ensure just that!

 

So when those who are, and should be most threatened by the Presentment tool, like politicians, prosecutors, and JUDGES, subvert that tool, it makes the case as to intent and motive. In other words, it would be like the MOB arranging for the ending of RICO laws; Law Enforcement eliminating internal affairs; or the President removing the Impeachment process. Self protection and preservation of that which must not be protected or preserved!

 

There are explanatory links below, but so you can speak from personal knowledge and not third-party, everyone should do what I did; go see it for yourself. For the less Internet savvy, I include a guide further on below.

 

First, what does the Constitution actually empower and say?

 

The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says in part as follows: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury . . . .”

 

What is the difference between a presentment and an indictment?

 

An indictment is a written accusation of an offense presented, upon oath, as true, by a grand jury, VIA the initiation of the government. Presentments, on the other hand, are the result of a jury’s independent action:

 

A presentment, is an accusation, made by a grand jury of its own mere motion, of an offense upon its own observation and knowledge, or upon evidence before it, and WITHOUT any bill of indictment laid before it BY the government.

 

In other words, a Presentment Grand Jury doesn’t use a Prosecutor or Judge to influence or direct WHO or WHAT does, or nowadays, DOES NOT get investigated. When needed, it is compromised much like the juries every American is familiar with, especially when the receive notices to report for jury duty. But after being formed, the similarities end as the Presentment jury is not overseen by a judge, nor is it led and fed by a Prosecutor. It is an investigative body with full subpoena powers.

 

The Founding Fathers wrote the grand jury into the Fifth Amendment, to specifically address bad government. These were men with more decency, integrity, intelligence, and patriotism in their little toes than all the politicians and judges combined! They would be outraged to have this last line of defense against tyranny messed with by those whose conduct it was intended to be used against.

 

Its use may have became less as America grew more “civilized” and the Indictment process became the more prominent tool, probably simply as a cost-saving move, or to avoid redundancy at a time when it was believed that the integrity of government wouldn’t need it, or that the three branches would keep a check on each other, or that there would always be honest prosecutors to indict the corrupt public officials. But simply because it wasn’t used, does not mean that is a basis to obstruct it, and intentionally use misdirection and slight-of-pen to change the Constitution!

 

What say you? Bolderdash you chide. Its well known that any change to the Constitution must be done legally and openly through an Amendment procedure! Au contrare my friend, not if you are of the despicable, craven kind, and you do it secretly, with a pen and via an obscure court rule.

 

How the dastardly wolves in robes committed the change.

 

Here is 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 “presentment.” because Note 4 of the Advisory Committee Notes on the Rules says this: “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.”

 

Oh really? So sayeth the Federal court? As if Presentments and Indictments are both sides of the same coin?

 

Don’t take my word for it, see for yourself. Use on of the two guides I prepared.

 

Your helpful guide: just cut and paste “Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” into your browsers search bar, and scroll down to Notes, specifically #4.

 

Or super helpful guide: Google the “Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” and in the Table of Contents, it shows the Rule dealing with Grand Juries, which is Rule 6, and it starts on page 7. Extra help – “Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure” (copy, paste, and insert into your browser) :

 

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/RulesAndPolicies/rules/2010%2520Rules/Criminal%2520Procedure.pdf&sa=U&ei=Q6l7UMLZF62u0AHImIH4BA&ved=0CEAQFjAH&sig2=9Zfa7wOXvrtj8yIP5ceK5Q&usg=AFQjCNGFnbTGN8R6SaKk5HBj3RhQap3KTA

 

On page 4 of the Forward of this Rule booklet, at the very end, it explains that if you want to see more details of a particular Amendment, to go to TITLE 18, APPENDIX—RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (if you Googled that, this is the link that would appear);

 

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-app-federalru-dup1-rule6.pdf&sa=U&ei=-617UNqkBobu0gHq84C4Dw&ved=0CBwQFjAB&sig2=P5E8cTIWq4cqVJHfEC03Yw&usg=AFQjCNG8hz0iPwQmVBuE-saoj_-RcrsGaQ

 

Note 4 is on page 42 and literally says that the part of the Constitution, the 5th Amendment, is being changed (aka amended) to NOT use “Presentments” because its “obsolete!”

 

Nothing in the Constitution ever becomes “obsolete.” Whether unused or not relevant to the current times, all such parts remain if only as a threat that can be used, and used if needed.

 

So while men and women, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, sacrifice(d) some or all, then or now, while that which they sought to protect was violated by the very people it was intended to be used against, the new organized mob, aka our government.

 

The sacrifices will have been in vain if you do nothing, starting now.

 

So, there you have it explained. The presentment power is “obsolete” because the Court so sayeth, and Government is a bunch of outlaws holding the sheriff hostage. Now whatcha gonna do bout it…? Rescue the sheriff is the only answer!

 

Sources:

 

The US Constitution

 

Federal Rules Rules of Criminal Procedure

 

Source articles:

 

http://www.clgj.info/the-4th-branch-of-government.html

 

http://www.newswithviews.com/Stang/alan195.htm

 

http://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/runaway.htm

TIME

The Republican Senate primary race in Mississippi ended last month — but the drama is only beginning.

The state Republican Party on Monday officially certified incumbent Senator Thad Cochran’s narrow victory over Tea Party challenger Chris McDaniel in the June 24 runoff vote. But McDaniel is still refusing to concede, alleging that rampant voter fraud tipped the race to the incumbent and threatening to launch a rare legal challenge with the goal of a political do-over: rerunning the race.

“The allegations of criminal misconduct against the Cochran campaign and his close associates continue to mount,” McDaniel, a conservative state senator, said in a statement July 8. “Mississippians deserve a full accounting of the unbecoming tactics the Cochran campaign used in their attempt to drive ineligible voters to the polls in June.”

At the heart of the controversy is the McDaniel campaign’s claim that Cochran’s team enlisted ineligible Democrats to boost…

View original post 349 more words

Its impossible and a boldfaced lie!

Proof of intent to obstruct the Constitution.

563930_419052618151144_7702531_n

While totally ignorant of the Presentment Grand Jury,
I filed a federal complaint pro se so as to gain access to a federal grand jury in order to present evidence of rampant and systemic criminal crimes and civil rights violations. See: B a r a no sk i v . U S Att y O ffice D ock e t N o . 06-3151
 

As a top cop police sergeant I was effectively blocked from holding any of the many public criminals accountable. Any and all legal or official offices or agencies either acted, or failed to act, in prosecuting those who broke the law. Namely because they were those who ADMINISTERED the Rule of Rule. I pursued my efforts all the way to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Their intent to perpetuate the hoax that citizens could access the grand jury per statue was realized in their “decision.”

Here’s the proof that this is an intentional act to block access to the Grand Jury so as to present evidence of crimes by Prosecutors, judges and politicians. This was an arranged collaboration between the USAO and the Courts for self protection.

I filed that Complaint because all avenues of any related legal enforcement refused to act or worse, participated in the vober up. Up to and including the NJ Attorney General (they said the did an investigation but I used OPRA and proved they never did) and even higher with then U.S. Attorney Chris Christie who refused to go after any big fish because he was planning on running for governor.

And here’s the proof in a simple nutshell.
The NJ Supreme Court referred to a federal statue that allowed people to communicate with a grand jury and not be considered as tampering. It was in a NJ decision where a NJ lawyer ( Loigman) fought to be able to present evidence to a grand jury about crimes. The NJ court in an effort to sidestep okaying Loigman’s intent, threw in that federal statue already allows citizens to communicate with a grand jury to present evidence of a crime and not be associated with tampering with a grand jury. Here it is:

18 U.S. Code § 1504 – Influencing juror by writing

Whoever attempts to influence the action or decision of any grand or petit juror of any court of the United States upon any issue or matter pending before such juror, or before the jury of which he is a member, or pertaining to his duties, by writing or sending to him any written communication, in relation to such issue or matter, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury.

This statue was designed simply to 1. Make it appear that people could access the grand jury and 2. To deflect from the fact that our Constitution already provides for a more powerful tool via the presentment grand jury that the founding fathers intended to be used AGAINST bad government officials or acts and 3. That the government had illegally obstructed this part of the Constitution!

Here is a link describing that trick: https://peopleorsheeple.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/58/

So, if as the statue states “Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the communication of a request to appear before the grand jury.” how could the court deny my Complaint? They couldn’t, hence the legal garbage “decision.”