Deputy Jerome Corsi Jumps Birther Ship!!!

Before Deserting The Ship, Jerome Corsi Says Good-Bye To The Rest Of The Cold Case Posse

Well, one thing I missed during my time off was Jerome Corsi’s departure from Birferdom on April 19, 2013. Here is a link to the story at Dr. Conspiracy’s website:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/04/jerome-corsi-birth-certificate-issue-a-dead-horse/

During the 2 minute plus excerpt from the interview, Corsi called the Birther issue a “dead horse.”  He said the issue has been marginalized. However, he maintained that he still believed it.  But. . . there were other issues which need his attention. Imagine that, an author just walking away from what would be one of the most devastating stories in American history to go off on some other issues. If true, this story would be bigger than Watergate. Our very own Manchurian President, and Jerome Corsi just prisses away from it with an, “Oh, I’ve got some other fish to fry. . .”

Corsi now has his own website:

http://1776nation.com/

It has been up and  running since January 24, 2013 as near as I can tell. There are no overtly birthery articles. No stories about the Cold Case Posse. As a matter of fact, Corsi managed to completely ignore Deputy Zullo’s shock and awe speech June 1, 2013 speech t0 the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Convention in St. Charles, Missouri.  The speech which supposedly impressed so many law enforcement personnel. Corsi should have been beaming with pride with his recent comrades scoring a victory like that.

But he wasn’t. Corsi is in Washington now, and is running with a more sophisticated crowd. He needs to distance himself from all that wahoo Birther stuff. That is how you can be sure that there is nothing but crapola in the Cold Case Posse report. That is how you can be sure that there were never any legs to the story. That is how you can be sure Corsi never believed any of it.

Anybody who bought into the whole “Where’s The Real Birth Certificate” farce he peddled out to be mad as heck. They got PWNED!  To give the Devil his due, Corsi never endorsed the idiotic “two citizen parents” nonsense pushed by Mario Apuzzo, Esq. and other Birthers.  I guess there is some stuff even rats will turn their noses up at.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image: This is PLAGUE: DANCE OF THE RATS. Rats dancing at the time of the plague. Oil on canvas by an unknown Flemish artist, 17th century. Copies can be purchased at:

http://www.artflakes.com/en/products/plague-dance-of-the-rats

Did Corsi and The Cold Case Posse Cross The Line???

Putting His Posse Camouflage Training To Good Use, Zullo Agreed To Meet Corsi By The Old Juniper Tree

Ever since I learned that Jerome “Jerry” Corsi of World Net Daily (WND) and Deputy Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse (CCP) had a pre-existing book deal when the investigation began, I have wondered if the sleeziness of such an act crossed the line into possible criminal activity. It just doesn’t seem right that an law enforcement investigator has a pecuniary interest in the outcome of an investigation. Well, I am not a lawyer but I play one on my blog sometimes. So here are my thoughts.

First, there is a Federal law which addresses a conspiracy against the rights of a person, 18 U.S.C. 241:

Conspiracy Against Rights (18 USC 241)

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

The United States Department of Justice says about this statute:

Section 241 of Title 18 is the civil rights conspiracy statute. Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same). Unlike most conspiracy statutes, Section 241 does not require that one of the conspirators commit an overt act prior to the conspiracy becoming a crime.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/crm/241fin.php

Well, despite the Image above, which is for humor, I don’t think they went in disguise. But did they:

conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same

Obama certainly qualifies as any person. Is running for the presidency or being the president a right or privilege??? According to a set of Federal Pattern Jury Instructions I found, the range  of rights is pretty broad.  The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, which includes Arizona, has general instructions to the jury, but none specifically tailored to individual offenses.  However, I did find some for the Federal District Court in South Carolina.  Each page there was a separate pdf file, so I combined them as text files in a word processor, and then repubished them as one pdf document. I also made minor cosmetic changes to make it easier to read. Here is the pdf file:

18 U.S.C. 241 and 242 Pattern Jury Instructions

I also included the instructions for Color of Law abuses. If you want to double check these instructions, here is the link to the South Carolina Federal District Court, where they run from page 50 to page 56:

http://www.scd.uscourts.gov/JuryCharges/

Now, back to whether running for the presidency is a right or privilege, we find on pages 52 and 53:

Other protected rights include the following:

The right to vote, United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 323 (1941), but the issue of voter bribery and an honest election falls under 42 U.S.C. § 1973i, United States v. McLean, 808 F.2d 1044, 1046 (4 Cir. 1987);

The right to report a crime, In re Quarles, 158 U.S. 532, 535 (1895);

The right to testify at trial, United States v. Thevis, 665 F.2d 616, 626-27 (5 Cir.1982);

The right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment, United States v. LaVallee, 439 F.2d 670, 686 (10 Cir. 2006);

The right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law. This right includes the right to be kept free from harm while in official custody. “No person  may ever be physically assaulted, intimidated, or otherwise abused intentionally and without justification by a person acting under the color of the laws of any state.” United States v. Bigham, 812 F.2d 943, 949 (5 Cir. 1987);

The right to enjoy public accommodations, 42 U.S.C. § 2000a. The presence of electronic video games turns a convenience store into a supplier of entertainment and therefore a place of public accommodation. United States v. Baird, 85 F.3d 450 (9 Cir. 1996). In United States v. Piche, 981 F.2d 706, 716 (4 Cir. 1992), the defendant was prosecuted for interfering with Asian-American men because they were enjoying the goods and services of a public facility. The district court correctly charged the jury that “[a] place of public accommodation is any establishment that is used by members of the general public for entertainment, that is, recreation, fun, or pleasure, and in which the sources of entertainment move in interstate commerce.”

You also find the range of rights to be fairly broad from these cases cited on page 51 of the Instructions:

“The right to choose is the right of qualified voters to cast their ballots and have them counted at Congressional elections. [T]his is a right secured by the Constitution [and] is secured against the action of individuals as well as of states.” United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 315 (1941). This includes primaries for Congressional elections.

§ 241 embraces a conspiracy to stuff the ballot box at an election for federal officers, and thereby to dilute the value of votes of qualified voters. The government does not have to prove an intent to change the outcome of the federal election. The intent required is to have false votes cast and thereby to injure the right of all voters in a federal election to express their choice of a candidate and to have their expressions of choice given full value and effect. Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211, 226 (1974).

Therefore, it appears to me, a non-lawyer, that Obama having the right to run for President is a right belonging to any natural born citizen, and subject only to the Constitutional limits imposed by Article II, Section , Clause 5. The recent ruling of the FEC regarding non-natural born candidate Abdul Hassan seems to confirm a citizen’s right to run for office, but not the right to receive matching campaign funds.

Abdul Hassan FEC Ruling

There does not seem to be a color of law requirement element in violations of the Conspiracy section. Here is the actual jury instruction from page 50:

Title 18, United States Code, Section 241 makes it a crime to conspire with someone else to injure or intimidate another person in the exercise of his civil rights. A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to join together to accomplish the unlawful purpose. It is a kind of partnership in crime in which each member becomes the agent of every other member. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government must prove each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that two or more persons agreed to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person;

Second, in that person’s free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having exercised his right or privilege [the right or privilege should be identified and explained to the jury]; and

Third, that the defendant knew of the agreement and willfully participated in the agreement.

Now the question becomes whether or not the actions of The Cold Case Posse and any potential co-defendants had an unlawful purpose. In other words, is the mere act of investigating Obama an unlawful purpose, such as to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate anyone. This issue has come up before when the police are involved. In a recent 2011 case, a Memphis police officer, Arthur Sease was accused of violations of BOTH Section 241 Conspiracy and Section 242 which is actually depriving someone of their rights under color of law:

Sease’s convictions are based on fourteen separate incidents. The incidents  follow the same basic plan. Sease would arrange for a drug buy or a drug sell (using  drugs taken in a previous incident) using a non-officer contact as the front person. As the deal was occurring, either Sease or one of his fellow co-conspirator officers would arrive at the scene to make a purported arrest and seize the money and drugs involved in the deal. The participants would then be released, and Sease and his conspirators would split the proceeds without reporting the incidents.

U.S. v. Sease

Sease argued on appeal:

Sease is correct that his appeal is properly understood as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. The offenses for which Sease was charged and convicted are predicated on the illegality of the searches and seizures he conducted. For example, Sease’s convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 242 for deprivation of rights under the color of law require the government to show that the defendant “depriv[ed] [any person] of [the] rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States . . . .” If Sease’s actions were in fact legal, the government could not prove the deprivation of rights element of the offense, and the convictions must be overturned.

Sease argues that this case is governed by Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (1996). In Whren, plain-clothed officers made a traffic stop on an individual who stopped for an unusually long time at a stop sign, and then dashed off at a high rate of speed. Whren, 517 U.S. at 808. Because the officers were working a high-drug area, they believed that individuals in the car were engaging in drug activity, but they did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion to make a stop on that basis. Id. at 809.

According to the petitioners in Whren, the police officers had improper motives, in the sense that the officers conducted a stop for the purpose of investigating drug offenses for which they did not have probable cause or reasonable suspicion, using the traffic offenses for which they did have probable cause as a pretext. Id. at 810-12. These improper motives, the petitioners argued, made the stop a constitutional violation. The Supreme Court rejected this approach, citing previous case law to “foreclose any argument that the constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops depends on the actual motivations of the individual officers involved.” Id. at 813 (citing previously, e.g., Scott

However, the Sease Court distinguished between improper actions in the course of duty and non bona-fide activitities:

Whren, however, presumes that the officers are engaging in bona fide law enforcement activities when they make the stops. However improper it may be to use a traffic violation as a pretext to look for drugs, there is no question that making traffic stops and looking for drugs are valid and appropriate law enforcement activities. It is only arguably improper if the officers lacked the required probable cause or reasonable suspicion under the specific facts of the situation. By contrast, it is inherently improper for officers to set up drug deals for the purpose of taking the money and drugs for themselves, regardless of the context. Sease’s actions are improper in an entirely different way and to an entirely different degree than the actions of the officers in Whren.

Unlike the actions of officers in cases such as Whren, Sease’s conduct was thoroughly and objectively illegal from start to finish.

Then, the Sease Court went deeper into the differences, and the burdens of proof:

[S]imply, the Fourth Amendment’s concern with ‘reasonableness’ allows certain actions to be taken in certain circumstances, whatever the subjective intent.” Whren, 517U.S. at 814.

However, this balance shifts in the context of a § 242 prosecution. Section 242 is a punitive statute designed to punish officers who willfully violate constitutional rights under color of law. The punitive purpose would be undermined were the court to allow a corrupt officer to hide behind the policy goals of the exclusionary rule. Accordingly, although for the purposes of the exclusionary rule the subjective intent of the officer is irrelevant, in the context of a § 242 prosecution, the courts may inquire whether the officer acted with a corrupt, personal, and pecuniary purpose.1 In addition, unlike in the exclusionary rule context, the court must already inquire into the subjective intent of the officer because willfulness is an element of an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 242. Accordingly, there is no additional evidentiary burden to justify ignoring subjective intent. 1

In other words, actions that may be legal on their surface, may be a violation if there was a corrupt,personal and pecuniary purpose. There is some question where the line is to be drawn.  Not all corrupt, personal, and pecuniary purpose constitutes a violation under Section 241 and/or Section 242. From Sease, here an acquittal:

Finally, while there are fortunately few reported cases that deal with this level of officer misconduct, those that do exist all agree that purely illegal activities by law enforcement constitute a constitutional violation. In United States v. Bradfield, we considered a series of raids of crack houses by Detroit police officers. 225 F.3d 660, 2000 WL 1033022 (6th Cir. July 18, 2000) (unpublished table decision). During the course of the raids, officers would take a portion of the money, drugs, and guns for themselves, while reporting the rest for forfeiture. Bradfield, 2000 WL 1033022, at *1.

We upheld the judgment of acquittal, via a review of the quantum of evidence supporting the individual charges against the officers. Id. at *4-10. However, implicit in our analysis is the premise that the actions of the officers would amount to constitutional violations, if supported by sufficient evidence.

Also reported in Sease, among several other cases, is this one:

[I]n United States v. Contreras, a Laredo police officer arrested a woman, raped her, and attempted to kill her to avoid having her testify against him. 134 F. Supp. 2d 820, 823 (S.D. Tex. 2000). On habeas review, Contreras argued that his stop was proper pursuant to a provision in federal law authorizing municipal police officers to make stops based on reasonable suspicion that the detainee is an illegal alien, and thus his 18 U.S.C. § 242 conviction should be overturned. Id. at 825. The district court dismissed Contreras’s contention stating “Contreras did not arrest [the victim] because he had probable cause to believe she was an illegal alien; he arrested her so he could rape her.” Id.

In my non-lawyer opinion, that is where any such action against the CCP and others would end up. Trying to determine the intent of the parties. Is the investigation of Obama based on any objectively realistic probable cause, or is it just a cover to get him, in violation of his rights??? One thing mentioned on page 51 of the jury instructions is that “the government is permitted to present evidence of acts committed in furtherance of the conspiracy even though they are not specified in the indictment. (United States v. Janati, 374 F.3d 263, 270 (4 Cir. 2004)). This means any book deals and other quid pro quos could be introduced as evidence.

It is unlikely that Obama would ever make the complaint against the Cold Case Posse and any accomplices, because at this point in the game, it is probably politically expedient to let them run around in hysterics. But I think I have shown that a viable legal option exists. A violation of the conspiracy statute seems easier to prove. No actual harm is required, nor any overt act. The whole thing is going nowhere, so there will probably never be a violation of  Section 242.

I would certainly appreciate any input from real lawyers on this. In the mean time, make up your own mind whether or not the lines have been crossed. As for me, I assure you any Defendants would certainly not want me on any jury.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note . Jury Instructions for 18 U.S.C. Section 242. From page 53, here are the jury instructions for this section:

Title 18, United States Code, Section 242 makes it a crime to deprive any person of his civil rights under color of law. For you to find the defendant guilty, the government must prove each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that [name of victim] was present in [name of state];

Second, that the defendant deprived [name of victim] of a right secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States [the right infringed must be identified], or to different punishments, pains, or penalties on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color or race;

Third, that the defendant acted under color of law; and

Fourth, that the defendant acted willfully.

As I said above, I don’t think the CCP et.al. can accomplish anything other than to sling mud. But I am not sure what this part means:

different punishments, pains, or penalties 

Do extra legal fees and emotional distress count???

The Herculean Labors (Or, Wrassling The Cretin Bull, And Cleaning Up Behind Him)

The Birthers Got Carried Away By The Cretin Bull

Well, the software is telling me that this is the 200th post at The Birther Think Tank. So perhaps is time to step back and reflect on the Big Picture nature of the Anti-Birther vs. Birther Struggle.  There are analogies to be found in two of the mythological Labors of Hercules, specifically the 5th and 7th Labors.

The Fifth Labor of Hercules was to clean the Augean Stables. Thousands of cows lived in these stables belonging to King Augeus. They had not been cleaned in 30 years, but Hercules was told to clean them completely in a single day. To do so he made two rivers bend so that they flowed into the stables, sweeping out the filth. ( from Infoplease)

The Seventh Labor of Hercules was to capture the Cretan Bull. This savage bull, kept by King Minos of Crete, was said to be insane and breathe fire. Hercules wrestled the mad beast to the ground and brought it back to King Eurystheus. Unfortunately, the king set it free, and it roamed Greece, causing terror wherever it went. (from Infoplease)

There Was Money To Be Made From Manure

Those two myths pretty much cover the life of the Anti-Birther. Our battle is defined by the other side. The Birthers create the bullsh*t, and  we must clean it up. It is a never-ending task because the bull-sh*tters are constantly pumping out new product on a regular basis. Unike Hercules, we can not divert any rivers (due to the lack of a Corps of Engineers’ permit) to short cut the job. No, we must shovel it up the old fashioned way, one scoop at a time into the Wheelbarrel of Truth, and roll it out to the Compost Pile of Birther Dreams.

Making the job more difficult is the fact that some people make money off the bullsh*t. Television provides a most appropriate illustration of  this fact. The Image directly above is from the TV series, Hercules, The Legendary Journeys, the Reign of Terror episode. In that episode Salmoneus, the somewhat shady promoter character, travelled with Hercules to visit the Augean Stables. He concocted a plan to sell manure from the stables with Hercules’ celebrity endorsement. (“Reign of Terror“).

Here you should be thinking Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, World Net Daily, Cold Case Posse Deputy Michael Zullo, and a host of other Birthers who profit, one way or another, from promoting the nonsense. It is my opinion that many Birthers are also in it for the attention, such as CDR Kerchner, Mario “The Mangler” Apuzzo, and the late “Leo Donofrio, Esq.” These people are not so stupid that they could seriously believe the two-citizen parents Imaginary Law. But, some people are.

Hercules Could Just Swear He Had Encountered This Bull Before

Daily, we Anti-Birthers wrassle with the insane Cretin Bull and no matter how many times we pin its shoulders to the ground, it just gets loose to cause more terror and distress. Old, discredited rumors persistently find resurrection in the Birther Blogosphere and resurface.  Most recently, Postman Allen Hulton has resurrected the Obama As A Foreign Student myth, based on 20+ year old hearsay conversations.  This Who Was He??? identity trope is also mirrored in the Hercules myth. There was uncertainty as to the identity of the Cretan Bull.

The Cretan bull, was said to be the father of the Minotaur by Pasiphae, wife of the Cretan king Minos. By one account, the Cretan bull was the beast that had carried Europa from Phoenicia to Crete for Zeus. In other myths, the bull was sent by Poseidon to Minos,to be sacrificed following the king’s promise that he would sacrifice to the god anything that rose from the sea. But Minos, struck by the animal’s beauty, sacrificed in its place another bull, thus provoking the god’s rage. The sea god then in revenge drove the animal wild, ravaging the crops and orchards of Crete.

Hercules captured the beast after a lengthy struggle. He brought it all the way back across the sea to Tiryns, to present it to Eurystheus. He then set the beast free. It then roamed around Laconia and Arcadia, crossed the Corinth Isthmus and ended up in Marathon, to be later captured and killed by Theseus.

http://www.igreekmythology.com/labors-of-Hercules.html

In fact, the first image here is Europa Carried Away By The Cretan Bull by Noël-Nicolas Coypel, 1726-1727. In a way, America has been carried away by the Birthers’ Cretin Bull.  A Cretan is, of course, someone from the island of Crete. A cretin, on the other hand,  is a person of subnormal intelligence. In the past that term, and others, were associated with specific I.Q. levels. There is some disagreement about the levels, but this seems representative:

Cretin…. IQ 70-85
Moron ….IQ 55-70
Imbecile..IQ 40-55
Idiot…….IQ under 40

What we must deal with daily are cretinous, moronic, imbecilic and idiotic arguments. Even Birther Mensa members like Sam Sewell of The Steady Drip blog sally forth into the two citizen parents argument despite repeated court losses on that point. Ex-military officers like CDR Kerchner and Walter “Citizen’s Arrest” Fitzpatrick spew forth Vattel like gargoyles on the Notre Dame Cathredal during a cloudburst. Jerome “Jerry” Corsi, who has a Ph.D from Harvard, carries on like a madman biting on every piece of worthless evidence like a Great White Shark chomping down on a surfboard – swallowing it now, and letting the other end worry about the consequences.

So why do we do it??? I can’t answer for other people. Personally, I don’t even think we are winning the battle.  Birther Blogs seem to be springing up everywhere, and the stupidity knows no shame. Or limits. The courts throw the Birther Junk out, but they would do that whether we were here or not. Obama is still on the ballot in every state, but I am not even an Obama supporter. I’ll probably vote for the Republican, or if he is too nutty, just stay home.  And it is not like any ex-Birthers have ever told me, ‘Thank you, Squeeky! You have convinced me I was wrong about this Birther stuff.” That has never happened.

I think that me, and probably the other Anti-Birthers and Obots, too, just can’t stand to let these idiotic lies go unchallenged. Like that other Hercules, the French one, Hercule-Savinien-De Cyrano de Bergerac said:

CYRANO:
What say you? It is useless? Ay, I know
But who fights ever hoping for success?
I fought for lost cause, and for fruitless quest!
You there, who are you!–You are thousands!
Ah!
I know you now, old enemies of mine!
Falsehood!

(He strikes in air with his sword):

Have at you! Ha! and Compromise!
Prejudice, Treachery!. . .

(He strikes):

Surrender, I?
Parley? No, never! You too, Folly,–you?
I know that you will lay me low at last;
Let be! Yet I fall fighting, fighting still!

(He makes passes in the air, and stops, breathless):

You strip from me the laurel and the rose!
Take all! Despite you there is yet one thing
I hold against you all, and when, to-night,
I enter Christ’s fair courts, and, lowly bowed,
Sweep with doffed casque the heavens’ threshold blue,
One thing is left, that, void of stain or smutch,
I bear away despite you.

(He springs forward, his sword raised; it falls from his hand; he staggers,
falls back into the arms of Le Bret and Ragueneau.)

ROXANE (bending and kissing his forehead):
‘Tis?. . .

CYRANO (opening his eyes, recognizing her, and smiling):

MY PANACHE.

Curtain.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Exclusive Scoop!!! Jerome Corsi’s Job Application Letter To Sheriff Joe Arpaio???

He Was Confident They Would Never Suspect His True Purpose

What a SCOOP!!! An anonymous source has sent me a copy of Jerome R. Corsi’s job application letter to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. I have no way to verify the accuracy, but it sure looks pretty authentic to me. You decide for yourself.

Here is a pdf of the file, and below is a copy of the letter:

Corsi Job Application ???

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Corsi, The Hatchet Man, Gets The Axe!!! (Some Legal Advice)

In A Previous Existence, Corsi Was A Lumberjack In A Pulp Wood Factory

Jerome Corsi, PhD., the Birther Agent Provacateur Extraordinaire, got canned from his day job as senior managing director at investment firm, Gilford Securities. He has been employed by the firm since 2010. Corsi complains that he was fired for working on a money-laundering story for World Net Daily, where he is employed in a part time capacity as a writer and assistant janitor.

Corsi said that Gilford notified him Monday that it would file a U-5 form with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA, to deregister him from the firm due to “corporate reorganization.”

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/next-shoe-drops-in-bank-scandal-on-wnd/

Time will tell who is telling the truth on this matter, and personally, I wonder whether  he was perhaps sent packing for being a nut. I mean the guy is into all this Obama birth certificate and two citizen-parent Birfer stuff, 9/11 truther stuff, abiotic oil stuff,  and New World Order stuff. I don’t know about the last two of those, but I think I am on firm ground that being a 9/11 Trufer-Birfer is indicative of a strong delusional streak. The kind of delusional thinking that causes people to bet the bank on European Sovereign Debt, and the pet.com sock puppet.  Delusions are not good things in the investment business.

But what I really wanted to do in this Internet Article was to give some legal advice to Corsi.  He is going to have to hire attorneys to help him through this, and I suggest that he hire the Dream Team of  Orly Taitz, Mario Apuzzo, and Leo Donofrio. I am not being sarcastic or anything.

Orly Taitz is nothing, if not a fighter as proven by the number of appeals she files. Leo Donofrio seems to be under-employed and could use the money to pay off some sanctions. He has plenty of time to research the issues, and is not afraid of going all the way back to 1785 to find legal precedents to overturn 1898 SCOTUS cases.  I mean, you just don’t find that kind of dedication every day.  Mario Apuzzo is located right there in New Jersey, so it is just a hop, skip, and a jump over to the Wall Street District for court and depositions and stuff.

Corsi obviously trusts their legal acumen, preferring their legal analysis to the 99.9999% of attorneys who think Obama is a natural born citizen and wonder what all the fuss is about. Corsi and World Net Daily constantly trumpet the findings of each of these attorneys, and you just know they would never do that unless they were really impressed with their legal abilities and talents.

It is true, that none of these three has any securities law background, but a lack of background did not stop them from diving into all this Birther stuff  and coming up with all sorts of new insights that eluded the Brand Name Attorneys and White Shoe Law Firms .  I mean, did Hillary Clinton’s legal advisers realize that Minor v. Happersett was the precedent for determining natural born citizenship??? No. That was Leo Donofrio who discovered that, and Hillary Clinton would be president now if she had been properly advised that Obama was not eligible for the presidency.

Mario Apuzzo is no legal slouch either, and his seminal works on the influence of Emerich de Vattel and French law upon the development of  American Law even escaped the like of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who foolishly thought it was the English who provided the foundation. Orly Taitz has single-handedly over-turned the outdated twin concepts of judicial immunity and judicial respect, which have long allowed judges in this country to make unpopular decisions with impunity. She has introduced a whole new generation of lawyers to her Moldavan Krav Maga Method of Litigation.

Sooo, in conclusion, I think Jerome Corsi should put them all on his payroll ASAP before Gilford Investments hires them out from under him.  I mean if these lawyers are good enough for Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily to push on the rest  of us,  shouldn’t they be good enough for Corsi???

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1: Moldavan Krav Maga Method of Litigation. This approach to litigation, with its emphasis on brutality, no rules, and a no frills street fighting efficiency, is based on the Krav Maga fighting method. Wiki says:

Krav Maga  /krɑːv məˈɡɑː/ (Hebrew: קרב מגע‎ [ˈkʁav maˈɡa], lit. “contact combat”) is a noncompetitive eclectic self-defense system developed in Israel that involves striking techniques, wrestling and grappling. Krav Maga is known for its focus on real-world situations and extremely efficient, brutal counter-attacks. It was derived from street-fighting skills developed by Imi Lichtenfeld, who made use of his training as a boxer and wrestler, as a means of defending the Jewish quarter against fascist groups in Bratislava in the mid-to-late 1930s. In the late-1940s, following his immigration to Israel, he began to provide lessons on combat training to what was to become the IDF, who went on to develop the system that became known as Krav Maga. It has since been refined for civilian, police and military applications.

Krav Maga has a philosophy emphasizing threat neutralization, simultaneous defensive and offensive maneuvers, and aggression. Krav Maga is used by Israeli Defense Forces, both regular and special forces, and several closely related variations have been developed and adopted by law enforcement and intelligence organizations, Mossad and Shin Bet. Outside Israel, Krav Maga is used by various special police, military and intelligence forces, such as American CIA, FBI, US Marshals, USAF, DEA, Federal Air Marshals, various police departments (SWAT teams), French GIGN, Belgian Army, etc.

A key principle of Krav Maga is finishing a fight as quickly as possible and therefore all attacks are aimed towards the most vulnerable parts of the body (e.g., face, neck, groin, knee, etc.). Because there are no sporting rules, individuals trained in Krav Maga are not limited to techniques that avoid severely injuring their opponents, but training and sparring drills provide maximum safety to the students by the use of protective equipment and the use of reasonable force. For example, kicks to the groin during sparring is commonplace, but groin protection must be worn and students should demonstrate due diligence with regards for their partners’ safety. Students learn to defend against all variety of attacks before engaging in full-contact sparring. Students are taught to respond to attacks in the quickest and most efficient way; a common lesson taught is ‘always use the nearest tool for the job’. This basically means use whichever limb is closest to your attacker at the time and whichever feels most natural. Men and women generally undergo the same drills. It has no sporting federation and there are no official uniforms such as a gi. Usual training attire consists of a t-shirt and loose fitting trousers. Krav Maga is also one of the few martial arts in which footwear is habitually worn due to it being ‘reality based training’. Most organizations recognize progress through training with rank badges, different levels, and belts.

General principles include:

* Counter attacking as soon as possible (or attacking preemptively).
* Targeting attacks to the body’s most vulnerable points such as the eyes, jaw, throat, groin, knee, etc.
* Neutralizing the opponent as quickly as possible by responding with an unbroken stream of counter attacks and if necessary a take down/joint break.
* Maintaining awareness of surroundings while dealing with the threat in order to look for escape routes, further attackers, objects that could be used to defend or help attack and so on.