Please note:

The opinions given in the political forum do not necessarily reflect those of the owners and management of the Turbo Diesel Register. This forum exists to keep political discussions out of the regular forum so that you do not have to read them unless you choose to. If you got here via a search or “view new posts” and do not wish to see political posts in those searches in the future please click here.

If you don't wish to see these ads, that is one of the many benefits of TDR membership. To receive a free copy of the TDR magazine and find out more information about membership benefits click HERE.



  
Go Back   TDR Roundtable > Other Topics > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

WTP Foundation appeals decision in re: AIG & bailouts
Old 05-14-2009, 06:12 PM   #1 (permalink)
Offline
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Union of American Socialist Republics
Posts: 3,537
Photo Gallery
Old Reader's Rigs Gallery
WTP Foundation appeals decision in re: AIG & bailouts

WTP To U.S. Court Of Appeals In AIG & $700B Bailout Case:
"This is a Republic, not a democracy. Please stop the transition."

Last September, in defense of the Constitution, Bob Schulz sued Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed. Chairman Ben Bernanke to prevent the flow of public funds to AIG until they identified where in the Constitution they found the authority, granted by the People, to give or lend public funds or credit to a private party for a decidedly and definitively private purpose.

Soon after, also in defense of the Constitution, Bob Schulz sued the leaders of the U.S. Executive and Legislative Branches and Fed. Chairman Ben Bernanke, to prevent the flow of public funds under the $700 Billion Bailout Bill (The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008) until they identified where in the Constitution they found the authority, granted by the People, to give or lend public funds or credit to a private party for a decidedly and definitively private purpose.

Despite the fact the bailout legislation passed into law expressly provides for Judicial consideration of injunctions brought on constitutional grounds, the federal District Court dismissed the case on the basis that Schulz lacked "standing" to bring the constitutional challenge and, therefore, the Court lacked "jurisdiction" to hear the case.

Yesterday, Schulz perfected his appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan. His Argument is repeated, below in its entirety.
In sum, Schulz argues that the decisions by the federal Courts, in cases (Petitions) seeking Redress of direct violations of the Constitution by officials in the two other branches of the federal Government, have put Schulz (and all other individuals) in the intolerable position of having to rely exclusively on the electoral process (i.e., the majority of people voting) for a guarantee of his Rights, not the Constitution or the Courts. ... (full story)
__________________
Neal P. Murphy
Salem, Virg.

Anger and intolerance are the twin enemies of correct understading. -- Mohandas Ghandi
When a thing is true, there is no need to use any arguments to substantiate it. -- Vinoba Bhave
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


  
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0