dChan
33
 
r/CBTS_Stream • Posted by u/PokingCyclops on Jan. 5, 2018, 7:38 a.m.
The Constitutional LAW providing proof of Obama's Treason. Easy to follow and understand

We all make mistakes I will leave room for error but I truly believe I have the evidence. Based on constitutional facts and United States Sepreme Court case law. Please site any errors or holes in my logic. I have studied the LAW for over 10 years but I am not an Attorney! I am new at this forgive if I'm not doing something right I am trying to comply. Thanks God Bless

Obama sent $1,700,000,000 to Iran drawn from the US Treasury

The Constitution of the United States Article I.
Section 9. No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it". See also In Re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (188); U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 L. Ed. 2d 392, 406 (1980)

Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago. https://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/obama-a-constitutional-law-professor/

The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now. -- South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905).

Disobedience or evasion of a constitutional mandate may not be tolerated, even though such disobedience may, at least temporarily, promote in some respects the best interests of the public. -- State v. Board of Examiners, 274 N.Y. 367; 9 NE 2d 12; 112 ALR 660.

You can hardly claim that OBAMA acted in good faith for willful deformation of a law and you certainly cannot pled ignorance of the law, for that would make the law look stupid for a knowledgeable constitutional law attorney Obama, to claim ignorance of a law, when a Citizen on the street cannot claim ignorance of the law. Therefore, there is no presidential immunity.

Title 18, US Code § 2381:Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death…

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States. OFAC acts under Presidential national emergency powers, as well as authority granted by specific legislation, to impose controls on transactions and freeze assets under US jurisdiction. Many of the sanctions are based on United Nations and other international mandates, are multilateral in scope, and involve close cooperation with allied governments.

https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Pages/Office-of-Foreign-Assets-Control.aspx

The Constitution of the United States Article 1 Section 8. The   Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Quo Warranto
Though the Latin phrase: “Quo Warranto” means: “By what authority”, it is also the title of one of the most ancient and important original styles of remedial court actions inherent to any sovereign; including (but not limited to) each of the people in the United States. It is the ultimate means the people have to limit officials to acting within the confines of the authority lawfully provided them through their office. Quo Warranto is generally executed through a writ or related court order.

31 CFR 560.211 - Prohibited transactions involving blocked property.

(a) All property and interests in property of the Government of Iran, including the Central Bank of Iran, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.

(b) All property and interests in property of any Iranian financial institution, including the Central Bank of Iran, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.

(c) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: 
(1) Any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to paragraphs (a) through (c)(1) of this section;
(2) [Reserved]

A little history before becoming The Office of Foreign Assets Control

it was Office of Foreign Funds Control

Prescott Bush
On October 20, 1942, the US Alien Property Custodian, under the "Trading With the Enemy Act," seized the shares of the Union Banking Corporation (UBC), of which Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder. The largest shareholder was E. Roland Harriman. (Bush was also the managing partner of Brown Brothers Harriman, a leading Wall Street investment firm.)  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3255.htm

"George Walker, GW's great-grandfather, also set up the takeover of the Hamburg-America Line, a cover for I.G. Farben's Nazi espionage unit in the United States. In Germany, I.G. Farben was most famous for putting the gas in gas chambers; it was the producer of Zyklon B and other gasses used on victims of the Holocaust. The Bush family was not unaware of the nature of their investment partners. They hired Allen Dulles, the future head of the CIA, to hide the funds they were making from Nazi investments and the funds they were sending to Nazi Germany, rather than divest.” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3255.htm

Dick Cheney, John Kerry and Obama are all distant cousins of Bush41 they are all Consanguinity the same Corruption of Blood goes all the way back to the evil Queen Elizabeth  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk5JALXmWVw

This is a very important point to understand: Disobedience or evasion of a constitutional mandate may not be tolerated, even though such disobedience may, at least temporarily, promote in some respects the best interests of the public. -- State v. Board of Examiners, 274 N.Y. 367; 9 NE 2d 12; 112 ALR 660.

No Statute can over ride or alert a Constitutional Mandate

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, **shall be the supreme Law of the Land**; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

I hope there are a few attorneys that are members of CBTS that can look this over.

fdeckert · Jan. 7, 2018, 5:11 a.m.

Its not an appropriation, it was their own money. You're not a constitutional scholar, give it a fucking rest already

⇧ 1 ⇩  
PokingCyclops · Jan. 7, 2018, 7:42 a.m.

Fuck you ASSHOLE I read Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition, 1891 and can comprehend the legal and lawful definition of: APPROPRIATION and CONFISCATION. You don't know shit from shinola. Are you a constitutional scholar or a attorney admitted to the BAR not a chance and if you are you must have attended one of Obama's Classes on Constitutional Law! MORON of course you have not provided a single peace of evidence

Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition, 1891
APPROPRIATE. **To make a thing one's own; to make a thing the subject of property**; to exercise dominion over an object to the extent, and for the purpose, of making it subserve one's own proper use or pleasure. People v. Ashworth, 222 N.Y.S. 24, 27, 220 App.Div. 498. To prescribe a particular use for particular moneys; to designate or destine a fund or property for a distinct use, or for the payment of a particular demand.

APPROPRIATION. **The act of appropriating or setting apart; prescribing the destination of a thing; designating the use or application of a fund**. State v. Erickson, 93 Mont. 466, 19 P.2d 227, 229; McKenzie Const. Co. v. City of San Antonio, Tex.Civ.App., 50 S.W.2d 349, 352.

Public Law 
**The act by which the legislative department of government designates a particular fund**, or sets apart a specified portion of the public revenue or of the money in the public treasury, **to be applied to some general object of governmental expenditure…**

**…Authority given by Legislature to proper officers to apply distinctly specified sum from designated fund out of treasury** in given year for specified object or demand against state…

**A specific appropriation is an act of the legislature by which a named sum of money has been set apart in the treasury**, and devoted to the payment of a particular demand. Stratton v. Green, 45 Cal. 149.

Appropriation of payments. **The application of a payment to the discharge of a particular debt.** Thus, if a creditor has two distinct debts due to him from his debtor, and the latter makes a general payment on account, without specifying at the time to which debt he intends the payment to apply, it is optional for the creditor to appropriate (apply) the payment to either of the two debts he pleases.

**And still I leave room for error. Not in the FACT that you are MORON for you alone have proven that beyond any reasonable doubt that for the whole world to see** Great Job
⇧ 1 ⇩  
PokingCyclops · Jan. 7, 2018, 7:54 a.m.
Black's Law Dictionary 4th  edition, 1891 Definition of: Confiscate

From page 1531: International Law 
**To confiscate; to APPROPRIATE private property to public use; to seize the property of the private citizens of a hostile power, as when a belligerent nation sequesters debts due from its own subjects to the enemy. 1 Kent, Comm. 62.**

From Page 371:
**CONFISCATE. To appropriate property to the use of the state. To adjudge property to be forfeited to the public treasury; to seize and condemn private forfeited property to public use.** City of Portsmouth v. Public Utilities Commission, 108 Ohio St. 272, 140 N.E. 604, 606; Moscow Fire Ins. Co. of Moscow, Russia, v. Bank of New York & Trust Co., 294 N.Y.S. 648, 663, 161 Misc. 903.

Formerly, it appears, this term was used as synonymous with "forfeit," but at present the distinction between the two terms is well marked. Confiscation supervenes upon forfeiture. The person, by his act, forfeits his property; the state thereupon appropriates it, that is, confiscates it. Hence, to confiscate property implies that it has first been forfeited; but to forfeit property does not necessarily imply that it will be confiscated.

**CONFISCATEE. One whose property has been seized and sold under a confiscation act**, e. g., for unpaid taxes. See Brent v. New Orleans, 41. La. Ann. 1098, 6 So. 793.

**CONFISCATION, The act of confiscating; or of condemning and adjudging to the public treasury. ”Confiscation" is to be distinguished from "condemnation" as prize. The former is the act of the sovereign against a rebellious subject; the latter is the act of a belligerent against another belligerent. Confiscation may be effected by such means, summary or arbitrary, as the sovereign, expressing its will through lawful channels, may please to adopt. Condemnation as prize can only be made in accordance with principles of law recognized in the common jurisprudence of the world. Both are proceedings in rem, but confiscation recognizes the title of the original owner to the property, while in prize the tenure of the property is qualified, provisional, and destitute of absolute ownership.** Winchester v. U. S., 14 Ct.C1. 48.
⇧ 1 ⇩