Monday, November 17, 2014

NULL AND VOID



Jonathan Gruber’ boisterous bragging about how he led a team of miscreants in perpetrating a fraud during the writing of ObamaCare, finally made the mainstream media over the weekend.  Pelosi denied ever hearing of Gruber; yet, she bragged about him and his MIT expertise in the moments leading up to the passage of ObamaCare.  Obama backed away from any knowledge of Gruber or his fraud; yet, Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Ezekiel, worked side-by-side with Gruber.  Rahm, of course, is as close to Obama, Valerie Jarrett and Eric Holder as you can get.  There is even documented reason to suggest that Obama himself was in the room with Gruber while the deception was being planned. 

COMMENTS:
So, there was an apparent collaboration that involved people of importance to the White House.  I believe that when the final I’s were dotted, Pelosi and Reid took one look at it and instantly knew it would not stand up to any serious scrutiny, so they rushed the passage through Congress in the wee small hours of the morning.  It has long been a principle in law that any action or agreement created by fraud is null and void.  So, why doesn’t the new House pass a bill declaring ObamaCare to be null and void?  When the Senate passes the bill, it lands on the President’s desk and, should he veto it, it occurs to be you have yet another impeachable offense.  Hey guys… let’s give it a shot; what can we lose?   

TODAY’S QUERIES & ANSWERS:
Q. Now that we know ObamaCare was a fraud upon the American people, why aren’t the American people up in arms demanding its repeal?  (Ginger ~ Sedona, AZ)
A. I guess it must be because, like Jonathan Gruber said, the American people are stupid. 

Q. Were you surprised to see the Senate Democrats reelect Harry Reid to be their leader?  (Virgil ~ Redding, CA)
A. Not at all.  Misery loves company.  Besides, if they don’t have a snake in charge, who’s going to keep Obama from getting impeached? 

Q. I know that the Grand Jury is about to deliver its conclusion on the Michael Brown casein Ferguson, Missouri.  Any insight?   (Jordan ~ Blaine, WA)
A. I’m not in possession of all of the facts, but I can tell you this:  We know that Brown had an extensive rap sheet for past problems with the cops; we also know that there was gun powder residue on his clothing, showing he was at close proximity to the officer when he got shot; then, we know that he was shot in the hand, suggesting he was wrestling with the officer trying to get the gun from him.  All of these facts line up with the officer’s recollection as to what happened.  Finally, Brown’s parents took their issue to the United Nations, claiming Brown’s death was the result of racism gone bad within the Ferguson Police Department; the U.N. stuck its nose into the issue and then tossed it out the door, saying Brown was a thug and entitled to what he got.  Given all of that, I would have to surmise that the Grand Jury might charge the officer with manslaughter, knowing that he will be found innocent at trial and thereby avoiding riots in the street should they issue a finding of not sufficient evidence.  Where’s Perry Mason when you need him?     

TODAY’S QUOTE:
“Objection, Your Honor!  That question was incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.” ~ Perry Mason

TODAY’S VIDEO:

No comments:

Post a Comment