Copyright Martin Armstrong All Rights Reserved December 19th, 2011

ron paul our last hope

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel

Ron Paul is one of the last of the great Patriots. There is simply no one in the running field that offers
any alternative to the nightmare we face. Ron understands the Elastic Money Supply at the Fed. He
understands the devious kill switch to the internet. He understands how corrupt the mainstream media
has become who refuse to acknowledge Ron as even a viable candidate. I simply cannot endorse anyone
other than Ron Paul. Ron is a person who cares about what is right and wants to change direction of the
country. Mainstream media hate his guts, may not as much as me, but damn close. They will elevate him
to attack mode if he starts to win. The only thing I fear is that they will rig the counting of the votes to
ensure he does not win.

I am shocked at the Obama Administrations willingness to

take away all our rights. Obama, despite all the rhetoric, is
not a LIBERAL. If he were, he would be on the side of
peoples rights, veto the kill switch on the internet, and
veto the new Marshall Law where not only if the
government arrests you there will be no indictment, no
trial, and you will be denied a lawyer. This is precisely what
they did to me but George Bush, Jr.s cousin was rolled out
to rule on my appeal John M. Walker, Jr., that this is an
inherent power of judges to deny the constitution as long
as they call it contempt. There are two types of contempt,
criminal used to enforce conduct in the courtroom and
civil which is not for the purpose of punishment but to
coerce people to do whatever the court demands. Judge Walker was not stupid, just corrupt. He
played a bait and switch calling the civil contempt an inherent power, by using citations to the criminal
contempt power, which of course entitles you to lawyers and a jury trial. He blended the two creating a
new hybrid that NEVER existed in any court since 1637.

The Supreme Court has long recognized that "[c]ertain implied powers must necessarily result to our
Courts of justice from the nature of their institution." United States v. Hudson, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 32, 34, 3
L.Ed. 259 (1812). "The most prominent of these is the contempt sanction, which a judge must have and
exercise in protecting the due and orderly administration of justice and in maintaining the authority and
dignity of the court." Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 764, 100 S.Ct. 2455, 65 L.Ed.2d 488
(1980) (quotation marks omitted); see also In re Debs, 158 U.S. 564, 595, 15 S.Ct. 900, 39 L.Ed. 1092
(1895), abrogated on other grounds by Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 L.Ed.2d 522
(1968) ("`The power to fine and imprison for contempt, from the earliest history of jurisprudence, has been
regarded as a necessary incident and attribute of a court, without which it could no more exist than
without a judge.'" (quoting Watson v. Williams, 36 Miss. 331, 341 (Miss.Err. & App.1858))); Sigety v.
Abrams, 632 F.2d 969, 976 (2d Cir.1980) (quoting the same). "The moment the courts of the United States
were called into existence and invested with jurisdiction over any subject, they became possessed of this
power." Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 505, 510, 22 L.Ed. 205 (1874); see also Anderson v. Dunn,
19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 204, 227, 5 L.Ed. 242 (1821) ("Courts of justice are universally acknowledged to be
vested, by their very creation, with power to impose silence, respect, and decorum, in their presence, and
submission to their lawful mandates."); NASCO, Inc. v. Calcasieu Television & Radio, Inc., 894 F.2d 696,
702 (5th Cir.1990), aff'd sub nom., Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27
(1991).

Armstrong v Guccione, 470 F3d 89 (2d Cir 2006)

 Judge Richard A. Posner is regarded as one of the greatest legal minds in
the country. Because he rules on what the Constitution really says,
Presidents avoid him like the plague when it comes to nominating for
the Supreme Court. Judge Posner warned that government is capable of
creating a "criminal punishment masquerading as civil contempt."
Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings Empanelled May 1988, 894 F2d 881,
885 (7th Cir 1989). Indeed, this is precisely what government did to me. Now with the new act allowing
the military to operate domestically, they no longer need to pretend to be coercing someone to justify
imprison them until they die, deny counsel, jury trial, rights to appeal, or anything that once
distinguished America as a free society. Both the establishment Democrats and Republicans are
transforming the United States into East Berlin all because they know what is coming with civil unrest
when they there is NO BID for their debt. We are preparing to use the military against civilians precisely
as we see in Syria right now. Here is what Posner wrote about contempt in this same case.

"The power to punish for contempts is inherent in all courts," Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 505,
510, 22 L.Ed. 205 (1874)--but this was said with reference to criminal contempt. Rather than being
deemed an inherent power of all courts, civil contempt--an ingenious method of coercion--originated, like
so many other devices operating on the person directly rather than on his assets, in equity, as a device for
enforcing compliance with equitable decrees. Mascolo, Procedural Due Process and the Reasonable
Doubt Standard of Proof in Civil Contempt Proceedings, 14 N.Eng.J.Crim. & Civ.Confinement 245, 250
(1988); Goldfarb, The Contempt Power 50 (1963); Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., 284 U.S. 448,
52 S.Ct. 238, 76 L.Ed. 389 (1932); cf. Louisiana Education Ass'n v. Richland Parish School Board, 421
F.Supp. 973, 976 (W.D.La.1976), aff'd without opinion, 585 F.2d 518 (5th Cir.1978); Landman v. Royster,
354 F.Supp. 1292, 1300 (E.D.Va.1973). It is still an equity procedure, Jacksonville Paper Co. v. Tobin, 206
F.2d 333, 335 (5th Cir.1953), and its remedies, such as incarceration, are subject to equitable defenses.
Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., supra, 284 U.S. at 457, 52 S.Ct. at 242; cf. Spallone v. United
States, --- U.S. ----, ----, 110 S.Ct. 625, 631-32, 107 L.Ed.2d 644, 58 U.S.L.W. 4103, 4106 (U.S. Jan. 10,
1990). So far as the right to a hearing granted by the rules of civil procedure is concerned, genuine issues
of material fact concerning remedy have the same status as genuine issues of material fact concerning
liability. Even if Dennis Freligh is in contempt of the district court, he is entitled, before being sanctioned, to
present to the district judge facts material to the scope and severity of the sanction, just as the defendant
in an injunctive proceeding is entitled to a hearing if there are contested issues of material fact bearing on
the scope and severity of the injunction, even if he concedes liability. A showing of genuine but
unreasonable and perhaps therefore easily dispelled fear might persuade the district judge that
incarceration for the statutory maximum was unnecessary to coerce Freligh to testify. Cf. New York State
National Organization for Women v. Terry, 886 F.2d 1339, 1353 (2d Cir.1989). It could be argued that the
right to a hearing in a civil contempt case is even broader than we have suggested: The purpose of holding
a witness in civil contempt is to elicit testimony. If it is perfectly clear that the witness, for whatever
reason, will not testify, there is--or so at least a number of cases have held--no ground for holding him. In
re Crededio, 759 F.2d 589 (7th Cir.1985); United States ex rel. Thom v. Jenkins, 760 F.2d 736, 740 (7th
Cir.1985); In re Grand Jury Proceedings, 877 F.2d 849, 850 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam); Simkin v. United
States, 715 F.2d 34, 37 (2d Cir.1983). When that point is reached, the government's remedy for the
witness's contumacy is to proceed against him for criminal contempt.

Matter of Grand Jury Proceedings Empanelled May 1988, 894 F2d 881, 884 (7th Cir 1989)
Civil Contempt was codified as a statute by Congress 28 USC 1826 with a maximum term of
imprisonment of 18 months Which Walker ignored calling it inherent power that not even Congress or
the people of the United States have any right to tell a judge what to do. This demonstrates why we are
no longer a free society and why Judges have created a silent revolution for no matter what the people
enact, judges can ignore our democracy and turn the place into East Berlin by simply declaring it to be
so. Judge Posner wrote regarding this statute that to claim I could be held until I died without lawyers,
trial by jury, or a right to appeal as declared by Judge Walker to protect the New York Banks, bluntly
stated civil contempt was now appealable, and that "any assumption on which Congress built section
1826 (b) supersedes any contrary implications." Matter of Witness Before Spec. G.J., 722 F2d 349, 351
(7th Cir 1983). The Supreme Court is supposed to resolve differences between the circuit courts. So here
I had every other circuit against Judge Walker and New York and Judge Posner articulated the way a free
society is supposed to act the legislative elected branch makes the laws (people) not unelected judges
who presume they are kings since they possess that throne for life. Had the Supreme Court not ordered
the government to respond, I would have died in prison to protect Goldman Sachs and their designs.

This is what this new bill is all about. What they did to me was unconstitutional. It offended every
principle of a free society and carried out a silent revolution eliminating our democratic foundation. This
is why Ron Paul had the courage to support me, and we should have the courage to vote for him
because he is TRULY our last hope. He would not be party as usual.

These people we pretend to elect are for the most part against everything America stands for. They are
brainwashed by the backroom dictatorship that never ends and remains intact regardless of what
happens at the polls. With two-thirds of the American people not trusting government, this may be your
last chance to save what is left. After Ron Paul, I know of nobody who would really change anything.

The U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless surveillance controversy

("Warrantless Wiretapping") concerns surveillance of persons within the United
States during the collection of foreign intelligence by the NSA as part of the war on
terror. These 19 guys and a camel have been used to take all our liberties away.
First was the "Warrantless Wiretapping" and then the kill switch for the internet,
and now it is the National Defense Authorization Act that will authorize the military to
attack citizens like the Occupy Wall Street crowd and anyone else that protests about the destruction of the
Constitution and eventually what happens when government encounters the no bid day and cannot sell its debt
any longer. They will need the troops to stem the civil unrest. They will never criminally charge Goldman Sachs for
(1) they did the reverse takeover of government and even ran Princeton Economics by court order, and (2) the
government needs them to sell their debt. Only Ron Paul has the courage to stand tall. The press tries so hard to
ignore him but the polls show he is the ONLY person who could beat
Obama, yet the Republicans ignore him. Obama talked a good game but did
nothing different from Bush. They are turning out the lights.

Ron Paul is our last hope before we go completely down the

rabbit hole. We have to turn politics on its head before it is too
late. Its the debt and Goldman will fail keep it rolling forever.