Seeking federal Grand Juries to investigate Obama eligibility to be POTUSSubmitted by Schvenzlerman on Mon, 01/26/2009 - 19:43
If you presently serve on a federal grand jury (GJ), or know someone who does, please read this post.
Pursuant to anyone being charged with and tried for any federal crime, the 5th Amendment requires that a GJ first make such recommendation to the government. Normally, a U.S. attorney asks a GJ to investigate and then, following a GJ recommendation, the attorney issues an indictment,
Alternatively, the GJ may unilaterally decide to investigate a matter and it can then give the U.S. attorney a "presentment" which basically amounts to the GJ demanding that the attorney charge and try one suspected of a crime. This was the means established by the Founders for We the People to investigate and ferret out corrupt government officials.
The presentment method is rare in modern times, but the 5th Amendment has never been modified by further amendments. This GJ power of presentment therefore remains in place and a U.S. attorney would thus have no means to stop a GJ's focus of investigation.
For a lengthier treatment on this subject, please read posts by Leo Donofrio, attorney for the Donofrio and Wrotnowski lawsuits that were denied Certiorari by the Supreme Court, on his blog at http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com.
The task now is to find Grand Jurors who will agree to present this eligibility issue before their GJ. It only takes a majority (51%) of the Grand Jurors to agree to an investigation and then the GJ can commence to subpoena documents and witnesses. Should a GJ investigate Obama after U.S. attorney(s), with whom they would normally work during the term of their service on the GJ, object, it would be referred to as a "runaway grand jury," but the attorneys would have no power to stop the investigation. If the attorneys interfere with, hinder or fail or refuse to cooperate with the GJ in its investigation. the GJ can refer such interference, hindrance or lack of cooperation to any federal Judge of the Court. The GJ can kick the attorneys out of their meeting / hearing room if they want for that matter.
An important question arises - what could the GJ do were the U.S. attorneys to fail or refuse to prosecute when a GJ might make a presentment? A Constitutional scholar of note refers to this question as "the neck of the funnel." I do not know whether such failure or refusal would by itself constitute a federal crime for which the GJ could make a further presentation to address such failure or refusal. If there is a federal prosecutor out there who can answer this question, please pipe up.
FIND THE GRAND JURIES. FIND THEIR JURORS. ASK THEM TO INVESTIGATE.