The facts so far are even muddier than they were when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. --- it's reasonable to me that the same people who killed Robert Kennedy also killed JFK for the same reason.
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 2:07:00 PM UTC-6, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/why-no-autopsy-for-supreme-justice-scalia?f=must_reads > > > Why No Autopsy for Supreme Justice Scalia? > > by AMIL IMANI > <http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/detail/amil-imani>, JAMES > HYDE <http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/detail/james-hyde> > February > 17, 2016 > > [image: Description: scalia ranch] > > Yogi Berra once said, "It's déjà vu all over again." His peculiar > linguistic pronouncements certainly fit regarding the circumstances > surrounding the demise of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The facts > so far are even muddier than they were when President John F. Kennedy was > assassinated. But here we are again and there's enough mystery here to get > Sherlock Holmes salivating. > > Even now, the sense of conspiracy about that day in Dallas is highly > palpable. But back then, all we knew was the president had been > assassinated after being shot in the head. Investigators began to see > problems with the official version almost instantly even though it would be > years before the public was shown the Zapruder film. That's when the polls > showed that 75% of the population came down on the side of conspiracy. > > In the case of Justice Scalia, things just are not adding up. It's > difficult to know what website or blog to believe, except to stick with the > most credible ones. Many sites are reporting that a judge, Presidio County > Judge Cinderella Guevara, declared Scalia dead from a heart attack, but did > so without even heading to the ranch where he passed away and to > investigate. > > She did clarify that aspect of the rumor flying thickly around us. Despite > a web loaded with stories that Scalia succumbed to a "myocardial > infarction," Guevara told The Blaze > <http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/14/it-wasnt-a-heart-attack-confusion-and-conflicting-reports-surround-justice-scalias-death/> > > that she did not declare the cause of death as being a heart attack. The > Huffington > Post > <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/antonin-scalia-heart-attack_us_56c0cae3e4b0b40245c70f1b> > > held its punches and declared the cause of the justice's demise to be > "undetermined." > > Guevara acknowledged talking to Scalia's doctor and being told by him that > Scalia had had an MRI done on his shoulder and that he suffered from some > "chronic problems," all of which were glossed over and none mentioned as > being capable of causing a heart attack. > > According to The Blaze > <http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/02/14/it-wasnt-a-heart-attack-confusion-and-conflicting-reports-surround-justice-scalias-death/>, > > "Guevara acknowledged to the Washington Post > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-tv-station-scalia-died-of-a-heart-attack/2016/02/14/938e2170-d332-11e5-9823-02b905009f99_story.html> > > that she pronounced Scalia dead over the phone on Saturday without seeing > his body. She told WFAA she had planned to head to the ranch but that a > U.S. Marshal told her over the phone, ‘It's not necessary for you to come, > judge. If you're asking for an autopsy, that's what we need to clarify.'" > > The Post > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-tv-station-scalia-died-of-a-heart-attack/2016/02/14/938e2170-d332-11e5-9823-02b905009f99_story.html> > > reported that another Justice of the Peace was called but couldn't get to > Scalia's body in time - and that she would have made a different > determination. "If it had been me ... I would want to know," Juanita > Bishop, a Justice of the Peace in Presidio, Texas, told the paper in a > Sunday interview. > > A scion of the Supreme Court, a man very much larger than life, amusing, > very close friends with the most liberal member of the court, a man who > cherished the Constitution and loved to teach, a fair-minded Supreme Court > icon is found dead in bed and there's no need for the judge to come out? > > A U.S. Marshal (not a local sheriff, but a U.S. Marshal) tells her to stay > put? How, pray tell did a U.S. Marshal suddenly show up and start telling > the judge what to do? That's convenient, and Yogi Berra pops into mind > again. Had JFK's body been autopsied in Texas, as it should have been, we'd > have a lot more answers about what happened to the president. Instead, two > doctors who had never done a forensic autopsy before were tapped to autopsy > the president? > > We decided to look up Texas law for such circumstances. Where murder may > have occurred [and the lack of any indication of foul play does not rule > out murder], it's governed by the "law of the situs," meaning that local > Texas law applied in this case. It was not a federal matter. > > Under Texas law, TITLE 1. > <http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.49.htm> CODE OF > CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, CHAPTER 49. INQUESTS UPON DEAD BODIES > > UBCHAPTER A. DUTIES PERFORMED BY JUSTICES OF THE PEACE Art. 49.04. DEATHS > REQUIRING AN INQUEST. (a) A justice of the peace shall conduct an inquest > into the death of a person who dies in the county served by the justice if: > > [Subsection one and two have been deleted because they do not apply in > this case.] > > (3) the body or a body part of a person is found, the cause or > circumstances of death are unknown, and: > > (A) the person is identified; or > > (B) the person is unidentified; > > The law clearly applies in this case. So, when is this inquest to take > place? Too late, the Justice's body, embalmed, is already on its way home > to Virginia, and nobody has any idea what caused his death. "Natural > causes" translated into plain English is: "Damned if I know," and that is > unacceptable in every respect in this case. He's declared dead of natural > causes by a judge who hasn't even seen the body. Does that strike anyone > else as extremely odd? It should be pointed out that under the law she can > do so, but when a member of the SCOTUS is involved, you'd think she'd want > to see the scene for herself. Relying on instructions from a Federal > Marshall makes her an unwitting complicit if Justice Scalia was poisoned > during dinner the night before. > > We might understand not going if the poor soul was a homeless person who > was clearly in really bad health anyway. But someone so important to the > SCOTUS and the country is just shipped out to a funeral home, apparently > embalmed quickly (thus no blood samples to find anything that might trigger > a heart attack or any other poison). This utterly shatters credulity and > forces the American people to ask the question yet again, is Texas suddenly > the land of conspiracies? First JFK, now this. Events are moving along way > too fast, and the most important evidence has been compromised. > > But that's only the prelude. It's been decided that no autopsy will be > performed. Isn't that convenient? If, and we are not saying it is the case, > but if the Justice was murdered and just before the Supreme Court was to > start its next term, it's simply too opportune not to consider conspiracy. > > In any such case, the investigators start by looking at who benefits from > Scalia's demise. The pipeline from lower courts that flows to the SCOTUS is > chock full of very meaningful rulings, such as Obama's executive action on > immigration, whether the Little Sisters of the Poor have to condone > abortifacients, labor issues and on and on. > > If he wanted to, President Obama could simply put a rabidly liberal > individual on the court right now. How? Recess appointment. The Senate is > not in session right now, and under the Constitution, the president can put > anyone he wants there unless... Mitch McConnell calls the Senate back into > session and declares it is in "pro forma" session. In essence that means > that while the Senators do nothing (nothing new), they are still in > session, and once it's been declared in session, they can all head back > home, leaving a couple of senators not facing re-election to sit in the > chamber. > > To his credit, the president says he will name his nominees in good time, > which translates to, "I'll wait until the Senate is in session." But if he > changes his mind and does choose the recess appointment maneuver, Mitch > McConnell should be impeached for incredible negligence. > > > > Read more: Family Security Matters > <http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/why-no-autopsy-for-supreme-justice-scalia?f=must_reads#ixzz40RcQY5GO> > > http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/why-no-autopsy-for-supreme-justice-scalia?f=must_reads#ixzz40RcQY5GO > > Under Creative Commons License: Attribution > <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0> > > > __._,_.___ > ------------------------------ > Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> > ------------------------------ > > > Visit Your Group > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaHRnMzkwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NTU3Mjg5NjY-> > > > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcjU0MzE1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NTcyODk2Ng--> > > • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • > Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use > <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
