Republicans are in control now

REPUBLICANS ARE IN CHARGE NOW

Prior to the 2014 elections, Republicans were hamstrung by a Democrat
controlled White House and Senate. The 2014 elections changed that dynamic.
As of January 2015, Republicans are in charge…

The House – 249 Republicans to 186 Democrats          57%
The Senate – 54 Republicans to 44 Democrats             55%
State Governors – 32 Republicans to 17 Democrats      65%
State Legislatures – 68 Republican to 30 Democrat       69%
Full State Control – 23 Republican to 7 Democrat          58%

This means that as of January 2015, Republicans can no longer blame Obama or
his Democrats for what is happening in our country. Because Republicans have
all the necessary power to stop Obama’s democratic destruction of our
Constitutional Republic at both the federal and state levels, Republicans
are now 100% responsible for everything that happens next in America

By J.B. Williams
November 18, 2014
NewsWithViews.com

Stewart Rhodes Oath Keepers Ask Police To Do What Is Right

Published on Dec 15, 2014

Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers “Lighting the Lamp of Liberty” event in Washington D.C. 11/17/2014 warns of rogue individuals in government abusing their power. He also asks sheriffs and peace officers to stand against the tyranny and abuse of individuals rights. He talks about Bundy Ranch and how bloodshed was closer than most realized. He also warns that the possibility of civil war is real.

View more videos at: WWW.CSPOA.ORG

Well-Known TV Veterinarian Faces Pending Disciplinary Action

“I think the situation’s wrong. I’ve always had great care from him.”
A well-known television veterinarian, under fire. Another vet is accusing him of not following regulations while treating this dog. The “Incredible Dr. Pol” is well-known for working with pets and their owners to find inexpensive ways to heal them. His efforts inspired a series on Nat Geo WILD. One of the episodes started a controversy with a vet from out of state.
Dr. Pol works at his practice in Isabella County’s Weidman Township.

9&10’s Cody Boyer and photojournalist Jacob Johnson visited the clinic today and have more details on the accusations.

Continue reading

Blaine Cooper Addresses John McCain at Town Hall Meeting

1835 Original Seal for MichiganI don’t believe that John McClain has maintained his office in AZ by an honest election.  I believe this is another case of “rigged voting”.  Listen to what he said just before Blaine started speaking.  This man is extremely arrogant, and what he says at the end telling Blaine to “run for office” and gloating about doing 8 terms himself…well…voter rigging and money will put into in office.  This is an old video from 2013 but I’m posting it to show the disdain McClain revealed at the town hall meeting. One thing that Blaine did at the 2:22 mark is he stated, “If I were in a position of power or authority I’d have you arrested….”  well, this is a defeatist statement and continues to esteem them.  We…the people do have the POWER but not approaching them!  The people need to reach out to the people and get more people to attend the meetings and to take back their voting ballots!  As long as we continue to try to topple the top we’ll not succeed but if we knock their feet out from under them at the local level in our communities we might, Lord willing, have a chance.  Once the communities are reunited then you take your state back.  Peaceful revolution happens without notice and they can’t stop it.

Published on Oct 22, 2013

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has come under attack, and rightfully so. He has gone from being a Vietnam Veteran hero to crossing the line, in my opinion and many others, of being a traitor to the Constitution and the United States. I ran across a video of a townhall meeting that apparently took place sometime in September, in which Blaine Cooper called out John McCain on his treason for aiding and abetting the enemy of the United States. Read More at http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/10/mar…

Manistique Paper Mill Possibly Closing

MANISTIQUE — Manistique Papers maybe closing for good next week.

UPDATE:  It is closing

According to a source, who wishes to remain anonymous, there was a meeting at the mill Monday discussing possibly shutting down the mill. The mill could be closed as early as Tuesday next week. In the meeting workers were told that the mill would run through its waste paper and start cleaning up.The mill was bought by Watermill Group of Lexington, Massachusetts back in 2012, after the original owners went bankrupt.  The mill is currently up for sale according to our source.  We will continue to look into the situation and will provide you with more information has it happens.  Source LINK

ESCANABA PLANNERS CONSIDER MEIJER SITE PLAN TOMORROW

Escanaba Planners Consider Meijer Site Plan Tomorrow

UPDATE: APPROVED, MEIJER COMING TO ESCANABA!

A public hearing on a site plan for a Meijer store and gasoline station at 505 North 26th Street will be conducted tomorrow night, March 18th, by the Escanaba Planning Commission.

The meeting will get underway at 6 pm at the Bonifas Civic Center. Meijer is proposing a 208,447 square foot main retail and grocery center with a gas station supported by a 2,509 square foot retail building. They are expected to rise on a 48 acre site.

The streets that border the property are 6th Avenue North on the north; North 26th Street on the east, 3rd Avenue North on the south; and North 3rd Avenue on the west. The property is under the control of Marvin R. Pouliot and Frank Stopich.

March 17, 2015

LEAVE TO APPEAL

1835 Original Seal for MichiganThis e-mail is only going out to a few folks who might actually read it and share the information about the property rights cause with friends. Our judicial system is constitutionally bankrupt but we must use the system to expose it to everyone who wants to reestablish liberty in America. To have a case heard by the MI Supreme Court you must ask their permission, this process is called LEAVE TO APPEAL!  This LEAVE is not the actual BRIEF that must be filled if you are GRANTED permission to go before the MI Supreme Court it is just to present why you think this case is important and why they should hear your case. There is only about a 5% chance the case they will agree to hear the case and that is ok because this is a step in the overall exposure process. Below is just the introduction to the leave to appeal. Attached is the actual leave that was filed with the court. The attached also have both the opinion of the circuit and appeals courts. I have highlighted a couple statements in the Appeals Court OPINION I think you will find very interesting.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.” –Ronald Reagan

Greg

GROUNDS   (INTRODUCTION)   MCR 7.302 (B)
This Constitutional and statutory case against the State could affect hundreds of thousands of acres of private property and property owners within the exterior boundaries of Michigan. Plaintiff’s / Appellant’s sought declaratory relief to prevent defendant Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) from entering the property to inspect for wetlands and to require wetland permit with restriction if State so desired.
The state has properly admitted they do not have any Holds, Liens, Monetary, Proprietary or Contractual interests in the physical Property which the Plaintiffs / Appellants is the Assign and holds fee simple patent with no reservation, as evidenced by chain of title. However, the state and lower courts claims PA 451 of 1994, MCL 324.30301 gives jurisdiction over the person and police powers are granted to them by Art. IV § 52 of Michigan Constitution to enter, inspect, and require permits. The Court has also stated this kind of entry and requirement for a permit would not constitute a taking.
The term “property” embodies more than just physical, corporeal assets; it can include intangible entities, such as rights and interests.[1]   The patent 4829 Grants all rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances of whatsoever nature, to heirs and assigns forever.” In its precise legal sense, property is nothing more than a collection of rights;[2] indeed, “property,” in law, is not the material object itself, but is the right and interest or domination rightfully obtained over such object, with the unrestricted right to its use, enjoyment, and disposition.[3] The right to exclude others, as well as their property, is one of the most essential sticks in the bundle of rights that are commonly characterized as property. [4] Our case was brought to defend the right to exclude other from the property, to retain control of resources and defend the right not to have to enter into any permitting scheme (contract) with the state for rights already secured.
Art. I § 14 Jury trials “The right of trial by jury shall remain, but shall be waived in all civil cases unless demanded by one of the parties in the manner prescribed by law.  So far, this case has been bantered around on the states home court by trustees and actors of the state, and now needs to be addressed by a jury, the ones who authorize the state to exist, and the ones whose properties are at risk.
The Declaration of Independence clearly states:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,…”

LEAVE TO APPEAL SUPREME COURT searchable PDF DOCUMENT
Continue reading

IG: 6.5M Social Security Numbers Linked to People Aged 112 & Up

The Social Security Administration sees dead people.

   US: There are 6.5 million recipients of Social Security benefits who, according to birthdates on their records, are 112 years old or over. [Since there are only 35 people on Earth that are older than 112, it is obvious that fraud is rampant, and taxpayers are footing the bill, as usual. The Social Security Administration says it has no plans for fixing the problem, because its resources are limited and it only wants to focus on accurately paying benefits.] Fox news 2015 Mar 10

Source:  Watch Video News Report

15 State House Reps. Co-Sponsor Fixing Roads without Raising Taxes!

ALTERNATIVE TO RAISING TAXES TO FIX MICHIGAN ROADS

We don’t need a big tax increase to fix our roads.  Call your representative now and tell them so.

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan <a@michigantaxpayers.com>
To: Catherine
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 7:42 PM
Subject: 15 state House reps co-sponsor fixing roads without raising taxes.  Yours?

Catherine,

The bills introduced by Reps. Gary Glenn [R-Midland] and Todd Courser [R-Lapeer] have 15 co-sponsors between them, according to the state legislature’s website.

Both bills are essentially re-introductions of the plan that the state House passed last year, the “Bolger Plan,” to fix Michigan’s roads without raising taxes, which were unfortunately abandoned in favor of putting massive tax increases up to the voters on May 5.

Of course as we’ve been saying all along, it is unconscionable for the legislature to sit back and wait until May 6, the day after the election, to begin to decide how it will fix Michigan’s roads.

And the “Bolger Plan,” which has already passed the House once and doesn’t raise any taxes, seems like a good place to start working today to fix our roads.  The plan also preserves funding for local governments and actually increases funding for public schools.

The House reps who are supporting the Bolger Plan may surprise you.  They are:

Rep. Todd Courser (primary bill sponsor)
Rep. Gary Glenn (primary bill sponsor)
Rep. Mike Callton (R-Nashville)
Rep. Lee Chatfield (R-Levering)
Rep. Ray Franz (R-Onekama)
Rep. Cindy Gamrat (R-Plainwell)
Rep. Joseph Graves (R-Argentine)
Rep. Thomas Hooker (R-Bybron Center)
Rep. Joel Johnson (R-Clare)
Rep. Tim Kelly (R-Saginaw)
Rep. Klint Kesto (R-Commerce)
Rep. Dan Lauwers (R-Brockway)
Rep. Bruce Rendon (R-Lake City)
Rep. Harvey Santana (D-Detroit)
Rep. Michael Webber (R-Rochester Hills)

That’s 15 representatives of 110- not a bad start, and refreshing to see a Democrat in support of the plan.

Of those 15, six of them (Callton, Kelly, Kesto, Lauwers, Rendon, and Santana) voted for Proposal 1 last December.  Courser, Glenn, Chatfield, Gamrat, and Webber are freshmen.  Franz, Graves, Hooker, and Johnson voted against Proposal 1.

If your state representative is not on this list please take a moment to send a message to your representatives in Lansing.  Tell them to do their job and support a plan to fix our roads on May 6 [the day after the election].

(Unlike the U.S. Congress, in the Michigan legislature bills can only be co-sponsored before they are introduced, so additional cosponsors cannot be added.  But every state representative, and every senator, can go on record supporting any plan.)

If you think about it, the sham argument for Proposal 1–“no choice”–would be absurd in any situation.  It would be irresponsible bordering on derelict for any legislator to say on any urgent public safety problem: “let’s ask voters to approve a given plan, but offer no alternative in the event they reject it.”

Yet that is the position some lawmakers are maintaining.

We need to tell our representatives in Lansing, today:  Do your job, and support an alternative.

Whether it is Rep. Glenn’s plan, Todd Courser’s plan, or any other plan, the legislature must act, now, to decide upon a plan for the day after May 5–and have it done before the election.

In our opinion, a rejection of the May 5 ballot proposal would be a mandate from the people of Michigan to fix our roads without raising taxes.

Please take a moment now to click here to contact your representatives in Lansing and tell them: Support a plan to fix our roads without raising taxes.

Predictably, the Prop 1 pushers are lashing out, with a spokesman for the “Vote Yes Or Else” campaign saying the plan doesn’t raise enough new money.

More is never enough for the special interests in Lansing.

We will soon focus our efforts on getting out the vote and defeating the massive tax increases on May 5, but we too cannot wait until May 6 to act.

We need to make sure lawmakers do the right thing on May 6, and that means working now, not having emergency meetings and rushing through some new mess.

And besides, the more lawmakers do their jobs and support alternatives, the clearer it will be to the voters that it isn’t “Prop 1 or bust.”  We can fix out roads without raising taxes.  That’s a message lawmakers need to hear, right now.

Please, take a minute to send a message to your representatives in Lansing.  Tell them to do their job and support a plan to fix our roads on May 6.

And keeping in mind that we still have a lot of work to do to win on May 5, we need as much support as we can get.  We’re taking on a multi-million dollar special interest blitz.

If you can, please consider chipping in to support our efforts to defeat the tax hikes on May 5.

Thanks for standing for low taxes and more prosperity in Michigan,

The Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan Team

P.S.  Our representatives need to hear from us now and they need to know they cannot remain silent.  They need to pass a plan to fix Michigan’s roads on May 6, now.  Please take one minute to sign the petition to Lansing today!

Paid for by Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan, PO Box 211, Milan MI 48160

You were signed up for this list via MichiganTaxpayers.com, opposing tax hike schemes in Michigan.

Our mailing address is:
Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan
Paid for by Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan
PO Box 211
Milan, MI 48160

Add us to your address book

Upper Peninsula land deal poised for approval

1835 Original Seal for MichiganWHY ARE WE ALLOWING A CANADIAN COMPANY TO MINE OUR LAND IN THE UPPER PENINSULA?  WHO WILL ACTUALLY BENEFIT FROM THIS?  It won’t be the locals…perhaps jobs for “illegals”?  Couldn’t this be a likened to our fiat money we pay the private Federal Reserve to put “ink on paper” and sell to us with INTEREST to use.  We constitutionally are supposed to be creating our own money and it wouldn’t cost us a dime so “no debt” but the US Corporate Government contracted with the Private Federal Reserve Bankers (Foreigners)…. is this not similar? Why aren’t WE MINING OUR OWN LAND and keeping ALL THE PROFITS INSTEAD OF RECEIVING ROYALTIES?  Who profits from this?  It won’t be the locals as they are claiming.  IT IS ANOTHER PILLAGING OF OUR STATE’S RESOURCES BY FOREIGN COUNTRIES WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE DEFACTO STATE GOVERNMENT.  STATE LAND BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE, NOT TO THE GOVERNMENT TO DO AS THEY WILL!!

UPPER PENINSULA LAND DEAL POISED FOR APPROVAL!!

 A controversial Upper Peninsula land deal appears closer to approval.   A Canadian mining company wants to buy land and mineral rights on ten thousand of acres of state land in the Upper Peninsula.

Graymont wants to mine limestone in the area northwest of St. Ignace. The company plans surface and underground mines.

Top Department of Natural Resources officials initially opposed the land deal.

But Graymont made changes to the proposal, including increasing royalty payments to the state and promises of greater wetland protection.

DNR department heads now support the plan which is likely to be approved next week.

A controversial Upper Peninsula land deal appears closer to approv

A Canadian mining company wants to buy land and mineral rights on ten thousand acres of state land in the Upper Peninsula.

Graymont wants to mine limestone in the area northwest of St. Ignace. The company plans surface and underground mines.

Top Department of Natural Resources officials initially opposed the land deal.

But Graymont made changes to the proposal, including increasing royalty payments to the state and promises of greater wetland protection.

DNR department heads now support the plan which is likely to be approved next week.

Environmentalists and others fear the mining operation will cause irreversible damage to the region.

Marvin Roberson is with the Sierra Club.

He says the DNR should give people 30 days to review the latest proposal before taking any action. He says Graymont has submitted multiple revisions to its proposal since the beginning of the year.

Continue reading