Our black swan strategy delivers Tampa for Ron Paul

The race for the Republican nomination for president is far from decided. With 75% of convention delegates yet to be determined and hundreds for Ron Paul in the pipeline to Tampa, NOW is the time to ramp up our operations! While our opponents and the corporate media have hyped hollow beauty contest wins, Revolution PAC and its seasoned consultants have quietly developed a powerful post-Super Tuesday victory plan. This ambitious strategy is winnable, we’re certain, but only if funded robustly and immediately. Contribute now to put the exciting “black swan” plan in motion! (What's the “black swan” strategy? If we revealed it here, our opponents would surely get the upper hand, so we've been advised to keep the plan under wraps, for now …) RevPAC is the only grassroots super PAC. Millionaire bankers won’t be found on our donor rolls. Still, we’ve produced and aired in multiple states four unique T.V. commercials. These ads helped boost Revolution PAC to #1 in Google’s political action committee YouTube rankings. We beat all other super PACs combined! At activists' request, Revolution PAC developed the groundbreaking Android PollWatcher application, deploying it using vetted exit polling volunteers in Arizona and Michigan. And, our historic live broadcasts have provided a home for tens of thousands of liberty activists seeking complete election returns, pro-freedom analysis and newsmaker interviews . . . Join our fifth live webcast this Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. CST as Alabama, Mississippi, Hawaii and American Samoa head to the polls! All of these initiatives and more were made possible by YOUR generosity. Are you in for taking this movement to the next level? If so, donate right now. Our enemies are betting that we wither in disappointment. They surge, you know, when we shrink. Ready to call their bluff? Gary Franchi Jr. Chairman, Revolution PAC P.S. With victory in his sights, Ron Paul is fighting for every delegate in every state. Revolution PAC has a plan in place to shift the electorate in favor of freedom. Your immediate contribution sets the “black swan” strategy in motion! https://www.revolutionpac.com/donate/ Unlimited donations may be accepted from individuals, business and organizations. Thank you!

	Copyright © 2012 Revolution PAC. All Rights Reserved. 3149 Dundee Rd. #176 | Northbrook | IL 60062 | info@revolutionpac.com

Sheriff Joe on Obama Investigation: 10 Times Worse Than Watergate; Bigge...

Join the YouGov US Opinion Center Panel

Join the YouGov US Opinion Center Panel

Who Reigns?: Photo proof

Quote by Pope Pius X:

"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he IS Jesus Christ Himself hidden under a veil of flesh.  Does the Pope speak?  It is Jesus Christ who speaks.  Does the Pope accord a favor or pronounce an anathema?  It is Jesus Christ who pronounces the anathema or accords a favor.  So that when the Pope speaks we have no business to examine.  We only have to obey.  We have no right to criticize his decisions, or discuss his commands.  Therefore, all who would wear the crown aught to submit to Divine Right."  (The Divine Right spoken of here is reference to Jesus Christ himself on earth, the Pope of Rome (the TRUE Antichrist of the Bible). The crown spoken of here refers to all the world's kings, queens, presidents and other heads of state.)

For proof, just go to Google Images and enter the name of any head of state in the world together with the word, Pope.

The Pope reigns over the kings of the earth.  They all pay worshipful homage due only to Christ by going to Vatican City (Rev 17:18  And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.) wearing black and veils (an outward sign of penance and submission) and bow and kiss his ring.

Elections of heads of state are total frauds that are conducted only to deceive the people into believing they have a choice. The Pope picks all the candidates through organizations subservient to the Pope.

Going to the polls only gives the appearance of legitimacy to a complete FRAUD.

Tom Friess
Inquisition Update

Ron Paul: Delegates and Freedom

It ain't over. Be not dismayed. The Fight is still on.


"If we didn't receive 20% of the vote in the primary, how can we get any delegates for Ron Paul?"

With the county conventions this Saturday, I want to take a moment to be absolutely clear. The Georgia Primary went exactly as projected and does not affect our strategy or chances of winning delegates for Ron Paul in Georgia at all!

We are all counting on one another to show up this Saturday! If we have the numbers at the Georgia county, district, and state conventions, we can win!

This is How it Works:

At the Georgia State Republican Convention, 31 delegates will be selected to go to the National Republican Convention. A candidate must have at least 20% of the statewide vote in order for any of those delegates to be bound to vote for him at the National Convention... but keep reading. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THESE DELEGATES HAVE TO PERSONALLY SUPPORT THE CANDIDATE TO WHICH THEY ARE BOUND!

The district conventions each select 3 delegates to the National Convention. These delegates will be bound to vote for candidates and generally will be split 2 to 1 depending on who came in first and who came in second in the district. Again, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THESE DELEGATES HAVE TO PERSONALLY SUPPORT THE CANDIDATE TO WHICH THEY ARE BOUND!

Under Georgia code, our delegates to the national convention are un-bound and FREE TO VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE:

1. After the second ballot, if no candidate has received 51% of the vote at the National Convention

2. When the candidate to which they are bound fails to receive 35% of the delegate vote from delegates at the National Convention

3. Or when the candidate to whom they are bound releases their delegates (drops out of the race).

When any of the above happens, if our supporters are in those delegate seats, we can deliver Georgia, the 5th largest delegation in the country, to our champion of liberty and defender of the constitution, Ron Paul. This is his strategy and what is happening in states all over the country! All we need to do to make this happen is show up and win delegate seats at our county, district, and state conventions!

To give one example of how we can benefit:

Newt has almost no chance at making it to the National Convention. What will happen to his bound Georgia delegates when he drops out? They will be unbound and can vote for anyone they choose! Who will be in those seats when that happens is up to us at these conventions!

With every primary and caucus this election season going to a different candidate, and with Ron Paul coming in 2nd more than any other candidate, not to mention picking up many secret delegates in various states, it is looking very likely that no candidate will receive 51% of the delegate vote on the first ballot. This will result in a "brokered" or "open" convention. In an open convention all bets are off. Again, who will be sitting in Georgia's delegate seats? That's what these conventions are all about!

I will continue to send updates and strategy information leading up to Saturday, after which your inbox will get a break and my family will get some time to see me again:)

Thank you for all of your hard work and I wish you all the best of luck on Saturday!!!

In Liberty,

"An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army - or any government!" -- Texas Congressman Ron Paul

Negro Womb: A Dangerous Place for Babies

Female Negro, Abortion, Feminism and Depopulation

IMPEACH OBAMA NOW!

In His Face White House Petition: IMPEACH BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA AND HIS ADMINISTRATION! https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/impeach-barack-hussein-obama-and-his-administration/CmmG5jPy

Michelle Obama admits Barack Obamas Home Country Is Kenya

Criticize government, get arrested!

Civil liberties organization says Supremes need to create 'deterrent'

A major civil liberties organization has filed a brief in a case heading to the U.S. Supreme Court that asks the justices to create a deterrent to government agents who would arrest individuals in retaliation for their speech.
The friend-of-the-court filing comes from the Rutherford Institute in the case Virgil D. Reichle Jr. and Dan Doyle vs. Steven Howards.

Howards was at a Colorado shopping mall with his son when he learned that then-Vice President Dick Cheney was there. Howards decided to approach Cheney and express his opposition to the war in Iraq.
The Institute said Howards “made a telephone call in which he was heard to say that he was going to ask Cheney ‘how many kids he’s killed today.’ The Secret Service agent who overheard Howards’ conversation alerted other agents on the detail to monitor Howards.”
The man eventually told Cheney his policies in Iraq “are disgusting,” and when Cheney turned to walk away, Howards “lightly touched” Cheney’s shoulder.
Federal agents conferred, questioned Howards and eventually arrested him for “assaulting” Cheney.
Howards sued under the First Amendment, alleging retaliation against him for engaging in unpopular or critical speech.
“This case will affect the right of Americans to petition the government for a redress of grievances – whether that petitioning takes the form of a shouted statement to the president or a sign that is critical of Congress,” said John W. Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute.
“If Americans are not able to challenge law enforcement officials over retaliatory arrests under the First Amendment, few, if any, checks will remain to deter government officials from employing intimidating tactics designed to chill the exercise of unpopular or critical political speech.”
Charges against Howards eventually were dropped, and his lawsuit alleged the agents violated his rights under the First Amendment. The agents said because Howards had denied touching the vice president, they had probable cause to arrest him for lying to a federal official.
At the appellate level, in Denver’s 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, justices reinstated Howards’ First Amendment claim, and the question now is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The brief explains that those who criticize the government “have historically faced the wrath of government officials who desire to squelch criticism.”
It continues, “If a remedy for retaliatory arrests in made practically unavailable, government officials will feel emboldened to target their critics and unpopular speech will be chilled. It is crucial that an effective deterrent remain in place to prevent invidious discrimination on the basis of the exercise of freedom of speech.”
“Restrictions on speech run afoul of the First Amendment when they produce a fear of punishment or sanction that inhibits the exercise of protected speech, even if the restrictions would otherwise be permissible,” the brief argues. “A chilling effect on First Amendment rights constitutes injury-in-fact…
“The availability of claims for retaliatory arrest serves to prevent and deter the government from imposing a chilling effect upon the speech of citizens,” it argues. “Recognition of a retaliatory arrest cause of action serves as a deterrent upon law enforcement officials who might use their power to prevent and intimidate persons from criticizing the government.”
At the lower court level, the agents had argued that if there was probable cause for an arrest on any allegation, they should be protected.
That, however, “would add substantially to the plaintiff’s burden and likely would prevent almost any plaintiff from prevailing on a retaliatory arrest claim … The petitions and the United States have argued, and the 10th Circuit understood, that the proposed ‘no probable cause’ element would require the plaintiff to show that, at the time of the arrest, there was no probable cause to arrest the plaintiff not for the crime for which he or she was arrested, but for any crime. Effectively, this would require the plaintiff to prove not just that he or she was innocent of every existing crime at the time of the arrest, but that there was no reason even to believe that he or she committed any crime at all.”
Most important, though, is the discouragement that would be created for interaction between government officials and citizens.

“The First Amendment guarantees citizens the right to petition at the very least the Legislative and Executive branches. … This right has no clearer expression than in petitions made directly and in person to senior officials,” the brief explains. “Chilling this activity strikes at the very core of the American tradition of representative democracy.”