We are either a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, or we have no government at all.
Those that SERVE WITHIN our federal government get their authority from either the branch that they serve within, or from a named office within a branch. NO person, no group, no agency, no entity, etc has any authority on their own. Basically, the US Constitution and each state's Constitution is our government and the people who serve within them - elected, hired, contracted, etc - are ALLOWED to use the authority of the branch or named office within a branch while serving IF they do the duties as assigned (in writing), take and KEEP the Oath.
The US Constitution IS the supreme Law of this nation and requires that all legislation be created in Pursuance thereof it in order to be Lawfully binding on the people. It is also the supreme Contract for ALL who serve within our governments - state and federal.
Those that serve within our governments LAWFULLY have no authority other then that delegated in writing to the branch or to the named-Office-within a branch that they serve within.
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides... The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction. ... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...” (end quote)
Archibald Maclaine, North Carolina’s ratifying convention: “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’”
"A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority." Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.
"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres." Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.
"The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves." Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.
James Madison: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”
Justice William O. Douglas, dissenting opinion, Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104 (1972): “Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.”
Want to get rid of the FCC, and other unLawful agencies? That is easy, you see, there is no delegated authority to the federal government to regulate anything except immigration.
Publius Huldahvia the US Constitution: “In a nutshell, our Constitution authorizes the federal government to handle the following objects for the Country at Large: -- Military defense, international commerce & relations; -- Control immigration & naturalization of new citizens; -- Domestically, to create a uniform commercial system: weights & measures, patents & copyrights, money based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, mail delivery & some road building; and -- With some of the amendments, secure (that means to defend them, protect them) certain civil rights.
As stated in the 10th Amendment, all others powers are reserved by the States OR THE PEOPLE…."
That is the ONLY LAWFUL authority those who serve within our governments have, and you can easily verify this for yourself by reading a VERY short document - the Constitution of the United States of America.
Consider this, all it takes is the enforcement of our constitutional republic, it is all in writing.
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides... The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...” (end Dr. Vieira quote) [Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions... ]
"In ways that trick citizens in to giving away their rights,..."
First, in reading your comments I must thank you for taking the time to understand our government.
Second, though this must seem like a "backhanded compliment", it is not. It is further educating the people.
It matters not what "color of law" is passed, our rights come from nature, God, being human, whatever is your choice. They are not there by government, they are there for us to use when there is no government - like water, air, earth, defense, speaking, etc. Even a bird defends itself and its young, its nest. WE choose not to speak, and not to defend our right to speak, or we let those who wish to decide for us what to think, do, accept.
You're correct in that everything that happens to us by those who SERVE WITHIN our governments is our fault, we allow it to go on.
The problem is that many do not know that the US Constitution that every single person in America should have read/read. They do not understand that keeping those who serve within our government keeping the contract that they are under is OUR duty.
Nor do governmental enforcers know that they make themselves *terrorists and traitors when they enforce "color of law" instead of keeping their Oath as is required of them. They do not understand, or choose to assist in, destroying our nation, our legitimate government means that they themselves no loner will own a thing - home, land, car, clothes, etc. They only own it under these laws, under our Constitutional government.
I choose to speak, to walk, to grow what I want, to educate where I can, particularly governmental enforcers - law enforcement and military - because they are/and will continue to be the first wave of violence and force used against our nation - remember when unlawfully those who serve within our governments removed the requirements of "warrants" and not being able to just break into private homes? Every one serving at that time and since was required to take and KEEP the Oath to Support and Defend the US Constitution. They made the personal choice to work against our nation and legitimate government. They are still making those choices. But there choices destroy their own lives as they know them - they will no longer own anything as well as the rest of us. Read what those who are working to destroy the USA want. The government will own all, will decide all, will decide who gets what and when, etc.
Can you show me where even one "ism" has liberty as a "corner stone"? Because all the "isms" I have studied have governmental control of all as a corner stone. Where is individual liberty in that?
So far, and admittedly I have not checked today, President Trump has not issued any laws (and the Office of US President was never delegated that authority). What he has done is issued EO's to his employees to enforce the laws already written by not enforced.
Example: SECURE FENCE ACT OF 2006. Ratified by Congress, signed into law in 2006. (Oct 26, 2006 signed by G. Bush) Supported and voted for by Dems & Repubs, was mostly democratic legislature. DHS received 1.2 Billion to fund the wall that was never built. Where is that money? So why was this already planned in, voted for, funded but not built wall, used to agitate the people, to cause delusions of who was doing what, etc?
“This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform." - President George W. Bush, 10/26/06
Today, President Bush Signed The Secure Fence Act - An Important Step Forward In Our Nation's Efforts To Control Our Borders And Reform Our Immigration System. Earlier this year, the President laid out a strategy for comprehensive immigration reform. The Secure Fence Act is one part of this reform, and the President will work with Congress to finish the job and pass the remaining elements of this strategy. The Secure Fence Act Builds On Progress Securing The Border. (end quote)
"Because in his view the public is only composed by white, conservative, Christian people"
I have not seen that. Can you list some areas where Trump has done this?
Actually, he can end it by requiring ALL who serve within our government to follow the supreme contract that they are all bound by in writing, by Oath.
You sound as if you are one of those people who believe that the USA is a "democracy". It is not, never has been one, will never be one. The USA, America, is a constitutional republic with all the duties and authority of those who serve within our governments - state and federal - are in writing for all to know and see IF they would only read.
"A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority." Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.
"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres." Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.
"The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves." Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.
You have it wrong. "There used to be slavery in the known WORLD..." would be more appropriate. When one says it like the way you did, it is used to sound like ONLY America had slavery, when it used to be a way of life in the world then.
Michael LeMieux: “The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs.”
The Trump Administration will be a law and order administration."
President Trump will a "law and order administration" only if he and his administration follow the US Constitution. Why?
Because the US Constitution defines our governments - state and federal; it assigns the delegated authorities/powers to the different BRANCHES and to OFFICES within a branch - not to any person or group of people. Those that serve within our state and federal governments are under that/those contract(s). Here under our LEGITIMATE government there are no such things as "emergency powers", "martial law", "assassination powers" (First Degree Murder powers). Those exist only in other nations.
IF they cannot do their job as the supreme and highest (state - if applicable) contracts requires of them then they need to look for another profession, because - as with any job contract - then they cannot do the job. There is no complaint when they are fired for breaking the LOWEST contract they are under, the one with whatever enforcement they signed on to - it is expected.
To make the supreme and highest contracts lawfully stronger, those who serve within our governments are REQUIRED to take an Oath to support and defend the US Constitution (and their own state's Constitution) before the orders of superiors and the duties of the position they occupy (Those who serve as US Presidents are held to a higher standard of Preserving, Protecting and Defending the US Constitution).
Breaking the Oath(s) are a felony and the crime of Perjury, and those that serve knew this, or should have, going into the governmental position.
If President Trump says yes to those who are working to destroy our nation from within (Yes, THAT is exactly what those requests are for), then we need to remove him, and those who were doing the asking.
Ask yourself this, Does the job you are working for let you rewrite your work contract, give yourself raises, decide what duties you will do and not do? Neither does our supreme LAW (another law they will be breaking, and if also state job, then 2 more LAWS they will be breaking))
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor: “The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of States for the benefit of the States or state governments as abstract political entities, or even for the benefit of the public officials governing the States. To the contrary, the Constitution divides authority between federal and state governments for the protection of individuals. State sovereignty is not just an end in itself: “Rather, federalism secures to citizens the liberties that derive from the diffusion of sovereign power.”
Mack and Printz v. United States: “The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The Federal Government’s power would be augmented immeasurably and impermissibly if it were able to impress into its service - and at no cost to itself - the police officers of the 50 States… Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself.”
Treason - Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States provides: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
*Terrorism: 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
If they are aiding in the destruction of our legitimate government by requiring that those who serve within our governments behave as if they are a tyrant or king, and since this is "enforcement" asking, force or the threat of force is always there in there official actions. By asking they are working to change our type of government from a constitutional republic in an unlawful and illegal way. (Yes, I know it has been done before, but that it continues is our fault.)
Color of law. The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241.
"Sixth, it's bullshit because the law Snowden would be prosecuted under does not allow motive as a defense."
Not if we remove our judges for NOT using "Good Behaviour" as constitutionally required. They are allowed to stay in for life as long as they use good behavior while serving. Good behavior is doing the duties as assigned by the US Constitution, and taking and KEEPING the Oath to support and defend the supreme law of our nation.
But that is up to the jurors, as it is their duty to decide on the law BEFORE deciding on the guilt of innocence, If the decision that the law is bad, then there can be no guilt or innocence to decide.
Since Snowden was KEEPING his Oath as is required of him - to support and defend the US Constitution - he committed no crime. Those trying to charge him are breaking their Oath which makes them no longer meet the requirements of the position being occupied; plus having committed a felony plus the crime of Perjury.
"Professor Colleen Chien (who advised the administration on intellectual property issues) and Quentin Palfrey (who worked for years in the Commerce Dept and the Office of Science and Technology Policy on intellectual property issues)... Trade policy should reflect our democratic ideals"
Not one person who has "advised" those who serve wtihin our government, or served within it themselves should be calling it a "democracy" or refer to "our democratic..." anything.
The problem they have, and most Americans have is that America is NOT a "democracy", nor has she ever been one, nor will she ever be one as long as I and others live. America is a Constitutional Republic, everything those that serve within our government must do, are forbidden to do, and are ALLOWED to do only under certain circumstances, etc is all in writing within the US Constitution and each state Constitution. Novel idea, huh?
Those are the contracts backed by those that serve at ALL levels of government required Oath that binds them to PERSONALLY support and defend the US Constitution, NOT any person who serves within our governments.
So if people who "advise" those who serve within our government, and those that actually serve within it do not understand that we are NOT a democracy and have, quite possibly, not even read the contract they are LAWFULLY oathbound to might be the problem we are having within our nation.
Worse is that the American people themselves have allowed the dumbing down of their knowledge of what our government is. They let those that SERVE WITHIN our government now tell us what the government OUR ancestors created is, what they can do or not do, and actually commit *Terrorism and Treason against the American people.
Ignorance is NOT bliss, as those who lived in Germany (Hitler), Russia (Stalin/Lenin, etc), China, etc learned to their grief
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
Alexander Hamilton: “We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”
George Washington: "The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people."
James Madison, Federalist 39: "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." (It was established.)
Thomas Jefferson: “When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”
Abraham Lincoln: “We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution”
Benjamin Franklin: “In free governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them.”
Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas: “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”
James Madison: “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”
Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”
Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Callee.
FISA court, spying, etc
We are either a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, or we have no government at all.
Those that SERVE WITHIN our federal government get their authority from either the branch that they serve within, or from a named office within a branch. NO person, no group, no agency, no entity, etc has any authority on their own. Basically, the US Constitution and each state's Constitution is our government and the people who serve within them - elected, hired, contracted, etc - are ALLOWED to use the authority of the branch or named office within a branch while serving IF they do the duties as assigned (in writing), take and KEEP the Oath.
The US Constitution IS the supreme Law of this nation and requires that all legislation be created in Pursuance thereof it in order to be Lawfully binding on the people. It is also the supreme Contract for ALL who serve within our governments - state and federal.
Those that serve within our governments LAWFULLY have no authority other then that delegated in writing to the branch or to the named-Office-within a branch that they serve within.
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides... The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...” (end quote)
Archibald Maclaine, North Carolina’s ratifying convention: “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’”
"A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority." Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.
"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres." Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.
"The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves." Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.
James Madison: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”
Justice William O. Douglas, dissenting opinion, Colten v. Kentucky, 407 U.S. 104 (1972): “Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.”
Re: If there's any reason for an internet boycott, this would be it.
Want to get rid of the FCC, and other unLawful agencies? That is easy, you see, there is no delegated authority to the federal government to regulate anything except immigration.
Publius Huldahvia the US Constitution: “In a nutshell, our Constitution authorizes the federal government to handle the following objects for the Country at Large:
-- Military defense, international commerce & relations;
-- Control immigration & naturalization of new citizens;
-- Domestically, to create a uniform commercial system: weights & measures, patents & copyrights, money based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, mail delivery & some road building; and
-- With some of the amendments, secure (that means to defend them, protect them) certain civil rights.
As stated in the 10th Amendment, all others powers are reserved by the States OR THE PEOPLE…."
That is the ONLY LAWFUL authority those who serve within our governments have, and you can easily verify this for yourself by reading a VERY short document - the Constitution of the United States of America.
Consider this, all it takes is the enforcement of our constitutional republic, it is all in writing.
Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides... The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights... The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
... the famous case Norton v. Shelby County... The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution...” (end Dr. Vieira quote) [Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).
For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions... ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Goodbye Politicians, Too bad you are criminals
"In ways that trick citizens in to giving away their rights,..." First, in reading your comments I must thank you for taking the time to understand our government. Second, though this must seem like a "backhanded compliment", it is not. It is further educating the people. It matters not what "color of law" is passed, our rights come from nature, God, being human, whatever is your choice. They are not there by government, they are there for us to use when there is no government - like water, air, earth, defense, speaking, etc. Even a bird defends itself and its young, its nest. WE choose not to speak, and not to defend our right to speak, or we let those who wish to decide for us what to think, do, accept. You're correct in that everything that happens to us by those who SERVE WITHIN our governments is our fault, we allow it to go on. The problem is that many do not know that the US Constitution that every single person in America should have read/read. They do not understand that keeping those who serve within our government keeping the contract that they are under is OUR duty. Nor do governmental enforcers know that they make themselves *terrorists and traitors when they enforce "color of law" instead of keeping their Oath as is required of them. They do not understand, or choose to assist in, destroying our nation, our legitimate government means that they themselves no loner will own a thing - home, land, car, clothes, etc. They only own it under these laws, under our Constitutional government. I choose to speak, to walk, to grow what I want, to educate where I can, particularly governmental enforcers - law enforcement and military - because they are/and will continue to be the first wave of violence and force used against our nation - remember when unlawfully those who serve within our governments removed the requirements of "warrants" and not being able to just break into private homes? Every one serving at that time and since was required to take and KEEP the Oath to Support and Defend the US Constitution. They made the personal choice to work against our nation and legitimate government. They are still making those choices. But there choices destroy their own lives as they know them - they will no longer own anything as well as the rest of us. Read what those who are working to destroy the USA want. The government will own all, will decide all, will decide who gets what and when, etc.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fake Rights
Can you show me where even one "ism" has liberty as a "corner stone"? Because all the "isms" I have studied have governmental control of all as a corner stone. Where is individual liberty in that?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Fake Rights
So far, and admittedly I have not checked today, President Trump has not issued any laws (and the Office of US President was never delegated that authority). What he has done is issued EO's to his employees to enforce the laws already written by not enforced.
Example:
SECURE FENCE ACT OF 2006. Ratified by Congress, signed into law in 2006. (Oct 26, 2006 signed by G. Bush) Supported and voted for by Dems & Repubs, was mostly democratic legislature. DHS received 1.2 Billion to fund the wall that was never built. Where is that money? So why was this already planned in, voted for, funded but not built wall, used to agitate the people, to cause delusions of who was doing what, etc?
“This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform."
- President George W. Bush, 10/26/06
Today, President Bush Signed The Secure Fence Act - An Important Step Forward In Our Nation's Efforts To Control Our Borders And Reform Our Immigration System. Earlier this year, the President laid out a strategy for comprehensive immigration reform. The Secure Fence Act is one part of this reform, and the President will work with Congress to finish the job and pass the remaining elements of this strategy.
The Secure Fence Act Builds On Progress Securing The Border.
(end quote)
Re:
"Because in his view the public is only composed by white, conservative, Christian people"
I have not seen that. Can you list some areas where Trump has done this?
Actually, he can end it by requiring ALL who serve within our government to follow the supreme contract that they are all bound by in writing, by Oath.
You sound as if you are one of those people who believe that the USA is a "democracy". It is not, never has been one, will never be one. The USA, America, is a constitutional republic with all the duties and authority of those who serve within our governments - state and federal - are in writing for all to know and see IF they would only read.
"A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority." Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.
"The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres." Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.
"The constitution of a state is stable and permanent, not to be worked upon the temper of the times, not to rise and fall with the tide of events. Notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immoveable, as a mountain amidst the strife and storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves." Vanhorne v. Dorrance, supra.
Re: Re:
"There used to be slavery in the States..."
You have it wrong. "There used to be slavery in the known WORLD..." would be more appropriate. When one says it like the way you did, it is used to sound like ONLY America had slavery, when it used to be a way of life in the world then.
Michael LeMieux: “The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs.”
The Trump Administration will be a law and order administration."
President Trump will a "law and order administration" only if he and his administration follow the US Constitution. Why?
Because the US Constitution defines our governments - state and federal; it assigns the delegated authorities/powers to the different BRANCHES and to OFFICES within a branch - not to any person or group of people. Those that serve within our state and federal governments are under that/those contract(s). Here under our LEGITIMATE government there are no such things as "emergency powers", "martial law", "assassination powers" (First Degree Murder powers). Those exist only in other nations.
IF they cannot do their job as the supreme and highest (state - if applicable) contracts requires of them then they need to look for another profession, because - as with any job contract - then they cannot do the job. There is no complaint when they are fired for breaking the LOWEST contract they are under, the one with whatever enforcement they signed on to - it is expected.
To make the supreme and highest contracts lawfully stronger, those who serve within our governments are REQUIRED to take an Oath to support and defend the US Constitution (and their own state's Constitution) before the orders of superiors and the duties of the position they occupy (Those who serve as US Presidents are held to a higher standard of Preserving, Protecting and Defending the US Constitution).
Breaking the Oath(s) are a felony and the crime of Perjury, and those that serve knew this, or should have, going into the governmental position.
If President Trump says yes to those who are working to destroy our nation from within (Yes, THAT is exactly what those requests are for), then we need to remove him, and those who were doing the asking.
Ask yourself this, Does the job you are working for let you rewrite your work contract, give yourself raises, decide what duties you will do and not do? Neither does our supreme LAW (another law they will be breaking, and if also state job, then 2 more LAWS they will be breaking))
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor: “The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of States for the benefit of the States or state governments as abstract political entities, or even for the benefit of the public officials governing the States. To the contrary, the Constitution divides authority between federal and state governments for the protection of individuals. State sovereignty is not just an end in itself: “Rather, federalism secures to citizens the liberties that derive from the diffusion of sovereign power.”
Mack and Printz v. United States: “The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The Federal Government’s power would be augmented immeasurably and impermissibly if it were able to impress into its service - and at no cost to itself - the police officers of the 50 States… Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself.”
Treason - Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States provides: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
*Terrorism: 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
If they are aiding in the destruction of our legitimate government by requiring that those who serve within our governments behave as if they are a tyrant or king, and since this is "enforcement" asking, force or the threat of force is always there in there official actions. By asking they are working to change our type of government from a constitutional republic in an unlawful and illegal way. (Yes, I know it has been done before, but that it continues is our fault.)
Color of law. The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241.
"Sixth, it's bullshit because the law Snowden would be prosecuted under does not allow motive as a defense."
Not if we remove our judges for NOT using "Good Behaviour" as constitutionally required. They are allowed to stay in for life as long as they use good behavior while serving. Good behavior is doing the duties as assigned by the US Constitution, and taking and KEEPING the Oath to support and defend the supreme law of our nation.
But that is up to the jurors, as it is their duty to decide on the law BEFORE deciding on the guilt of innocence, If the decision that the law is bad, then there can be no guilt or innocence to decide.
Since Snowden was KEEPING his Oath as is required of him - to support and defend the US Constitution - he committed no crime. Those trying to charge him are breaking their Oath which makes them no longer meet the requirements of the position being occupied; plus having committed a felony plus the crime of Perjury.
Trade Opinions
"Professor Colleen Chien (who advised the administration on intellectual property issues) and Quentin Palfrey (who worked for years in the Commerce Dept and the Office of Science and Technology Policy on intellectual property issues)... Trade policy should reflect our democratic ideals"
Not one person who has "advised" those who serve wtihin our government, or served within it themselves should be calling it a "democracy" or refer to "our democratic..." anything.
The problem they have, and most Americans have is that America is NOT a "democracy", nor has she ever been one, nor will she ever be one as long as I and others live. America is a Constitutional Republic, everything those that serve within our government must do, are forbidden to do, and are ALLOWED to do only under certain circumstances, etc is all in writing within the US Constitution and each state Constitution. Novel idea, huh?
Those are the contracts backed by those that serve at ALL levels of government required Oath that binds them to PERSONALLY support and defend the US Constitution, NOT any person who serves within our governments.
So if people who "advise" those who serve within our government, and those that actually serve within it do not understand that we are NOT a democracy and have, quite possibly, not even read the contract they are LAWFULLY oathbound to might be the problem we are having within our nation.
Worse is that the American people themselves have allowed the dumbing down of their knowledge of what our government is. They let those that SERVE WITHIN our government now tell us what the government OUR ancestors created is, what they can do or not do, and actually commit *Terrorism and Treason against the American people.
Ignorance is NOT bliss, as those who lived in Germany (Hitler), Russia (Stalin/Lenin, etc), China, etc learned to their grief
*28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.
Alexander Hamilton: “We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”
George Washington: "The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people."
James Madison, Federalist 39: "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." (It was established.)
Thomas Jefferson: “When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”
Abraham Lincoln: “We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution”
Benjamin Franklin: “In free governments the rulers are the servants, and the people their superiors and sovereigns. For the former, therefore, to return among the latter was not to degrade but to promote them.”
Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas: “Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.”
James Madison: “Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.”
Thomas Jefferson: “…To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps… The Constitution has erected no such tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots….”
Patrick Henry: “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.”