WHAT CONSTITUTION DID GEORGE WASHINGTON SWEAR TO “PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND”? ~ EDRIVERA.COM – United States America Organic Law Taxes Property Jurisdiction Constitution : EDRIVERA.COM
When Obamacare was recently affirmed many Americans assumed bad law was established as constitutional—that wrong had trumped right. In fact, as heirs to the constitutional history of Europe connnecting back to the earliest Greek and Roman thinkers and biblical writers, there is no compelling reason to accept an evil law.
It is the Western concept that claims a set of precepts exists above all human law which is used to model and judge our own temporary laws. In fact, one can argue persuasively that without the notion of good law above used to fight against evil laws, the West as we know it would have never evolved.
There’s a reason no one expected this decision.
It’s because it makes no sense.
SOME SURPRISING INSIGHTS REGARDING THE US CONSTITUTION, BY NUMEROUS AUTHORS…
SEE LINK BELOW…
Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it.
Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing.
Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process, Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State.
When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.
At the risk of breaking Godwin’s Law of the internets::
This is just creepy on the part of the obamites:
Only the Swastika is Missing
See Reader responses…
Could A County Grand Jury Investigate Its Congressman?| The Post & Email:
by Robert DeBeaux
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has said that the grand jury is separate from the other three branches of government and ‘a constitutional fixture in its own right.’ Could a county grand jury be convened to examine the evidence against the congressman who represents that county’s people?
(Jul. 29, 2011) — It has become evident that the Congress (Both the House of Representatives and the Senate, 435 members strong) are knowledgeable in the crimes of the usurper-in-chief’s illegal tenure in the People’s White House, and these elected buffoons consider themselves immune from any repercussions of the law or failure to uphold their Oaths to defend the Constitution.
They are wrong.
Every House member represents a district. They must live in that district (or maintain a residence). Therefore they are subject to the Grand Jury of the county they reside in. That is where you put legal pressure on them. The Fifth Amendment gives the Grand Jury “Presentment” authority totally separate from the Indictment process the prosecutor holds.
This procedure is cemented not only in common law but Justice Scalia in 1992 with his infamous ruling about the Grand Juries decreed:”
Posted by Gunny G at Friday, July 29, 2011
“In a free society, government reflects the soul of its people. If people want change at the top, they will have to live in different ways. Our major social problems are not the cause of our decadence. They are a reflection of it.” — Cal Thomas
You’ve undoubtedly heard the old wives’ tale about frogs and boiling water. If you toss a frog into boiling water, he’ll immediately jump out — but supposedly, if you increase the temperature just a bit at a time, the frog will sit comfortably in the water until he’s cooked alive. Is that true? No. However, if you apply that story to the way that human beings behave, there’s a lot of truth to it. The world is extraordinarily complex and human beings are remarkably adaptable; so it’s entirely possible that if changes are incremental enough, people will adjust to “the way the world is” without truly examining the size of the shift that’s changed their world.
In the last few decades, our country has spiraled downward into decadence in ways that are genuinely threatening the continuance of the American Dream.
1) Our legal system is broken: There’s nothing just about our legal system anymore. Liberals have pushed the idea of a “living constitution,” which means nothing more than implementing left-wing policies and calling it constitutional law. Every constitutional case is now decided by the number of judges who still believe in the Constitution that happen to be on the bench for the trial. Laws are no longer applied equally either. If the people running the government don’t like certain laws, say against illegal immigration, they simply refuse to enforce it.
Getting beyond that, because lawyers have become a corrupt parasitic class in America, innocent people can be crushed by the cost of defending themselves in court, even if
Gunny G: U. S. Constitution Apparently NOT All It’s Cracked Up To Be?….
Nullify Obamacare »
THE STATES HAVE THE POWER OF SOVEREIGNTY by Bob Serrao (May 8, 2011) —
May 8 2011 /
No comment /
Read More »
The Liberal interpretation of the Constitution revealed
THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | 08/05/2010 | J.D. Thorpe
Posted on Thursday, May 05, 2011 3:38:59 PM by hope_dies_last
In a town hall on July 24, California Congressman Pete Stark gave us a revealing look into the mind of a liberal. He made the following statement regarding the Constitution, “I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life.”
When liberals are asked about their interpretation of the Constitution, they generally are not as truthful as Congressman Stark. They tend to respond with ambiguous rhetoric about a “living Constitution.” The basic idea follows that the Constitution naturally adapts to changing conditions over time.
This definition is their way of avoiding the fact that they do not believe in adhering to the Constitution as it is written or pursuing the correct steps for amending it.
The Liberal philosophy uses the “living Constitution” concept to legitimate any usurpation of power from the people.
When liberals want to pass a piece of legislation that is not permitted under the Constitution, they spuriously use the General Welfare Clause as their justification. Using this method, they claim that healthcare, a living wage, and even owning a home are constitutional “rights.” This thoroughly distorts the original intent of the Founding Fathers.
Read more at:
Gunny G: GLOBE AND ANCHOR WEBLOG ~ “CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret) to U.S. Army: “Expose the True Traitor to our Constitution” »”
CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret) to U.S. Army: “Expose the True Traitor to our Constitution” »
A new day is emerging and it’s called America’s Second Revolution where the Constitution is, once again, the law of the land. No more free ride, no more anchor babies, no more collecting welfare without doing something for it (school crossing guard, picking up litter, etc.), no more showing up for a government job to just sit around and talk about pensions, and no more people allowed across our borders whose aim is to implement Sharia Law.
No more foreign aid to countries that do not support us. Not one cent of protection money to any Muslim country. No more training foreign troops in our military just so they can go back home to fight us. And as far as manufacturers of weapons here in the U.S.A., the free ride is over. You will fill out every export form, cross every ’t’ and dot every ‘i’. You will not be selling even one B.B. to any Muslim country.
Our state leaders are really stepping up to the plate under the realization that those in the federal government cannot be relied upon to follow or uphold the United States Constitution, so the state leaders are taking action to do so themselves.
We’re seeing flurries of legislation at the state level that seek to uphold our country’s immigration laws. We’re also seeing states challenge the unconstitutional federal health care deform law, as well as states proposing anti-Shariah legislation to prevent the spread of unconstitutional Islamic Shariah law in America.We’re also……………………..
Judge Andrew Napolitano on Chaotic Courts and ‘Unconstitutional’ Justice in the United States: Interview with Scott Smith
Judge Andrew Napolitano on Chaotic Courts and ‘Unconstitutional’ Justice in the United StatesInterview with Scott Smith
The Daily Bell is pleased to present an exclusive interview with Judge Andrew P. Napolitano.Introduction: Judge Andrew P. Napolitano joined FOX News Channel FNC in January 1998 and currently serves as the senior judicial analyst.
He provides legal analysis on both FNC and FOX Business Network FBN. He is also a fill in co-host for “FOX & Friends” regularly and co-hosts FOX News Radio’s Brian and The Judge show daily and is host of FreedomWatch on Foxnews.com. Judge Napolitano is the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey. While on the bench from 1987 to 1995, Judge Napolitano tried more than 150 jury trials and sat in all parts of the Superior Court – criminal, civil, equity and family.
He has handled thousands of sentencings, motions, hearings and divorces. For 11 years, he served as an adjunct professor of constitutional law at Seton Hall Law School, where he provided instruction in constitutional law and jurisprudence. Judge Napolitano returned to private law practice in 1995 and began television broadcasting in the same year. Judge Napolitano has written five books: Constitutional Chaos:
What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws; a New York Times bestseller, The Constitution in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law of the Land; A Nation of Sheep; Dred Scott’s Revenge: A Legal History of Race and Freedom in America; and his most recent book is another New York Times bestseller, Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power and Deception in American History.
We have been waiting for nearly two years for someone with authority in this country to take some responsibility for answering questions that are of the utmost importance to determine if we are a legitimate nation, under God, with law and order or are we a shiftless, drifting, wayward vessel of more than Three Hundred Million citizens that lacks the rudder and steering necessary to conduct daily legal transactions and can speak the truth?Up to this date, we have been the latter irresponsible ship of state without conscience or the necessary leaders capable of standing straight and handing down a direct decision of constitutionally accepted verity.
IOW in other words, as they say on the Internet, a bunch of spineless, truth-less, unprincipled butt-protectors reluctant to hand down a directruling that might place their jobs in jeopardy.It’s not as if someone would be required to rule on whether or not Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is factually correct or whether homosexuality is abefore or after birth affliction or abnormality.
No, those examples are particularly stressful to someone charged with ruling on them; all of what the American people are looking for in this instance is a final judicial determination as to whether or not the current occupant of the Office of President of the United States is legally qualified to serve in that office pursuant to the terms of the United States Constitution.
We didn’t stand up for truth, we didn’t stand up for the Constitution, we didn’t stand up for the rule of law. And now the day of reckoning is upon us. Please, prepare.
HOW HAS THE JUDICIAL BRANCH BECOME SO POWERFUL?by JB WilliamsThe third branch of government was intended to be kept in check by the other three, which includes “We the People“Nov. 5, 2010 — When running down the laundry list of modern threats to freedom and liberty in America, atop that list is the corrupt and anti-constitution nature of today’s judicial branch.
Without a genuine respect for the rule of law and reverence for the supreme law of this land inside the judicial branch, JFK is right – an absence of peaceful solutions will always result in violent revolution.When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. – Thomas Jefferson
“INVESTIGATIVE SUBPOENA” LAW GAVE THE POWER TO PROSECUTORS AND JUDGES
by Sharon Rondeau
Michigan became part of the United States in 1837Oct. 30, 2010 — During the last several months, The Post & Email has been focusing on the absence or corruption of grand juries at the county and state level throughout the country. Here a resident of the state of Michigan describes how he attempted to obtain a grand jury hearing in 2009 and discovered that there had not been a grand jury convened in his county for more than a decade due to the passage of the “Investigative Subpoena” statute by the Michigan legislature in 1996.An article from a 2002 Michigan Law Review provides a description of the Investigative Subpoena statute’s purpose and function as compared to the “grand jury” method of investigation:…Michigan does have some archaic grand jury statutes still on the books-statutes which are rarely utilized because they are cumbersome, expensive and require extensive judicial involvement.
However, in 1995, the Michigan Legislature passes [sic] the Investigational Subpoena law that became effective on January 1, 1996. This law has given prosecutors and police a tremendous new ability to solve some of the most difficult crimes, by expanding their pre-charging powers, while retaining many of the protections of the old grand jury laws, insuring both judicial scrutiny, and individual rights.
In a decision that reads more like leftist talking points than a judgment based upon any true and sound legal determination based upon the US Constitution, Clinton appointed “Judge” George C. Steeh has ruled that the commerce clause gives the federal government the “right” to compel any and all citizens whom it wishes and to buy any and all demanded products whether they want them or not.
In other words, the Marxist Judge Steeh has ruled that the US Constitution no longer precludes slavery of its citizens. [snip]
What if the president had to hand-write a copy of the Constitution before he took office?That’s the question Dr. David Corbin and Dr. Matthew Parks of The King’s College-New York City are asking. Corbin is an associate professor of politics, while Parks is the assistant provost.According to them, the presidential oath “to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States” is one that should be taken very seriously.
But “you can’t do this if you don’t know the Constitution or aren’t willing to submit to it,” they say.So, in a blog post on the First Things website, Corbin and Parks reveal a proposal that “each 2012 presidential candidate … adopt the ‘Constitution Pledge,’ promising to present a hand-written copy of the Constitution to the Chief Justice as he rises to take the oath of office.”“We’re constantly looking for reminders of just what it is that makes America exceptional,” Corbin told The Blaze. “And our constitution is one of those things.”
But presidents today are too preoccupied with “big things” such as sweeping reforms, he says. Rather than focus on grand projects that may or may not fail, he would rather future presidents understand their job description. The president’s, he says, is “ready made” in the Constitution.“And how would we know that you understand the job description [of president]?” Corbin asks, “By you reading and writing it down.”
The idea of the pledge is based on two examples: a biblical one and an historical one. The biblical passage of Deuteronomy 17:18-20, which instructs new kings to transcribe a copy of the law and keep it with him “all the days of his life,” was part of the impetus.
Laws of War to Rules of Law or the Old Switch-A-Roo!“The purpose of military law is to promote justice, to assist in maintaining good order and discipline in the armed forces, to promote efficiency and effectiveness in the military establishment, and thereby to strengthen the national security of the United States.” – Preamble of the UCMJExcerpt Read more at warchronicle.com …
(Post By Retired U.S. Marine)
excerpt ~ continues @ links/see many responses…
DIRECT GOVERNMENT PUNISHMENT ABSENT JURY APPROVAL IS “ATTAINDER”
by Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III,
Have Articles of War replaced the U.S. Constitution?Sept. 5, 2010 — Saint Crispin’s Day 2006“Today, you are the law!”So begins Frank Galvin’s summation to the jury in the movie The Verdict. Galvin’s narration laconically illustrates to citizens in the jury box that their participation, inspection, deliberation, and approval of government action defines the rule of law. More to the point Galvin’s succinct charter defines the rule and role of citizen juries.The scales of justice in criminal proceedings balance the interests of the state against the rights and interests of citizens. In peacetime jurors do the assaying.In time of WAR large letters, the rules change.
The first casualty of WAR is the jury. Truth’s survival is irrelevant.Juries are silent in time of WAR inter arma leges silent.
EXCERPT ~ CONTINUES @ LINK…
The thing about having a lawyer as president is he or she, if unscrupulous, will manipulate the law according to his or her own personal philosophy instead of upholding original intent of the law. Why because legal training teaches them all things are relative and values have no meaning.
That’s why the president says the things he does about America and the constitution to which Americans scratch their heads in disbelieve and say, “I can’t believe he just said that!”Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are classic exemplars of this type of thinking. The Clintons known for the philosophy of “The Third Way” meaning not only was there a right and wrong or black and white but there was a third way that was equally as viable as the other two alternatives.
The Clintons were always parsing language and meaning because if words have no real intended meaning then one can, as they often did, arrive at any personal conclusion all depending on what you are will to accept the meaning of is—is.
Therefore, the Constitution is what a judge says it is, not what it was meant to be. That’s why Justice Elena Kagan was selected Nevertheless, we’ll talk about that in a moment.The latest assault on reason and constitutionality is the Barry Hussein Soetoro covert amnesty initiative. see story here and here
“HE WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A TRIER OF FACT”
by Sharon Rondeau
Nevada was recognized as a territory in 1861 and became a state in 1864Aug. 19, 2010
— Mr. Tim Fasano, candidate for U.S. Senate from Nevada, has updated The Post & Email on his request for a grand jury to investigate a criminal complaint he had filed against Churchill County Judge David A. Huff.
As a result of Mr. Fasano and his wife having become victims of a horrific crime, they have learned that a grand jury has not been convened in the county for more than 35 years. Our original report on Mr. Fasano’s ordeal and request for the convening of a grand jury is here.
EXCERPT ~ CONTINUES…