How to use Article V of our Constitution to move us into the North American Union 

By Publius Huldah

Article V convention supporters seem to think they are oh! so clever when they accuse those of us who oppose an Article V convention of “fear mongering”.

Well, I graduated from “fearfulness” long ago – now I’m in the HORROR stage: Under the North American Union (NAU), Canada, the United States, and Mexico merge and a Parliament is set up over them. This was President George W. Bush’s plan, cooked up during 2005 at his ranch in Texas with the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of Mexico.

But in order to set this up, they need a new Constitution which transforms the United States from a sovereign nation to a member state of the NAU.

How do they get the new Constitution? At an Article V convention.

How do they get an Article V convention? Tell the American People that at an Article V convention, they can get Amendments to our existing Constitution which will “limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government”.

And, as ordinary citizens who support an Article V convention give daily proof, such tactics work. People don’t think – they follow what popular people tell them, and then they repeat it as if they know all about it.  And they insult, revile and marginalize the people who do tell them the Truth (as they have been programmed by their Conditioners to do).

Americans don’t know that delegates to an Article V convention have “PLENIPOTENTIARY POWERS” and thus have the power (recognized in the 2nd paragraph of our Declaration of Independence) to throw off our present Constitution and establish a new one with a new (and easier) mode of ratification.

Americans don’t know that in Federalist Paper No. 40 (15th para), James Madison invoked this clause in the Declaration of Independence as justification for what they did at the federal convention of 1787:   Instead of proposing Amendments to the Articles of Confederation (as they had been instructed to do), they wrote an entirely new Constitution which created a new government.

Americans don’t know that because of these plenipotentiary powers, Delegates to an Article V convention can do whatever they want.  It doesn’t matter whether they were sent to the convention for “the sole and express purpose” of proposing a balanced budget amendment, or a term limits amendment, or a countermand amendment, or some other designated purpose – they are not bound by those spurious limitations.

Americans don’t know that “faithful delegates” laws are a joke: Not only do delegates have plenipotentiary powers and sovereign immunity for whatever they do; it is a simple matter to circumvent “faithful delegate” laws.

So that’s how a Constitutional Republic is destroyed and replaced by a global government.

You can read about the NAU here. Read the Task Force Report. Heidi Cruz was on the Task Force which wrote the report.…/building-north-american-community/p8102

Questions: Is Senator Ted Cruz in on this plan to move us into the NAU? Is Governor Greg Abbott of Texas in on this plan to move us into the NAU? Is Lt. Gov Dan Patrick of Texas in on this plan?

People! Your guides are leading you astray and are confusing the path you should take. You better start using your own heads – and you better start doing it today. We are close to having Congress call an Article V convention. You better get with your State Legislators and educate them about the dangers and give them the Facts.

If you continue to refuse to hear the Truth; and if you continue to revile those who do tell the Truth, then the blood of a great many people will be on your head.

Hell is just around the corner. Look at Western Europe – how has the EU worked out?  Americans better wise up now. Stop an Article V convention.  Tell your State legislators to rescind the applications for a convention your State has already passed; and tell them not to pass any more applications.  For an unofficial list (by State) of applications to Congress which have already been passed, go HERE. 

Update June23, 2017:  The CFR has since removed the Task Force Report from their website.  Now, one must purchase a copy.  It’s on Amazon.

Source: How to use Article V of our Constitution to move us into the North American Union « Publius-Huldah’s Blog

Posted in Article V Convention, Constitution | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Article V Convention: NC General Assembly Doubling Back in the Wrong Direction | Beaufort County Now

Published: Wednesday, July 5th, 2017 @ 12:51 am
By: Publius Huldah 

On June 29, 2017 the North Carolina House voted against SJR 36, the COS application for an Article V convention. The vote was 59 against; and 53 for.

But a few hours later, COS and the Republican leadership got the members to vote to “reconsider” their vote against SJR 36 (66 to reconsider – 45 opposed). So they brought SJR 36 back to life and sent it to the House Rules Committee. There it will sit until COS and Republican leadership twist enough arms and pressure more House Republicans to vote for it.

[Below I use “Left” to describe those who want big government;

and “Right” to describe those who want small government.]

It has always been the Big Money on the Left which wants an Article V convention so they can get rid of the Constitution we have and impose a new one. Some 50+ years ago, the Left came up with the proposed Constitution for the Newstates of America. Under this proposed Constitution, the States are dissolved and replaced by regional governments answerable to the new national government. It sets up a totalitarian dictatorship under which (among other things) we will be disarmed. It is ratified by a national referendum.

It has always been the Right which resisted the periodic pushes for an Article V convention. The Right understands that delegates to an Article V convention have plenipotentiary powers and can exercise [once again] that “self-evident right” recognized in the 2nd para of our Declaration of Independence, to throw off the Constitution we have and set up a new one which creates a new government.

So the Left changed clothes and changed tactics. Now, they are pretending to be “Right” and they are marketing the con to Republicans. Many of our State Legislators are jaw-droppingly ignorant of our two Founding Documents. And too many Republican Legislators believe whatever the fake “Right” con-con lobby tells them.

Much confusion has been caused by the false claims that those supporting the con-con are “Libertarian”, “right-wing”, or “conservatives”. We know that the Koch Brothers on the fake “Right”, among others, are spending vast sums of money to buy Republican politicians to get them to support an Article V convention. See, e.g., THIS.

Many Republican Legislators, who don’t understand our Founding Principles and Founding Documents, go by the labels which others assign. And since they are told that an Article V convention is the “conservative” position, they go along with it.

So Republican State Legislators who have been bought and paid for by the fake “Right”, or who go along with their Leadership, are the ones today who are doing the work of the Left by passing applications for an Article V convention. Most of them have no idea of the dangers. In some States (North Carolina), the Republican leadership prohibits their members from hearing voices in opposition at Committee meetings.

SJR 36 passed North Carolina Senate Committees with no public notice given of the Committee meetings. So the voices in opposition were not heard. After SJR 36 passed the Senate committees it was rushed to the Senate floor for a vote.

At the hearing on June 28 before the North Carolina House Judiciary Committee IV, the sponsors of SJR 36 were given all the time they wanted to speak for SJR 36; but our Friend, Wynne Coleman of NoCOS-NC, was only allowed one (1) minute to speak in opposition; and the Chairman of the Committee would not allow her to distribute to the Committee Members the documentation she had prepared for them. One Legislator who opposed was also given only one (1) minute. And that was it for the opposition at this “public” hearing.

I suggest that the reason the bought and paid for State Republican Legislators prohibit voices in opposition from being heard is that they know that when Legislators are given the TRUTH, they generally oppose an Article V convention.

We are in imminent peril of losing our Constitution. It seems that what the Fake “Right” now wants is to move us into the North American Union (NAU). Under the NAU, Canada, the United States, and Mexico basically merge, and a Parliament is set up over them. The borders between the three countries are to be effectively erased. I have read the Task Force Report on the NAU sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations. The globalists (fake “conservatives” George W. Bush, the Cruzes, etc.) need a new Constitution for the United States which transforms us from a sovereign nation to a member state of the NAU. How do they get a new Constitution? At an Article V convention. How do they get an Article V convention? By lying to the American People and to State Legislators, and by preventing voices in opposition from being heard.

See THIS short commentary on the NAU.

I suggest we better make defeating an Article V convention a primary focus of our lives.

Please get with your State Legislators and educate them. Warn those in your spheres of influence. We must get States to rescind their existing applications for an Article V convention. This past legislative session, three States (Maryland, New Mexico, Nevada) rescinded their outstanding applications for an Article V convention! That took lots of work by many people.

If you want to know what America will look like once the Parliament for the NAU takes control of immigration, look at Europe. And pray that you aren’t disarmed under the new Constitution.

Fight this evil.

Source: Article V Convention: NC General Assembly Doubling Back in the Wrong Direction | Beaufort County Now

Publius Huldah added in comments:

“…my concern is not with any Amendments which could be proposed at an Article V convention. My concern is that the Delegates will almost certainly invoke that “self-evident right” claimed in the 2nd paragraph of our Declaration of Independence to throw off the Constitution we have and set up a new Constitution (with a new mode of ratification) which creates an entirely new government.

That is what the delegates to the federal convention of 1787 did. Even though their instructions from the Continental Congress and their States were to propose Amendments to the Articles of Confederation (our First Constitution), the Delegates ignored their instructions and drafted a new Constitution which created a new government.

Furthermore, the new Constitution had a new [and easier] mode of ratification: Whereas the Articles of Confederation required that Amendments to the Articles be approved by the Continental Congress and ALL of the then 13 States; the new Constitution provided at Article VII thereof that it would be ratified by only 9 States.

And in Federalist Paper No. 40 (15th para), James Madison, Father of our Constitution) specifically invoked this “self-evident right” to throw off one government and set up a new one – as justification for what they did at the federal “amendments” convention of 1787.

The Left is well aware of this! It’s the Right who stuck their heads in the sand. The Leftists’ proposed Constitution for the NewStates of America is ratified by a National Referendum. All they need to get their Constitution in place is an Article V convention where it can be proposed. And it will be easy to get it ratified: whoever controls the voting machines will determine the outcome.

So George Soros and the Marxists have the progressive Constitution they want in place by the year 2020; and the globalist Bush/Cruz/Council on Foreign Relations/Koch Brothers?/ conspirators need a new Constitution to move us into the North American Union.

Everyone on the Left and the phony “Right” is well aware of this!

But they don’t want Republican Legislators to know it. That’s why they push for hearings on applications for an Article V convention with no public notice – or limit opposition speakers to 1 or 2 minutes. That’s why they smear and revile the honest Patriots who tell the truth and prove it.”

Posted in Article V Convention, Constitution | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Repeal Unconstitutional Federal Gun Laws – Don’t Add to Them! ⋆ The Constitution

By Publius Huldah  July 3, 2017

“If the central government has the authority to tell a state it must accept permits from all the other states, then it also has the authority to tell a state it may not accept a concealed permit from any other states. If the central government can do these things it can set up a national concealed carry permit scheme and in essence bring into existence a national arms registry. That is exactly where this is headed.” Attorney Richard D. Fry 1

Some are touting the federal Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (HR 38) as a bill which would expand our right to carry. But if you will walk with me for a few minutes, I’ll show you a better path to take.

Let us look at the applicable First Principles, to which I propose we return.

1. Gun control is not an enumerated power delegated to the federal government

Our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large 2 to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment.

The only power the federal government has over the Country at Large respecting arms is set forth at Article I, §8, clause 16 with respect to providing for the “organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia”. Pursuant to this clause, Congress passed the Militia Act of 1792which required every able-bodied male citizen (with a few exceptions) between the ages of 18 and 45 to acquire a rifle, bayonet, ammo, ammo pouch, and report to his local Militia Unit for training. 3

2. What does your State Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms?

Each State has its own Constitution which addresses its State Militia and the right to be armed.

Now listen: No State may lawfully make any law which contradicts its State Constitution orwhich interferes with Congress’ power to “organize, arm, and discipline, the Militia”.

Accordingly, any State Statute which purports to require a permit before one may carry a gun is probably unconstitutional under that State’s Constitution; and is certainly unconstitutional under the federal Constitution because Congress may lawfully require able-bodied male Citizens to acquire firearms and ammo and report to their local Militia Unit for training!

Do you see?

Now let’s look at Title 18, US Code, Part I, Chapter 44, which HR 38 proposes to amend.

3. Title 18, US Code, Part I, Chapter 44 is unconstitutional

It sets up a complex federal regulatory scheme over firearms, every word of which is unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated, and as in violation of the Second Amendment.

HERE it is, look through it (§§ 921-931).

4. What HR 38 actually does

HR 38 proposes to amend this existing federal regulatory scheme to insert a new provision [to be § 926 D] to require States which have a statute which permits residents of their State to apply for a permit [!] to carry a concealed firearm

to allow persons from other States:

· who aren’t prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms [!]; and

· who are carrying a photographic ID issued by a government body [!]; and

· who are carrying a concealed carry license or permit from the other State [!],

to possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or “destructive device”) which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

So! Even though a State Constitution, such as that for Connecticut, 4 prohibits the State Legislature from making ANY laws restricting firearms (such as imposing requirements for registration, a permit, government issued photo ID), a Citizen of Connecticut who exercises his constitutionally recognized right to carry without registration or a permit or a government issued photo ID, wouldn’t qualify under HR 38 for concealed carry in another State.

To qualify for concealed carry in other States, the Citizen of Connecticut would need his State Legislature to pass a law [which is unconstitutional under the Connecticut and federal Constitutions], so that he could comply with an unconstitutional federal statute [HR 38], so that he could carry in other States which also would have to pass unconstitutional laws imposing permit requirements on those who carry concealed.

Do you see how a God-given right [self-defense] is thus converted into a privilege which is regulated, granted, or denied, by civil government?

HR 38 also provides that any person carrying a concealed handgun in a State under the reciprocity provisions may also carry concealed in the public parts of National Parks and certain other lands under federal control. Lest you think this a gain, consider that: (1) The Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to operate national parks and such like, and (2) the federal government has no lawful authority to impose registration requirements for carrying arms anywhere!

5. What’s the solution?

Read our Declaration of Independence and federal Constitution. Then you won’t fall for unconstitutional gimmicks like HR 38.

The gun rights organizations could perform valuable services to our Country by working for:

· the repeal of the entire unconstitutional federal regulatory scheme respecting arms;

· the repeal of all unconstitutional State regulatory schemes;

· the revitalization of the State Militia to replace the federally controlled National Guard; 5 and

· by providing more classes for Citizens in arms training.

And please stop lobbying for unconstitutional federal legislation!


1 From the late Attorney Richard D. Fry’s email of Dec. 10, 2015 to US Senator Moran, a co-sponsor of SB 498, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015. Richard, who was my Friend, sent me a copy of his letter.

Pursuant to Article I, § 8, next to last clause, Congress has general legislative powers over the District of Columbia, military bases, dock yards, mints, federal courthouses and post offices, and such other places needed for Congress to exercise its enumerated powers. The exercise of such powers by Congress over these small federal enclaves is restricted by the Bill of Rights – including the 2nd Amendment. So Congress is prohibited from making, for these federal enclaves, any laws which infringe the Right of The People to keep and bear Arms. Congress may properly require individuals visiting federal prisons, the psych ward of military hospitals, the mint, federal courthouses, and such like, to leave their arms in their vehicles. But Congress may not require Citizens to obtain and carry a permit or photo ID as a condition precedent to carrying a firearm.

3 The “Militia of the several States” were creatures of State Statutes – not of the federal government. Dr. Edwin Vieira’s short video shows how the State Militia were replaced by the federally controlled National Guard.

4 The Constitution of the State of Connecticut says at Article I: “SEC. 15. Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.”

5 See A SERIOUS QUESTION FOR THE NRA, by Dr. Edwin Vieira, re revitalization of the Militia of the several States.

Source: Repeal Unconstitutional Federal Gun Laws – Don’t Add to Them! ⋆ The Constitution

Posted in Constitution, gun control | Tagged | Leave a comment

Feminism, Children and the Future

There is a fanatical element to leftist ideologues. As illustrated in the article, they display an almost suicidal devotion to their dogma. The leftist cultural current infecting the Western world promotes anger, outrage, and confrontation and rejects rational discussion. Leftists don’t have workable or rational solutions to the issues they see as problematic; they don’t build, they tear down. God help us all if they should ever really gain power; demolition is their only skill.

Aussie Conservative Blog

fem.jpgSydney Traditionalist Society, August 20, 2016:

During World War I, Serbia had the most casualties of any country as a percentage of the population; between 16.67% to 27.78%.1 This meant that subsequently there was a very real man shortage in Serbia. In the movie Tears for Sale by Uroš Stojanović,2 a group of women from a Serbian village leave in order to find husbands. After viewing the movie, a female professor with whom I am acquainted said that she found the topic abhorrent. Men are just not that important and penises are nothing to be obsessed about. When it was pointed out to her that what the women were doing was necessary for the survival of the village, the professor said that this was irrelevant and unimportant.

This seems to be an instance of ideology overriding the question of basic survival. The implication is that the death of…

View original post 1,942 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

News With Views | Legal Audacity Is The Answer To Political Aggression

Since his inauguration, President Trump has assumed an all-too-reactive and -defensive posture vis-à-vis his political enemies. He seems quite unable to foresee, let alone to forestall, forfend, or even fashion an adequate response to his opponents’ next moves, no matter how pellucidly predictable they may be. Rather, he suffers his antagonists to strike at will, whenever and wherever an opportunity to make mischief presents itself. For example—

  • They float knowingly false “leaks”, defamatory stories, and innuendoes in the big “mainstream media”, not simply to ridicule and embarrass him personally (along with members of his Administration and even his immediate family), but also (and of greater consequence) to undermine his prestige and standing as President amongst the American people.
  • They file frivolous lawsuits aimed at providing rogue judges with legalistic rationalizations to deny, defeat, frustrate, and impede the exercise of his undoubted statutory (and as the agent of Congress, constitutional) Presidential powers, while he meekly acquiesces in the courts’ assertion of “judicial supremacy”.
  • They impugn both him and his Administration with spurious scandals, tying up the Office of President in interminable “investigations”, in comparison with which the Salem witch-trials appear as models of rational deportment and due process.
  • They charge him personally, as well as leading members of his Administration, with specious violations of plainly inapplicable criminal laws.
  • They agitate for his removal from the Office of President through “Impeachment for, and Conviction of, * * * high Crimes and Misdemeanors”under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution, or on the grounds that he is otherwise “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” under Section 4 of the Twenty-fifth Amendment.
  • In various public fora they openly threaten him with assassination, and contend that his homicidal elimination—and that of other officeholders who take his part—would be justified. And
  • They unleash fanatical “anti-fascists” and other maniacal thugs from the neo-Bolshevist Rotenfrontkämpferbund verbally to harass and even physically to assault his supporters in the streets and on college campuses.

All of this is obviously intended to instill in Mr. Trump confusion, uncertainty, indecision, self-doubt, and pessimism sufficient to dissuade and disable him from effectively exercising the authority of the Office of President with which the Constitution and other laws of the United States invest him.

These goings-on have been so concatenated, coördinated, and concerted in character as to indicate the operation of a common plan. And this plan is plain enough. Mr. Trump’s enemies are not engaged simply in an extreme version of “monkey business as usual” in the District of Columbia’s political zoo. Neither are they primarily concerned with figuratively handing Mr. Trump his Presidential head on a platter, as a warning to other potential interlopers who might presume to trespass on the territory the “good old boy” hierarchs of the Democratic and Republican parties have long reserved unto themselves. Nor is their chief purpose to destroy Mr. Trump as an individual (although they apparently do detest him). Rather, their target is the Office of President itself insofar as anyone elected to that position might dare to exercise its powers in the interest of the Deplorables and other patriotic Americans. By intimidating Mr. Trump into reneging upon the plans for reform which he has promised Americans, and into becoming its compliant puppet or political eunuch (if he cannot be eliminated in some other way), the Deep State is perfecting “the small solution” for serial “régime change” in this country—the specific operation of “Presidential emasculation”, as opposed to a seditious overthrow of the General Government as a whole—which can be applied to each and every future President who sides with the Deplorables against the Deep State. The point is to demonstrate to the Deplorables that, even if somehow against all odds they can succeed in putting their own man into the Office of President, they still cannot prevail. Ever.

In response to this political aggression, to date Mr. Trump seems strangely satisfied with publishing “tweets”, as if he were merely the victim of some college fraternity’s juvenile hazing, to which he imagined that what he considered to be snappy verbal comebacks in the most juvenile of the Internet’s juvenile fora could provide sufficient answers. Although this may be a method for him to “go over the head” of “the mainstream media” by addressing the American people directly, it will hardly prove to be effective, even if Mr. Trump pillories the Deep State in no uncertain terms, because mere harsh phrases bounce off the Deep State’s case-hardened carapace as readily as cold water flows off a duck’s oily back. No, indeed—if he intends to break the Deep State’s bones before it breaks his own neck, Mr. Trump must employ sticks and stones, not just words. So, as always, the question becomes, “Now what?”

A set of acts so concatenated, coördinated, and concerted in character as to indicate the operation of a common plan aimed at an illegal goal through the use of illegal (and, in some cases, even legal) means is properly termed a conspiracy, and the perpetrators are properly denoted conspirators. This is not “conspiracy theory”, but conspiracy law (or the law of conspiracy). The political aggression against President Trump has been so notorious that the various “law-enforcement” and “intelligence” agencies of the General Government—with their vaunted methods of surveillance, infiltration, computerized analysis of data, and so on—should be able to identify not only the illegal means being employed but also the primary malefactors employing them, including both the miscreants brazenly operating in the open and (of far greater consequence) the instigators, financiers, and other string-pullers manipulating events from behind the scenes. (If not, Mr. Trump can invoke for that purpose the sweeping powers statutorily delegated to him under 10 U.S.C. §§ 252 and 253.) Moreover, one need not hire a $1,000-an-hour big-city attorney to find at least one statute which applies in this situation.

Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 241 provides in pertinent part that

[i]f two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States * * *

[t]hey shall be fined * * * or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section * * * , they shall be fined * * * or imprisoned * * * for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Observe that this statute protects “any person * * * in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States” in any respect. Moreover, for it to come into play, no actual deprivation of “any [such] right or privilege secured” need have occurred. A conspiracy aimed at any such deprivation, together with the commission of some overt act in furtherance thereof, suffices. As well it should: “For two or more to confederate and combine together to commit or cause to be committed a breach of the criminal laws, is an offense of the gravest character, sometimes quite outweighing, in injury to the public, the mere commission of the contemplated crime. It involves deliberate plotting to subvert the laws, educating and preparing the conspirators for further and habitual criminal practices. And it is characterized by secrecy, rendering it difficult of detection, requiring more time for its discovery, and adding to the importance of punishing it when discovered.” United States v. Rabinowich, 238 U.S. 78, 88 (1915).

As to deprivations of certain rights or privileges, private parties can be charged even without the involvement of rogue public officials in their wrongdoing, See United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757-760 (opinion of the Court), 775-784 (opinion of Brennan, J.) (1966). But private individuals are certainly liable as to deprivations of any and all such rights or privileges when they collude with such officials. United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787, 794, 795, 798 (1966). And in this case rightly so: For various puppet masters and their mouthpieces in private station are doubtlessly as much instigators, initiators, promoters, and planners of, and otherwise accessories to, the attacks against President Trump as are their co-conspirators among rogue officials and employees in the Deep State’s governmental apparatus. So, inasmuch as rogue public officials “participate[ ] in every phase of the * * * venture”, and “[i]t [i]s a joint activity, from start to finish”, “[t]hose [private parties] who t[ake] advantage of the foul purpose must suffer the consequences of that participation”, even to the extent of being punished as principals. Compare id. at 795 with 18 U.S.C. § 2.

Now apply 18 U.S.C. § 241 specifically to the President:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate [Mr. Trump] in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States [specifically in his capacity as the President of the United States] * * *

[t]hey shall be fined * * * or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section * * * , they shall be fined * * * or imprisoned * * * for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

(Inclusion of the part of this statute referring to the death penalty is not an exercise in hyperbole, either. For example, was Mr. Seth Rich’s murder one of the “results from the acts committed in violation of this section”? Only a thoroughgoing and uncompromising criminal investigation—not a Vince Fosteresque whitewashing of the case—can determine what the facts, and who the culprits, really are.)

As President, Mr. Trump is entitled to numerous “right[s] or privilege[s] secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States” in relation to that office. And “two or more persons” are now engaged in a complex of acts incontestably intended “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate [him] in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in [his] free exercise or enjoyment of [those very] right[s] or privilege[s]”. Indeed, those “persons” are bending their every evil effort in every “State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District”, not only to nullify or frustrate Mr. Trump’s exercise of “the executive Power” vested in him by the Constitution, but even to deprive him altogether of the right to “hold his Office during the Term of four Years” to which he has been elected pursuant to the Constitution. See U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 1. Therefore, Mr. Trump could enforce 18 U.S.C. § 241 against those individuals right now—and, besides having a personal interest in the matter, is bound in legal duty to do so. See U.S. Const. art. II, § 3 and, e.g., 18 U.S.C. §§ 3 and 4.

One must wonder, then, why Mr. Trump has refrained from invoking that statute. If the present author—a simple resident of “the Canoe Capital of Virginia”—can figure it out, why have Mr. Trump’s high-profile lawyers not so advised him? Or, if they have, for what is he waiting? Why does he foolishly persist in fighting this battle on his enemies’ terms, on the ground they have chosen, with the worst of them sheltered from legal retaliation in some sort of political sanctuary, when the indictment of a few—or, better yet, a few dozen—of the conspirators would transform the situation radically in his, and the Deplorables’, favor?

The answer is not to be found in some quirk of legal procedure. No “independent counsel” need be installed to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 241. The Department of Justice already employs numerous ordinary prosecutors presumably fit for that purpose. And if none can be found there after all, Mr. Trump can invoke 10 U.S.C. §§ 252 and 253 in order to enlist the experienced and reliable people he needs.

So what is wanting? Apparently, only l’audace, encore l’audace, toujours l’audace.

© 2017 Edwin Vieira – All Rights Reserved

Source: News With Views | Legal Audacity Is The Answer To Political Aggression

Posted in Donald Trump, leftist bullying, liberal intolerance/persecution, Politics | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The (Disturbing/Dangerous) Parallels Between DHS & Nazi Germany’s Gestapo…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki | Adina Kutnicki

On its face, the comparison of a U.S. based agency to the infamous Gestapo appears off the walls. In fact, if the Radical-in-Chief was not at the helm, this American-Israeli would be in full agreement. Loony tunes.

However, the U.S. is saddled with the most revolutionary POTUS in U.S. history ( and that “science” is already settled, at least if one hues to patriotic leanings. The Constitution alike.

In this regard, a primary lesson was given comparing/linking socialism to Nazism – Most essentially, one has to recognize the Socialist-in-Chief’s ultimate goals, albeit through a more nuanced looking glass –

Once said lessons are learned, the next phase demands an ability to discern events swirling – some literally – overhead. As “mama Janet” (head of DHS) implements the orders of a revolutionary Commander-in-Chief, the expectation is that Americans will either “trust” (but not verify) that “Dear Leader” has their best interests at heart, or that patriots will remain frozen in place. Sort of like deer-in-headlights. Do patriots really want to get caught with their pants (figuratively, of course) down?

So, in order to internalize the thesis posited at the onset, a review of DHS’s “strange” pronouncements/actions is more than in order.

Now, does it seem prudent to politicize the main agency tasked with keeping the homeland safe, whatever ones political leanings? – .

Equally alarming, is the power given to Valerie Jarrett, a woman who is not only running the show, but whose communist and Islamist proclivities should preclude her from access to America’s power centers – …but that would necessitate a patriot steering the ship of state. Valerie’s fingerprints are embedded within DHS, and its Director is more than pleased to march in lock-step.

Back to the Black Hawks – …and onto the end game –

Extrapolating therein, does it seem to be overkill to compare DHS (under Obama) to the Nazi’s Gestapo?

‘Is the Department of Homeland Security Obama’s Gestapo?’

When Adolf Hitler made his rise to power, he established the Secret State Police in 1934, headed by Heinrich Himmler.  The German name for them is Geheime Staatspolizei.  Taking the bolded and underlined letters from the newly formed entity you get the more familiar term, Gestapo.

The role of the Gestapo was to spy on the German people and identify any and all opposition to Hitler’s Third Reich.  They were given full authority to investigate and report or suspect cases of criminal attacks against the Nazi Party along with cases of sabotage, espionage and treason.  What made them so deadly and sinister was that they were also given authority to act without any judicial oversight.  They became the prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner of anyone that stood in Hitler’s way.

The Gestapo was given a sizeable budget and access to all the weapons, ammunitions and spying devices they wanted.  Once they established their dark reputation, they used all of those devices and weapons far too frequently.  Within a few years, no one dared to say or do anything that might be considered critical of the Nazi Party and its leaders.  If they did, the Gestapo or its sister agency, the SS (Security Service) moved in and took care of the alleged problem.

Eighty years later, Barak Obama talks about creating a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, strong and as well-funded as the US military.  In 2008, Obama talked about his desire to create his civilian army, but many of the references to that speech have mysteriously disappeared.  However, WND posted the following clip of Obama’s admission:

Joseph Farah of WND also points out that the concept of a civilian national security force seems to be the idea of Robert Gates, then Secretary of Defense under President George W. Bush.  Using Gates’ idea for the civilian force, it was no surprise to some that Obama kept him on as his Secretary of Defense.

Under Obama’s supervision, the Department of Homeland Security has been purchasing thousands of assault weaponsover a billion rounds of ammunition, of which 450 million are hollow-points, bulletproof vests, riot gear, bullet-proof traffic stops and other equipment one would readily associate with an army.  Nearly 200,000 rounds of ammunition are specifically designed for sniper rifles.  There are also plans to place 30,000 drones in our skies to spy on us.

If that makes you nervous, the Obama administration has also given approval for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to purchase 46,000 rounds of .40 caliber hollow points.  Supposedly, they were purchased for NOAA’s Fisheries Office of Law Enforcement.

If the concept of a massive well-armed civilian national security force makes you nervous, consider the fact that Obama is currently tailoring the top military leaders to fit his agenda.  Those that say they are willing to shoot American citizens if ordered to, are being promoted and placed in positions of top leadership.  Those that won’t fire upon fellow Americans are being replaced by those that will shoot you and me.

If you look at the DHS website, you will see the following:

“The Department of Homeland Security has a vital mission: to secure the nation from the many threats we face. This requires the dedication of more than 240,000 employees in jobs that range from aviation and border security to emergency response, from cybersecurity analyst to chemical facility inspector. Our duties are wide-ranging, but our goal is clear – keeping America safe.”

Reading this carefully, I see that they believe it is their job to spy on every American in the name of national security.  Cybersecurity means they are monitoring our emails, web posts and internet searchers.  Aviation encompasses the 30,000 drones that they plan to fly overhead.

DHS also has oversight of ATF and the Border Patrol.  Although they fail to secure the border and protect Americans, it does give the DHS additional armed personnel already on the ground and awaiting instructions, and now they have plenty of ammunition for whatever those orders are.

Why else would Obama and the Democrats be pushing gun control legislation requiring every American to register their guns, be fingerprinted, photographed, and have a background check run on them?  They know that there are over 300 million guns in the hands of private citizens and they want to know where they all are so they can use their superior weaponry to confiscate our guns.

When you add everything up, it seems that the Department of Homeland Security is becoming Obama’s civilian national security force.  With the powers being given to them the weaponry and ammunition they have purchased, they are taking on many of the same aspects of Hitler’s Gestapo and Janet Napolitano may be the next Heinrich Himmler.

Need more proof? Here is something to cogitate over –

‘Obama Building A Personal Army At The Department Of Homeland Security’

FEBRUARY 7, 2013 BY  

General Obama Forward Stand Down SC Obama building a personal army at the Department of Homeland Security

In July of 2008, presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama stated that Americans could no longer “…continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

It was 4 months before the election; yet no one in the “mainstream” media seemed interested in asking a presidential candidate about his promise to create a “civilian security force” with a $440 billion annual budget! What, exactly, would it do? Who would be in charge? Where would a force the size of the U.S. Military be housed? Would its members—like their military counterparts—be armed? How much authority would such a force exercise over the American people? From whom would it be derived? In his speech, Mr. Obama made it sound as though most of the members would be volunteers. If so, why would a near-half trillion dollar budget be necessary?

In the almost 5 years since Obama’s frightening pledge to put a powerful, unidentified force in charge of “national security,” the American public has discovered that:

  • though Obama has never again repeated the terms “civilian national security force,” it is obvious that the Department of Homeland Security is filling that role in the Obama Regime.
  • DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have purchased more than 450 million rounds of .40 cal, hollow point ammunition. Hollow points are expensive and wholly unnecessary for range use. It seems members of the DHS are to be armed—well armed. At the same time, Mr. Obama is working to see to it that the American people are NOT.
  • the immigration services and enforcement budgets at DHS were nearly $20 billion in 2010. Yet the Mexican-U.S. border was guarded by a “virtual fence” which leaked illegal aliens like a sieve. Some 4-5.5 million foreigners have overstayed their Visa’s in the US, yet just 8,100 arrests have been made by the DHS!

Then, in October of 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order creating the “White House Homeland Security Partnership Council,”  its ostensible purpose to “…advance the federal government’s use of local partnerships to address homeland-security challenges.” But the DHS was ALREADY working with local governments across the nation. Why would Obama intercede in this way?

Because “he [wanted] to be able to dictate who gets to participate in these local partnerships – and they don’t have to be local law enforcement or local government officials to do so. These partnerships will be with ‘the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, foundations and community-based organizations.’  All of whom will be handpicked by Obama and those federal bureaucrats he appoints.”

The National Defense Authorization Act empowers Obama ON HIS OWN to determine who represents a threat to the United States and to have that individual detained and imprisoned. And the Executive Order he signed allows the president to select like-thinking “deputies” nationwide, authorized to act on Obama’s behalf. These men will have little or no concern for the security of the United States. Rather, they will be working exclusively to increase the power of the president by threatening and intimidating his political enemies.

Barack Obama is at last building his Civilian National Security Force. It consists of a thoroughly corrupt organization of the far left, employed by the DHS and empowered by the president himself to ignore the Constitution and the laws of the United States.  Representing the 3rd largest department in the federal government, these DHS forces of a Constitutionally ineligible president are working to implement a police state—a dictatorship in which all “rights” will derive from the sole authority of Barack Obama.

Make no mistake–Barack Obama has every intention of imposing his will on the American public by creating a Marxist dictatorship during his second term. It is for that reason the assault has begun on American gun owners, as an armed public can fight back and defeat such would-be tyrants.

It’s difficult to conceive of an American president deliberately arming a federal force for the purpose of killing and enslaving the American people. But we will see it happen. …short of a goose-step.

A thought experiment: replace DHS with Gestapo, as you read the above article from Western Center for Journalism too. The parallels are stunning, frightening and very much on target. Bull’s eye.

Source: The (Disturbing/Dangerous) Parallels Between DHS & Nazi Germany’s Gestapo…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki | Adina Kutnicki

Posted in Barrack Obama, leftist bullying, Obama, Politics, Socialism | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Fanaticism Is a Disease Like Alcoholism | Psychology Today

Fanatics, ideologues and absolutists are humanity’s greatest scourge. Whether they’re the leaders or the followers, fanatics are people who indulge in a heady, intoxicating and toxic concoction of self-affirming, know-it-all confidence that they have unique access to absolute truths, truths so perfect that they have to impose them on everyone.

The absolute truths that fanatics latch onto might be religious or political, right wing or left wing, Christian or Islamic, libertarian or communist, new age spiritual or old-time religious. It’s not what they believe that makes them fanatics but how they believe it, that they have final word, no need to consider further evidence, no need to ever wonder or doubt themselves again.

Fanaticism is a drug. Let loose on society it’s like crack cocaine or alcohol only worse. Fanatics drive through life like alcoholics driving under the influence. They think they’re perfectly fine driving. They kill innocent bystanders, sometimes by the thousands or millions.

We’ve learned though, that treating alcoholics as criminals doesn’t help us or them. Alcoholics Anonymous has been so successful in part because it gives the addict a graceful way out of the corner he or she is painted into. It’s hard to kick a drug if sobriety means admitting that you’re a vile person through and through. Shaming the addict can make him dig in his heals. It’s easier to kick it if you declare that you’ve become host to a virulent disease that can attack any of us. No one is exempt from the risk. It’s not your fault, but it is your responsibility to kick it.

What’s needed is an AA-style safe-haven for recovering political and religious fanatics, ideologues and absolutists. It’s message is, “Yes, you’re a wreck and have done real damage. But don’t beat yourself up over it. Like so many of us, you became host to a powerful parasite that mutates quickly and has taken over minds throughout human history. Don’t blame yourself. You are not alone. Join us. Together we can lick this thing.”

Here’s a rough draft for the 12 Steps of Fanatics Anonymous

1. We admitted we were powerless over fanaticism—that our lives had become unmanageable.

2. Came to believe that Reason, a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of Reason.

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.

5. Admitted to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.

6. Were entirely ready to have Reason remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly invoked reason to remove our shortcomings.

8. Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10. Continued to take personal inventory, and when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.

11. Sought through inquiry, debate, conversation, curiosity and doubt to improve our conscious contact with Reason seeking for better understanding of the human tension between what we want to believe and what’s most likely to be true.

12. Having had an awakening to Reason as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to fanatics of all kinds, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.

Of course, the peculiar move here is replacing god with Reason, and more peculiar perhaps to repurpose the AA model for fanatics anonymous, what with AA’s surrender to god’s will, the most notorious excuse for fanaticism in fanaticism’s long and sordid history.

And what is Reason anyway?

Reason is nature’s gift to humankind and to the humanitarian impulse. It’s also called rationality, which comes from the same root as ratio, to compare, discern, evaluate, judging carefully and humbly in our efforts to find the better bets on how to live.

Reason is also related to logos, a word with diverse implications over the millennia but related to language, and logic, uniquely human gifts for our ongoing effort to understand the true ways of the world.

Ongoing–that’s how science practices reason. Where fanatics say “I reasoned once, came to the absolute truth and don’t have to reason again,” science, a practical practice we can learn to apply well beyond the lab, admits that there’s no last word, just today’s best guesses, to be improved upon through ongoing inquiry.

Sustained reason is just the hard work that an addiction to fanaticism frees us from. No wonder fanaticism is so intoxicating. Being a know-it-all provides such powerful pain relief. Reason is a much harder master than god. Humbling ourselves to it is painful.

No wonder so many of us fall off the wagon.

Source: Fanaticism Is a Disease Like Alcoholism | Psychology Today

Posted in leftist bullying, political correctness, Politics | Tagged , | Leave a comment