He is the President of the USA, not just Washington D.C.
6
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
4 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.vxxc calls Trump "the Mayor of Federal Buildings".
AMRX
Level 5
June 23, 2020
1
We will see. So far, all I’ve seen him do is talk...while hostages are being raped in Chaz / Chop. He’s just waiting to use vigilantes as scapegoats. He should send the military and live press in there to search every nook and cranny and make offers it safe escort out of the zone. If the enemy combatants in chaz prevent the search and rescue of hostages, it’ll be seen on live tv. But no, trump will just tweet some more.
HauntedFalcon
Level 5
June 23, 2020
1
@JVIP-WTPNN I want you to be right. I’m gonna go looking for some videos of trump stopping people in chaz on June 22nd 2020 and I look forward to seeing something inspiring some sort of hope
Rule of Law versus Rule by Criminal Means?
Are innocent people injured by aggressive people intent on causing injury to innocent people?
Once upon a time someone “at war with society” was considered a Felon, and as such the Felon who was at war with society was considered an outlaw, which is someone who decides to begin causing injury to innocent people.
Rule of Law returns when criminals are no longer allowed to injure innocent people with impunity.
Rule by Criminal Means happens when Criminals overpower defensive forces constituted from moral people who will not stand idle while criminals run amok in the playground.
An analogy I like to use is a fictional pack of Mad Dogs tearing through a playground full of children, where the pack of Mad Dogs rip children apart in the playground until there are no more children in that playground, and then the pack of Mad Dogs move to the next playground.
Some people have enough of it, so some people do something about it, such as (at the very least) Publicly indict the pack of Mad Dogs, describing their crimes in detail, and acknowledging the fact that the pack of Mad Dogs are, in fact, criminals, even if the pack of Mad Dogs have not yet been found guilty in a Court of Law.
I will show a non-fictional account of this very process by which some people reach a point at which they have had enough of the crimes perpetrated by the pack of Mad Dogs, and these people who have had enough of the crimes perpetrated by the pack of Mad Dogs join forces in defense against the aggressive, attacking, criminal, pack of Mad Dogs.
You can ride along as a passenger as we travel through this example of a time and place where some people begin down the path of effective defense, and a return to rule of law, a return to rule of law clawing their way back as they find themselves deep in a despotic hole dug by the pack of Mad Dogs. The children’s bodies pile high in the deep despotic holes dug by the pack of Mad Dogs as they happily move from one playground to the next, destroying all good things as they go.
“We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these ends, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government shall become destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, & to institute new government, laying it's foundation on such principles & organising it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety & happiness. prudence indeed will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light & transient causes: and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”
Source:
[loc.gov]
I link the source because some people are going to claim that my narrative here is a pack of lies told by someone working for the pack of Mad Dogs.
That ought to be understood by those who truly need to return to rule of law and dig themselves out of the deep state we are in, a hole dug deep on the backs of human independence, human freedom, human liberty, where people are free to find their bright star in liberty, rather than people being robbed, extorted, raped, horrified, tortured, enslaved, murdered, and murdered en masse, murdered by the builders and those who maintain Subsidized Slavery (of everyone): the pack of Mad Dogs. It ought to be understood that those who build and maintain Subsidized Slavery (of everyone) lie. One of their lies is routine, and that ought to be understood. The routine lie is the lie that their victims are guilty of what they are doing to their victims. So...when I tell this narrative, I will be accused of telling lies, so I am linking my sources.
The good guys defend against the bad guys, and in the case mentioned the bad guys are The British Aggressors whose intent is to enslave everyone in America, and the cost of enslaving everyone in America will be paid from the productive work done by Americans: Subsidized Slavery.
What about the following?
“he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.”
Is it important to accurately discriminate the difference between someone challenging criminals who claim to be government authorities and someone perpetrating crimes while claiming to be challenging criminals who claim to be the government?
It is important to me, perhaps not to anyone else.
In the above text are words that are relevant to the current situation in America as some people are obviously (self-evident facts that matter) inciting a war between White and Black people: Race War.
So...again, is it important to accurately discriminate the difference between good and bad people?
Case in point (riding along as passengers in a historical account of a power struggle between good and bad people):
In the Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I. p. 10
"The clause, too, reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for, though their people had very few slaves themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others."
The British incited Race War (according to Thomas Jefferson) in order to subject all Americans to their form of Subsidized Slavery of everyone subject to British Rule. The means to the end is criminal means to criminal ends when the criminals like the British Monarchy fund their “government” with “legalized” slavery.
If it were Rule of Law, not Subsidized Slavery, then the slaves would be on juries, and the slaves would set each other free, because when there is Rule of Law the people, not the government, decide facts at law.
You think not? If you think not, they you are possibly an innocent victim of the lies so often told by the pack of Mad Dogs.
Tomas Paine
Rights of Man
Page 52.
"A government on the principles on which constitutional governments arising out of society are established, cannot have the right of altering itself. If it had, it would be arbitrary. It might make itself what it pleased; and wherever such a right is set up, it shows there is no constitution."
“It is a matter well known, and well understood, that by the laws of our country, every question which affects a man's life, reputation, or property, must be tried by twelve of his peers; and that their unanimous verdict is, alone, competent to determine the fact in issue.”
That above is a quote from a 1788 Supreme Court Case. The judge in that case is Thomas M’Kean, who was also a President of The United States of America:
Thomas McKean (DE)
2nd President of the United States
in Congress Assembled
July 10, 1781 to November 5, 1781
-
Good side: Rule of Law, the people as jurors decide, the government does not decide.
-
Bad side: Rule by Criminals means, the criminals do whatever they want, they have 2 sets of rules, one set is enforced upon the slaves, the other set is the rules that keep their criminal organization from eating itself.
If you think you are on the good side, you may be deceived.
If the good side was in power then the worst of the worst would be offered a court date. The court would be a Court of Law, not a Court of Admiralty or Equity, or a Military Tribunal.
The Court of Law where the accused was the worst of the worst criminal currently running amok in the playground, and the trial would proceed according to the common law, but the trial would be a formality, so as to Transcribe the Facts that matter in the case, so as to inform the public of those facts that matter, because all lives matter, so it matters when some lives are being destroyed willfully by criminals.
Where is the publication of the court date in a Court of Law where the good side is represented, and the facts that matter according to the good side are brought to the jury, for the jury to decide on behalf of The Public, on behalf of the good side (assuming of course that there is anyone left in the country capable of representing the good side), where is this court date?
Where is the publication of the court date where the accused is afforded the opportunity to state their case before the jury, so that the jury can decide if the actions of the accused warrant (probable cause) a guilty verdict?
Who exactly is inciting Race War?
Where is the court date?
I submit to you that Rule of Law left America some time ago.
If it returns there will be a Court of Law where those most guilty are before The People in a Trial by The Country; a trial by jury according to the common law.
Once upon a time in America the people commanded the power of prosecution (the sword) not merely the power of defense (the shield) at law, because the law was determined by the people, not the government.
Think about that, please. Consider, please, the fact that there is no court case, yet there are prima facie (self-evident) perpetrators inciting Race War, and there is an obvious central power (puppet masters pulling the strings behind the curtain) at work, so discovery during investigation (independent grand jury, populated by non-government officers: the people, not the government) of one puppet would certainly lead to discovery of their masters, and then additional charges, additional court dates, at law (not Admiralty or Equity or Military).
The absence of a court date (before the people, before common law juries) proves beyond reasonable doubt that there is no law in America.
What do you expect to happen in a land where there is no law?
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
June 23, 2020
0
In a land where there is no law I guess I would expect there to be the mobs and the vigilantes, however it’s very difficult for either of these groups to act truly when you still have the court pretending to be here. If I need to differentiate between who’s a good guy and who the bad guy is, maybe I can just look at their actions. Maybe the guy who was raping people in chaz and maybe the guy who beat that dude up in Macy’s...maybe those are the bad guys. Those looters that beat that woman with a huge stick; bad guys. That cop who kept pressing his knee; bad guy.
Suppose one individual who may be guilty of inciting race war in America manages to get caught in the net with huge holes (counterfeit law in America), and now while playing through this fictional scenario, go ahead and put a name on a presentment (indictment) so as to then imagine a date at which that individual states his (or her) case before The Public in a Court of Law.
My point here is to point out that this type of discussion IS fictitious.
My point here is to point out that if the law was in America this type of discussion would be the type of discussion discussed by independent grand jurors whose duty is to discuss this, so as to put a name on a presentment, and then put a date on the calendar, where the accused faces The People in a Court of Law.
Because it is fictitious, not real, it means that there is no law in America.
You can't say that no one is guilty of inciting race war without making an obviously false statement. You could make that statement out of ignorance, sure. You could make that statement out of apathy, sure you can. You can also make that statement because you could be paid to do so, in some manner, such as you know that your livelihood depends upon the false narrative where the naked Emperor wears the best clothes imaginable. The fact is that someone, obviously, is inciting a race war.
Go ahead and pick a name, and I can offer one up too.
How about one of the so-called "Governors" who issue an order to the so-called police (corporate employees) to "Stand Down," while paid-to-loot looters rob, extort, rape, horrify, torture, enslave, murder, and mass murder?
You can't play along?
That is the point I wish to point out here: there is no law in America.
No one knows how it works, for one thing, or at least the ones who do know (a little bit of) how it works are too few to matter: a fact that matters, and it is very difficult to inspire other people to learn how it works. It is very difficult to inspire other people to help learn the workings of the law process.
So I try.
Imagine that you are an independent grand juror in a State where the criminal Governor is, in fact, inciting riots, which obviously lead to Race War.
Go ahead, if you can, put a name on the case you are charged with the duty to investigate lawfully: the common law, the actual law, not Admiralty, Equity, Military, or Corporate "law."
Based upon very easy to know principles would you vote (in a grand jury) to present (indict) the named individual (I suggested a governor, you can suggest anyone) to stand trial in a Court of Law, to state their case (defense) before The People; the jury?
How hard is it to play along? Is it impossible?
If it is impossible, then not only is there no law in America, the law isn't returning to America any time soon.
@Josf-Kelley when I said that I’d expect to see mobs and vigilantes, I wasn’t disagreeing with you. I was merely trying to answer your (maybe rhetorical) question of “what do I expect to see in a land with no law?”
Yes, I agree that there are string pullers that are purposely stirring people up. I agree that the whole “system”’is so corrupt that they will never be publicly held accountable.
This whole thing seems unreal, like a masquerade. The justice system, the election, our freedoms...don’t seem real.
Okay. So let’s just bring it to here. There’s no law. There are some mobs and there’s violence. There are many who simply watch and talk, nothing more. There are hidden string pullers. Now what?
It has happened in the past, so it can happen again, whereby the power struggle swings decidedly in favor of liberty (peace, freedom, effective defense, crime doesn't pay the highest profits, accurate accountability, the law, etc.) instead of Subsidized Slavery of everyone worldwide.
If that happens, what would be an indicator that it is happening?
My point is to point out that there would be a public trial, public transcripts, and the most powerful criminals would be accounted as such in that example trial where things are then documented as turning back to liberty.
It also stands to reason that expecting the criminals in power to indict themselves, put themselves on the calendar for their trial before the people, is not likely. Therefore, if things are going to swing back from the precipice, the people (not the government) have to do it.
The People's Panel
The Grand Jury in the United States, 1634 - 1941
Richard D. Younger
Page 3
"They proved their effectiveness during the Colonial and Revolutionary periods in helping the colonists resist imperial interference. They provided a similar source of strength against outside pressure in the territories of the western United States, in the subject South following the Civil War, and in Mormon Utah. They frequently proved the only effective weapon against organized crime, malfeasance in office, and corruption in high places.
"But appreciation of the value of grand juries was always greater in times of crisis, and, during periods when threats to individual liberty were less obvious, legal reformers, efficiency experts, and a few who feared government by the people worked diligently to overthrow the institution. Proponents of the system, relying heavily on the democratic nature of the people's panel, on its role as a focal point for the expression of the public needs and the opportunity provided the individual citizen for direct participation in the enforcement of law, fought a losing battle. Opponents of the system leveled charges of inefficiency and tyranny against the panels of citizen investigators and pictured them as outmoded and expensive relics of the past. Charges of "star chamber" and "secret inquisition" helped discredit the institution in the eyes of the American people, and the crusade to abolish the grand jury, under the guise of bringing economy and efficiency to local government, succeeded in many states."
When things move the wrong way things don't move that way by accident.
"The judiciary of the United States is so constructed and extended, as to absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several states; thereby rendering laws as tedious, intricate, and expensive, and justice as unattainable by a great part of the community, as in England; and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor."
George Mason, 1787
@Josf-Kelley Alright. I agree. The people have to do it. Can’t rely or wait on a corrupt system to do the right thing. I don’t think that the riots are an indicator that any righteous things are happening though.
In the quotes I offered are the known methods by which people re-establish rule of law, none of it involves rioting or other criminal acts.
I think the point is such that if the end in view is peace, then the means to that end can't be more crime.
Here is a saying:
Si vis pacem, para bellum is a Latin adage translated as "If you want peace, prepare for war".
That does not mean if there is peace and you want to keep it, then start rioting.
That means (correct me if I am wrong), if the criminals have taken over the government, and they are inciting a race war, and you want peace, then hold the criminals inciting race war accountable, including every step they take to your front door with their aggression, they won't stop as you show them the Bill of Rights.
Check these 3 things out, and please know that none of these messages call for, suggest, aid, abet, prescribe, or otherwise incite aggression, but every single one of these messages accurately share the same common roots in common law:
- "That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:"
That is taken from The First Congress of the forming United States of America, which was until 1789 a Federation of Independent States.
-
Bonding Code
"A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).
"When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists." -
Commercial lien right and military lien right
"In American history, the Declaration of Independence served the legal purpose of making a Solemn Recognition of Mixed War, which is a Notice of Military Lien Right, a warning of No Trespass, an assertion that any killing or taking of human life necessary for the protection of the legal remedies of the common citizen is being done, in the immediate situation described in the Solemn Recognition or Notice, not as murder, but as lethal self-defense of the commercial and social remedy against the cited domestic enemy or enemies. The Declaration of Independence is the legal model or format for the construction of the Solemn Recognition of Mixed War and the Notice of Military Lien Right."
None of that above is meant to incite any criminal behavior (such as rioting) whatsoever. The law of the land, the common law, is eluded to still in America in at least the Bill of Rights, which suggests, if not drawing a step by step instruction booklet, the "legal remedies" available to people who face aggression from government or from any other source, such as violent rioters hired by criminals in government spending your investments in government: taxes.
Gone from most of Major and Alternative Media CURRENTLY are the voices from those in America who remain (as best they know how) on the Lawfullly Defensive Side.
Example:
The point with me posting that message is to point out that "they" (the criminals in government, NOT those in government that are not criminals, but that would be hard to find since nonfeasance is a crime) who are guilty of inciting Race War may end up with so-called Civil War, so it may be a good idea to start holding the worst criminals in government to account for their worst crimes (inciting race war for example) before the boots on the ground start firing larger calibre weapons at each other.
Recent Visitors 41
Photos 516 More
Posted by CourseofEmpireA little weird. All of them ina nation that is overwhelmingly Eastern Orthodox? Shouldn’t there be more of them in there instead?
Posted by InspirationHow do you explain this.
Posted by CourseofEmpireIf the international banking cartel says that you aren't allowed to have a bank account, it means you are a threat.
Posted by CourseofEmpireThis should be our objective
Posted by CourseofEmpireProposed measures to reduce fertility in the US, 1967. "Too Many Americans."
Posted by CourseofEmpireA little pita bread, tsaziki, souvlaki, mmmm, quite tasty; not sure about the social media platform though. ;)
Posted by CourseofEmpireI mean, is he really wrong?
Posted by CourseofEmpireThere are reports many larger cities are starting to see an outward drift. Maybe the early stages of this? ;)
Posted by CourseofEmpireWhy can’t C-19 vaccine mandates be taken seriously?
Posted by CourseofEmpireWarren is one of the inventors of mRNA and he believes 1 to 2 billion will die from this vaxx. [twitter.com]
Posted by CourseofEmpireThe vast majority are vaxxed. This can’t be the unvaxxed who are mostly dying. Remember, they are a few months ahead of the Northern hemisphere.
Posted by CourseofEmpireAwesome 😂
Posted by CourseofEmpireWeimar (yes, THAT Weimar) will no longer report numbers of vaxxed people being hospitalized for COVID because the truth might be used for "misinformation." -Lovecraft's Cat
Posted by CourseofEmpireAny cause. This is an amazing vaccination, you are almost invincible if you get it, everyone (except a few little side effects and such)! 😂
Posted by CourseofEmpireHow long before a politician is physically attacked and even killed for mandating vaccines? [news.com.au]
Posted by CourseofEmpireNotice how much things increased with this one vaccine?